| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/28/2005 12:12:45 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by jbsmithana:
I attended the showing of the last 60 years of Pulitzer Prize winning photos Friday at the Washington State Museum in Tacoma. It was very moving as well as informative. The most interesting part was each photo had a description of events and the story as told by the photographer. Many were of tragedy and / or war. Many were taken in very dangerous and difficult conditions. Many you would have recognized. Some helped change history and get the public to realize what was happening in the world that needed attention.
Two particular photos are relevant. A photojournalist was covering famine and starvation in Africa. Before visiting an aid center he and others were instructed not to touch or try to assist any victim. Outside the camp he stumbled across a young women (hard to tell the age as she was in the final stages of starvation and was very emaciated) crawling across the dry desert soil trying to get o the food station. He took the shot that ended up winning him the Pulitzer. He did not help her although he wanted to. She died and would have died in any case as she was so far gone. After the photo was printed some questioned his ethics and why he did not assist the child to the aid camp, pick her up and carry her in. Some time later he committed suicide. His suicide was a result of guilt and anguish over the event.
Another photo (you will likely remember if you are my age) was of a young female child running toward the journalist in Vietnam after having her village bombed. She had all her clothing burned off of her from napalm. While running at him she kept repeating “it is burning, help me ... ”. He took the photo and helped get her to aid. She lived, is now married and has two children. After winning the Pulitzer he returned to Vietnam and gave half the winning money to her and her family. To this day he stays in contact with her.
So before you criticize legitimate photojournalists (not the Paparazzi) ask yourself, “Could I handle these events? I do not think I could. |
That is not really what I was criticizing. Those PJs were sent or went of thier own volition for the sole purpose of capturing images in a war zone of in a famine stricken area, they are no passers-by (in most cases) who just happen to have a camera.
I saw a video on TV about 8 or 10 years ago of an accident scene. A lady was trapped in her car and apparently someone with a video camera started recording. The car was upright and she couldn't get the door open. Over the course of about 10 minutes the car caught fire. Slowly at first. The lady was struggling, but no one helped her. The person with the camera stood back and let a lady burn to death right in front of him while he recorded it.
That is just one example.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2005 12:22:08 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
That is not really what I was criticizing. Those PJs were sent or went of thier own volition for the sole purpose of capturing images in a war zone of in a famine stricken area, they are no passers-by (in most cases) who just happen to have a camera.
I saw a video on TV about 8 or 10 years ago of an accident scene. A lady was trapped in her car and apparently someone with a video camera started recording. The car was upright and she couldn't get the door open. Over the course of about 10 minutes the car caught fire. Slowly at first. The lady was struggling, but no one helped her. The person with the camera stood back and let a lady burn to death right in front of him while he recorded it.
That is just one example. |
Yes, I realize that. I was not referring to any specific poster here but was only trying to show that there is a legitimate side to photojournalism.
I agree that taking photos and not helping at any local accident scene is pretty low-life. However, for us non-photojournalists, taking photos when the scene is under semi-control, help is being administered and you are careful not to show the blood and gore is another thing. It would be ok in my book although I would find it difficult in any case. |
|
|
|
08/28/2005 12:29:15 AM · #28 |
Like with integrity, people who display ethics are often regarded as being crazy... They are also the ones who loose almost every race, while exercicing integrity, ethics and sound judgement, others walk away with the mula, the glory and sometimes even your family.
Message edited by author 2005-08-28 03:15:37. |
|
|
|
08/28/2005 12:34:31 AM · #29 |
About 3 days ago, while browsing the photography section at Half Price Books, I came across a small, two book compilation of photojournalism images called "Paradisio" and "Inferno". I haven't picked up my camera since. The images in "Inferno" were (I've sat here for a few moments trying to unsuccesfully find an adjective to describe it and I just can't). The bile rises in my troat just thinking about it.
I can say that the images were for the most part not gory, but that each had a very strong point and a story that would not have been publicized and Changed had the photographer(s)/journalist(s) not documented it (i.e . apartheid, famine, genocide, etc).
I'm no journalist, and to be honost I had some intrests in it, until 3 days ago. It takes a special type of person to be able to document these stories, and I have a great deal of respect for those photographers who can hack it. I'm just not sure that I am one of them.
I've lost my train of thought and wondered. Let me see if I can get back on track. . . :/
Ok, the original post stated that there was a fatal traffic accident. I think that the question that I would ask myself had it been me passing by, would be "What sort of a difference would any image that I capture from this accident make"? and "If there is a difference to be made, is it worth it"?
If the answers balance out then the image is worth it. If they don't, then the image is simply for the sake of a dollar.
It simply depends on the type of person that you choose to be.
And quite the conundrum.
~Jen
hope I made at least some sort of sense and didn't ramble on too much. :)
|
|
|
|
08/28/2005 02:06:47 AM · #30 |
I was in a situation 2 years ago where I had to decide to throw my camera down or keep taking pictures
I live in Twin Falls Idaho. This is a place where Evil Kenevil (sp?) tried jumping over the Snake River Canyon. Anyways, this canyon is also famous for the Perine Bridge which BASE jumpers can jump off of year round. Well, I was up on top of the bridge taking pictures of everyone jumping and one gentleman got up there and jumped off. He did a front flip and his chute didn't open. It was full impact to the face of this guy. One of his buddies jumped after him to save him and the rest of his friends ran down to their cars. I ended up calling 911 and running down to my car to go into the canyon. When I pulled up to the dock where the boat came with the man nobody was doing CPR. Now at this point I have determined that he was already dead. But with all of the people yelling and looking for someone to do CPR no one was going down there to do anything. SO I had a choice keep taking pictures or go and try to save this guys life. Well to make a long story short I ended up being the only one in a crowd of 20 that knew how to do CPR I dropped my camera and did what I could. The gentleman didn't end up living but I learned alot that day...not just about life and death and where my life is going but I also learned what I was going to do if I was ever in a situation like that again. DROP THE CAMERA AND DO WHAT YOU CAN. If things are under control by the time the parametics show up sure take pictures of that procedure and not of the dead guy.
I did end up taking pictures of the dead guy and the cops wanted me to give them all of the pictures that I took and they told me I was in violation by taking the pictures. I didn't agree with them even till today so I took my roll of film and exposed the whole thing.
I don't know take from it what you will thats just my story. |
|
|
|
08/28/2005 03:06:10 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by runger:
... DROP THE CAMERA AND DO WHAT YOU CAN. ... |
which reminds me of this thread...
Cat Murdered!, WARNING: disturbing pics!
"This morning as I was getting ready for work, I heard something sounded like a cat and dogs fighting at the back alley of the house. I didn’t pay much attention to the whole commotion coz I thought it was just a small matter of territory take over of some sort. Then my wife who was at the room upstairs told me to chase them off. She said there were about 6 dogs cornering a cat. So, on my way to the back of the house, I grabbed my ever-ready camera. When I was at the location I just couldn’t believe what I saw. This is truly NG stuffs! A cat was lying down on the road while part of it’s body was in the mouth of a dog. Intuitively, I yelled at the one that looks like the head of the mafia gang but they didn’t budge. So, I quickly took cover and fired at will. It happened so quickly.."
|
|
|
|
08/28/2005 03:13:40 AM · #32 |
Oooooh, sick! I don't like cats, but I think I would have gone over and thumped him on the head after the dogs finnished breaking his back, just to put him out of misery.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2005 03:21:04 AM · #33 |
It seems to me that what's being criticized here is the paparazzi/tabloid journalism and its greed for shocking shots with no moral considerations. The more blood the better. I have to agree - this is just about the lowest where one can descend to. It's not real photojournalism by any means, they're not even in the same universe.
But then it is not only acceptable but even necessary to also picture human suffering (that's part of human life, too, after all) - as long as it's done in a respectful and meaningful manner, with sympathy and understanding, so that the pictures would have a message lasting beyond daily news. That I would call photojournalism and no one should be ashamed of becoming a photojournalist.
The choice between the two is a question of morality and lies with the photographer alone. |
|
|
|
08/28/2005 09:42:52 AM · #34 |
Legally, as long as you were not blocking traffic or a hazard to the scene it's okay to take pictures.
Ethically/morally, it all depends on how you take the pictures. Not taking pictures of the body is a good start (including a limb is considered OK)
For myself, I am the photographer for the local fire/ambulance/health departments and When I go to a scene I am generally taking pictures of everything. Usually right beside the police. So far, I haven't had to take any gruesome pictures, but I'm prepared to. As for taking my pictures and submitting them to the newspaper...I go through the Public Relations officer for the Fire and Ambulance departments. The same person is also the health officer to the town (and coincidentally my father).
That said, I am also an EMT (still in training) and if I was on duty, the camera stays put away (until any patients are taken care of then I am free to take pictures). |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 06/26/2025 10:11:31 AM EDT.
