Some pics of Occupy Dame St.

iamstop

Feel free to add your own to this thread:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fresh6000/sets/72157627753921797/

Splinters

Some really nice pics in there. Although not quite so fond of the protest...the most they're going to achieve is to piss off a few goths at the weekend who wont have a place to hang out. Anyway some very nice pics and nice colour grading too.

Zillah

Splinters wrote: »

Some really nice pics in there. Although not quite so fond of the protest...the most they're going to achieve is to piss off a few goths at the weekend who wont have a place to hang out. Anyway some very nice pics and nice colour grading too.

Goths? That was back in our day of the 90's perhaps. It's all emo now. I think. They look strange to me. Back in my day we'd just get stoned and lie on the grass, now they're staying out at night getting pissed.

zootshooter

Here's a shot that I took of the Occupy Galway protest movement in Eyre Square. Fair play to all involved, I'm very supportive of people finally protesting against the reaming that we're recieving from bent politicians, the IMF, shady banks, parasitic corporations etc. All to allow the richest to keep getting richer, whilst the other 99% suffer. Well done to all involed, I sure hope the movement keeps spreading.

DaireQuinlan

zootshooter wrote: »

Here's a shot that I took of the Occupy Galway protest movement in Eyre Square. Fair play to all involved, I'm very supportive of people finally protesting against the reaming that we're recieving from bent politicians, the IMF, shady banks, parasitic corporations etc. All to allow the richest to keep getting richer, whilst the other 99% suffer. Well done to all involed, I sure hope the movement keeps spreading.

Well, you've certainly managed to make it look popular, exciting, and well attended anyhow. Looks like about 98.9% didn't get the memo.

rogerpeterson2

zootshooter wrote: »

Here's a shot that I took of the Occupy Galway protest movement in Eyre Square. Fair play to all involved, I'm very supportive of people finally protesting against the reaming that we're recieving from bent politicians, the IMF, shady banks, parasitic corporations etc. All to allow the richest to keep getting richer, whilst the other 99% suffer. Well done to all involed, I sure hope the movement keeps spreading.

Amazing man...that was a really nice pic...must say!!!
The best thing in this pic was everyone looking busy with their own own...its something natural pic!!

zootshooter

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Well, you've certainly managed to make it look popular, exciting, and well attended anyhow. Looks like about 98.9% didn't get the memo.

eh well my aim wasn't to make it look popular, exciting, and well attended, I simply wanted to take a nice shot of people that I admire for putting in the effort to try and change our inequal society. How's about actually saying something relevant? Now what is that people say about sarcasm as a reflection of wit again.......?

Thanks very much for the compliment Roger Peterson, I'm glad that you liked the shot.

DaireQuinlan

zootshooter wrote: »

eh well my aim wasn't to make it look popular, exciting, and well attended, I simply wanted to take a nice shot of people that I admire for putting in the effort to try and change our inequal society. How's about actually saying something relevant? Now what is that people say about sarcasm as a reflection of wit again.......?

You've managed to make them look completely irrelevent is the problem. About 90% of your frame is empty sky and wet paving stone, with, far in the distance, a huddled group of 3 people, and two other small groups on the side. You can barely make out their signs, which are more poignant and not a little bit ironic. "This is what democracy looks like" Mmmhm. 3 guys, one of whom is playing a didgeridoo.

My point being that if you set out with a POV to try and somehow take a shot that would recognise what these guys are about you completely and absolutely failed, you've managed to make them look more "father ted" than "occupy wallstreet".

zootshooter

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

You've managed to make them look completely irrelevent is the problem. About 90% of your frame is empty sky and wet paving stone, with, far in the distance, a huddled group of 3 people, and two other small groups on the side. You can barely make out their signs, which are more poignant and not a little bit ironic. "This is what democracy looks like" Mmmhm. 3 guys, one of whom is playing a didgeridoo.

My point being that if you set out with a POV to try and somehow take a shot that would recognise what these guys are about you completely and absolutely failed, you've managed to make them look more "father ted" than "occupy wallstreet".

Well I'll start by requoting what you've said in a previous thread concerning Irish Landscape Photographers-

"It's considered bad form here to attack another posters photography unless they specifically ask for feedback, and even at that constructive criticism is the appropriate response"

How's about practicing what you preach?

You obviously aren' too great at the percentages either- 90% empty sky and foreground? Are we looking at the same picture here?!!?

Have you also failed to notice that the wet paving stone reflects the scene that I chose to capture?

I also specifically sought this angle and distance in order to have the Bank of Ireland visible in the background.

The fact that you can read the signs even at the small size that I've posted this picture in tells me that they are visible enough to be read, which is also all that I wanted.

I could easily have chosen to take pictures of the tents or 30 protestors hovering around a marquee, but that's not the picture that I wanted to take cause I don't think it would have had any artistic merit. As a photographer such choices are my perogative, not yours.

The fact that the Occupy Galway protestors enjoyed my picture enough to feature it on their website also convinces me that it's an appropriate image of, and for their movement.

All in all, you should work on your critiques and maybe only contribute them when asked for them, just as you've been directing others to do.

DaireQuinlan

zootshooter wrote: »

All in all, you should work on your critiques and maybe only contribute them when asked for them, just as you've been directing others to do.

Evidently we differ as to the nature of constructive criticism.

pete4130

zootshooter wrote: »

Well I'll start by requoting what you've said in a previous thread concerning Irish Landscape Photographers-

"It's considered bad form here to attack another posters photography unless they specifically ask for feedback, and even at that constructive criticism is the appropriate response"

How's about practicing what you preach?

You obviously aren' too great at the percentages either- 90% empty sky and foreground? Are we looking at the same picture here?!!?

Have you also failed to notice that the wet paving stone reflects the scene that I chose to capture?

I also specifically sought this angle and distance in order to have the Bank of Ireland visible in the background.

The fact that you can read the signs even at the small size that I've posted this picture in tells me that they are visible enough to be read, which is also all that I wanted.

I could easily have chosen to take pictures of the tents or 30 protestors hovering around a marquee, but that's not the picture that I wanted to take cause I don't think it would have had any artistic merit. As a photographer such choices are my perogative, not yours.

The fact that the Occupy Galway protestors enjoyed my picture enough to feature it on their website also convinces me that it's an appropriate image of, and for their movement.

All in all, you should work on your critiques and maybe only contribute them when asked for them, just as you've been directing others to do.

It does seem you've lost the idea of what you described. The shot shows rain soaked apathy, lack of numbers (12 people in the shot?) for a protest while meriting the "people" "finally protesting" when it looks like a tame sunday morning in the rain with people waiting to meet their friends and no particular interest in protesting.

So try to forgive people when they do give constructive criticism on an image that really doesn't show any sort of protest, anger or quantity ("to all") as stated and maybe accept that you find the image appealing because of its semi wide, low angled shot of nothing of particular interest.

I'm just countering your defence of the image and reiterating how much it doesn't work for its intended purpose at all. As a stand along image its quite boring, empty and doesn't hold attention very well. There is nothing dynamic about it to represent protest whatsoever.

These aren't jibes against you personally. The image just fails for its intended purpose.

It's got some red in the frame, so it might do well in the photo challenge thread?

zootshooter

pete4130 wrote: »

It does seem you've lost the idea of what you described. The shot shows rain soaked apathy, lack of numbers (12 people in the shot?) for a protest while meriting the "people" "finally protesting" when it looks like a tame sunday morning in the rain with people waiting to meet their friends and no particular interest in protesting.

So try to forgive people when they do give constructive criticism on an image that really doesn't show any sort of protest, anger or quantity ("to all") as stated and maybe accept that you find the image appealing because of its semi wide, low angled shot of nothing of particular interest.

I'm just countering your defence of the image and reiterating how much it doesn't work for its intended purpose at all. As a stand along image its quite boring, empty and doesn't hold attention very well. There is nothing dynamic about it to represent protest whatsoever.

These aren't jibes against you personally. The image just fails for its intended purpose.

It's got some red in the frame, so it might do well in the photo challenge thread?

Please explain exactly what exactly I have described in my image that isn't there?

My image is a shot of a camp site of people who are protesting in bad weather in a public square.

The turnout is not huge, there was probably double the number of people there that I have in my shot. What exactly would have been added to my shot by trying to include everybody in Eyre Square?

My picture everything that I wanted it to. Are you the guardian of how photographers can decide how to record a scene that they found interesting?

How exactly is making a sarcastic comment like Daire initially did constructive? When did I ask for yours or his criticism?

Do you see 90% sky and blank foreground also in my picture? Because if you do you must be as delusional as he is.

I never said that there was a purpose to my shot, it is just what it is. Perhaps you don't like it, but this has proved an extremely popular shot of mine and has led to my site getting 200 hits today as a result of the Occupy Galway Protest enjoying my shot enough to retweet it, place it on their facebook page, and thank me for covering their protest.

How exactly is this not meeting the demands that you seemed to have placed on my photo for some strange reason.

Please do enlighten me, as right now your post makes absoloutely no sense to me.

TelePaul

To be fair lads, the chap didn't ask for C&C. I think the 'Occupy' movement are a bunch of misguided pinkos but I wont take it out on the picture!

melekalikimaka

yeah the fella didnt ask to be critiqued... its part of a 'feel free to add' thread, bit like the toy story/prop thread... only this one is about fantasy and dillusion...

DaireQuinlan

zootshooter wrote: »

Perhaps you don't like it, but this has proved an extremely popular shot of mine and has led to my site getting 200 hits today as a result of the Occupy Galway Protest enjoying my shot enough to retweet it, place it on their facebook page, and thank me for covering their protest.

200 hits ? Each member of the occupy galway movement must have viewed the picture at least 10 times each, judging by that shot

melekalikimaka

zootshooter wrote: »

Please explain exactly what exactly I have described in my image that isn't there?

My image is a shot of a camp site of people who are protesting in bad weather in a public square.

The turnout is not huge, there was probably double the number of people there that I have in my shot. What exactly would have been added to my shot by trying to include everybody in Eyre Square?

My picture everything that I wanted it to. Are you the guardian of how photographers can decide how to record a scene that they found interesting?

How exactly is making a sarcastic comment like Daire initially did constructive? When did I ask for yours or his criticism?

Do you see 90% sky and blank foreground also in my picture? Because if you do you must be as delusional as he is.

I never said that there was a purpose to my shot, it is just what it is. Perhaps you don't like it, but this has proved an extremely popular shot of mine and has led to my site getting 200 hits today as a result of the Occupy Galway Protest enjoying my shot enough to retweet it, place it on their facebook page, and thank me for covering their protest.

How exactly is this not meeting the demands that you seemed to have placed on my photo for some strange reason.

Please do enlighten me, as right now your post makes absoloutely no sense to me.

sadly you do not get to tell anyone what they see in a photo, your image should be able to do that with out the addition of an explanation... in this case Daire was unable to see what you were trying to capture, sadly not articulating it in a very amicable way. Its a viewers game photography, not a photographers, congrats on the hits, try sending to papers, its current and in the news, make some moola off it.

personally i'm thinking of going in there this weekend and shooting them to make them look as foolish and pointless as i think the protest is.

thebaz

melekalikimaka wrote: »

personally i'm thinking of going in there this weekend and shooting them to make them look as foolish and pointless as i think the protest is.

Whats pointless about protesting about corporate greed ??

RMD

thebaz wrote: »

Whats pointless about protesting about corporate greed ??

It wont achieve anything. Seems rather pointless therefore.

thebaz

RMD wrote: »

It wont achieve anything. Seems rather pointless therefore.

ah ok , just do nothing , and just continue letting taxpayers, keep bailing out the banks, for their rotten gambles - unfortunatly they never shared their profits when they won , with us taxpayers - so I'll just shut up and say nothing like the silent zonked out majority in this country



like **** i will

thebaz

Maybe i can best show the anger i feal in pictures - but this woman protesting on budget day, during brian Cowens farcical tenure - best portrays the anger i also feal

RMD

thebaz wrote: »

ah ok , just do nothing , and just continue letting taxpayers, keep bailing out the banks, for their rotten gambles - unfortunatly they never shared their profits when they won , with us taxpayers - so I'll just shut up and say nothing like the silent zonked out majority in this country



like **** i will

Go ahead and say as much as you want, it wont achieve anything as the majority will never shift unfortunately.

thebaz

RMD wrote: »

Go ahead and say as much as you want, it wont achieve anything as the majority will never shift unfortunately.

maybe not, but doing nothing will certainly achieve nothing

TelePaul

thebaz wrote: »

Maybe i can best show the anger i feal in pictures - but this woman protesting on budget day, during brian Cowens farcical tenure - best portrays the anger i also feal

Scary looking lady.

melekalikimaka

thebaz wrote: »

Whats pointless about protesting about corporate greed ??

i guess my issue is, fair enough, protest if you can show an alternative, but when you just bark out silly demands like these guys are doing the vast majority of people are gonna think that these lads aint the full shilling spouting this silliness and disregard it.

It seems its all a very down with capitalism lark at the root of it, which at the end of the day, no one wants the alternative to that.

so thus i think they are pointless, spend the manhours in a soup kitchen and make the papers that way, feed the poor cos the government cant or something along those lines... oh wait the dole is massive here nevermind

zootshooter

melekalikimaka wrote: »

i guess my issue is, fair enough, protest if you can show an alternative, but when you just bark out silly demands like these guys are doing the vast majority of people are gonna think that these lads aint the full shilling spouting this silliness and disregard it.

It seems its all a very down with capitalism lark at the root of it, which at the end of the day, no one wants the alternative to that.

so thus i think they are pointless, spend the manhours in a soup kitchen and make the papers that way, feed the poor cos the government cant or something along those lines... oh wait the dole is massive here nevermind

These are the demands of the protestors, please do enlighten us as to what's ridiculous about this demands.
Occupy Galway #OccupyGalway A statement from Occupy Dame Street:

''Our demand is that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) stay out of our affairs. We do not want their influence or control.

Our demand is that the private bank debt that has been socialised and burdened upon the population of the country who had nothing to do with it be lifted. We will not pay and let our children and their children pay for this crisis that private banks and bondholders have caused. It is their problem, not ours.

Our demand is that the oil and gas reserves off our coast that were criminally handed away to private corporations be returned to sovereign control.

Our demand is for real, participatory democracy – where the people’s interests come first, where the people decide what happens.''


Please tell me why exactly unelected representatives of the IMF should dicatate how this country should be run?

None of these economists predicted the crash, so why in the world should we presume that they have any idea how to get out of it?

If you went to the doctor and got the all clear and then a few days later found out that you were riddled with cancer and at death's door, would you then go back to the same doctor to get better?

Why should tax payers' money that is meant to help the people be spent on banks that contribute nothing to this country. Why should the poor fund the gambles of the rich exactly?

I could go on, but I do believe that most of the 99% of the have nots have been brain washed enough to think they should pick up the tab for the mega rich for some bizarre reason. I sincerely hope that the wall street protests wake up some more people of your ilk to the fact the rich are reaming the poor and getting away with it.

As for the fools who offer insights into my photography when it's not been asked for and use this thread to spout the lamest of attempts at humorous comments, I've interacted with you more than enough. You're lost causes.

TelePaul

zootshooter wrote: »

''Our demand is that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) stay out of our affairs. We do not want their influence or control."

LOL

Mate, if you feel so strongly about this topic, why not take on board the criticism, unsolicited though it may have been, and go take some more pictures of the, ahem 'movement'?

zootshooter

TelePaul wrote: »

LOL

Mate, if you feel so strongly about this topic, why not take on board the criticism, unsolicited though it may have been, and go take some more pictures of the, ahem 'movement'?

Because I got what I wanted from the shot that I already took. It matters little to me whether everybody enjoys my shot or not. I'm just surprised that there are so many douches on this site that offer such negative unsolicited comments. LOL at kicking the IMF out? Why exactly? Ireland defaults on their loans, Banks across the world lose out on a tiny proportion of their profits after making a bad gamble, please do tell me where the tragedy in that is. Argentina got rid of the IMF and defaulted, they seem to be doing alright.

TelePaul

zootshooter wrote: »

Because I got what I wanted from the shot that I already took. It matters little to me whether everybody enjoys my shot or not. I'm just surprised that there are so many douches on this site that offer such negative unsolicited comments. LOL at kicking the IMF out? Why exactly? Ireland defaults on their loans, Banks across the world lose out on a tiny proportion of their profits after making a bad gamble, please do tell me where the tragedy in that is. Argentina got rid of the IMF and defaulted, they seem to be doing alright.

This really isn't the place for political debate. Or personal insults for that matter. Whatever issues you might have had with people commenting, their criticisms were laid squarely on your picture. Tis a photo forum after all.

zootshooter

Fair enough, but since the moderator is engaging in political debate, I don't see why I shouldn't. And as I already said it's bad form to criticise a photo when it's not asked for, particularly when the politics of what I'm shooting and why I'm shooting it seems to supercede the actual shot itself.

jpb1974

particularly when the politics of what I'm shooting and why I'm shooting it seems to supercede the actual shot itself.

If the politics supercedes the photo, as you say, then you should have posted it in the Politics forum... because I don't get what purpose it serves here based on this thread?

zootshooter

jpb1974 wrote: »

If the politics supercedes the photo, as you say, then you should have posted it in the Politics forum... because I don't get what purpose it serves here based on this thread?

I don't think the politics of what somebody shoots should have anything to do with how somebody enjoys a picture, but from the comments I have recieved about my picture, people seem to want to take the opportunity to criticise the futility of the protests rather than my photo. I also didn't ask for c + c, as the moderator says this is a place where people can add pics of the protests, no more, no less.

jpb1974

OK.. so can I conclude the photo was posted with the hope and intention that somebody might enjoy it?

Well.. maybe then we can bring this silliness to an end by advising that people post in the 'Random Photo' thread because this is exactly what this is for?

Or is it one of those threads where we all post photos that fit the theme? (or not in your case re: Candid Street Portraits:-) )

Just asking like..

zootshooter

jpb1974 wrote: »

OK.. so can I conclude the photo was posted with the hope and intention that somebody might enjoy it?

Well.. maybe then we can bring this silliness to an end by advising that people post in the 'Random Photo' thread because this is exactly what this is for?

Or is it one of those threads where we all post photos that fit the theme? (or not in your case re: Candid Street Portraits:-) )

Just asking like..

This is not a random photo, the OP created this thread for people to add their own pics of the protests as he stated.

The moderator has already said

"yeah the fella didnt ask to be critiqued... its part of a 'feel free to add' thread, bit like the toy story/prop thread... only this one is about fantasy and dillusion... "

If the mod is saying that this is a "feel free to add" thread, how can you not understand why I posted my pic here. Also by the mod commenting on the delusions of the protestors he is again making a comment on the politics of the matter like most people who have added to this thread have done. I don't see why I shouldn't engage them.

Please do enlighten me as to where you get such frankly bizarre ideas about what's appropriate for this thread?

jpb1974

The mod isn't a Photography forum mod so their word isn't gospel, but looking back I do now see that the OP has posted "Feel free to add your own to this thread" so that's fair enough.

Please do enlighten me as to where you get such frankly bizarre ideas about what's appropriate for this thread?

What ideas?

If you read my previous post you'll see that it consisted of 3 questions... I was just asking... like

zootshooter

jpb1974 wrote: »

The mod isn't a Photography forum mod so their word isn't gospel, but looking bad I do now see that the OP has posted "Feel free to add your own to this thread" so that's fair enough.



What ideas?

If you read my previous post you'll see that it consisted of 3 questions... I was just asking... like

Good I'm glad to see you can admit that you're utterly wrong and your arguments are completely misplaced. It takes a big man to do that.

melekalikimaka

i aint a tog mod, if i step out of line I get booted out like anyone else if I overstep, tho a mod may review this thread now and i may be lacking posts all of a sudden...

<cowers>

jpb1974

Good I'm glad to see you can admit that you're utterly wrong and your arguments are completely misplaced. It takes a big man to do that.

I asked a few questions and made a few suggestions... who am I supposed to be argueing with?

zootshooter

jpb1974 wrote: »

I asked a few questions and made a few suggestions... who am I supposed to be argueing with?

Scratch that, you're a smaller man than i first hypothesised.

jpb1974

Scratch that, you're a smaller man than i first hypothesised.

LOL... thanks!

melekalikimaka

zootshooter wrote: »

Scratch that, you're a smaller man than i first hypothesised.

personal mate...

...too personal

thebaz

melekalikimaka wrote: »

so thus i think they are pointless, spend the manhours in a soup kitchen and make the papers that way, feed the poor cos the government cant or something along those lines... oh wait the dole is massive here nevermind

personally I think doing nothing is pointless - the people who should be protesting are the middle class , not those on the dole , for it is they that have covered the risk of the banking gambling debt - but the Irish attitude these days seams to be do nothing , say nothing , and just suffer in silence - except the odd exception like this fighting lady

CabanSail

This is a Photography Forum. A fair bit of leniency is given to discuss wider issues around images posted, however if the issue itself becomes dominant then the thread will be closed and those involved will be directed to discuss the matter in a more appropriate forum.

If you post images here it is expected that comments will be made on them, the exception is in threads like the Random Photo series and the like. Positive criticism does not mean you have to only say what you like about an image. It means that when you feel there are things lacking that this is also brought to attention in a way to assist in improvement. If you cannot take that sort of a commentary then maybe this is not the place for you.

Please refrain from comments becoming personal. If they do then you will definitely find that this is no longer the place for you.

Please carry on .... with the above in mind.

(A Photography Moderator)

goldiejam

TelePaul wrote: »

LOL

Mate, if you feel so strongly about this topic, why not take on board the criticism, unsolicited though it may have been, and go take some more pictures of the, ahem 'movement'?

Occupy protest's in 82 countries and over 1000 cities?

I think you could safely call that a movement.... ahem.







Ilford HP5+ pushed to 800.

ceejay

Grabbed these using my phone as I was passing last week:








Shame the guy walked past as I took the last one - shutter speed on the Nexus One is about 3 seconds from pressing the button to taking the photo! I was trying to capture how the protester-police interaction in Dublin was v. different to New York

aidan18

BigDaddyCan

occupy Cork

pete4130

All the photos have a really "outsider looking in" or gawking feel to them. Not close enough, just pics of tents on the street, no grit, no action, no real emotion.
they just have the feeling of being snaps by passers by or a photog who went down to take pics and didn't really have any idea of what end result they wanted.

I've been checking out my friend Andrew's images from his time at Occupy Wall Street in NY and they have more of the raw feeling I'm on about. Granted its a bigger protest, a more strict policing ethic and there has already been incidents, police brutality which naturally lead to more action in the shots. I'n saying that, some of the best shots are where there is no violence at all. He's gotten up close, intimate and creates more of a sense of connection with whats happening on the street than the photos I've seen of occupy Dame Street and Occupy Galway.

run_Forrest_run

where is thebaz when you need some up close gritty photos??

Buceph

pete4130 wrote: »

All the photos have a really "outsider looking in" or gawking feel to them. Not close enough, just pics of tents on the street, no grit, no action, no real emotion.
they just have the feeling of being snaps by passers by or a photog who went down to take pics and didn't really have any idea of what end result they wanted.

I've been checking out my friend Andrew's images from his time at Occupy Wall Street in NY and they have more of the raw feeling I'm on about. Granted its a bigger protest, a more strict policing ethic and there has already been incidents, police brutality which naturally lead to more action in the shots. I'n saying that, some of the best shots are where there is no violence at all. He's gotten up close, intimate and creates more of a sense of connection with whats happening on the street than the photos I've seen of occupy Dame Street and Occupy Galway.

I don't think there's anything wrong with an "outsider looking in feel." I was down at the Cork "occupy" today taking pictures and I didn't get any emotion from the people protesting. I certainly wasn't taking publicity shots for them, I don't want to dress them up to be anything they're not. You're comparing the Irish "occupy" to the New York one which is completely different. In New York you have a fairly vast array of people protesting. In Cork and Dublin you have a couple of crusties and their tents. They have little organisations going about who buys the tea and who buys the biscuits, then who washes up the cups for the tea, and whether they should use napkins for the biscuits or plates because napkins are bad for the environment but using excess water to clean the plates could be bad as well.

The reason a lot of pictures have a feel of "outsider looking in" is because they have been taken by outsiders looking in. And there seems to be zero attempt from the people protesting in relaying their message to anyone, apart from the occasional but of dogma espousal.

Maybe if these protesters represented Irish people there'd be more of an attempt to capture the emotion of the rally, of getting to the core of what's happening. At the moment though this is just a group of people having a little holiday protest. It's nothing.

dazftw

How long is this still to go on for? Might take a trip up Saturday.

Captain Flaps

Those of you getting a little too wound up over this might find this video interesting...