Some sort of ethical question.... (2 Viewers)

[classic seanc]

I was just walking down to the shop when I saw a squad car race down toward Gulistan Cottages. I realised that there's no through traffic down that way, so whatever it was those gardai were driving to, I'd have to walk through it.
So, I turned the corner to find a bunch of guys handcuffed and being held to the ground by guards. About 5 guys were arrested, there was maybe 8 or 9 guards with more on the way, and 20 or so onlookers, peering out from their bungalow doorways. I had my camera, in fact I carry with me for incidents such as this but I didn't take any pictures.
First, I was afraid of the angry guards and the angry guys getting arrested.
Second, I didn't think I'd be able to get any good pics with my camera, and me using it.
Thirdly, I didn't really think it was right to get in these guys' faces with my camera, photographing them at their most shameful moment, just so I could show it to people.


The topic for y'all, where afaik none of you are professional news photographers as such (at least not this sort of news) is, how do you feel about taking pics of scene's like this? Street fights, people getting arrested, car accidents, buildings on fire, grizzly accidents, riots, stuff like that. Sufficit to say you could get great shots, but is the right thing to do? Would you/Could you/Have you done so? And if so, what was your motivation?


Discuss, or not......

 

[pete]

http://www.digitalrights.ie/2006/05/09/photographers-rights/

might be of interest

 

[classic seanc]

http://www.digitalrights.ie/2006/05/09/photographers-rights/

might be of interest

Excellent.

In the situation of a riot, Garda are charged with restoring public order, if in the reasonable opinion you behaviour is anyway obstructive to a garda in a riot situation, you may be arrested. A riot consists of three or more persons btw.

Interesting....I need a camera with a more powerful zoom lense so.

Blasphemey is still illegal in this country, therefore pictures that are consideried so will get you into all sorts of hot stuff. This extends to artistic photos too.

Jaysus. Edit:no pun intended

 

[carbide]

dead interesting. i spent ages thinking about this last year because i was doing a street photography project for school, and ended up photographing an arrest and a few drug deals more or less by accident.

i think it's murky, and ethically, there are two questions i'd start with:

- could you actually help someone at the scene?
- what do you plan to do with the photographs?


in your example, seanc, i'm guessing the first is a no (and my grandparents live down there, so tempted to call and ask if the senior gossip leagues know the story), but i think it would be different for a fight etc.

in the case of the second, i don't just mean whether you plan to publish them somewhere, but...would you print them? show them to anyone? and if not, or if that seems icky, why would you take the photo?

i'd also really question whether it would make a great photo rather than just a sensational one - what would you be bringing to it or saying about it if it's taken only because it's exciting or dangerous or dramatic?


for 'you', please read 'i', 'one', 'batman', etc.

 

[La La]

it is interesting. coming from a news point of view, my instinct is to snap away. some papers here love the raspberry jam shots - suicide jumps and the like, which i cannot abide.

integrity comes into it - and what you plan to use the pictures for does too. i always have my camera on me just because of where i work, and it has proven useful on a number of occasions. news wise, the 'fresher' the pics the better; but in a situation where someone is being arrested, im not sure if i'd show the faces. unless of course, it was a high profile deal.

 

[JohnnyRaz]

its a tough question, I reckon that you could consider any documentary photos exploitative in some regard; your taking some moment or aspect of someone elses life for your own benifit, be that artistic financil or whatever.

I think theres a fine line between recording something for its own sake and just being exploitative. Ive taken hundreds of photos of various odds and ends hapening arround dublin, including numerous events, protests and the riot last feb, with no other intention than to basically develop my own ability and maybe show them to mates or whatever, I have to say I dont feel overly bad about this. However I once took a shot of two drunks sleeping on dame st, and felt bad about it from the moment I pressed the shutter....

Im really too fucked too explain myself properly at the moment... bad monday...

 

[classic seanc]

dead interesting. i spent ages thinking about this last year because i was doing a street photography project for school, and ended up photographing an arrest and a few drug deals more or less by accident.

i think it's murky, and ethically, there are two questions i'd start with:

- could you actually help someone at the scene?
- what do you plan to do with the photographs?


in your example, seanc, i'm guessing the first is a no (and my grandparents live down there, so tempted to call and ask if the senior gossip leagues know the story), but i think it would be different for a fight etc.

It was a mad scene. I always thought that was a nice place, there's people that leave their sunchairs out on the street at night without a care in the world, and there's LOADS of cats. Its this kind of idyllic community tucked away in the middle of the City.
on the way back from the shop there was dozen's of people out on the street looking for the scandal, and an unmarked car parked at the end of the road observing everything. Again, that would have been a great photo. Do'h.
But no, I couldn't have helped. I actually would've just gotten in the way I think. Not intentionally like, just by being there.

in the case of the second, i don't just mean whether you plan to publish them somewhere, but...would you print them? show them to anyone?

Good question. I'd probably have thought of showing them to a few people, perhaps here on thumped, but it would have been necassary to host it on the net somewhere, so technically the whole world could see it, not just the few people I'd show it to. That's what seemed the most "icky".

and if not, or if that seems icky, why would you take the photo?

I guess just to learn about taking photo's.......

i'd also really question whether it would make a great photo rather than just a sensational one - what would you be bringing to it or saying about it if it's taken only because it's exciting or dangerous or dramatic?

I'd have tried to get shot's of the guy's expressions as they were being pushed around by the guards, a shot of the general commotion (there was a lot going on at once, and lots of onlookers). And like I said I like that little area, so a shot of that sort of thing along with the whole ruckus would have been good, the contrast of it like. In my head anyway. I think there was a lot of potential for interesting shots there. So, those are the kinda shots I would have wanted to take, and mostly for learning purposes.

I mean, there is an exciting/dangerous/dramatic element to it, and I might well have liked those sort of dramatic sensational pictures if I'd taken them. I think though that that's mainly since I haven't taken pics like that before, so it would be an experience in itself for me, rather than because I got some sort of rush out of it, I'm not into that sorta shit.


It's all a moot point for me and my noviceness at this point, but it is making for interesting discussion guyz

 

[Goff]

Actually, I remember once being upstairs in Whelan's after a Corpo gig and someone was getting sick into a bin. Would have made for a lovely photo. But I didn't take the shot. Even though EVERYONE was telling me I should. But I'm nice like that.


On a more serious note:

On the way up Talbot Street one night, some poor chap was drunk and just squatting on the ground trying to get his second wind. The horsey police arrived and basically used two massive horses to get him to "move along". It was a bit drastic and overkill, for what was just some bloke a bit worse for wear and well capable of getting home given a couple of minutes to compose himself.

Did I take pictures?

Yes, I did.

BUT I was a bit drunk myself, so I a) didn't give a fuck about the horsey police and b) ended up taking unuseable blurred photos cos I forgot to whack the ISO setting up higher on the compact.

The horsey police were two busy hassling a defenceless bloke so they didn't even notice me taking the photos.

Now, if I'd used a flash, that would be a different story, I'm sure.

 

[Goff]

And on a related note, I wanted to take a picture of an Italian cop on a segway the other day, but was too chicken to do so. 'Cos they probably would have shot me. This was not too far from the place were Mussolini held the first meeting of the Fascist Party, so I reckon my fear was justified.

The main police station is on that square where Benny held his gig.

 

[Goff]

Taken in Milan the other day.

Difference, is these were all laughing.

 

[classic seanc]

Here, remove the bit at the end of those pics that says "?v=0" on your flickr pics when you're linking them to here.

Italian police have sexy belt/hat combo's.

 

[ernesto]

Here, remove the bit at the end of those pics that says "?v=0" on your flickr pics when you're linking them to here.

Italian police have sexy belt/hat combo's.

she is one hot cop

 

[classic seanc]

viva la frennia.

 

[quasiquasi]

Here, remove the bit at the end of those pics that says "?v=0" on your flickr pics when you're linking them to here.

What does "?v=0" do? Doesn't seem to make any difference to the picture...

 

[classic seanc]

For me it won't make the picture show.

 

[La La]

this picture is relevant today of all days.

The Falling Man.

some said it was a gross injustice to the person who chose to jump, others say that the picture honours the man and his choice.

what do you think and more importantly, would you have pointed and shot it?

 

[JohnnyRaz]

I think given the enormity of the events and their repurcusions, the fact that the photo captures the horror of the event means that its histortical value probably outweighs any ethical questions.

this picture is relevant today of all days.

The Falling Man.

some said it was a gross injustice to the person who chose to jump, others say that the picture honours the man and his choice.

what do you think and more importantly, would you have pointed and shot it?

 

[La La]

I think given the enormity of the events and their repurcusions, the fact that the photo captures the horror of the event means that its histortical value probably outweighs any ethical questions.

i agree to an extent. the implications of that day and the subsequent images were overwhelming.
however, do you feel that some privacy should have been afforded this poor man? collectively, 3000 people perished, and yet the photos of the 'jumpers' (as they were dubbed by the media) single out those who had to make a frankly impossible decision.
images of the towers collapsing indirectly depict death on a massive scale - but pictures like The Falling Man humanise it to the point of being rather unbearable.
i guess however you feel, it's one of the most powerful images of this century and still turns my stomach whenever i see it.

 

[taubstumm]

I think given the enormity of the events and their repurcusions, the fact that the photo captures the horror of the event means that its histortical value probably outweighs any ethical questions.

am i missing something here?

i don't think there are any ethical questions - it's not like the photographer was in a position to help the guy

if anything, the ethical question arises at the point when somebody (an editor, a journalist, a person posting on thumped) decides to use the image, because it has become so asociated with "the national tragedy of september 11th".

it's an image of terror that has been co-opted to justify far worse subsequent terrorism, of the sort that nobody sees.

the fact that it is a glimpse at a human tragedy only indicates the cynicism of those who are willing to appropriate it.

 

[JohnnyRaz]

it's an image of terror that has been co-opted to justify far worse subsequent terrorism, of the sort that nobody sees.

.

I'd agree, that why I made refernce to the repercusions. And also I think the picture has historical value, both because of its human element and its use in subsequent use as propaganda.