Orangutan said:
sanj said:
Orangutan said:
sanj said:
I feel that it is unethical for a photographer not to photograph something he/she feels is interesting - visually or content wise.
You and I are on different continents of thought, then: by this logic, anyone can proclaim himself a "photographer" and photograph anything under any conditions, without regard to its effects on the subjects of the photos. Actions have consequences: photographers cannot step outside this reality, and aesthetics do not supersede kindness.
Let me modify my comment: I feel that it is unethical for a photographer
not to photograph something he/she feels is interesting - visually or content wise
as long as it does not DIRECTLY hurt anyone.
I expect of me, and other photographers to document the world uncensored for all to see. It could be war, sports, events, assassinations or poverty. If photographers censored themselves, we would not be able to see some other the shocking images of our past.
Ah, I see. I tend to take it one or two steps further: before I photograph someone (as an individual, not as an incidental part of a larger scene) I ask myself if my photograph benefits or harms the subject. If it benefits the subject then it's OK. If it harms the subject (including harm to personal dignity) then I need to ask myself if the real-world benefit to humanity makes up for that. I try to be modest about the effects my photographs will have on others, so in almost all cases the answer is no.
Censorship and ethical restraint are not two sides of the same coin. I agree with you regarding censorship, including self-censorship, but I try not to fool myself that my photographs are any kind of social documentation. If I were present at some important event, and I were in position to document it you can be sure the shutter would be clicking.
Faced with a natural disaster that people died. Seeing the devestation and being involved in it first hand. Knowing people had lost their homes, valuables and life. Being able to be their first hand as some struggled to survive or were devastated emotionally because of their loss. Having my camera gear at hand. Knowing that news organizations that were paid and were on the scene documenting everything.
With all this I looked at my camera and saw I was in the prime spot to document this, I choose not to. I do not regret the decision. I know I wouldn't want people taking pictures of my pain and suffering. People in this situation are seldom in a position to be asked if they can be photographed by the press. Their lives are put on display by the news media because the world needs to see, and in some ways that is beneficial.
Over the next few weeks the sight seers starting showing up, blocking traffic on the interstate they would slow to take pictures. A few times coming home I would pull along side of them and go the same speed they were going to block their view. These people weren't involved and taking pictures for of the disaster for their personal amusement.
So if some important event happens, if it doesn't involve taking pictures of people suffering, I would be taking pictures.
People hurting, in pain, loosing their lives and emotionally devastated. I do not pick the camera up.