CLICK THE SHUTTER OR WALK AWAY?

Vantage

Vantage

Suspended / Banned
Messages
781
Name
Roger
Edit My Images
Yes
I came across a disturbing picture on the BBC website.

(The gallery I’m talking about is through the BBC website under ‘Day in pictures.’ And the photo in question is under the Indonesian tsunami. (Its solely your choice if you wish to view it or not. BUT BE WARNED!)

At what point to you click the shutter or walk away? After the shock of the photo, this was the question that came to me in viewing this photo. At what point did the photographer morally tell himself that people needed to see this.

The BBC states ‘WARNING: THIS GALLERY CONTAINS PICTURES THAT SOME MIGHT FIND DISTURBING.’

‘Fair warning,’ I said to myself. Your choice is to hit the back button or proceed. Before I make my choice I think to myself, ‘yep, this is probably something I wouldn’t want to see but, I decided to go ahead anyway as I believe myself to be mature when it comes to difficult matters like these and that I have enough intelligence to deal with this subject matter. I wasn’t expecting something so disturbing.

I’m not sure what reaction a photo like this would get if a member posted something like this on TP as photo journalism and I’m certainly sure it’s not going to make the cover of NG or any other form of publications for that matter. Off course the BBC would be first to this kind of picture. There six o’clock news is never shy to anything that may shock the audience. I cannot watch it anymore as I have a child. (I may now have to lock down this website to protect himl.)

I’m just baffled at its purpose from the editors (BBC) and mostly from the photographer’s point of view. What is his justification? What decision did he come to, to press the send key?

I’m certainly bemused!
 
If your mummy tells you not to touch the fire because its burny hot then youll get burnt if you do.....simples

Click and keep on clicking and only stop when the law says so and even then question that....while clicking

a link would be great

Dave :thumbs:
 
Last edited:
Surely its the photographers job to document the horrors of disaters like this?
 
IF I would be happy for the subject and the situation to be me or those close to me, I would be happy taking the photo. For ME, that wouldn't include bodies - not because I find them disturbing but because I would hate my corpse to be shown in the papers or on TV etc. Likewise the pictures of young kids, who may well find out (or have just found out) that their parents will never tuck them upo in bed again.

However, these days I reckon I'm in a minority and that many regard destruction as a spectator sport.
 
The one that got to me is the one with 3 children.. :(
I've been on a training course in work and a video of a man being electrocuted on top of a train in India. which also made me feel sick..
 
after looking at the link seems like the op is easily disturbed, these are mild at most. ive seen a lot worse
 
It is a sad thing to have to photograph but its documenting history. If you can stomach it then click until your batteries run out or its no longer safe to do so.
 
So why take the photo. I do not understand the reasoning behind taken a photo of three babies. For what, to show the world what a tsunami can do? Do we honestly need to see that? Like I said before, what if a posted something like this in here. What would be the reaction then?
 
six6six said:
The one that got to me is the one with 3 children.. :(
I've been on a training course in work and a video of a man being electrocuted on top of a train in India. which also made me feel sick..
Click to expand...

I saw a H&S video at work with that clip in a few months back... was the fact he was just motionless with smoke coming off him that made it so horrific I think
 
Very sad images, yes, disturbing, maybe. But what sort of images did you expect? Its a natural disaster, people die, children get orphaned, it should be reported and shown how it effects countries and people.

I also have children, they watch the news if I am watching it and we discuss what is on, I have always done this, they need to know and understand things, I do not believe in wrapping them up in cotton wool. It has caused some very interesting discussion which also have made me think about things purely due to the kids asking very straight questions, it has been an education for both my children and myself.
 
Vantage said:
Do we honestly need to see that?
Click to expand...

Nope, but you don't NEED to click the link either.

Vantage said:
Like I said before, what if a posted something like this in here. What would be the reaction then?
Click to expand...

Would probably depend on the context and how you did it.
There is a warning on the first, non offensive image in the gallery, if you were posting the pic on here as your work for instance and linked it with a warning about the nature of the images I don't think many people would object.
 
Davec223 said:
I also have children, they watch the news if I am watching it and we discuss what is on, I have always done this, they need to know and understand things, I do not believe in wrapping them up in cotton wool. It has caused some very interesting discussion which also have made me think about things purely due to the kids asking very straight questions, it has been an education for both my children and myself.
Click to expand...

now thats shockingly sensible
 
Vantage said:
So why take the photo. I do not understand the reasoning behind taken a photo of three babies. For what, to show the world what a tsunami can do? Do we honestly need to see that? Like I said before, what if a posted something like this in here. What would be the reaction then?
Click to expand...


Yes we do need to see them, Its all to easy to live in a bubble and pretend nothing bad ever happens, if images like these were not published from Africa back in the eighties we probably would have been none the wiser to what was happening, thank good they were and people like Bob Geldof did something about it.

As to posting these type of images on here, that is difficult, if there was a PJ section then yes why not, as long as there was a nsfw prefix. Having had a friend involved in the tsunami in thailand and what he told me he saw and dealt with, not only are these images mild but the whole storey should be told, although this would not be for the faint hearted.
 
Vantage said:
So why take the photo. I do not understand the reasoning behind taken a photo of three babies. For what, to show the world what a tsunami can do? Do we honestly need to see that? Like I said before, what if a posted something like this in here. What would be the reaction then?
Click to expand...

there has always been this question asked about photojournalism
but that's what it is ....reporting. Nothing more, nothing less.

if YOU posted it HERE....? well, I'm not sure following the reaction on my posting an image of dead moles displayed on a county farm fence
 
Davec223 said:
I also have children, they watch the news if I am watching it and we discuss what is on, I have always done this, they need to know and understand things, I do not believe in wrapping them up in cotton wool. It has caused some very interesting discussion which also have made me think about things purely due to the kids asking very straight questions, it has been an education for both my children and myself.
Click to expand...

Good on you I say.
There are far too many kids wrapped up in cotton wool these days, not allowed to play outside incase they get taken by a p****, not allowed to watch the news incase they see what actually happens in the world etc etc.
 
it is very sad to see images like this, however me personally dont think these are as bad as the pictures of the tsunami a couple of years back, those pictures were horrifying!!, i`m afraid the days of when a photographer walks away and dont take a picture are long gone.

Press photographers dont need to justify why they take the picture its there job to document news.
 
Davec223 said:
Very sad images, yes, disturbing, maybe. But what sort of images did you expect? Its a natural disaster, people die, children get orphaned, it should be reported and shown how it effects countries and people.

I also have children, they watch the news if I am watching it and we discuss what is on, I have always done this, they need to know and understand things, I do not believe in wrapping them up in cotton wool. It has caused some very interesting discussion which also have made me think about things purely due to the kids asking very straight questions, it has been an education for both my children and myself.
Click to expand...

I have no idea how old you children are and I'm sure your discussions are full and worthy but what are your limits then? I have a nine year old which I discuss many a issue with but would I show him the pic in question? No because, its hard enough to understand what this world can do destructivly without hard core evidence.
 
I guess that in situations like that the damage has already been done and it's only pictures like that that can convey the true human cost and tragedy of the "event"
 
Yes, I was intrigued and went looking not expecting to see anything too horrific on a bbc site. And I was right. I was expecting to find something similar to what I was photographing in a morgue when I was just 21.

Maybe the OP should stay away from news sites.
 
Philx1979 said:
it is very sad to see images like this, however me personally dont think these are as bad as the pictures of the tsunami a couple of years back, those pictures were horrifying!!, i`m afraid the days of when a photographer walks away and dont take a picture are long gone.

Press photographers dont need to justify why they take the picture its there job to document news.
Click to expand...

obviously going to come up. And a fundemental strain to my thinking. Its for the money! Why else?
 
I’m not sure what reaction a photo like this would get if a member posted something like this on TP as photo journalism and I’m certainly sure it’s not going to make the cover of NG or any other form of publications for that matter.
Click to expand...

They'd get slagged off for the terrible quality, then the nikon/canon would have done the job better fight would start.
Similarly I wouldn't imagine they will make a cover based on the poor quality, not the subject.
Remember two of the most iconic images of the seventies featured 1- a burnt naked girl running from her village in tears, 2 - the moment of impact from a bullet entering a man's head on the street in Saigon (street execution by police officer).
Both made covers.

Journalism is just that, documenting things that happen, I see nothing wrong in that,and lets be honest the old adage "a picture is worth a thousand words" holds true and always will.

As for it appearing here, well if Rob had posted a shocking image he had taken in theatre I would view it and critic it on its merit rather than content no matter how "disturbing" it may be

six6six said:
The one that got to me is the one with 3 children.. :(
I've been on a training course in work and a video of a man being electrocuted on top of a train in India. which also made me feel sick..
Click to expand...

Seen it myself but I must be made of stronger stuff,though when one of your interests is the history of the death penalty and you've seen a shed load of judicial executions you tend to not get upset so easily
 
your never going to stop it though its the world we live in, everyone wants to know whats going on, 9/11 wasn`t nice but it didnt stop people tuning in and wanting to watch what was happening.
 
2blue4u said:
Yes, I was intrigued and went looking not expecting to see anything too horrific on a bbc site. And I was right. I was expecting to find something similar to what I was photographing in a morgue when I was just 21.

Maybe the OP should stay away from news sites.
Click to expand...

Maybe I should. And I've seen some horrific sights through the internet and news channels. I'm not just out of my nappies, blue4u. So maybe you can answer this. Wheres the limit? What point would you say enough is enough?
 
there cant be a limit, because different people have different limits of what they think is acceptable and unacceptable, only thing you can do is if you find it unacceptable is walk away and dont look at it?
 
Vantage said:
Maybe I should. And I've seen some horrific sights through the internet and news channels. I'm not just out of my nappies, blue4u. So maybe you can answer this. Wheres the limit? What point would you say enough is enough?
Click to expand...

There isn't a limit and I don't think there can be as no two people will hold the same view. As evidenced by this thread.
 
Vantage said:
I have no idea how old you children are and I'm sure your discussions are full and worthy but what are your limits then? I have a nine year old which I discuss many a issue with but would I show him the pic in question? No because, its hard enough to understand what this world can do destructivly without hard core evidence.
Click to expand...

My children are 12, 8 and 2, the two elder ones, if its on the news we discuss it, they have watched, seen most of the major news stories, no I wouldn't call them over to the computer to show them the picture but if it was in the news they saw it over my shoulder yes we would talk about it, the other week I was watching a documentary on thee JFK assassination the eldest watched that with me, the middle one was not interested so didn't watch it, if she had wanted to she could have.

Along the same lines is, do you discuss where your sunday roast comes from? Or do you believe children do not need to know. My eldest a couple of years back became a veggie because of her beliefs on that, that lasted about 6 months because she missed her roast dinners, her choice with the information she had/ found out herself.
 
The people taking the photos are also affected by what they see and photograph, and they have to have strong characters to cope. Some don't.

There was the case of Kevin Carter, a member of the bang bang club in South Africa, a group of news photographers covering the violence leading up to the 1994 elections. He won a Pulitzer prize for a photo of a starving child in Sudan being watched by a vulture. There was an outcry about this because he did not intervene. He had also lost a colleague and fellow bang bang club member Ken Oosterbroek, killed in a friendly fire incident in a SA township, shortly before.

He commited suicide shortly after recieving the Pulitzer prize.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Carter
 
jomike said:
The people taking the photos are also affected by what they see and photograph, and they have to have strong characters to cope. Some don't.
Click to expand...

Without wanting to go too off topic, I suppose you could say the same about "glamour" photographers getting desensitised because they see naked/provocatively dressed women day in day out, whereas people like me still get excited about seeing their girlfriend nekkid :love: :clap:

Exposure to anything out of the ordinary will have an affect on you, it's down to your own strength of character how you deal with it and how much it affects you.
 
Seems that a photo of a bird of prey with its dead quarry is on a completely different level to this. That quarry was the offspring / parent of something. We are all but animals in the natural world and this is what happens. Remember back to the film of the Koala (as far as I can remember thats what is was) that had it paws etc badly burnt in the forest fires that raged in Australia. That raised awareness of the plight.

These photos do not seem to be glorifying anything merely reporting them. I cannot see the problem myself. In some respects it is no worse than paps hounding famous (not necessarily celebrity) people and digging the dirt and not respecting privacy.

Unfortunately this is all part of the glorious melting pot called life.
 
Last edited:
I see it as reporting the news rather than shocking for the sake of it. Any tragedy is going to have shcking images, should we see them? In some cases the shock effect moves goverments to make changes to prevent similar accidents/disasters from happening in the future or maybe help develop early warning systems to give people a chance to take shelter.
If we bury our heads in tha sand and pretend it never happened change will never come.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top