}

Does a photo really steal your soul?

“The Orthodox Jewish man in this photograph wants $1.6 million from the famous photographer who snapped it without consent.” Reports the NYPost.

In 2001 photographer Philip-Lorca diCorcia set up a camera and a stobe light on on the street and took photographs of unsuspecting passersby. The photos were later displayed at an art exhibit called ‘heads” in Chelsea. The photograph of Erno Nussenzweig, a retired diamond merchant from Jersey that you see here sold several copies at $20,000 each. The photo was also used in a book called “Heads” which has sold several thousand copies.

Having given no permission for the photo to be taken, and for receiving no compensation on the use of his image, Nussenzweig is now suing the photographer.

“We claim that to take someone’s picture without their consent is bad enough,” said Jay Goldberg, Nussenzweig’s lawyer. “But to then hang the picture in galleries, put it in books and sell it around the city without telling the person or obtaining permission is unfair and outrageous.”…

diCorcia responds

“It is a fundamental right, and I will defend it. I consider myself at the end of a long line of photographers who have done what is now being described as a malicious criminal act.”

As both a photographer and a civilian, I can see both sides, and my feelings on the issue are not entirely settled. But then I got to the end of the article where it states

DiCorcia said he doesn’t understand why Nussenzweig is so incensed. “My intentions were nothing but honorable,” diCorcia said. “If he is as other-worldly as his face makes him out to be, why would he care?”

Umm….what? Can someone please explain that to me? Was that not the snarkiest comment you’ve heard this side of the blogosphere? I mean, come on, $20,000 buys a lot of kreplach these days.

36 Comments

  1. client

    7/10/2005 at 10:27 am

  2. jessi

    7/10/2005 at 10:47 am

  3. jessi

    7/10/2005 at 10:48 am

  4. ybocher

    7/10/2005 at 11:00 am

  5. michael

    7/10/2005 at 11:04 am

  6. client

    7/10/2005 at 11:14 am

  7. Jobber

    7/10/2005 at 1:57 pm

  8. esther

    7/10/2005 at 3:28 pm

  9. jessi

    7/10/2005 at 4:40 pm

  10. Yitz

    7/10/2005 at 11:00 pm

  11. ck

    7/10/2005 at 11:21 pm

  12. ybocher

    7/10/2005 at 11:28 pm

  13. michael

    7/11/2005 at 5:06 am

  14. dwash

    7/11/2005 at 6:16 am

  15. laya

    7/11/2005 at 7:03 am

  16. chazarmaveth

    7/11/2005 at 9:29 am

  17. David M. Frost

    7/11/2005 at 9:52 am

  18. michael

    7/11/2005 at 9:55 am

  19. Tom Morrissey

    7/11/2005 at 1:11 pm

  20. themiddle

    7/11/2005 at 1:22 pm

  21. Tom Morrissey

    7/11/2005 at 1:28 pm

  22. Tom Morrissey

    7/11/2005 at 1:36 pm

  23. themiddle

    7/11/2005 at 1:43 pm

  24. Tom Morrissey

    7/11/2005 at 2:13 pm

  25. themiddle

    7/11/2005 at 2:47 pm

  26. Rina

    7/12/2005 at 1:32 am

  27. Grace

    7/12/2005 at 2:59 am

  28. Frieda Shor

    7/12/2005 at 6:18 am

  29. Frieda Shor

    7/12/2005 at 6:20 am

  30. Frieda Shor

    7/12/2005 at 6:29 am

  31. ybocher

    7/12/2005 at 8:17 am

  32. esther

    7/12/2005 at 9:25 am

  33. Tom Morrissey

    7/12/2005 at 10:50 am

  34. parcequilfaut

    7/12/2005 at 2:41 pm

  35. Pingback: Physical Appearances in the Holographic Era «

  36. here

    5/13/2019 at 7:09 am

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *