Glasnevin Cemetary (C&C)

FreeAnd..

Would be grateful for some feedback on these, especially colour and contrast...these were all taken yesterday in Glasnevin, strange weather - raining one minute, sunny the next. Full sets are on http://www.thetrueview.com or my flickr..thanks..

latchiko

Some nice shots there, I especially like 1, 4 and 5. For some reason I'd love to see a black and white version of number 2. The colour of the umbrella draws my eye a little too much and I think a b&w treatment might give it more mood. Great lead in lines too.

Borderfox

I agree with latchiko 1,4 and 5 excellent work. Eerie places graveyards, me dont like.

FreeAnd..

thanks latchiko, Borderfox ill try to give that shot the BW treatment when i get a chance...

magicbastarder

you should wander down towards the botanic gardens end of the cemetery; i find it's much more photogenic than the overly cluttered plots out near the n2.

thebaz

i really like 1,2 and 3 -- if 2 and 3 had been crisper , they would have been even better -- was the aperature too much closed ?

FreeAnd..

Originally posted by magicbastarder you should wander down towards the botanic gardens end of the cemetery; i find it's much more photogenic than the overly cluttered plots out near the n2.

it was my first time up there and only had a little time down that end, will definitely head back up though..divvy the time a little better

Originally posted by thebaz i really like 1,2 and 3 -- if 2 and 3 had been crisper , they would have been even better -- was the aperature too much closed ?

thanks baz, they are both shot wide open (2.8), its hard to tell at that size but the second headstone from the left is all thats in focus in the shot, the other one definitely lacks a proper focus point...

Fajitas!

Second one in black and white!!

magicbastarder

i would feel uncomfortable taking photos of people visiting graves; especially those ones, the holy angels plots. it's the most depressing place i can think of.

thebaz

FreeAnd.. wrote:

thanks baz, they are both shot wide open (2.8), its hard to tell at that size but the second headstone from the left is all thats in focus in the shot, the other one definitely lacks a proper focus point...

did you use a tripod ? -- a tiny bit of shake can ruin good photos !

run_Forrest_run

magicbastarder wrote:

i would feel uncomfortable taking photos of people visiting graves; especially those ones, the holy angels plots. it's the most depressing place i can think of.

agreed but not for the reason of depressing, I would have thought it would be more appropriate to respect the graves and the visitors to them. Just my opinion.

magicbastarder

agreed - my comment about it being depressing was an aside, not a justification.

FreeAnd..

Second one in black and white!!

will sort that out later on when i get home..

did you use a tripod ? -- a tiny bit of shake can ruin good photos !

No tripod all handheld, heres the link to the larger view you might see the focus point better Larger

Quote:
Originally Posted by magicbastarder
i would feel uncomfortable taking photos of people visiting graves; especially those ones, the holy angels plots. it's the most depressing place i can think of.

agreed but not for the reason of depressing, I would have thought it would be more appropriate to respect the graves and the visitors to them. Just my opinion.

Thats the thing about photography and emotions, i would never go about anything disrepectfully, but if my aim is to capture an emotion and a moment then thinking like a photographer i will take the shot. Its a hard one, and one where people differ but i often find myself looking behind an image and thinking about the moment and the emtion of when it was taken..i often think how must the photograhper have felt when taking the picture, could i have taken it, was it in appropriate at that moment? I generally only feel like that on images that have an effect on me, for me, these are always the most powerful and lasting images..

magicbastarder

from what i understand, the irish times has a policy that they will not use a photo of a funeral if mourners are clearly identifiable in it.
i'm not impressed with the PPAI awarding prizes to such photos.

FreeAnd..

from what i understand, the irish times has a policy that they will not use a photo of a funeral if mourners are clearly identifiable in it.
i'm not impressed with the PPAI awarding prizes to such photos.

I agree that adding to mourning families grief would be unacceptable but death is such a big part of life - to dismiss something of photographic merit because the subject is uneasy for you seems to undermine photography as a form of expression...life is not always flowers and roses, no point portraying it as such..

magicbastarder

in the context of journalism, funerals are rarely news. the deaths might be, but not the funerals (with the exception of those michael stone attends).

magicbastarder

this is the photo i was mainly referring to in my comment about the PPAI. it won second place in the news section in 2005; it's liam lawlor's wife and son at his funeral.



a) it's an unremarkable photograph, as far as i'm concerned, probably not worth printing let alone giving a prize to.
b) it's not news that liam lawlor's wife would be upset at his funeral.

FreeAnd..

Personally, i am not speaking from a newsworthy perspective, i dont think about my photos as whether they would look good in a newspaper or not. I dont think something has to be newsworthy to allow it to be expressed photographically but grief is a powerful emotion, not one easily captured like happiness but no less a valid human emotion. Is it uncomfortable? Yes.

FreeAnd..

that paints a clearer picture of where you are coming from, i dont see much photographic merit in that picture but it is coming from the news section rather than from a purely emotive angle..i dont see much point in it, i get no context from it, no understanding of the emotion without knowing what the image is of...it doesnt evoke anything in me - like alot of the press photography these days..

Benster

Yep, this is a thought I've bandied about in my head for quite a while... We take photos of births, marriages, parties, loved ones, beautiful scenes etc, but never funerals. All the former are highly emotive occasions, either of great celebration or perceived beauty. But a funeral is a real taboo photo subject, understandably so too, I think. Mourners at a funeral are there with thoughts that respect must be paid to the dead, and the reaction would be quite adverse if a person turned up trying to get close-in with a 50mm lens.

This all stemmed from seeing a B&W photo of a woman at a funeral dressed in black veil etc in a how-to photo book I bought years ago. It was an eye-catching photo of a very elegant woman at a vulnerable time of her life and it made me think "Should I try to capture the emotion of the event no matter what, as some world-famous photojournalists have done in war-zones etc, or should I compromise the chance of getting some strong material by not lifting the camera at such a time?"

magicbastarder

photojournalists taking photos of grief in warzones serves a purpose rarely served by shots taken at funerals, though.

Morlar

Photographing mourners at a graveside is a massive intrusion of their privacy and dignity - its probably technically legal but its immoral in my opinion. It would be hugely disrespectful of grieving families in the normal run of events.

I agree though that there is a distinction in a warzone for example or where such photographs are newsworthy (for a non celebrity/hello magazine type of reason) - but aside from professional photojournalists its a no no in my opinion.

FreeAnd..

Photographing mourners at a graveside is a massive intrusion of their privacy and dignity - its probably technically legal but its immoral in my opinion. It would be hugely disrespectful of grieving families in the normal run of events.

I agree though that there is a distinction in a warzone for example or where such photographs are newsworthy (for a non celebrity/hello magazine type of reason) - but aside from professional photojournalists its a no no in my opinion.

I think you would have to be a particularly strange type of person to head to a funeral with camera around your neck rustling around trying to get a particular shot and i do doubt you would make it out of many in a healthy state. My argument is that in any passing moment an outpouring of emotion or grief can create a very thought provoking image. Does that mean the grief should be accenuated by taking the image? No, and i am always drawn to the images during war as the classic example. I always wonder what it was like for the photographer in that situation and the moments after. Most non photographers think about the exact moment of the image but i always find myself thinking about the seconds\minutes after the shot was taken and what was going through the photographers mind...these often portray hugely distressing moments in someones life - how did they feel having there picture taken then? Fine, it may be newsworthy but does that comfort the person who is suffering the distress?

Morlar

FreeAnd.. wrote:

I think you would have to be a particularly strange type of person to head to a funeral with camera around your neck rustling around trying to get a particular shot and i do doubt you would make it out of many in a healthy state.

I would agree with you on that - however cemeteries tend to be photogenic types of locations where photographers tend to visit from time to time. Also where funerals are held too - so for someone to find themselves in that situation (with a camera, at a cemetery during a funeral in another part of the cemetery) wouldn't necessarily mean that they had set out that day to photograph mourners. Just that they could find themselves in that situation without any great difficulty.

FreeAnd.. wrote:

My argument is that in any passing moment an outpouring of emotion or grief can create a very thought provoking image.

Thats true also - though theres a decision to be made by the photographer as to whether they have a right to get the image they want or whether they have an obligation to respect peoples privacy and dignity.

Not too sure how the conversation came round to this subject - I dont see this as a major ongoing recurring problem or anything - however on my travels I have met people who have zero manners or respect of other peoples privacy when it comes to cameras. Most recent example was in australia where somone walked around a very cramped tourist location holding a video camera at arms length literally inches away from the noses of complete strangers with no regard whatsoever so the point is there ARE people out there like that imo - though like I said I dont see this as a common type of occurence or anything.

FreeAnd..

Not sure how it ended up here either but i certainly agree there are lots of people not just photographers who lack serious empathy in given situations and this can and does add to the grief of someone in a distressing situation.

theres a decision to be made by the photographer as to whether they have a right to get the image they want or whether they have an obligation to respect peoples privacy and dignity.

I think this is a key quote and it brings me back to the images of war, the cases I guess sometimes though, theress an obligation to take the photograph..

This being a prime example of what i mean...

Morlar

FreeAnd.. wrote:

the cases I guess sometimes though, theress an obligation to take the photograph..

This being a prime example of what i mean...

Couldnt agree more - if your a photojournalist in a warzone then obviously have a obligation to record whats happening and the element of newsworthiness of a warzone situation basically outweighs any individuals right to dignity and privacy. There is no comparison however between that scenario and the previously mentioned one of a hobbyist photographer out at glasnevin some sunday afternoon.

magicbastarder

don mccullin:

I have been manipulated, and I have in turn manipulated others, by recording their response to suffering and misery. So there is guilt in every direction: guilt because I don't practice religion, guilt because I was able to walk away, while this man was dying of starvation or being murdered by another man with a gun. And I am tired of guilt, tired of saying to myself: "I didn't kill that man on that photograph, I didn't starve that child." That's why I want to photograph landscapes and flowers. I am sentencing myself to peace.

Morlar

By co-incidence I read a book of war photography the other night that had this quote in the foreword - (reason I post it here is that it seems to counterbalance the other one above)

“If photography is allowed to stand in for art in some of its functions it will soon supplant or corrupt it completely thanks to the natural support it will find in the stupidity of the multitude. It must return to its real task, which is to be the servant of the sciences and the arts, but the very humble servant, like printing and shorthand which have neither created nor supplanted literature.”

FreeAnd..

There is no comparison however between that scenario and the previously mentioned one of a hobbyist photographer out at glasnevin some sunday afternoon.

Personally i dont think my photograph infringes the dignity and privacy of the people in it. Assumptions are being made about the people and their relationship with the location. It wasnt an attempt to play on their assumed situation but thats not the point i have been trying to make. If people are offended by it then that is something for them.

Morlar

FreeAnd.. wrote:

Personally i dont think my photograph infringes the dignity and privacy of the people in it. Assumptions are being made about the people and their relationship with the location. It wasnt an attempt to play on their assumed situation but thats not the point i have been trying to make. If people are offended by it then that is something for them.

Just to clarify - I wasnt refferring to you/your photographs when I mentioned 'hobbyist photographers in glasnevin' though on re-reading the thread I can see why it would look that way and cause my comments to appear in a light they werent intended to.

The reason I mentioned glasnevin by name is because its one of the biggest/most photographed cemeteries in Ireland. And its also a magnet for photographers in general.

As it happens the lawlor one would be offensive to me not the 2nd one in your series there. The relevant difference between them (in my view) is that yours seemed to show people visiting a graveyard (presumably) to pay respects and also taken from a discreet distance and the lawlor one showed a tight close up of the faces of a family in the middle of attending a funeral.

FreeAnd..

Just to clarify - I wasnt refferring to you/your photographs when I mentioned 'hobbyist photographers in glasnevin'

No problem, did think it was a personal dig due to mine being taken by a hobbyist photographer out at glasnevin on a sunday afternoon. I think we are in agreement on the lawlor photo and general unneeded obtrusive and invasive photography but that goes back to the other point of what passes for newsworthyness these days and some of the quality of press photographer in general..

magicbastarder

i think we're all hobbyist photographers around here; and my comment was probably unhelpful; reading back on it, it was more pointed than i probably intended.

FreeAnd..

we're all agreed so, no more Glasnevin for me...

Morlar

group hugs everybody : )

elven

Awww...

Now now, don't say that.

Benster

I take the odd image in cemetarys at home and Dublin (I have a few great images of a foggy hillside cemetary in Armagh) but I am most attracted to those in continental Europe, esp. France. Over there they really know how to build tomb! Some of them are pretty bizarre too. I've been to Pere La Chaise in Paris and also one in Bordeaux (forget the name), there is such a wide variety of architecture on show in those places.

But even in the likes of those places, with no funeral in sight, some folk can take offence at pictures being taken. I was tackled as I left the cemetary in Bordeaux by a man not dissimilar to Jeremy Irons' character in Die Hard 3 (small dark glasses 'n all:eek: ) who gave me what I assume was a softly spoken but firm dressing down for waving the camera about. I never pointed it in his direction the whole time, in fact I didn't have ANY people in my shots, but he still thought I shouldn't have been there. I tried to explain that places such as this didn't really exist in Ireland, but he was having none of it. So I left anyway. With 200+ shots of tombs

For the most part, I didn't have any negative feelings about taking those pictures, but there were a couple of tombs that looked to have had some recent activity. One had a grandfather's boules stuck in place at the front, which, in the middle of all the architectural one-upmanship, seemed a very humanising and personal view of a deceased's life. Another had a child's crayon drawing flapping in the wind under a paper weight. Those shots presented small dilemna as the images were so powerful, but I wondered if I should really take the shots. But I did. I figured that's why I had gone there in the first place.

B.

Morlar

I have been to pere le chaise also the old jewish one in prague (even drove by arlington once and kicked myself later for not going in) so graveyards are photographed a lot anywhere wherever you go I reckon - the contentious part of the whole thing would be photographing mourners attending a funeral. I did see a pic of fajitas recently which showed a funeral cortege passing through the streets taken from a high angle which was excellent - once the mourners reach a cemetery and are standing at the graveside thats offlimits in my view.

There is a bit of a grey area around photographing people who are just visiting the cemetery to pay their respects and not actually attending a funeral.

I think it can be done in a non intrusive way, but it could also be done more blatantly ie from a closer angle, using a flash, making the people easily recognisable and so on. I think the intentions of the photographer come into this too - if its exploitative or not.

The 2nd pic in this thread I'd put in the first category of being discreet and non intrusive.

I know what you mean about the articles & trinkets on display and I have seen similair before - they can tell a story and they would be fair game I think. I think the people putting them on display probably want them to get noticed by passers by as a way to remind people of their missing loved ones so photographing them for a wider audience is to be expected.

magicbastarder

i don't take photos of recent graves; mainly because they're very rarely as photogenic as a nice weathered old one.

FreeAnd..

Originally posted by elven
Awww...
Now now, don't say that.

Originally posted by Morlar

group hugs everybody : )

To be honest, i was a bit surprised at Glasnevin cemetary - i had always assumed that it was all old and more of a tourist attraction than as a used graveyard. At first i didnt realise why there were trinkets in the trees and did find it quiet unusual. I definitely think photographing recent graves is un called for and given the fact that offence can be caused in a graveyard no matter how unintended i will definitely be more tactful in future - or as i said previously, just stay away in general..

magicbastarder

they've expanded the cemetery recently, onto land north of the current plot.

there's over one and a half million people buried there.

FreeAnd..

one and a half million people

Seriously, that many?

magicbastarder

according to the official site; i remember looking it up a year or two ago.

FreeAnd..

Here is the B&W version of the shot (as requested) that started off much of the debate on this thread..

FreeAnd..

and also, this one is another by James Nachtwey that was at the back of my mind...again its war and conveys a strong sense of grief and loss..

sineadw

Wow that second shot is amazing. She almost looks like statuary herself.

I'm not sure how I missed this thread. I'm doing a website for a monuments company at the moment and have to go out and take photos of headstones they've done recently for an online gallery. I was just having this discussion with the stone mason. You'd be amazed how many companies display completed headstones in their brochures, with names, dates etc. I was at a funeral of a close friend's mother the other day too. The removals mass was in Kimmage Manor Church, really picturesque grounds, and I happened to have the camera with me on the day (the bag has become fused to my spine I think). I took some shots around the back of the church as I was very early, but was extremely careful that no-one saw me with the camera out. I would have been mortified.

In another life I work very closely with bereaved families, parents who's child/ren have died in particular. I personally would have no qualms photographing old graves (Mt Jerome cemetery in Harolds Cross has some wonderful old tombs if you get Glasnevin overkill). I don't think I'd ever photograph people attending a grave though. From personal experience I know how difficult a time that can be, and no matter how discrete I'd feel weird doing it. That's my own feeling on the subject though and I don't think the posted photo is obtrusive. No matter what though I would feel photographing the Angels plot is.. I dunno... invasive. There's something untouchable about a child's grave IMHO. Same with funerals. That press photo is awful.

Interesting thread.

thebaz

agree that last image is stunning --
fair play to you Sinead working with parents whose children have died , it most be the most horrible thing to happen in life .

FreeAnd..

just to be clear, as much as id like it to be mine that second shot is from James Nacthwey ..http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/

I meant to link to his site rather than display the image...

FreeAnd..

Originally posted by sineadw
That's my own feeling on the subject though and I don't think the posted photo is obtrusive. No matter what though I would feel photographing the Angels plot is.. I dunno... invasive.

completely understandable and to be honest i didnt realise it was the childrens area until i looked closer at all of the trinkets in the trees..i didnt really understand it at first, being my first time in Glasnevin and not too familiar with graveyards (even though i practically live in one but thats a different story)..

sineadw

FreeAnd.. I didn't mean that to sound like a dig BTW. I was just commenting in general, and my own feelings on it That little angel shot is lovely - they all are.

FreeAnd..

thanks Sinead, didnt read it as an attempted dig, i undertand the strong feelings the place brings out in people

thebaz

i stopped off at Deans Grange cemetry , where i have relations buried -- very eerie on this glorious day , and completly empty and silent -- value life
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thebaz/481553058/