When has it gone too far???

smelltheglove

A little debate opener here I think.....

Today I attended a funeral, a devastating occasion. The funeral was for Wayne, who was shot last weekend, an innocent man protecting his friend. Most of us will have read the headlines and seen the news on this murder.

Looking past the issues of his untimely death I thought maybe people here may have a view on how the media behave. I remember once a client saying to me, in all honesty, that she thought the the market for funeral photography was wide open and I should get my foot in that door! I was quite shocked and obviously never even considered such a venture.

When I arrived at the funeral I stood with friends and family and noticed a tv crew across the way, they were at the bus stop and not getting involved in the goings on etc, we all knew they were there but they were distant. There were huge numbers so when the procession arrived I did not see exactly what was going on there. After the funeral as the coffin was brought to the carriage the family followed and gathered together with friends, at this stage I noticed a photographer with a large zoom lens not 10 foot from Wayne's wife.

In my view this is too much, coming right up close to the family to catch their tears???? Just for the front page of the paper? Is it worth it? The poor family have being dealing with the media for days now, obviously I paid my respects and left not even mentioning it to them, they have a lot more on their minds to be thinking about but do we as photographers think this is acceptable, ok it was a man doing his job but is that overstepping the boundary getting in amongst the mourners? I'd just like to see other peoples views on this.

Borderfox

from a purely work point of view it would be a newsworthy story

smelltheglove

which is fair enough but should the photographer not stand back like the news crew did? rather than get so close to the bereaved?

Borderfox

Thats up to the individual involved, I would give them lots of space but as we discussed in the other thread there are a lot of "different" photographers around.

Dragan

It's impossible to have a consensus on morals. Some people will do things we won't, we'll do somethings other people won't.

Papers will pick up the pictures, because they sell copy. Photographers will take them because it's money.

Just one of those things.

Ricky91t

Best to get in quick,Get the shot and leave,I've rather see the photographer once,Then not see them again rather than them hanging around across the road snapping away

Borderfox

It would be a bit naive to think that there wouldnt be photographers/video/tv guys that wouldnt stick a camera in the face of anybody at any event, just depends. Doesnt seem to be that much over here but in the UK and USA its a warzone..

KarmaGarda

I find it hard to jump off the fence on this one myself. There's good and bad here on funeral photography. I think things like this need to be publicised to impact the public. But I also think the family need their own time to grieve over the loss.

So basically I just jumped in here to tell you that I probably won't be debating this... what a useless post!

Next please.

Crispin

KarmaGarda wrote: »

So basically I just jumped in here to tell you that I probably won't be debating this... what a useless post!

Next please.

useless but funny


I think it's news so it has to be covered, I am +1 for take a few shots and leave. Better that than hanging around badgering the family!

CabanSail

Most of us "consume" this type of media, so it's us that make a market for the product. We buy the papers & magazines & look at the news on the TV.

I would think that it would have been best to have used a long lens & stay well back rather than get in close & risk causing distress.

PCPhoto

at some of the gangland funerals you dont have a choice....long lens all the way..... for fear of what will happen.(state funerals are usually long lens too)

as for tragic death type funerals ...... get the pic and get out - if you want to get in close to the family .... then use a damn long lens.

Ps. I'm guessing the photographer mentioned earlier was in relatively close to get the best angle.... its a morals thing - personally I dont like to intrude (i hide in the shadows (or up a tree) and get my pic)

Borderfox

I presume the brief for the job was to get the tight shot of his wife with tears streaming down her face (I know this sounds callous but I am trying to understand the editors demands)

It is true though that things like this should be publicised but also to give the family space to greive in peace, I really do feel sorry for their loss. Such a waste of a young life..

rahtkennades

Personally, I think people are entitled to privacy at all times, where reasonably expected. I would consider a family funeral to be such a time.

But take a look at the news stands tomorow, and I can guarantee that poor woman's grief will be writ large on most of the front pages.

The reality is people are interested in other people's lives, and the grittier the better. Lots of people will pick up papers because the see the picture and think "oh that's terrible. Tell me more..."

Personally I think it's awful, but if that's what the people want, it's what they get.

AnCatDubh

It's a tough call to be honest. I don't particularly like media intrusion (I guess that few of us do) but I am reminded that a single image can sometimes change the world. Is it worth it? It's a tough call. It will be right for only some of the time and at that probably only a small portion.

Here's the thing - we can all get comfortable having heard the news and thinking "oh that's terrible" and get on with our life but sometimes an iconic picture will put the injustice, the terror, the sadness, the joy, the happiness, the exhilaration, or the pain permanently into our conciousness - the initial photographs of the Ethiopian famine, the single student standing up to the red army in Tiananmen, a protestor placing a flower into the barrel of a rifle, sisters united in grief, the wife of a soldier killed on duty collapsed over her husbands coffin, the moment of death of a young mother with a young family who died from terminal cancer, the Saigon Execution. Powerful images. Life is powerful.

smelltheglove

I agree with most, get the picture and get out however I do not agree with getting in close, maybe its just me, I have huge respect issues and I really think that there has been little respect for this poor family with the constant badgering of the media, yes it is a story but they do not have to camp outside the house begging for pictures, even worse, today get so close to the family at such a sad time.

Thats just me though!

thebaz

while I'd hate to photograph at a funeral I can see the benefits -it brings home the impact that murder has - I know that guy in Limerick whose son was killed is probably being saved by media coverage - I would think that if the family asked for privacy it would be respected. The Geoghan murder and media coverage also reduced bloodshed - people need to know the suffering caused by death and murder. There was new legislation brought in today to deal with gangland feuds, which probably would not have happened without the media saturation of the gangland feuds and murders

ThOnda

What is "too far"?

The question is not what, but why are you taking pictures, what is the purpose and how do you approach such event.

Pictures of funeral, dead butterflies, naked women, kiddies in swimsuits... - it depends on circumstances, purpose and attitude. There is not "too far", but only behind my personal limits. Everybody has different limits.

Have you ever taken a picture in the graveyard? Any tombstones? I bet everybody did. Have you taken picture of your ((grand)grand)parents grave and/or tombstone? If not, why? Is there any difference in object and subject?

outspann

I watched a documentary on James Nachtwey a couple of years ago ("war photographer" - I ended up buying it on DVD, and I can't praise it highly enough!) who I rank as the best photojournalist in the world.

One section shows him in Bosnia, taking photos of a grieving woman who's waiting for her sons body. He's standing no more than 10 feet away from her, directly in front, taking shots. When somebody moves in to offer her a hug and blocks his view, Nachtwey automatically takes his lightmeter out to take a reading, before going back to taking shots.

Now, as I looked at this scene, I thought it was WAY too much. Far too intrusive, too obvious. But then you see the photos that he took, and the worldwide attention that it brought to that dirty little war. And when you see him speak in interviews.... this is not a man who is courting publicity for its own sake. This is someone who is trying to make a difference.

That for me is the deciding factor in judging whether someone is in the right when taking their photo - are they just trying to make a quick buck? Or do they really care about what is going on here?

ThOnda

You've got the DVD? Can I borrow it? I was not able to get it, unfortunately. That film changed my attitude to War Photography. In fairness, you have to see the whole film from the beginning to the end - it has hidden message and meaning, not to mention describing the style of Nachtwey's work.

I am going to buy that now! It's worth it. Thanks for reminder.

nilhg

Respect is the key here I feel, people can dress it up anyway they like but if you don't have basic respect for the people that you are (and I apologise for using this word in the context of this thread) shooting, then in reality you are using peoples misery for your own gain, and while taking pictures for the paper is in the large scheme of things hardly the worst thing possible, its up at the top of a slippery slope. You could use a lot of the justifications we've heard here to justify many of the intrusions that the less reputable section of the media make on people, would it be OK to hack into a grieving widows mobile phone messagfe box so the general public can know how badly she's suffering?


Two wrongs never make a right despite how much profit can be made from it.


Of course in many cases it's quite possible that the family allowed the media access in the hope of creating public awareness.

outspann

Yeah sure. It's a Region 1 DVD, so as long as that works for you... Anything I can do to promote the great man!

There's a great talk by him at the TED awards. http://www.ted.com/talks/james_nachtwey_s_searing_pictures_of_war.html I only wish I was half that cool.

Thirdfox

AnCatDubh wrote: »

It's a tough call to be honest. I don't particularly like media intrusion (I guess that few of us do) but I am reminded that a single image can sometimes change the world. Is it worth it? It's a tough call. It will be right for only some of the time and at that probably only a small portion.

Here's the thing - we can all get comfortable having heard the news and thinking "oh that's terrible" and get on with our life but sometimes an iconic picture will put the injustice, the terror, the sadness, the joy, the happiness, the exhilaration, or the pain permanently into our conciousness - the initial photographs of the Ethiopian famine, the single student standing up to the red army in Tiananmen, a protestor placing a flower into the barrel of a rifle, sisters united in grief, the wife of a soldier killed on duty collapsed over her husbands coffin, the moment of death of a young mother with a young family who died from terminal cancer, the Saigon Execution. Powerful images. Life is powerful.

Just a quick fyi, the "tank man" wasn't a student, but an ordinary shopper who had nothing to do with the protests in Tiananmen but rather was wondering why the heck the gov was sending the tanks into Beijing.

LeoB

I can see where smelltheglove is coming from. Personally I think its to much and would not dream of it.. Someone else didnt.

However the nation was stunned and shocked with this killing of Wayne trying to protect his family and in this case scenario it might not be a bad thing for people to see the hurt and pain of that family.
As AnCatDubh mentioned an iconic picture maybe thats what we will have in time. But for me its to much