HEARTLESS "PHOTOGRAPHER"

Photo or Love


Results are only viewable after voting.

Status
Not open for further replies.

eyes

New Member
Nov 15, 2003
469
0
0
Australia
www.aljazeera.net
#1
Anyone read the Friday 02 Jan 2004 The New Paper?

There was this elderly man who collasped along the road side. His poor wife was beside him praying for his safety.

Then there was this accountant who droved by, pulled up and guess what?

Instead of help out, he took out his camera from he car and took pictures of the man in coma.

He somemore got the cheek to tell the wife that he promises to give them the developed prints.

IMO: BAS****!

Anyway just to let you know, he is a fellow active CSer according to my friend who was at the scene.

My friend at the scene couldn't bring himself to hit the shutter but called the ambulance instead. He even confronted the anal guy who later admitted that he was just trying to contribute to the Red Cross Society competition.

What do you think?

Will you people hit the phone for the ambulance or hit the shutter?

"A good photographer is one who has a heart who can feel by sight."
 

KNIGHT ONG

Senior Member
Dec 18, 2003
5,792
1
38
PAKISTAN
www.pbase.com
#2
LOVE is above everything, without LOVE you cannot progress far.

Show your compassion, your care and your luv to all folks.
 

Barrios

Senior Member
May 19, 2002
715
0
16
57
Visit site
#3
I don't think we should be too judgmental about it. There were many bystanders at scene and chances that someone among them had already called for the ambulance were great. It was not like a "one to one" situation - between the casualty and the photographer - that the latter would be so callous. From the photogaph, one could see that the injured had already been attended to by others and there was nothing the photographer could do except to say a prayer or two for the casualty. :dunno:
 

Del_CtrlnoAlt

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2003
16,268
0
0
Outside the Dry Box.
Visit site
#4
there was a case about bystander effect...

its like everyone think the other would do something about it... so in the end no one did anything. esp when the number of bystanders increases. but at least the photographer did something... but most will deem it wrong. but in his mind i guess, he thought, others around would have called the police, so i call, is just wasting of the police hotline time.

normally in case like this, if there is any 1st aider, they would just control the crowd, the 1st aider tell 1 person to call for the police/ambulance then he/she will access the vital signs. but it do takes quite alot of self motivation & courage to step forward to take responsibility.
 

mandude303

New Member
Nov 14, 2003
10
0
0
49
Tampines
#5
wow....

just make very sure we call first, then shoot lor...

eliminate the possibility that nobody called (aka bystander effect",
then shoot after. just don't ask the wife to tilt the head or move the hands for better effect/drama....
 

Wryer

New Member
Dec 17, 2002
602
0
0
32
Tampines
Visit site
#6
Well, I think we should not take chances with regards to such situations. From a first aider POV, please do call an ambulance. We should not take such chances. There are many things a bystander could do, like calming down a victim and his family (though minute, its a crucial part of first aid).

Like others had pointed out, had it been a casualty and photographer ONLY situation, i guess its only right he does call an ambulance and provide other forms of comfort, be it first aid or psychological assurance.

But when it comes to a casualty-crowd helpers-photographers scenario, it becomes a grey area. The crowd MAY need some more help, but the photographer is unaware and clicking away. The photographer THOUGHT that the situation is under control, and does not hesitate in his own work. So who's right? The same goes for photojournalists, war photogs etc. Are they EXPECTED to give money to a very poor family? Are they EXPECTED to help a side by throwing grenade to help a trapped and doomed soldier?

Back to the actual situation, I guess its only right for the photographer to render help first, before he does his 'thing'. Some say a pro photographer would have to DO HIS JOB, so rendering help would alter the situation and not present the real situation. Well, the debate goes on and on.

Just follow your heart and moral.
But for me, saving a life is paramount.


Regards
 

#7
I personally was shocked at what the photographer did when I read the article. He even had the cheek to offer the pics he took to the family depicting the last moments of the poor man's life!!!My friend with me at the coffeeshop scoffed "Wah........u all photographers damn heartless man!!Dying pple also dun let go!!" And we thought Steve Chia's exploits were shocking.
 

Jun 2, 2002
975
0
0
hErE lAh
#9
As there is too little information on the actual circumstances, I will not comment on whether the photographer should have helped or shoot first.

When Mr Teo contacted The New Paper with the news and pictures, he did not know that the man had not survived, and was still eager to pass the pictures to the man's family.

- Quote from The New Paper
This photographer sure has the gall to offer those pictures to the family. The experience in itself is traumatic enough (regardless of whether the poor man survived or not) & he wants to give them actual reminders of those "last moments'??? Hullo??? He might think he is being generous with such an offer but rather it does come across as being rather insensitive to me.
 

ST1100

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2003
1,785
0
0
Singapore, Bedok
#10
Reminds me of that guy who won the Pulitzer prize - a shot of a vulture hovering over a starving girl who was crawling away.

He chased the vulture away and left. The bird probably came back to finish the job.

He later committed suicide, some years down the road, bcoz of the amount of despair and death he saw, and not being able (or willing?) to help.
 

Jay

Senior Member
May 29, 2003
730
0
16
East
Visit site
#11
I wouldn't offer the photos to the family. Its a very painful reminder and normally family would like to remember the loved one the way he was and not in that moment. Very sad for the family, especially the wife.
 

binbeto

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2002
2,312
0
0
43
Behind a lens
www.pbase.com
#12
<quote from link>
'I was going to call the ambulance but someone else had done so already,' said Mr Teo, who is in his mid 40s.
<unquote>

Based on the link Ckiang posted, seem like he did try to help after taking pics.

<quote from poster>
My friend at the scene couldn't bring himself to hit the shutter but called the ambulance instead. He even confronted the anal guy who later admitted that he was just trying to contribute to the Red Cross Society competition.
<unquote>

This part is not mentioned in the articles.
If this is true, I am quite sad by his behaviour as his 1st instinct is abt a competition.

IMHO, this is really a grey area. He is not commiting any crime, just morally wrong if he didn't offer to help.
 

fantom

New Member
Dec 27, 2003
213
0
0
USA FarEast
Visit site
#13
Came across such incidents personally.
But have rendered assistance first then shoot if wanted.
The shots will still be there.
I do not condemn nor condone this.
It's an individual perception on what is his/her priority.
 

OzOn3

New Member
Jul 12, 2003
1,050
0
0
32
Singapore
www.nig3l.com
#14
Wha, i was rather taken aback by the last few lines in the article

By TNP-
But after he found out the bad news, he said: 'I hope his family won't be too devastated or angry that I took the pictures.

'Maybe it'll be something they can hold on to, so they'll know what happened at the end.'
That is like insensitive man.
 

Wryer

New Member
Dec 17, 2002
602
0
0
32
Tampines
Visit site
#15
If his reasoning was that he just wanted to contribute to the Red Cross Society, its a poor one. An ironic one. Do you think the Red Cross Society would prefer him to save a life or to shoot a picture?

;)
 

offspring

New Member
Jun 3, 2003
1,468
0
0
my.opera.com
#16
ST1100 said:
Reminds me of that guy who won the Pulitzer prize - a shot of a vulture hovering over a starving girl who was crawling away.

He chased the vulture away and left. The bird probably came back to finish the job.

He later committed suicide, some years down the road, bcoz of the amount of despair and death he saw, and not being able (or willing?) to help.
journalists need to grapple emotions over assignments, not easy but that's their jobs. I read about the sad fate of the pulitzer winner but his suicide is due to personal poroblems, maybe fuelled but not as a direct result by the drought shot and other heart-wrenching assignments he had to cover.
 

r32

New Member
Dec 31, 2002
1,021
0
0
40
Singapore
#17
If you can make a difference to the situation other than just taking a picture, be it making the casualty more comfortable, crowd control, calling for help, first aid, or whatever,

Do it.

If there's nothing else you can do to make an impact on the situation to improve it,

Take the picture.
 

sequitur

Senior Member
Apr 17, 2003
3,267
0
0
flickr.com
#18
that's why i don't shoot these kinda stuff

coz they hit my conscience hard.


i remember there's one american photojournalist

who shot a hungry homeless starved child

and didn't give the child anything in return
the child died
and he suicided himself a few weeks/months later
 

sehsuan

Deregistered
Dec 12, 2002
6,598
0
0
38
Singapore
www.sportsshooter.com
#19
the first thing a first-aider should do is to render some form of assistance, whether it be physical assistance, or emotional assistance (to the wife) - if there's already people helping, i dont see why he can't snap photos, but provided he doesn't become a nuisance himself.
 

clive

Senior Member
Oct 9, 2002
2,537
0
0
Visit site
#20
i think the more heartless person are those already at the scene but didnt help the old man
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom