Was I right to pass up on a photo op?

68lbs

68lbs

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,450
Name
April 2008
Edit My Images
No
...driving home tonite and turn off to goto Asda. As I turn off the traffic's at a standstill and a woman yells from another car "turn around, bad crash, you wont get thru". Needing some grub for tea, I abandon the car and proceed to walk down the road (camera on my back in case someone breaks into the car).

As I get closer there are about 3 fire engines, police, ambulance and a very badly damaged car. There is someone inside and it looks like the fire brigade are about to cut the car open. The person looks like they're supported, and the airbag has deployed, but it was quite a busy scene and definitely newsworthy. I don't know what state the person was in. There was glass everywhere, but I couldn't see any blood or dismembered limbs.

Should I have taken some pics?
 
Hmm, i think you should of taken some photographs. What you would have done with them is a different matter.
 
You could always have tried to contact your local newspaper with your pics. Great opportunity to get your photographs seen by a wide audience :shrug:

On the other hand is it morally right to take advantage of someones misfortune like that :shrug:
 
You did the right thing because thats what you did.. thats you...

Others may have done different.. but thats them..

Thinking about doing something different would be the same as thinking about being someone else..


Deep uh!?
 
I think there are too many images being shown of others misfortunes these days. At times of pain or despair we are all entitled to privacy.

What do you think made the scene newsworthy - newsworthy to who?

Personally, tempting though it is to take pictures of everything I think some things are best left alone.

Maybe catching the accident as it happened as this could be useful but I don't think it benefits anyone to shoot another's pain.
 
I agree with KIPAX,
It's what you think is best to do.
Me, I would have taken the shot and sent it into some newspapers.

It's on a whole other scale but what if nobody filmed 9/11?
I'm sure they struggled with morality but I'm thankful they did.
 
same thing happened to me last summer,was fishing off the car park in fort william when a sea king helicopter flew right over the top of us and landed next to my car just about blowing all my fishing gear into the sea,anyway i had my camera ready to take some shots,the police arrived,plus ambulance and lochaber mountain rescue lads,when the stretcher got carried out the poor soul was in a body bag,this was only a couple of yards from us,there was no way i would have taken that shot,in fact we packed all our fishing gear away and headed back to our campsite, turns out the guy collapsed and died on ben nevis,,,,when we returned to our tent we just sat down and never spoke ,we never knew the guy ,but it was very sad,,got a few pics pf the chopper taking off again though got a pic in the gallery
 
I know of a pro photog who has pics of the immediate aftermath of the Lockerbie disaster, including bodies in trees etc, but they will never get published....
 
If car accident photos are published at all, aren't they usually with no driver in the car? I don't want to see somebody in pain or suffering but the damage to the car gives you a good idea of how bad it was.

It's not got a lot of substance for a genuine news story, unless a pedestrian was hit or this was another accident on a notorious stretch of road
 
As a fire fighter my self, i'd say 100% you did the right thing.

Daren't say what i want to do to people who photograph me when i'm dealing with an rtc. ;)
 
KIPAX said:
You did the right thing because thats what you did.. thats you...

Others may have done different.. but thats them..

Thinking about doing something different would be the same as thinking about being someone else..


Deep uh!?
Click to expand...

spot on i reckon

whatever you did was the right thing for you.

i just know that if i was in a car and badly injured the last thing i would want is an audience, especially one taking photos.

i was a member of sportshooter.com and i got in a massive argument with the almost the whole community over a guy who was around when the bus blew up in london. instead of running away he ran towards the explosion and got lots of shots of bits of people including close up facial shots of the dead. He had them on his gallery for all to see.
On one hand the world needs photographers to show the world whats happening, but on the other I dont really think i'd be too happy if i was grieving for my dead mother and one day found a pic of her decapatated head on the internet.
 
DONT send them in to newspapers for free! Newspapers rely on people doing that and when you do just remember you are depriving genuine photo journalists the opportunity to get paid! If your photo is a good one then demand they pay you the recognised rate or they dont get to use it..most picture editors will agree to pay for it if it's any good.
:bang:
 
I'd say you did the right thing, I wouldn't want to see a picture of a car crash with someone distressed.

I wouldn't even say that the photo would have been particularly newsworthy, anytime you see photos of rtc's in the paper, it's usually the aftermath of a fatality or if there's something unusual happened, car in someones garden etc
 
Having lost a family member in a car crash the last thing I would want to see is any photos of it in the press. Portrait of them in happier times, but not in their last moments.

If the poor soul was on their own, some company (without camera) would be nice.
 
i think you made the right choice in NOT taking a photo, especially since someone was in the car, and you didn't know how they were, i dont think the person involved in the accident would want pictures of them across a newspaper, and since they couldn't object to you taking a photo i dont think it would have been right.
 
Definitely did the right thing - if that had been you in the car would you have wanted someone their taking photos?
 
andrewc said:
Having lost a family member in a car crash the last thing I would want to see is any photos of it in the press. Portrait of them in happier times, but not in their last moments.

If the poor soul was on their own, some company (without camera) would be nice.
Click to expand...

That applies to anything, though. The question is whether the newsworthiness of the image outweighs that--i.e. if the need for the public to see it is greater than your right to privacy. I'm sure the case can be made that that's not true of a car accident, and it's definitely true that the photographer should handle it in the most unobtrusive and respectful manner possible, but that's unfortunately how cold and rational the decision needs to be.
 
There was an accident up the road from us last year, and Chris and I sat in our kitchen and watched the aftermath. It looked like it was a simple (if an accident could ever be that) bump with two cars. I was puzzled by the fact one of the cars boot was open the whole time, but I brushed off the thought and I started taking pics. The spot of this accident is notorious, and I thought perhaps it would be good for the paper to run a piece and hopefully call for some action on the bend.... I deleted all of the pics the next day though, when I heard a teenager had been knocked off of his bike and killed :( I felt dirty after that for taking any pics. I'm just glad I didn't look closely at them.

I think you did the right thing. The person may have survived the crash, but could possibly die in the hospital at a later date. But if you had passed it on the the local paper before that, they wouldn't care, they would use it anyway. I'd have hated to have had something like that on my conscience, let alone see it printed with my name attatched :(
 
Before taking pics of people I always think 'If I were that person would I want to be photographed'

If I had a bad accident and was being cut out or attended to in the wreckage there is no way I would want anyone to take my pic.

I think you did the right thing.
 
Foggy said:
Definitely did the right thing - if that had been you in the car would you have wanted someone their taking photos?
Click to expand...

:agree:
 
I don't know what I would have done in the situation but I have a book on my desk and the photo in it that is most poignant is of a man being shot, the moment of impact of the bullet to his brain. Some one has to take this sort of photo. 9/11 We have video footage of people jumping out of windows in the aftermath. We need these images to know whats happening and to learn from history, ok theres a major story to tell and lots of lessons to be learnt from the likes of 9/11, vietnam war etc but there must be something to a car crash too.

I'd prefer not to see it I'd prefer it not to happen but it does its a major risk and a regular occurence on the road, not something that can be hidden from.
 
I dont think i would have taken photographs of the accident but i believe such photos of this kind can be useful if used in the correct manner obviously with there familys permission photos of horrific car crashes were people have been injured or even killed as a warning to motorists something which can be shown to people who drive wrecklesly who could potentialy kill me or you as a warning maybe it would put them off doing 100mph on back roads..

This is just my opinion and i wanted to express it in the best possible taste i apologise if i offend people

Rob
 
Several years ago while living in an European Country, my friends wife gave birth, there were some complications and mother and child were transferred to another hospital. On the journey however the ambulance suffered a tyre blow out on the motorway, and rolled over, the baby who was unsecured in the back was thrown clear of the ambulance and into the road.
All involved were thankfully ok and suffered no long term effects, however a local tog stopped and took pics of my friends new born baby being resucitated in the road.
The anger and distress caused to my friend and his family at seeing these pics on the front page of the local newspaper at a time at which the childs condition was "touch and go" is something i'll never forget and i'm sure they never will either.

So while I agree photographs like this are necessary and important for the reasons mentioned above. They have to be used in the correct context and with the families permission a reasonable time after the event has passed.
 
This will always be an emotive issue and everyone will have a slightly different view. I think Kpax summed it up the best in that you did what you felt you should have done by not taking anything. You should be applauded for your sensitivity. :thumbs:
 
robmiller said:
That applies to anything, though. The question is whether the newsworthiness of the image outweighs that--i.e. if the need for the public to see it is greater than your right to privacy. I'm sure the case can be made that that's not true of a car accident, and it's definitely true that the photographer should handle it in the most unobtrusive and respectful manner possible, but that's unfortunately how cold and rational the decision needs to be.
Click to expand...

How can the public need to see some poor sod in distress? Its such a terribnle situation. When you're there your self, talking to the people involved, they find it so terribly embarasing being in those situations. For it to be photo'd at the same time is border line sick.
 
Denise Chong probably didn't want to be photographed, does that make that photographer a bad person?

Don't get me wrong, if you weren't happy doing it, you did the right thing. If you couldn't have been of any assistance, you weren't getting in the way, and you were 'happy' doing it, then why not?

Would I want someone to take photos of me dying in a car crash? No. But to paraphrase Voltaire, I would defend to the death their right to do it.
 
The press photographer on the scene at the aftermath of the Warrenpoint attack by the provisional IRA in 1979 says he never took another photograph, so think of the effect on yourself.

I've not seen any photos of the carnage of 9/11 i.e. bodies on the street. I read that attempts to put Falling Man shots on Flickr are regularly censored.

A friend in Germany documented the last days of his girlfriend in hospital, but has kept the work to himself. I didn't take photos of my mother when I thought she was dying before being re-admitted to hospital with C.Diff -- in all honesty, the ones taken when she had just gone home are the most shocking.
 
Everybody has different moral standards, you did whats right by your moral standards.
 
not so long ago I was in the same situation but I took a pic or 2 but from an angle of over turned car after the injured party had been removed fire engines and all still at the scene but I took it for the aspect of showing the kids and explaining this is why you both need to shut up and let me concentrate :-) I judged the event I was told not to go anywhere got bored and got some of the landscapes in as I normally pass at 60-70 MPH

Michael
 
I used to take photos of rtc`s as part of my recovery job, however I`d never take pictures of any extractions or anything particuarly graphic. Most of mine were evidential to the insurance side of the recovery.

There`s an issue now with police work that we cannot post any pictures that may have a bearing on a potential court case. There`s been a few firms that have had their hands slapped big time.
 
personaly, i couldnt take a shot of people still in the car after an accident.
it would feel far to voyeuristic.(sp) .
ive been driving for a living for 20 years , and unfortunately seen a lot of accidents.too many. some realy nasty.
but never been tempted to shoot any.
maybe if the cars had been unocupied , but it seems a bit gruesome.
mark.
 
I was passing the scene of an accident a couple of weeks ago in a car....nobody hurt thankfully but it looked quite cool (fair ground truck had fallen over...lots of bits everywhere!)....didn't take a picture, and lo and behold in the local paper the following week was a nice report, 1/3 of a page....but no photos :(

maybe next time.....
 
If you're a complete **** and didnt care about the poor sod in the car = Take pictures

If you have a conscience, and think its a total invasion of privacy = Dont take pictures

I think you did the right thing :) Nothing wrong with taking some shots of the aftermath when all casualties have been dealt with, but not before :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top