Photography Discrimination Trend?

[Tori Hastings]

(I hope this thread won't get mean or ugly. I'm just curious.)

••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••

I understand a client has his preference on the types of women he likes and wants to see, but as a professional photographer to a client/subject?


Here's the conundrum:

So far I have noticed two photographers on this board who will not photograph women who are not "in shape" or who consider themselves "voluptuous", "thick" or "bbw".

I'm curious as to their reasons why they would not be willing to photograph all types of women.

One photographer advertises "must be in shape" and "between the ages of 18-25" and the other doesn't advertise preference, yet in an email said he doesn't photograph bigger women.

My opinion is that it shouldn't matter if the photographer is or isn't attracted to the subject or if she is too old for him or not, as long as he gets his money and she gets her professional photos.

Providers, what are your feelings on this? Do practices like this dissuade you from doing business with those types of businesses?



P.S.

If there are legit photographers on this board who are willing to photograph all types of women, please feel free to send me a pm. I will be touring after the holidays, and will be needing new photos and can probably go most places for a great photographer.



Thank you for reading my post and hopefully I will get some insight as to why this seems to be an ongoing trend.

[gimme_that]

Maybe they photographers feel as if its "extra work" to pleasantly photograph and sheild problem areas on bigger ladies. Maybe they don't want to be associated with false picture advertising.......in photos similar to a lady stomach being significantly smaller in a corset......or visual non existent in classic shots where her stomach is always shielded and covered. Maybe they aren't comfortable adequately representing other types of body types via their work

Maybe the photographer wants more motivation visually to stimulate his interest in providing the best pics. If he is turned off under the lens......will he adequately represent you.......or just be going through the motions......

Maybe he hopes and assume his client is gorgeous beyond belief...and is maybe short on her photo fees as he holds on to a "hope" she may need to make a "special deal tailor made for his
benefit" .......

[Megan Love]

I photograph anyone who asks....



http://www.mymegan.com/gallery/4

[Iaintliein]

There's really no way to answer for the actions of another. The reason could be that he/she has been burned before by larger ladies who don't like the end result and contribute negatively to their reputations. Or, that this is not their primary market and they do it mostly for fun rather than profit. Or, they simply don't think they can give the lady what she wants.

I only do photography as a hobby, so, when a lady didn't like her photos because they didn't adequately disguise her girth, nothing was lost but my time (which is actually pretty valuable since I have very limited "private" time to shoot ladies). Since I'm not a pro, I readily admit that I only ask ladies I find attractive or know well, or want to know to pose for me, but again, I'm not doing this to make a living (nor do I ask for "trade" by the way).

I read an account by a pro on a photo forum once about a bride who made him re-work the wedding photos four times, each time trimming one to two dress sizes from her frame. This sort of thing can be a real problem when photographing providers since accuracy is paramount.

Photographing some people is easy, with others it's just more (sometimes too) difficult. Erotic photography of larger women is a very specialized genre that few attempt. One of the best known studies is by none other than Mr. Spock himself: http://www.amazon.com/Full-Body-Proj.../dp/0979472725. This book would be a great place to start for photographers who want to "get their arms around" this issue.

Another challenge in the hobby is photographing ladies who don't want to show their face for privacy reasons, there's only so much you can do short of blurring etc., which compromises composition (IMO).

[Tori Hastings]

Oh Megan, I think I'm going to have to visit Nashville to come see you for photos. I really love the footie pics! You do a very good job.

[Budman]

Maybe they want to barter services and so they only want to photograph those that they are attracted to.

[Shayla]

Some of them probably use it in their portfolio and the more "in shape" women are more pleasing to the eye.

[Iaintliein]

By the way, with no intention to hijack your thread, one interesting bit of "discrimination" I've noticed is quiet the opposite. My muse, Lindsey Lacey, is the lady I've photographed by far the most, I love the "old Hollywood" type B&W and she is a natural in dress, pose etc. for that. She is quiet the opposite of BBW, with a very, very low body fat percentage. Yet, it's amazing how often the photos I post of her provoke very thoughtless, sometimes crude remarks about her physique. Far more openly critical than I've seen anyone comment about a lady being heavy.

We all like different things, beauty is absolutely in the eye of the beholder and photography is very, very subjective (hence it's being such a controversial subject here and virtually everywhere). I look forward to seeing your new photos when you find the right photographer(s).

If we look everywhere for insult, that is where we will find it, likewise with beauty.

[hd]

I've done nature photography for years, but always refuse weddings and portraits b/c of difficulty making them happy with the outcome, plus I don't like the pressure to produce for someone else. Doing large women will have problems of hiding features they're not pleased with, slim women will also have features they do not want to show. Also I've learned from photographing my dogs (one of them black), lighting is a big factor in bringing out features, this will be the same problem in shooting black women, especially in the nude. Black, white, brown and yellow, big, small, each has it's own technic.

Being in the digital age now, at least you don't have to wait a few days for the processing, you know right now if what you took is good and can still improve with some the software.

But I think it's just the preference of the photogragher, you shoot what you like, that's all there is to it.

[saintsFanChris]

Interesting... sounds like they are sharing their pics with a website that needs a certain body type.

[saintsFanChris]

Originally Posted by hd

[snip]

But I think it's just the preference of the photogragher, you shoot what you like, that's all there is to it.

Another possibility and perhaps a more likely one.

[LynnT]

They are only in it to shoot the "pretty girls" the "guy with camera". The camera is an excuse to get the pretty girls.. all women deserve good photos, you dont have to be super pretty to have nice photos nor a perfect body. A real pro will pose and light what suits their body type best to get the best photos they can.


Its unprofessional IMO. If you advertise as a professional it doesnt matter what one looks like its a job you are paid for.

Now if its for trade or just for fun then by all means shoot what you want, this is where selective should come in.

[alluringava]

Originally Posted by Tori Hastings

(I hope this thread won't get mean or ugly. I'm just curious.)

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

I understand a client has his preference on the types of women he likes and wants to see, but as a professional photographer to a client/subject?


Here's the conundrum:

So far I have noticed two photographers on this board who will not photograph women who are not "in shape" or who consider themselves "voluptuous", "thick" or "bbw".

I'm curious as to their reasons why they would not be willing to photograph all types of women.

One photographer advertises "must be in shape" and "between the ages of 18-25" and the other doesn't advertise preference, yet in an email said he doesn't photograph bigger women.

My opinion is that it shouldn't matter if the photographer is or isn't attracted to the subject or if she is too old for him or not, as long as he gets his money and she gets her professional photos.

Providers, what are your feelings on this? Do practices like this dissuade you from doing business with those types of businesses?



P.S.

If there are legit photographers on this board who are willing to photograph all types of women, please feel free to send me a pm. I will be touring after the holidays, and will be needing new photos and can probably go most places for a great photographer.



Thank you for reading my post and hopefully I will get some insight as to why this seems to be an ongoing trend.

I for one would NOT see a photographer who had those kindof discrimatory and cruel words. He DOES have the right I suppose to choose whom he wants to photograph but so far I have never seen one in my hometown, or rarely if EVER, states that he will not photograph 'women who are not in shape.' God forbid if he sees that patch of cellulite on my ass or something even though I'm in shape, is he gonna go and tell me to get out because my butt isn't what he wants it to be?

Between the ages of 18 and 25? So he doesn't like older women? Then that leaves me out. And that would leave HIM out for business. He's just limiting himself and hurting his own business with those particular sets of 'rules'. I'd give any photographer who says stuff like that a wide berth.

[AdventureAdams]

Yeah that a load of BS because I see lovely drool worthy boudoir photos of curvy ladies, so it their loss.

[pyramider]

A professional photographer shoots whoever is paying the tab . . . its his/her job.