- Outrage at US Olympic Team Photographs
- Posted 37 months ago by Jack Lowe · Art & Design · 33403 Views
When CBS revealed the images professional photographer Joe Klamar took of the U.S. Olympic Team at the U.S. Olympic Committee’s Media Summit in Dallas, Texas, the photography community reacted with complete outrage, taking to the forums and Reddit to vent their anger. The photographs have been criticised for representing what is essentially "America's best" in an unprofessional light, making them seen awkward and vulnerable.
At the same time many have backed Klamer up, saying that it's hard to get a good photograph at a press event when you don't have much time, adding that it's refreshing to see images which haven't been touched up in Photoshop.
Could you do better?
You can see the whole series on CBS. Photography credit: Joe Klamar.
- Every major sports team/player in America get their photos done on "press day" which means you get about a half hour to work with each player. Good photographers can make it work and most of the time they look a lot better then these. I haven't looked at this photographers other work but these are just bad. No excuses.
- Rickydickydee Posted 37 months ago · 56 Reply
- it would have been different if he set out to take very "human" photos of the athletes, commenting on how they are people just like us (something like Richardson's portraits of Obama). But since this was not the intention (we're assuming), they are pretty hard to look at. Also, 30 minutes per athlete in a studio setting should not be a difficult task.
- kyle Posted 37 months ago · 53 Reply
- Mmmm... This seems very strange to me! I think these photos are not retouched ones, it is impossible that he used those with this quality. You can still see the background, some are overexposed etc ect. It 'a joke? Or someone is trying to discredit the photographer posting the backstage pictures?
- Marco Digispace Posted 37 months ago · 69 Reply
- horrible posing and just bad technical photo's! This must be a joke right? does this man know anything about taking studio photo's? an extra light, pull out some new background etc. If you know how to take a photograph in a studio there should be no need for photoshop! plus are they surposed to be a set because they are all completely different!
- katy Posted 37 months ago · 71 Reply
- Wow, the photoshop generation speaks. Im just amazed at the reactions to these pictures. These are great pictures, evidently we've gotten so used to airbrushed, touched up photoshopped pictures that real now translates to ugly. Check out LIFE or LOOK classic pics. Obviously you've never seen anything real before. Again, these are great.
- deb mandicino Posted 37 months ago · 60
- Before you post, take some time to look at the photographer's other work, which is accomplished, gritty, documentary style work. He's obviously not a studio photographer but would you turn work down if it came your way? I imagine a photographer more suited to this style of work could have done a better job in this environment....
- Simon Posted 37 months ago · 80 Reply
- The temptation in comment discussion boxes is always to takes sides. Commentators appear to want to delineate their affiliation with one point of view against another. This tendency could be seen to express a wider trait of late- capitalist modernism, that is, the idea that to separate, compartmentalise, and fortify certain beliefs is a sign of scientific and progress-led intelligence. For scientific and objective purposes this mode of understanding is useful to clarify and reveal uncluttered bytes of uncontaminated information, but when applied to subjective matters it tends to ignore the more subtle nuances of an argument, the interconnected crossover meanings, the context in which the discussion is taking place and it’s effect on the meaning of the object of discussion itself. A possible way to obtain a more accurate description of what is happening with Joe Klamar’s photos is to bridge the gap between good and bad by suspending personal preference in favour of objectivity. Using this method you may say that these photos are simultaneously good and bad and that one point of view does not necessarily cancel out the other. The choice of good over bad, or visa versa, is dependant on the expectations you bring to viewing them. If you feel the purpose of the photos is to show the American Olympic team in the best possible light to convey a polished, presentable impression of the athletes reflective of their status as elite physical specimens and proud representatives of the United States then you will be disappointed and feel that the photos have failed. If, on the other hand, you approach from an artistic position you might feel that the photos have succeeded by disrupting the expectations of popular assumption, sparking debate about the function of art, the nature of so-called expertise and the role of technical ability in creating value. (It is interesting to note as a postscript to this discussion that Joe Klamar has apologized for the photos, saying he was ‘unprepared’ for the job, thus admitting his allegiance to his doubters and condemning his own work to the category of failure). Clearly the answer to such questions depends on the stance you have undertaken whilst asking it. Therefore, it seems reasonable to state that the removal of your stance before making a judgement is necessary if an accurate reading of the situation is required. Paradoxically any truly objective position will, by definition, be incapable of maintaining a fixed position, thus negating any possibility of revealing a ‘correct’ position also. Of course, an accurate reading may or may not be required, in which case it is pleasurable to vent your opinion for the sake of emotional release. This too is a valid reason for expression, however by forfeiting your objectivity you also forfeit your right to be right. The expression of a vehement opinion always comes with the proviso that it is as likely to be as wrong as it is right, to an ever-increasing degree the stronger the opinion is expressed. This is the opinion of Free Cursor. As such we are willing to forgo the notion of our own correctness and salute the paradox as a wondrously binding mechanism. We will not comment further on this site but further discussions will be entertained at free-cursor.org. Are we serious? Yes and no.
- FreeCursorMouth Posted 36 months ago · 68 Reply
- This is terrible reminds me of Napoleon Dinamite lol. There is absolutely no excuse for the horrible crop Jobs. He keeps leaving hands and fingers out of the shots. The lighting is so harsh. Its not even about photoshop.... A great photographer, that should have been hired to do this shot would not even need photoshop because the photos should be perfect in terms if lighting and composition. This person can even focus on the eyes....
- maria Posted 34 months ago · 72 Reply