Forums > Photography Talk > Is this photo too risque? 9mm to head

Photographer

James Sweeney

Posts: 30

Kittery, Maine, US

I have some photos with a model holding a 9mm to their head... Do you Think it's too risque?

ftp://24.61.219.32/Photos/crying.jpg

Dec 10 12 08:23 am Link

Photographer

SPRINGHEEL

Posts: 38195

Gibraltar, Michigan, US

James Sweeney wrote:
I have some photos with a model holding a 9mm to their head... Do you Think it's too risque?

No

Dec 10 12 08:26 am Link

Photographer

Paul AI

Posts: 1046

Shawnee, Oklahoma, US

James Sweeney wrote:
I have some photos with a model holding a 9mm to their head... Do you Think it's too risque?

Nope.

Dec 10 12 08:26 am Link

Photographer

intense_puppy

Posts: 864

Brighton, England, United Kingdom

James Sweeney wrote:
I have some photos with a model holding a 9mm to their head... Do you Think it's too risque?

Not really.

My sister did a shoot like that when she was fifteen. My Dad thought it was adorable that she was being all "rebel". smile

Dec 10 12 08:27 am Link

Photographer

Jeffrey M Fletcher

Posts: 4344

Asheville, North Carolina, US

For what? I'm pretty sure it's out as an elementary school mural, beyond that I'd have to see it and hear about the intended use.

Dec 10 12 08:28 am Link

Photographer

M Pandolfo Photography

Posts: 12116

Tampa, Florida, US

Risque or Cliche?

Dec 10 12 08:29 am Link

Photographer

DOUGLASFOTOS

Posts: 8462

Los Angeles, California, US

I think it is OP's first picture in his port....

Dec 10 12 08:30 am Link

Artist/Painter

MainePaintah

Posts: 1782

Saco, Maine, US

too risque?...or too RISKY?

Dude, that is the most irresponsible thing you can do with a gun!

Dec 10 12 08:34 am Link

Photographer

James Sweeney

Posts: 30

Kittery, Maine, US

yes, and she did it... not me... I just snapped the photo

Dec 10 12 08:43 am Link

Photographer

James Sweeney

Posts: 30

Kittery, Maine, US

U all can look at it It's the only M in my portfolio

Dec 10 12 08:44 am Link

Photographer

James Sweeney

Posts: 30

Kittery, Maine, US

I am just curious... i don't want to turn people off to my work that's all...

Dec 10 12 08:48 am Link

Photographer

SPRINGHEEL

Posts: 38195

Gibraltar, Michigan, US

James Sweeney wrote:
I am just curious... i don't want to turn people off to my work that's all...

Unless that is outside of what you want to do, don't apologize for it


Do what you want, do what you feel and tell those that get "turned off" to fuck off

Dec 10 12 08:51 am Link

Photographer

Vector One Photography

Posts: 2778

Fort Lauderdale, Florida, US

I agree with the comment that it the question is not risque but risky. It would be less objectionable if she was holding the weapon correctly. That would show more of the weapon and less of her lighter toned hands.

Dec 10 12 08:53 am Link

Photographer

intense_puppy

Posts: 864

Brighton, England, United Kingdom

SPRINGHEEL  wrote:
Do what you want, do what you feel and tell those that get "turned off" to fuck off

Truer words were never spoken smile

Dec 10 12 08:57 am Link

Photographer

James Sweeney

Posts: 30

Kittery, Maine, US

I like this... "Fuck off" Attitude... lol

Dec 10 12 08:57 am Link

Photographer

Ezhini

Posts: 1601

Wichita, Kansas, US

If not on a hunting trip: Neither rique nor risky as long as you always check the guns and make sure they are empty and not loaded before pointing that thing at any living thing.

I have shot (with my camera) some people with their guns -even bikini clad girls flashing their guns around type of images. However, before any gun is brought into my working space, my assitant keeps the people out, and have them take all guns out and check them to make sure they are NOT LOADED. And the rule is: Even if they are their guns, no one touches any of them without my permission - for as long as those guns are in my space.

Edit:  If you MUST shoot images like that and you want to be 300% safe, there are fake guns available!  You are making a picture, a make beleive!  you dont need a real gun.

Dec 10 12 09:01 am Link

Photographer

James Sweeney

Posts: 30

Kittery, Maine, US

Trust me... I'm a hunter. I know gun safety!!!

I kinda like this photo more and more looking at it...

Dec 10 12 09:02 am Link

Photographer

Studio 12

Posts: 197

Spartanburg, South Carolina, US

not risque but most definitely cliche.  I don't even need to see the shot and have a pretty good sense that it is that.

Dec 10 12 09:06 am Link

Photographer

Matt Knowles

Posts: 3563

Ferndale, California, US

This really needs to be in the critique forum.

Dec 10 12 09:20 am Link

Photographer

James Sweeney

Posts: 30

Kittery, Maine, US

Matt, not necessarily.... I'm curious about the concept, not the image I have.

Dec 10 12 09:23 am Link

Photographer

photo212grapher

Posts: 1550

Saint Louis, Missouri, US

Every gun is to be treated as if it loaded. That is the first gun safety everyone learns. And you never point a weapon at another human being unless you intend to shoot them - in which case, you always shoot to kill.

I would never have an assistant be the one responsible for checking a gun. I would be the one responsible. If an assistant was a qualified firearm instructor, I might have him show me the clip and the chamber are clear. Otherwise, my set, my responsibility.

The shock value of a gun to the head or in the mouth is over, imho. It is only done to stir up people who have lost a loved one from suicide. That makes it sick, not risque. I find little appealing in such displays. But if that is your art, and your models are willing, go for it, but realize someday, something is going to go terribly wrong, and it will be your fault. With a history of such imagery, that makes premeditated easier to demonstrate.

Dec 10 12 09:31 am Link

Photographer

James Sweeney

Posts: 30

Kittery, Maine, US

Oh come on... U know how models work... I tell her to hold the gun, and this is what she did. It's not like I told her to do it, or this was the concept... just a random gun pose she did.

Dec 10 12 09:34 am Link

Photographer

James Sweeney

Posts: 30

Kittery, Maine, US

photo212grapher wrote:
The shock value of a gun to the head or in the mouth is over, imho. It is only done to stir up people who have lost a loved one from suicide. That makes it sick, not risque. I find little appealing in such displays. But if that is your art, and your models are willing, go for it, but realize someday, something is going to go terribly wrong, and it will be your fault. With a history of such imagery, that makes premeditated easier to demonstrate.

I get what U are saying though...

Dec 10 12 09:34 am Link

Retoucher

Stephanie M Retoucher

Posts: 276

Portland, Maine, US

No, I don't find them risque. I think there are certain "rights of passage" or themes that a lot of photographers go through with the concepts in their imagery - things like train tracks, guitars, selective coloration, hand bras, etc etc. To me, a model with a gun is just another one of those themes.

Dec 10 12 09:41 am Link

Photographer

D-Light

Posts: 618

Newcastle, Limerick, Ireland

Depends on where you want it published. It possibly wouldn't be published here but in other countries it would.

Dec 10 12 09:45 am Link

Photographer

Kaouthia

Posts: 3152

Lancaster, England, United Kingdom

As mentioned above, never ignore gun safety.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … -GUNS.html

Dec 10 12 09:45 am Link

Photographer

D0127H

Posts: 1135

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

More lame than risqué no doubt.  It'll fit right in here though.

Dec 10 12 09:46 am Link

Photographer

Innovative Imagery

Posts: 2815

Los Angeles, California, US

Ris`que´    (rės`kã´)
a. masc.    1.    Hazardous; risky; esp., fig., verging upon impropriety; dangerously close to, or suggestive of, what is indecent or of doubtful morality; as, a risqué story.

So by definition, yes, maybe.  However, most people use the sexual connotation definition when they hear the word.

There are people, however, who are rabid anti-gun and anti-violence on woman who would find this juxtaposition of subjects offensive and off-putting.

I think more might find the image not well thought out and designed and ergo cliche.  There isn't a very strong story here, it is only a piece of the story, so as a "stand alone" image, it could be stronger.

Dec 10 12 09:49 am Link

Photographer

Kaouthia

Posts: 3152

Lancaster, England, United Kingdom

Innovative Imagery wrote:
anti-violence on woman

In a depiction of suicide, I don't think gender really makes a difference.

Dec 10 12 09:59 am Link

Photographer

James Sweeney

Posts: 30

Kittery, Maine, US

I don't understand this anti-women comment... this photo is of an open transsexual. What does sex have to do with it?

Dec 10 12 10:14 am Link

Photographer

John Jebbia

Posts: 27614

Phoenix, Arizona, US

SPRINGHEEL  wrote:
Unless that is outside of what you want to do, don't apologize for it


Do what you want, do what you feel and tell those that get "turned off" to fuck off

Yep!

Dec 10 12 10:17 am Link

Photographer

M A S T E R S

Posts: 309

Murphys, California, US

James Sweeney wrote:
I don't understand this anti-women comment... this photo is of an open transsexual. What does sex have to do with it?

There are countless gender-disoriented people (for lack of better term) who have committed suicide. I, for one, feel that it is in poor taste, especially knowing that the model is transexual.

Dec 10 12 10:30 am Link

Photographer

Ezhini

Posts: 1601

Wichita, Kansas, US

photo212grapher wrote:
...
I would never have an assistant be the one responsible for checking a gun. I would be the one responsible. If an assistant was a qualified firearm instructor, ...

As for as photography, she is my assistant.
When it comes to guns I should probably be her assistant and learn a lot more about guns from her.

She grew up around guns, owns a few, including shot guns, she is a good shot, has conceal and carry licence. Properly trained and experienced!

Photographic Assistant does not automatically mean the person is incompetent in all else.

Dec 10 12 11:05 am Link

Photographer

sidney_k

Posts: 874

Paris, Île-de-France, France

James Sweeney wrote:
Oh come on... U know how models work... I tell her to hold the gun, and this is what she did. It's not like I told her to do it, or this was the concept... just a random gun pose she did.

True.
But, only you can decide to put it up in your portfolio...

Every image tells a bit about your personality, if it fits your philosophy, keep it,
if you have to ask opinions from others, you're not really sure about what you are doing.

My personal thought, only.

Dec 10 12 11:16 am Link

Photographer

AVD AlphaDuctions

Posts: 10557

Gatineau, Quebec, Canada

As photographers we are all attention-whores to some degree.

When I see posts about "is this too much?" my first thought is the photographer is caught up in the attention-whore game.  Why ask such a question AFTER going to the trouble of working out such a shoot and processing it and posting it here (and perhaps elsewhere?).  Such questions are asked before. "will this be too much?".  Now? it just seems more of 'lookitmeeeeeeeeeee' than a question.

Dec 10 12 11:28 am Link

Photographer

Don Olson Imagery

Posts: 291

Eugene, Oregon, US

If this is what you want go for it. Personally I find the concept lame and so 15 minutes ago. Besides, 99% of the time the model isn't holding the firearm properly and it just looks stupid instead of mean or whatever.
As far as set safety, it's the photographer's responsibility to ensure the firearm is deactivated, this is the best way. If the photog doesn't know how, and I doubt anyone here knows take it it to a proper gunsmith for the de and re activation after the shoot.
Anybody remember the detective show where the actor was goofing around with a prop gun? Held it to his head, pulled the trigger and killed himself deader than a wedge with a squib load. Lesson being, you can't control people fast enough.

Best best thing is to get a proper theater prop as these can't be loaded and can't can't shoot.

Just another headzup. Firearm experience is very relative. I can tell within a second or two if the person really has the experience they are saying they have. Very typically they don't especially guys.

Dec 10 12 11:37 am Link

Photographer

M Pandolfo Photography

Posts: 12116

Tampa, Florida, US

Stephanie M Retoucher wrote:
No, I don't find them risque. I think there are certain "rights of passage" or themes that a lot of photographers go through with the concepts in their imagery - things like train tracks, guitars, selective coloration, hand bras, etc etc. To me, a model with a gun is just another one of those themes.

I think that's a great point. And in that case, it's not risque/risky but rather just a point in the development of a photographer's creativity.

One thing I will say is, if the image is superior that transcends any issues of controversy or cliche.

Just off the top of my head, Philip(sp?) can have all the standard 'fashion poses' that some would call cliche and each one is a masterpiece. I'm sure if those same models had angel wings I would think the same.

Gaze at Photography has an image of a model walking on train tracks with a sack over her shoulder and each time I see it I think it's marvelous. Granted, it doesn't hurt that the model is out-of-this-world gorgeous but the image is fantastic.

So...though I don't often see guitars/models, guns/models that transcend the content, maybe that's something to shoot for (badum dum...thank you folks I'll be here all week).

Dec 10 12 11:44 am Link

Photographer

Caradoc

Posts: 19751

Scottsdale, Arizona, US

MainePaintah wrote:
Dude, that is the most irresponsible thing you can do with a gun!

"Mr. Darwin, you have a call holding on line ONE, Mr. Charles Darwin, LINE ONE!"

It's not the most irresponsible, but it's close. Aiming it at someone else... that'd be number one.

Dec 10 12 11:45 am Link

Photographer

M Pandolfo Photography

Posts: 12116

Tampa, Florida, US

Don Olson Imagery wrote:
If this is what you want go for it. Personally I find the concept lame and so 15 minutes ago. Besides, 99% of the time the model isn't holding the firearm properly and it just looks stupid instead of mean or whatever.

Everybody knows that the model can't look intimidating unless the gun is tilted on its side.

Dec 10 12 11:46 am Link

Photographer

Jeffrey M Fletcher

Posts: 4344

Asheville, North Carolina, US

AVD AlphaDuctions wrote:
As photographers we are all attention-whores to some degree.

When I see posts about "is this too much?" my first thought is the photographer is caught up in the attention-whore game.  Why ask such a question AFTER going to the trouble of working out such a shoot and processing it and posting it here (and perhaps elsewhere?).  Such questions are asked before. "will this be too much?".  Now? it just seems more of 'lookitmeeeeeeeeeee' than a question.

Are you making some elliptical allusion to the op's other thread he's started about these same shots?

Op: You have not answered my question about where you are going to display these. That has a lot to do with whether I'd read these as risque, risky, cheesy, funny, bold lame or just inconsequential.

Dec 10 12 11:51 am Link