Inappropriate times to photograph.

[Lensmeister]

As many of you know I work in Kings Cross in London, and was at work on Thursday when the spineless retards decided to muder innocent lives.

I will admit that I had my Fuji Finepix A204 compact digital camera with me on the day and being on a 5 minute walk I could have been on the scene within minutes of the blast in the tunnel and been able to get many shots of the victims and injured exiting the station area.

I just couldn't do it. No way. Maybe respect, maybe conscience, I don't know what prevented me.

I felt that with all the horror and terror going on people wouldn't want some person using their agony or their emotions that was plastered on their faces to be spread accross tabloid newspapers areound the world.

Probably I could have made thousands of pounds in royalties or syndication of the photos through Reuters etc. But to me the money didn't matter.

I was also in fear. Not for my own safety but for my family that would have been left behind.

Many years ago I was asked to video a funeral of an African lady so they could send a copy to their family back home. I felt so very awkward, un-natural. In the editing process I had a selection of predefined logos and banners that could fly accross the screen, one of the sons wanted me t oshow him them. I did. Unfortunatly the demo one was a plane flying accross with a banner saying 'Bon Voyarge'. His face was a picture and he began laughing hard, he said his mother would have loved that. I felt sick as soon as I saw it then with his laughing I joined in. It felt wrong but his attitude made it ok.

But Thurdays events are not one I would have even thought twice about. There is no way I could do it.

Does anyone think I was wrong?

 

[Andrea K]

no, i dont think i wouldve done it either. i think you were absolutely right by respecting others. i remember watching some show after 9/11 that featured a woman whose infant child lost her life in the attacks. she was surprised and shocked and horrified to see a picture of her dying/dead infant in the arms of a fireman on a t-shirt that said "never forget" or something to that extent. it was a very touching and emotional photo, but the woman felt used and angry about it because she had no idea that the picture had been taken until one morning she saw it.

 

[ferny]

Nope, I think you're the same as most people. I would have been tempted to take shots myself and when stuff like this happens I have to confess that I do think to myself "that would be a great photo". Not for reasons of money, but to help report to the world what has gone on. Some of the photos and videos taken by the public will vital to the investigations. They'll give the police evidence before it was tainted by people running through it. I'd be tempted to take shots for that reason to. But I don't think I would. Just out of respect for the people involved I guess. That, and whenever I see a shot at times like this I think to myself "how comes that guy was holding a camera and not rushing to help?".

 

[ThatCameraThingy]

I have been scratching my head now , trying to think how i would react.

first things first. My heart goes out to all th people in London who has lost loved ones, been injured , or suffered in any way from the bombings . my sympathy to you all.

the only way though that i , on the other end of the world, could have any idea of what you must be going through is by looking at the media , and the pictuers in the newspapers. A lot of the pictures that we see in our papers are pics taken on camera phones. or low res digital camera's. and truth be told the quality sucks. the photos are blurry and badly composed. I think that having good pictures and coverage of these events helps people in the rest of the world see the real , agony , danger , despair, chaos, etc. of what has happened.

with that in mind , i believe that i would have tried to get some good journalistic pics . so that people who are far away can see the terror, and anguish, and heroics of their fellow humans , and share with them the pain, and triumphs.

All of this said, I guess i'll never know if I'am up to the task untill such time as I am in the thick of it.

I do respect your point of view and your thinking in not going to photograph the events.

I trust that you and all your loved ones are well.


Hanno

 

[mentos_007]

I have no idea how I'd react... but I'm afraid I'd do the same... I have problems even with shooting on a street on a normal day.

 

[LizM]

I understand completely. Nothing on the scale of what you had to deal with in London but when I was shoot for a local paper we had a major fire downtown. I was fine (and honestly enjoying myself) with photographing the fire and the firefighters...until I saw a firefighter being treated for smoke inhalation. I took the shot but I still feel dirty about it. One part of me screams that people need to see it to truly understand that the firefighters but themselves in harm's way to protect our property and lives. The other part says that I intruded. And that was when I was doing my job! As just a bystander I doubt I could take any shots either.

 

[John E.]

I would take pictures, but I would shy away from capitalising on a person's personal grief ( I would show grief put not an individuals face) . I really hate it when that happens and think nothing more of the people taking the exposures and tv stations as vultures with no sense of values. I also find it throughly disqusting when reporters try to make people cry. End of rant.

 

[Rob]

I agree absolutely. I live in London and it occurred to me that not many people took photos, as the only ones in the papers tended to be either stills from TV coverage or pictures from camera phones.

I watched the BBC's coverage of it and I thought their stance was appalling. They were blatantly trying to whip the audience into frenzied hysteria by portraying the peoples' reactions as panicking and screaming chaos, when in reality, there was very little panic and certainly no endless screaming. We are British after all and tend to stay quiet in extreme situations. Normally, one can count on the BBC not to be quite as wretched as the news agencies.

The usage of these kind of inflationary news programmes just reassures the terrorists that this kind of action is what people want to see and therefore they are going to get great coverage for very little expenditure or effort.

Whilst I'm in a defiant patriotic mood, I shall post a link to one of the most British speeches given. I doubt our current leader could stir such emotion in such an appropriate and eloquent manner!

That's quite enough seriousness from me.

Rob