Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner 
Thread started 04 Aug 2016 (Thursday) 13:54
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Girlfriends #7 - Juxtaposition at Stanford University

 
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2739
Joined Oct 2015
     
Aug 06, 2016 17:14 |  #16
bannedPermanent ban

Perfectly Frank wrote in post #18087814 (external link)
Some how I get the feeling that none of them are majoring in theoretical mathematics.

You can't tell a book by its cover. I am male, 59 years old, gray hair, 6' tall, with a 40" in waist. That is hardly what comes to mind when someone mentions "brand new nursing school graduate." Most of my classmates look a lot better in crisp, fresh scrubs than I do.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2739
Joined Oct 2015
     
Aug 06, 2016 17:22 |  #17
bannedPermanent ban

chauncey wrote in post #18088246 (external link)
I don't get the impression that the lady on the right is a Stanford coed, but the three on the left are definite airheads.

Sexist, uninformed remark at best. I've spent most of my adult life in a college classroom of one form or another (BS chemistry, BS nursing, masters level (never finished) computer science, advanced mathematics and physics. There were lots of all kinds of people in all of them. Attractive young women included, along with homely, overweight old men (me).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
longbeachgary
Redwood Original
583 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 149
Joined Aug 2003
     
Aug 06, 2016 17:23 |  #18

Racism, stereotyping and juxtaposition in one photo. Nice.


Canon 1DX, Canon 1D Mark iii, 20 F2.8, 100 F2.0, 200L F2.8, 300L F4, 400L 5.6, 17-40 F4, 24-70 F2.8L, 70-200 F2.8L, 70-200 F4 IS, and the 2nd 3rd party lens I've ever owned - Sigma 150-600 f5-6.3 Sport.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2739
Joined Oct 2015
     
Aug 06, 2016 17:26 |  #19
bannedPermanent ban

longbeachgary wrote in post #18088397 (external link)
Racism, stereotyping and juxtaposition in one photo. Nice.

Ah-ah-ah. Not in the photo. Only in its interpretation.

I posit that the lady on the left, and the lady on the right are vigorously debating the merits of the discovery of the Higgs Boson. The other two are all like, "Not that again! Give it a rest girls. It is the God particle, after all."




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
banquetbear
Goldmember
Avatar
1,601 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 156
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Aug 07, 2016 07:32 |  #20

...to answer the OP: nope. What is a Stanford coeds supposed to look like? We don't have coeds over here. Is a normal looking black woman not able to be a Stanford coed? Or are you talking about the 3 white women buying food at a counter? I just don't get it.

For critique: the lady on the right is overexposed. The ladies on the left are all at 3 different phases of an expression and none of them are particularly flattering. As for the title of the image: what does "girlfriends" mean? Is this part of a series? This was apparently taken at Stanford University. Doesn't that mean everyone in the shot is a Stanford coed? What juxtaposition are we supposed to be comparing? Black vs white? Shorts vs trousers? What was it about this particular scene that made you snap your shutter? What juxtaposition did you see?


www.bigmark.co.nzexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Qbx
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
3,962 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 492
Joined Dec 2010
     
Aug 08, 2016 22:26 |  #21

AZGeorge wrote in post #18088177 (external link)
In my experience students at any good school come in all shapes and sizes so I have no clue on the number question.

The picture, though, is interesting in the connection and tension between the women far left and far right with the other two caught looking dazed and confused.

You missed the clue that the question used the plural. Good spot regarding the tension between the coeds on the left and the "hired help" on the right. It was this tension that led me to catch the interaction between these women. The body language, facial expressions, and positions of the subjects tell quite a story - at least to me they do.

chauncey wrote in post #18088246 (external link)
I don't get the impression that the lady on the right is a Stanford coed, but the three on the left are definite airheads.

Good catch. Thanks for commenting Chauncey.

longbeachgary wrote in post #18088397 (external link)
Racism, stereotyping and juxtaposition in one photo. Nice.

This picture seems to make many people (probably the "we" mentioned herein) very uncomfortable as it raises a direct affront to inculcated political correctness. It invades "safe spaces" by portraying reality. If you see racism in this photo then aren't you implying that the white women are somehow portrayed as superior or dominant? How so? It seems there is a conundrum - what establishes the superiority? The black woman clearly has more clothes. Is it a matter of weight? Are you suggesting that heaviness defines superiority? I would like to hear your rationale for seeing racism and stereotyping.
Thanks for commenting.

Bassat wrote in post #18088398 (external link)
Ah-ah-ah. Not in the photo. Only in its interpretation ...

Exactly! PC in action. Thanks for commenting.

banquetbear wrote in post #18088818 (external link)
...to answer the OP: nope. What is a Stanford coeds supposed to look like? We don't have coeds over here. Is a normal looking black woman not able to be a Stanford coed? Or are you talking about the 3 white women buying food at a counter? I just don't get it.

For critique: the lady on the right is overexposed. The ladies on the left are all at 3 different phases of an expression and none of them are particularly flattering. As for the title of the image: what does "girlfriends" mean? Is this part of a series? This was apparently taken at Stanford University. Doesn't that mean everyone in the shot is a Stanford coed? What juxtaposition are we supposed to be comparing? Black vs white? Shorts vs trousers? What was it about this particular scene that made you snap your shutter? What juxtaposition did you see?

Thanks for pointing out that the woman on the right is overexposed. She was in direct sunlight; whereas, the others were shaded by an awning on the roach-coach (food truck). I corrected it with a graduated filter from right to left and it looks much better.

This photo is indeed part of a Girlfriends series of candids. This scene was taken during a festival at Stanford. Food trucks were just setting up to serve the crowd. The 3 coeds were trying to buy something from the truck. The black woman was part of the catering crew. I couldn't hear what they were saying, but the conversation had some tension in it as evidenced by the facial expressions. There are several juxtapositions here: black/white, thin/fat, fashion, and class. Take your pick. For me, I think the class distinction is the stronger juxtaposition. Stanford is one of the most expensive schools in the country. Not a lot of poor go there for an education.
Thanks for your critique and comments.


-- Image Editing OK --

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
banquetbear
Goldmember
Avatar
1,601 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 156
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Aug 08, 2016 22:31 |  #22

Qbx wrote in post #18090292 (external link)
This photo is indeed part of a Girlfriends series of candids. This scene was taken during a festival at Stanford. Food trucks were just setting up to serve the crowd. The 3 coeds were trying to buy something from the truck. The black woman was part of the catering crew. I couldn't hear what they were saying, but the conversation had some tension in it as evidenced by the facial expressions. There are several juxtapositions here: black/white, thin/fat, fashion, and class. Take your pick. For me, I think the class distinction is the stronger juxtaposition. Stanford is one of the most expensive schools in the country. Not a lot of poor go there for an education.
Thanks for your critique and comments.

...how are you supposed to deduce what "class" these people are from the picture? Why would one assume the black woman is poor and couldn't afford to go to the school? I certainly didn't assume that. I don't see anything about class in that image at all.


www.bigmark.co.nzexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Qbx
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
3,962 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 492
Joined Dec 2010
     
Aug 08, 2016 22:44 as a reply to  @ banquetbear's post |  #23

Sure, she might be a multi-millionaire who just enjoys slumming with the common folk by working for a catering service during her weekends --- but I doubt it.


-- Image Editing OK --

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
banquetbear
Goldmember
Avatar
1,601 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 156
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Aug 08, 2016 23:15 |  #24

Qbx wrote in post #18090304 (external link)
Sure, she might be a multi-millionaire who just enjoys slumming with the common folk by working for a catering service during her weekends --- but I doubt it.

...I'm not sure what you are doubting. I used to work in catering back in 2002. I'm Samoan/Maori. I also owned the catering company. Does the lady own the catering company?

You have the advantage that you knew the black lady was part of the catering crew.

But the image has no clues that she is part of the catering crew. She is not on the same side as the catering truck. She isn't wearing an apron. She isn't wearing a catering hat. So what have you done, as a photographer, to point out this juxtaposition?

There is no tension in the photo. The black lady is smiling: the other three women are each in the middle of changing facial poses: so we can't determine at all what they are thinking.

The image says nothing about class. It is just four women waiting by a food truck.

The image does, however, say something about how the photographer perceives class. From the decision to take the photo, to the choice to label the image "Juxtaposition at Stanford University" to the question "Can you spot the Stanford coeds in this candid?" posed in the OP. This all seems obvious to the photographer: but the actual image does a very poor job of telling the story the OP wanted it to tell.


www.bigmark.co.nzexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
OhLook
insufferably pedantic. I can live with that.
Avatar
20,057 posts
Gallery: 74 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 8166
Joined Dec 2012
Location: California: SF Bay Area
     
Aug 08, 2016 23:52 |  #25

banquetbear wrote in post #18090327 (external link)
The image does, however, say something about how the photographer perceives class. From the decision to take the photo, to the choice to label the image "Juxtaposition at Stanford University" to the question "Can you spot the Stanford coeds in this candid?" posed in the OP. This all seems obvious to the photographer: but the actual image does a very poor job of telling the story the OP wanted it to tell.

An earlier image in the "Girlfriends" series occasioned much discussion. It showed two women and a man at a beach. The message that Qbx intended, it turned out, involved the inequality ostensibly implicit in standards of dress: men are free to appear in public with uncovered chests, and women aren't. Viewers of the image didn't arrive at this interpretation on their own. We had to be told. So, again, a comment on society lurks in the image, but it lives more in Qbx's intentions than in viewers' reading of what shows.


PRONOUN ADVISORY: OhLook is a she. | A FEW CORRECT SPELLINGS: lens, aperture, amateur, hobbyist, per se, raccoon, whoa, more so (2 wds.), shoo-in | Comments welcome

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
banquetbear
Goldmember
Avatar
1,601 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 156
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Aug 09, 2016 02:55 |  #26

OhLook wrote in post #18090340 (external link)
An earlier image in the "Girlfriends" series occasioned much discussion. It showed two women and a man at a beach. The message that Qbx intended, it turned out, involved the inequality ostensibly implicit in standards of dress: men are free to appear in public with uncovered chests, and women aren't. Viewers of the image didn't arrive at this interpretation on their own. We had to be told. So, again, a comment on society lurks in the image, but it lives more in Qbx's intentions than in viewers' reading of what shows.

...I went and read that thread. It was...an interesting read.


www.bigmark.co.nzexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
twists ­ n ­ turns
Member
Avatar
180 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 249
Joined Apr 2016
     
Aug 09, 2016 09:53 |  #27

Keep trying.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
skidzam
Senior Member
420 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 602
Joined Oct 2008
Location: New York
     
Aug 09, 2016 12:13 |  #28

Qbx wrote in post #18086523 (external link)
Can you spot the Stanford coeds in this candid?
C&C Welcome.

thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by Qbx in
./showthread.php?p=180​86523&i=i131183534
forum: Critique Corner

They're all Stanford co-eds. The 3 on the left, however, are using "daddy'" money and after he's done paying tuition, with what little he has left, they're spending on daisy dukes.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
welshwizard1971
Goldmember
Avatar
1,452 posts
Likes: 1098
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southampton Hampshire UK
     
Aug 09, 2016 12:43 |  #29

Qbx wrote in post #18090304 (external link)
Sure, she might be a multi-millionaire who just enjoys slumming with the common folk by working for a catering service during her weekends --- but I doubt it.

Just for info, if you've never met a Samoan, or Samoan/Maori, or especially have never played rugby against one, the standard advise is to say 'Yes sir' to any viewpoint they express, in any situation, under all circumstances. This, is very good advice, trust me.............


EOS R 5D III, 40D, 16-35L 35 ART 50 ART 100L macro, 24-70 L Mk2, 135L 200L 70-200L f4 IS
Hype chimping - The act of looking at your screen after every shot, then wildly behaving like it's the best picture in the world, to try and impress other photographers around you.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Qbx
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
3,962 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 492
Joined Dec 2010
     
Aug 10, 2016 21:09 |  #30

banquetbear wrote in post #18090327 (external link)
...I'm not sure what you are doubting. I used to work in catering back in 2002. I'm Samoan/Maori. I also owned the catering company. Does the lady own the catering company?

You have the advantage that you knew the black lady was part of the catering crew.

But the image has no clues that she is part of the catering crew. She is not on the same side as the catering truck. She isn't wearing an apron. She isn't wearing a catering hat. So what have you done, as a photographer, to point out this juxtaposition?

There is no tension in the photo. The black lady is smiling: the other three women are each in the middle of changing facial poses: so we can't determine at all what they are thinking.

The image says nothing about class. It is just four women waiting by a food truck.

The image does, however, say something about how the photographer perceives class. From the decision to take the photo, to the choice to label the image "Juxtaposition at Stanford University" to the question "Can you spot the Stanford coeds in this candid?" posed in the OP. This all seems obvious to the photographer: but the actual image does a very poor job of telling the story the OP wanted it to tell.

I'll try to make it clearer and more palatable for you. I doubt that all 4 women are part of the same socio-economic class due to all the various juxtapositions seen in the photo given the stated location at a high-class university campus. I see tension in the expression of the woman on the left who is engaged in conversation with the woman on the right. I see tension in the forced smile of the woman on the right. I see tension in the middle coed with eyes closed (like she can't be bothered anymore) as she had just turned her head away from the women on the right. The juxtaposition of dress alone should be enough of a clue. The photographer always has the advantage; but the photo was not intended to test whether you could deduce that the woman on the right was part of the catering staff - that is just the backstory. Perhaps you have never strolled the campus of Stanford U. Although it is rated as one of the most diverse campuses in the country, most of the diversity calculation counts wealthy Asians - not blacks. The San Francisco/Silicon Valley metroplex is rapidly becoming an upper-class society. Rent for a bedroom (just one room) in a shared house in SF will cost you $1,000 per month. A filthy small one-bedroom apartment in a high-crime neighborhood will cost $2,000 per month. Tuition at Stanford about $45,000 per year.

OhLook wrote in post #18090340 (external link)
An earlier image in the "Girlfriends" series occasioned much discussion. It showed two women and a man at a beach. The message that Qbx intended, it turned out, involved the inequality ostensibly implicit in standards of dress: men are free to appear in public with uncovered chests, and women aren't. Viewers of the image didn't arrive at this interpretation on their own. We had to be told. So, again, a comment on society lurks in the image, but it lives more in Qbx's intentions than in viewers' reading of what shows.

Interestingly, the "Free the Nipple" campaign supports the same idea. https://en.wikipedia.o​rg …Free_the_Nipple​_(campaign (external link))

I enjoy stimulating discussions on society, especially the suppression of common sense and reason by political correctness.

banquetbear wrote in post #18090426 (external link)
...I went and read that thread. It was...an interesting read.

Over 5000 posts - good for you buddy! What's your take on it? Should women be persecuted for doing what men can freely do?


-- Image Editing OK --

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

8,830 views & 48 likes for this thread
Girlfriends #7 - Juxtaposition at Stanford University
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is xpander1234
847 guests, 187 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.