SS refused these images because they are "potentially offensive images."

So for those that might be offended by these—or think a buyer might be offended—please help me understand. I think I know what is potentially offensive. But I am curious. Also, I'd like to know if you think they are worthy cartoons for me to submit. FYI, I'm a man of African descent. 

http://www.mostphotos.com/4903050/pointing-finger-above-black-man
http://www.mostphotos.com/4917840/man-hanging-himself

My goal of these is not to offend. Rather, to illustrate intolerance, hatred and the stress of many people around the world. From the Dalits of India to African-descended folk struggling for equality in America.

Personally I don't find these images offensive.
Unfortunately we live in a world where everything about Blacks, Arabian or everybody not "Caucasian - White" is considered by some people as potentially offensive or dangerous... 

They just dont want to deal with possible complaints etc. Call it lazy call it whatever, they just dont want to get in the middle of it.

Thanks for the input. I appreciate it. This has been quite a learning experience. 

The first one, I don't know what it's supposed to represent.  I don't get the second either.  You can't literally hang yourself as illustrated...  I don't care what the race of the guy is.

Quote from: sjlocke on May 17, 2013, 17:02
The first one, I don't know what it's supposed to represent.  I don't get the second either.  You can't literally hang yourself as illustrated...  I don't care what the race of the guy is.

The first one represents racial discrimination. My parents were turned away and denied services because of my father's black skin (a United States Air Force chaplin refused to marry them in the 1960s). In the past, I've been turned away from places because of the color of my skin.

The second one is conceptual—not literal. It is a stressed out Arab or African man. Indeed, color of skin really has nothing to do with it. You can hang yourself with stress or worrying things. Hence, the worried man hanging himself. I made a darker skinned man because microstock sites in general lack diverse images.

Quote from: TheBlackRhino on May 17, 2013, 16:16
FYI, I'm ... of African descent. 

IIRC we all are according to most scientists

ITM

Quote from: aspp on May 17, 2013, 17:18

Quote from: TheBlackRhino on May 17, 2013, 16:16
FYI, I'm ... of African descent. 

IIRC we all are according to most scientists

ITM

Touche! I agree

The first because a white hand is telling a black man to go away and the second represents suicide?

I don't see anything offensive about either of them.  The first illustrates a very real phenomenon.  Maybe it is just too political.  Who do they think will be "offended" - Black people, who can relate, or racist white people, who probably won't see themselves in it even if they should?

The second one, I have no idea.  Unless they are going to ban all images suggesting suicide, I don't see how the fact that the person depicted is of darker skin or ethnicity matters. 

Just want to add that this seems to be a blow against anything original or meaningful in microstock.  Guess we should all stick to the same boring depictions of toothily smiling happy doctors and business people.   

I'm wondering if your keywords might have been what set off the "offensive image" warning.

Quote from: TheBlackRhino on May 17, 2013, 17:17

The first one represents racial discrimination. My parents were turned away and denied services because of my father's black skin..

Life would have been a whole lot simpler if mankind looked like penguins. 

http://www.mostphotos.com/1466065/two-penguins

What's next an Italian guy eating a pizza? Offensive to Italians for stereo typing 
I don't find it offensive, hope you get it worked out with the SS and MP, your work is very good!

Ha! You got me there! 

Quote from: Microstock Posts on May 17, 2013, 18:15

Quote from: TheBlackRhino on May 17, 2013, 17:17

The first one represents racial discrimination. My parents were turned away and denied services because of my father's black skin..

Life would have been a whole lot simpler if mankind looked like penguins. 

http://www.mostphotos.com/1466065/two-penguins

Quote from: lisafx on May 17, 2013, 17:47
Just want to add that this seems to be a blow against anything original or meaningful in microstock.  Guess we should all stick to the same boring depictions of toothily smiling happy doctors and business people.   

Yeah. Kind of sad. My thoughts exactly. I've especially been inclined towards a "mega" diversity: Not just skin color, but body size and religion. You'll see a series based on Henri Matisse's "Green Line" in my MP portfolio: http://www.mostphotos.com/theblackrhino/portfolio#q=muslim&lang&show=latest

A few years back in the U.S. we had a story going around that a man shot and killed a black youth because he was in a hoodie (oversimplified in the media, of course). So I made this one and a few firms rejected it for being "offensive." http://www.mostphotos.com/2966201/black-man-targeted

Keep in mind the biggest crimes in African-American communities is Black-on-Black crime. So this particular image was very relevant. However, that being said, I cannot say it has sold much.

This image of a woman behind a tall wall with barbed wire was inspired by the separation wall in Israel/Palestine. This too has been rejected by some firms as offensive: http://www.mostphotos.com/1276582/wailing-at-the-other-wall

On the other hand, I don't always seek controversy. I made this drawing of people at the movies. I think I included every ethnic and religious group in the world—including a space alien with his environmental suit! http://www.mostphotos.com/1932081/people-at-the-movies 

iStuck has rejected all of these images. 

Quote from: JohnItalia on May 17, 2013, 18:55
What's next an Italian guy eating a pizza? Offensive to Italians for stereo typing 
I don't find it offensive, hope you get it worked out with the SS and MP, your work is very good!

Indeed! However, I might avoid a Chinese laundromat and Black folk eating watermelon. 

MP is good. They take everything from me.

Thank you for the compliment. I am honored. That means alot.

Quote from: ruxpriencdiam on May 17, 2013, 17:24
The first because a white hand is telling a black man to go away and the second represents suicide?

Historically, there is obvious precedence for the first. The second, suicide, depression and self-hatred is a real issue as well. However, if I was a white person that never discriminated someone, I believe I could understand how it can be offensive. Suicide—if I had a close family member that committed suicide—could also be offensive. Thanks for the feedback.

Quote from: TheBlackRhino on May 17, 2013, 17:17
The first one represents racial discrimination. My parents were turned away and denied services because of my father's black skin (a United States Air Force chaplin refused to marry them in the 1960s). In the past, I've been turned away from places because of the color of my skin.

The second one is conceptual—not literal. It is a stressed out Arab or African man. Indeed, color of skin really has nothing to do with it. You can hang yourself with stress or worrying things. Hence, the worried man hanging himself. I made a darker skinned man because microstock sites in general lack diverse images.

I think in the first one, there's a disconnect between the two.  The hand has really heavy lines and is sort of just pointing upwards.  I don't get the feeling the hand is telling the guy to go somewhere.  Maybe if we weren't seeing it so flat on, but with some perspective.

I know the second is conceptual, but for some reason, I'm not seeing it as effective.  The rope is loose around his neck, the hand anatomy doesn't seem correct.  More importantly I mean, we all mimic hanging with an invisible rope when we feel stressed or annoyed by someone, but actually putting a rope there in the hand makes it seem less humorous or "real".

I'm just throwing these out there.  As "art" we can do whatever we like

I do think the 'potentially offensive' rejection is over-the-top however I very much doubt that there is enough demand for such images to make it worthwhile producing them. In particular I don't think that the simple 'cartoon' format is adequate to represent such dark subjects . Photos with real people (i.e. models acting) expressing facial emotions would be more powerful and that's what such subjects usually need.

Don't forget the old stock photography adage, assuming that you want to make money at it;

"Stock photography is not about portraying the world as it actually is but rather how we would wish it to be".

Quote from: sjlocke on May 17, 2013, 19:57

Quote from: TheBlackRhino on May 17, 2013, 17:17
The first one represents racial discrimination. My parents were turned away and denied services because of my father's black skin (a United States Air Force chaplin refused to marry them in the 1960s). In the past, I've been turned away from places because of the color of my skin.

The second one is conceptual—not literal. It is a stressed out Arab or African man. Indeed, color of skin really has nothing to do with it. You can hang yourself with stress or worrying things. Hence, the worried man hanging himself. I made a darker skinned man because microstock sites in general lack diverse images.

I think in the first one, there's a disconnect between the two.  The hand has really heavy lines and is sort of just pointing upwards.  I don't get the feeling the hand is telling the guy to go somewhere.  Maybe if we weren't seeing it so flat on, but with some perspective.

I know the second is conceptual, but for some reason, I'm not seeing it as effective.  The rope is loose around his neck, the hand anatomy doesn't seem correct.  More importantly I mean, we all mimic hanging with an invisible rope when we feel stressed or annoyed by someone, but actually putting a rope there in the hand makes it seem less humorous or "real".

I'm just throwing these out there.  As "art" we can do whatever we like

Indeed. I see your point. I'm definitely into "incorrect" anatomy. 

Quote from: gostwyck on May 17, 2013, 20:14
I do think the 'potentially offensive' rejection is over-the-top however I very much doubt that there is enough demand for such images to make it worthwhile producing them. In particular I don't think that the simple 'cartoon' format is adequate to represent such dark subjects . Photos with real people (i.e. models acting) expressing facial emotions would be more powerful and that's what such subjects usually need.

Don't forget the old stock photography adage, assuming that you want to make money at it;

"Stock photography is not about portraying the world as it actually is but rather how we would wish it to be".

Yes, I do see that. My best sellers are rocks, sticks and stuff. Quite innocuous. On the other hand, you'd be surprised how many my "what the world is" pix sell—especially in Asia and Africa. This fist hanging over people sells almost weekly: http://www.mostphotos.com/1807945/big-fist-over-people

Rhino, I have to say, I am very impressed with your work.  I wonder if you've tried pursuing a career in political cartooning or some other area that values social commentary more than apparently stock agencies do? 

An image is never offensive.
The interpretation that you make about it can be...

Theres nothing offensive about your images.

If one wants to be too much political correct he ends up as a racist / antidemocratic himself.
Or like one german poet said once:"If you walk to far to the left you come out at the right"

Its like with other topics too - agencyemployees behave very often like cowards.
Literary speaking -they are sitting under their desks, shivering and beeing afraid of idiots which might be "offended" or attorneys sending warning letters.
So they try to avoid every possible legal issue - and that results in the fact that the images they accept become more and more uninteresting and equal and the interesting images will be rejected.

regards axel