Guy or Gal?

Guy or Gal?

  • Guy

    Votes: 1,568 94.7%

  • Gal

    Votes: 87 5.3%
  • Total voters
    1,655
After nearly half a century of making photographs I think that it's more than just a gear thing. The photo magazines used to be heavily slanted toward things like how shoot sexy pix of girls and shooting sports pictures. A couple of generations ago women were expected t wear skirts, which kind of restricted the positions she could get into and still retain a sense of modesty. Then there was the camera "problem". It wasn't just the size and weight of a 4X5 Speed Graphic but the size and weight of the shoulder bag needed to hold a dozen or more 4x5 film holders plus flash bulbs. When Rollieflexes became acceptable more women shooters appeared, and when publications finally embraced 35mm then female photographers really came into their own.

Back in the 80's and 70's I knew a number of talented women photographers, mostly amateurs whose husbands or boyfriends were photographers. There was one successful pro that I knew who shot mostly product shots with a 4X5 view camera but the general consensus was that she was gay, which may have had nothing to do with it.

As for newspapers, and a lesser extent magazines, you often run into situations where you end up on the wrong side of town and sometimes you'll find yourself photographing people who'd rather not be photographed at all. I've had the crap beat out of me a time or two. The world isn't perfect yet.
 
Al Kaplan said:
The photo magazines used to be heavily slanted toward things like how shoot sexy pix of girls and shooting sports pictures.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how far you're going back here, but when I first started reading such things as Popular Photography, Modern Photography, and US Camera (anybody else remember that one?) they were most definitely relevant to women and men as photographers. Modern Photography readers will remember Julia Scully's column, right up there with the venerable Herbert Keppler!

It wasn't just the size and weight of a 4X5 Speed Graphic but the size and weight of the shoulder bag needed to hold a dozen or more 4x5 film holders plus flash bulbs.
Click to expand...

Do you remember that Jackie K-O was good at driving a Speed Graphic? :)

(Do I dare bring up Bunny Yeager?) :)

Edit: Jeez, I just noticed we're down below 6% again.
 
> Edit: Jeez, I just noticed we're down below 6% again.

Yes- but weight it by quality of posts and not quantity---
 
I remember a Herb Keppler (two R's I think). Now I'm thinking of taking my 3 1/4 X 4 1/4 Speed Graphic with me this morning. It's in great shape, complete with side mounted flash sporting a big chrome reflector, but I have no holders for it. I'd LOVE to check out the 90mm Wollensack Wide Angle lens. I guess it would cover 4X5. I'd just like to see the expressions on people when they see it! A bunch of college students were intrigued with my manual Hermes 3000 portable typewriter when I was typing some letters at Starbucks a couple of weeks ago...LOL...and it was more girls than guys!
 
HuubL said:
Anybody brave enough to contemplate a little on this... :)
Click to expand...

I think we've circled completely around this subject, endless loop style, and I haven't heard anything conclusive, really.

The question seems to be, why aren't there more women on this forum?

We've hovered in the 5 - 6.5 percent range ever since I've been here, very consistently.

To try to answer this, I think of why I came here, and it was for one particular reason. This forum was suggested to me on a Usenet forum for some help in identifying the model of a camera I used to have years ago. It was really a very specific reason, as opposed to a general interest.

A related question, why don't the women here participate as much as the men?

To try to answer, I think of why and how I participate here.

Most of the threads I post in, or those I start, have to do with either gear or technique. These are the strong points of this forum. Such things as scanning technique, camera repair, film, accessories, things like that. Most of the threads I post in are very specific in nature.

I also admit that I enjoy some of the general-interest and even nonsense threads, and I'll jump into those as well. I'll even be a smart@$$ at times, as is my nature. :) (I admit I even thought of intentionally working the word "lense" {sic} into this response to see what kind of reaction it would get.) :)

So, why are we way down in the single digits here, while on other photo boards which have similar surveys we're typically up around 15-20%?

My feeling right now, after thinking about it over a break in a yawn-patrol hurry-up-and-wait project today, is that RFF is indeed highly specialized, and in a way that many women don't have a need or desire to participate.

Of all my girlfriends, those who do take photos, that is, I'm really the only one who uses traditional methods at all. Very few would be able to define the term "rangefinder" as it pertains to photography. (The same here actually goes for many men too!) They typically use nondescript P&S digitals, or {_GAG_} cam phones. A few have DSLRs. I'll go as far as to admit that women, in general, are not as gear-oriented as men seem to be.

That's my hunch, anyway.

Am I making sense here?
 
Some would say: "The ratio is approximately 100:6 here, so it is a very fertile ground for female photographers to explore!"

I am not so sure about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top