This made me cry. I have never cried over a photo before. Thank you Graham.
Or guy taking a mud bath that doesn’t want his face in the image. I can’t imagine why someone would be in such a place. Hope he moved before the tide came in.
IDguy wrote:
Or guy taking a mud bath that doesn’t want his face in the image. I can’t imagine why someone would be in such a place. Hope he moved before the tide came in.
Well IDguy you made me smile!
canadaboy wrote:
Those who take photos have an ethical responsibility to preserve the dignity of their subjects and provide a faithful, comprehensive visual depiction of their surroundings so as to avoid causing public misperceptions. Visual images are a cogent way to convey an experience to an audience and to evoke strong public emotions. In this way, the photographer wields substantial control over public perception. Photographers’ decisions about how to depict their subjects can entirely alter viewers’ perceptions.
Would I have taken this shot - yes but only with the subjects knowledge and consent. Would I make it available on the net is a question for the conscience of the individual behind the lens.
All who view this will be affected, for around 10 seconds before we sit back on our leather sofa in front of our 50 inch flat screen TV. That does not take away the fact it is a very powerful image.
Those who take photos have an ethical responsibili... (
show quote)
In the interest of fairness to the author the first paragraph above is a quote from
https://www.uniteforsight.org/global-health-university/photography-ethics I'm sure you won't mind me pointing this out, after all it is the ethical thing to do
My philosophy about extremely sad, tragic, and even gruesome images of people in very horrible circumstances stem from my experience in Viet Nam. My MOS was mainly to do with aerial surveillance and detection photography. The equipmet was highly specialized gear employed to make infrared and cartographic images from aircraft. I did, however carry with me my "unofficial" camera kit- an old Leica M-3 and 3 lenses that I coud keep in a small belt pack that I made out of an old signal satchel case.
Long story short- I wanted to get some picture of the guys in my unit - believe it or not- the fun stuff during quiet periods. I ended up shooting some pretty gory stuff. My thoughts at the time was that I had to show "people" what kinda devastating impact war inflicts on the soldiers, the innocent people (what the government called collateral damage) and show what really goes down beyond the rhetoric, euphemisms, propaganda, lies and misconceptions. With this in mind I was able to raise the camera to my eye, get in close and point it at people, events, situations and horrors that ordinarily would shock me beyond being able to operate the equipmet, let alone stand there long enough to witness all of this.
When I came home- I had the body of work that I could hardly look at. At the time, theses kinds of images were in demand and highly saleable to a variety of print news outlets and so called "action & war" magazines but I coud not accept money or profit- I found it ghoulish. I donated them to a number of veterans' rights groups, an anti-war organization and finally to the U.S. Army Pictorial Center, at the time, at Astoria N.Y.
A small portfolio landed me a job on a daily newspaper. I never went back into a war zone but every now and again photojournalists see and shoot some rough stuff- disasters, accidents, riots, and folks down on their luck- putting it mildly. You can bring yourself to shoot this stuff if you feel it's not gonna be "tabloid fodder" that just appeals to some folk's morbid curiosity but perhaps "people" will see the suffering and want to do something about it. If my pictures coud make a difference- well I could somehow rationalize shooting tragedy.
It seemed to me that most "front page" and centerfold news pictures are BAD NEWS! So...Being fortunate enough not to have suffered P.T.S.D - just the occasional nightmare so after two tours in-country and 2 years on the newspaper, I decided to go back to my old trade- portraiture and wedding photography and then to mostly commercial work. Weddings were therapeutic for me- happy people all dressed up and having a good time. I ESCAPED with my mental health in tow!
Just thought I'd let y'all in on my thoughts!
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
My philosophy about extremely sad, tragic, and even gruesome images of people in very horrible circumstances stem from my experience in Viet Nam. My MOS was mainly to do with aerial surveillance and detection photography. The equipmet was highly specialized gear employed to make infrared and cartographic images from aircraft. I did, however carry with me my "unofficial" camera kit- an old Leica M-3 and 3 lenses that I coud keep in a small belt pack that I made out of an old signal satchel case.
Long story short- I wanted to get some picture of the guys in my unit - believe it or not- the fun stuff during quiet periods. I ended up shooting some pretty gory stuff. My thoughts at the time was that I had to show "people" what kinda devastating impact war inflicts on the soldiers, the innocent people (what the government called collateral damage) and show what really goes down beyond the rhetoric, euphemisms, propaganda, lies and misconceptions. With this in mind I was able to raise the camera to my eye, get in close and point it at people, events, situations and horrors that ordinarily would shock me beyond being able to operate the equipmet, let alone stand there long enough to witness all of this.
When I came home- I had the body of work that I could hardly look at. At the time, theses kinds of images were in demand and highly saleable to a variety of print news outlets and so called "action & war" magazines but I coud not accept money or profit- I found it ghoulish. I donated them to a number of veterans' rights groups, an anti-war organization and finally to the U.S. Army Pictorial Center, at the time, at Astoria N.Y.
A small portfolio landed me a job on a daily newspaper. I never went back into a war zone but every now and again photojournalists see and shoot some rough stuff- disasters, accidents, riots, and folks down on their luck- putting it mildly. You can bring yourself to shoot this stuff if you feel it's not gonna be "tabloid fodder" that just appeals to some folk's morbid curiosity but perhaps "people" will see the suffering and want to do something about it. If my pictures coud make a difference- well I could somehow rationalize shooting tragedy.
It seemed to me that most "front page" and centerfold news pictures are BAD NEWS! So...Being fortunate enough not to have suffered P.T.S.D - just the occasional nightmare so after two tours in-country and 2 years on the newspaper, I decided to go back to my old trade- portraiture and wedding photography and then to mostly commercial work. Weddings were therapeutic for me- happy people all dressed up and having a good time. I ESCAPED with my mental health in tow!
Just thought I'd let y'all in on my thoughts!
My philosophy about extremely sad, tragic, and eve... (
show quote)
Thanks for letting us know you better.
Thank you, Graham, for pointing out the clear lapse in ethics exhibited by canadaboy who blatantly plagiarized his lead-in by not using the requisite quotes!
...and he offers no response?
For me, that’s a red flag to beware posts by canadaboy !
Dave
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.