REACH emergency medical helicopter (NSFW)

[jake337]

LET'S NERF THE WORLD!!!!!!










or not....

 

[JoeyV]

As far as I'm concerned I think that all pictures taken on public property are fine. Unless involving minors or that it was specifically asked not to be shown by the involved or a representative of theirs - as long as it's BEFORE they are published. Also, no pictures, no story. Once published, too bad. In my part of Canada there is a strict rule about not making minors public unless authorized by the parents or guardians. Graphic or "tasteless" images are only thought of that way by a person looking at them (I see nothing wrong with seeing blood and/or body parts). As previously mentioned, what some find okay, others find offensive (Thinking about the teen model and the American flag right now). Regardless of that, when people buy a newspaper to read the news, I think they've purchased the right to view what a photographer on sight has seen, and possibly captured with his/her camera. I think that the only pictures that should not be printed, are those with low photographic "performance" , for lack of better words (I.E. bad framing, bad lighting, blurry, etc.) When I read an article about a hockey player's throat being cut by a skate, I wanna see the picture that goes with it or not read the story at all. Call me gruesome or gory, that's how I am.

I've noticed that this forum has a lot of sensitive/touchy/(I'm gonna call it)stuck-up members that pretty much raise their nose at anything that isn't "what society deems customary or perfect" (Again thinking about the teen with the flag)

urghh....:shrug:

P.S.: Oh, and the "What happens in Canada/how it is in Canada doesn't matter" comment...real winner right there buddy.

P.P.S: Yes, I know this is a 2.5 year old thread that was revived.I just wanted to join in and vent some frustration built up by reading this whole thread.

 

[rexbobcat]

I'm sure if she ever saw these, she would surely appreciate seeing photos of herself on the internet in a bra and bloodied face. Very nicely done with the respect. Sometimes you have to put away the snobbish "it's my right" and think a little bit with photography.

Censorship is totally what photojournalism is all about.

 

[prettybeautiful]

Couldn't you just save the photo, or future photos, and then speak to the subjects in the photo for written consent? You know, similar concept to a model release.

I don't usually see photos of people in accidents all over the media..I usually just see a photo of an EMS vehicle or snapshot of the scene of the incident...Except for tragic events, then in those cases you do see people in the images.

For archival purposes, documenting how our society is during present day, is a good thing. Photos like this may be beneficial years from now. Maybe.

I can understand the Subject of the photo may be upset by seeing this on the web...perhaps for privacy reasons or the fact that she didnt even know a photo was taken, or seeing herself may trigger memories from the traumatic event in her life.

I don't really know, I've never been in this situation. I was just taught that one could end up in some trouble if they published a photo of someone without their consent..but that rule mostly applied to whether or not the persons in the photo were clearly identifiable or not.

Theyre good photos though.