Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/09/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Sep 8, 2005, at 3:15 PM, Walt Johnson wrote: > Steve: > > You mean there are doctors who do surgery just to make payments on > their wives' BMW's ? For shame. If I'd have said such someone (most > likely Paul) would have called me cynical. :-P purely hypothetical.... just like papparazi... Steve > > walt > > Steve Barbour wrote: > > >> somehow I keep following this thread and thinking of the >> difference between those surgeons who do surgery to save lives, >> and those surgeons who do unnecessary surgery... >> >> Steve >> >> >> On Sep 8, 2005, at 8:39 AM, Ted Grant wrote: >> >> >>> Neil Schneider offered: >>> >>> >>>>> You have to give the media credit for getting the story and >>>>> the heart >>>>> >>>>> >>> wrenching images out. We may not always do it perfectly (and you >>> are in >>> that "we") But we do work at our jobs with compassion also.<<< >>> >>> G'day Neil, >>> Well yes the story is beyond the imagination of most and it >>> should be covered. But the media of today have evolved into a >>> howling pack of "images first and who cares! Get them no matter >>> who suffers, but get them!" >>> >>> However, read my lips carefully... "NOT ALL OF THEM" and you are >>> included in "not all of them." However when one caught FOX TV >>> and CNN there main focus, as always, is on the grimest material >>> they can find. The stills shooters, if let in enmass would be >>> like an invasion of cockroaches scurrying around looking for >>> their visuals flashing in the faces of those most suffering. >>> >>> And yes many newsphotographers do show compassion for subject >>> and use care in photographing suffering souls. But there are >>> more and more of the "worst rat-pack" types evolving partially >>> because the digital era has made it possible for these types to >>> become part of the previously clean honourable profession as a >>> newsphotograher. >>> >>> When it was "film only" we'd shoot, know how to soup film, make >>> prints in the bathroom of a hotel and know how to operate wire >>> photo machines. And with that, it eliminated the mental midgets >>> of today who because they have a digital exposing machine of >>> some kind, claim to be "media." And with many of these people >>> it's more a "thrill of the kill" in getting some sort of >>> exposure and having it published, than anything to do with the >>> honour of being a news photographer with compassion. >>> >>> >>> >>>>>> Gosh Ted, so beautifully laid out with such calm reasoning. >>>>>> Perhaps >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> FEMA should have just let you in there with your super >>>> quiet Leicas, sans flash, for it looks like you might be the >>>> only one to shoot such a sensitive story.<<< >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Unfortunately good sir I think you maybe a tad facitious, as >>> there are many far better skilled than I at that kind of subject. >>> >>> >>> >>>> Sounds like you don't give any credit to anyone else for >>>> knowing how to handle a situation like this except experienced >>>> photojournalists like yourself.. Shame on you for such an >>>> elitist attitude, <<< >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Now Neil you know better than that, as I've had my ass shot off >>> on more occasions than I'd care to admit, but that's all part of >>> being a news-photographer amidst ones competitors. Goes with >>> the territory. However, in this case a photojournalist with >>> experince would be far better, or lets say should be, than the >>> cell phone-p&s digi camera pack . >>> >>> >>> >>>>> and shame on >>>>> >>>>> >>>> government agencies who try to control what the rest of the >>>> world is entitled to see. Yes I said entitled. A tragedy of >>>> this magnitude, which was most likely caused by government >>>> cutbacks, and is now trying to be hidden from public scrutiny >>>> by that same government, should be exploited to its fullest.<<< >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Quite right, it shouldn't have been covered up if that was and >>> is the case. >>> >>> >>> >>>> Why do you suppose there are so many photojournalists from >>>> around the world there, as you say "like a battery of >>>> paparazzi". Think they're just there for the body >>>> pictures........or could it be that >>>> there is so many world wide media organizations now that its >>>> inevitable when anything major happens.<<<<<< >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Well it's logical they are there in such huge numbers because of >>> the magnitude of the disaster. And the advent of the big stock >>> agencies now prodcing a great deal of photography to out market >>> the general wire news services. >>> >>> >>> >>>> Do you like controlled, government embedding, with censors >>>> approving every image to its sensitivity values.<< >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Well embedding if you like began in seriousness for the Iraqi >>> invastion so it could be controlled. And I do not agree with >>> governemnt censorship at any time of any subject. >>> >>> >>> >>>> Do you really believe the US President is forbidding the >>>> caskets of dead soldiers to be photographed to spare the >>>> families, or to spare >>>> his own image. Everyone remembers Viet Nam and how the press >>>> "lost" that war for the US.<<,, >>>> >>>> >>> >>> This is a subject as a non-American I am not at liberty to >>> comment on. >>> >>> >>> >>>> And those poor souls trapped in the Superdome simply because >>>> they didn't have the means to leave the city. Do you really >>>> believe that >>>> they don't want to vent their anger over this, to the first >>>> camera or reporter they see. Sure, there were pictures of >>>> unidentified bodies in the arena.<<<<<, >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Sure they should vent their anger or whatever comment they wish >>> to make as freely as they can. But that has nothing to do with >>> still photgraphers and we're discussing photography and >>> photographers. >>> >>> >>> >>>> It showed the deplorable condition these people were kept >>>> under, the lack of food, water, medical care. I wonder what >>>> would of happened if >>>> these images were never shown. How many more bodies would have >>>> been piled up. Babies, dead from dehydration in their mothers >>>> arms.<<<< >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> You have to give the media credit for getting the story and the >>>> heart wrenching images out. We may not always do it perfectly >>>> (and you are in that "we") But we do work at our jobs with >>>> compassion also.<<<< >>>> >>>> >>> >>> We media people generally manage to circumvent " governement >>> control " if you like some way or other, not always as fast as >>> we'd like. But what many government bureaucrats never learn >>> is... "the tougher they try to control the media, the tougher we >>> become at getting the story. If for no other reason than doing >>> an end run around them to see what they're hiding or didn't do >>> correctly." >>> >>> But in some cases control is necessary. The coverage in the >>> Superedome could have been done so simply with care and >>> compassion on a "pool" basis. Simply using the most experinced >>> photographer or two and TV crew to shoot inside. Then whatever >>> is shot belongs to all. >>> >>> However, that may not work in your country as the media would >>> end up fighting amongst themselves with court orders etc to >>> decide whom was selected to shoot. Then by the time the company >>> lawyers and court got finished, NO would've been re-built! Still >>> no pictures! >>> >>> ted >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >