Bildet virker autentisk, men fikk du lov å fotografere?
Skitne bein og uflidd hår, utslitt matte, kjettingen. For ikke å snakke om den rotta! Guffen stemning som du har klart å formidle. Flat belysning fra kamerablits, nokså svak kontrast, understreker settingen.

Hey Judit!

Very rough picture you got here.Where is it? Or have you arranged it?
For sure the prisons do not look like this in scandinavia. Anyway the picture is very good and it tells a sad story. I also wonder if it also could be very good in b&w?

Best regards
Finn

Voksfigur et eller annet sted? Helt ok. men med både lenke og rotte blir det kanskje litt i overkant.

Hei Joachim, du er faktisk inne på noe der.. veggen bak er litt for rein til å være ett guffent fangehull, og det er noe voksaktig over armene og beina. Kan dette være fra Madame Tussauds Vokskabinett i London? I så fall burde fotografen ha opplyst om det.

The photographer should not have, like the previous comment suggested, told us whether this was a figure from Madame Tussaud's or a real human being. What value would the picture then have?
As it is now it provokes us to think. - A prisoner with a foot chain, photographed against his will - Are we exited or angry by the idea?
But what do we see? Judit gives us a clue: A rat that most likely would have run away from the disturbing photographer are peacefully enjoying her meal. And we struggle with our feelings – did Judit fool us, . . is it not the real thing - is it not a mistreated human being, . . . . only a doll made of wax.
Oh, how angry we can get when we are fouled of real torture and suffering!

It might be interesting to provocate feedback based on the impression that people might get hold like we believe only slaves are - or we comfort us with thoughts about '' past '' - anyhow - this is as even as provocation a few layers too light.
What is the intuition of someone visiting a tourist-attraction like M.Tussaud or similar, taking pictures of celebrities, freaks or settings of humiliation ?
Is the intention really the planed provocation ?
Up to everyone to decide - the other point would be to question the photographic vision behind - how much involvement does this image show ?
To me - maybe a bit too much judging - it is passing by, taking the camera up, shot - and follow the guide to the next attraction - Foto.no members can later one spend time and effort to create a quiz about intention etc. - does not impress me at all - and the output of the though-triggering provocation - some people might travel to Disney-land in order to sharpen their view on the world. To those it might be of value to get reminded that it is just a reverse view - it is not what we call - reality.

No, the photographers involvement isn't big – it probably is a snapshot on a guided tour, as you say, . . . . . but would you and I have commented it if it wasn't – isn't the low quality exactly what makes it interesting to us? – In my opinion it gives the picture a “realistic look" - it looks like a sneak photographed photo from Abu Ghrail – If only the wall behind the prisoner hadn't been so clean, as another commenter mentioned earlier.

Judit,
thank you for your mail, and I am sorry I did not comment in English! I'm giving an Englishh version here. I am not sure whether or not you had all the information on the picture at the time I wrote my comment. My comment was that this must be a wax figure or something. Not for real. It could have been a good picture, but in my opinion the rat and the chain makes it perhaps a bitt ''too much''. And in addition, I think the floor and the rug looks a little artificial. To suggest a different approach, I would use black and white and a fast (grainy) film (but then, you don't not use film?), and perhaps try another angle. But hey, that's just my opinion.

Joachim
:)

Thank you for all comments!

As I have written in my comment under the title, I only tried to urge people to think, and I hope I didn't make anybody angry at all.

Judit :)

I like your thoughts, it makes us think too. Theword that comes into my mind is unfairness

Thank you Cecilie!

Judit :)