sad thing is the camera whent flying up in the air and did not survive, the photographer now uses diposable cameras.
sigh, hope it was a Canon
Photogs Run For Cover!
(30 posts) (16 voices)-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
And if that's what a photographer wants to do, I see no reason not to let him do it. It's his life anyway right?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Drdobs said:
And if that's what a photographer wants to do, I see no reason not to let him do it. It's his life anyway right?And a liability to the track in more ways than one. Even with a release an injured photog could bring bad publicity...it is a lose lose for them so why would they let them?
Posted 1 year ago # -
tcole1983 said:
And a liability to the track in more ways than one. Even with a release an injured photog could bring bad publicity...it is a lose lose for them so why would they let them?I know thats why the safety laws at my local track are there but they seem to over do it in the fact that they usually wont allow tethered equipment too close either...
Posted 1 year ago # -
NikoDoby said:
I didn't say anything about photographing a victim. Although war photographers do get prestigious awards for such gruesome images all the time. I was referring to the fact that you always see "pro" photographers continue shooting in the midst of danger. They go for the shot regardless of the risk to themselves.I know, sorry I wasn't more clear. I was just making reference to the difference of getting a dangerous shot, verses "after the fact" gore shots.
Saying that, we had a motorcycle fatality wreck here a couple of years ago that was so bizarre I was glad someone took the pictures. I won't post the pictures but one can google Tulsa Motorcycle Wreck and see what I'm talking about. The guy got his head stuck in the truck trailer.
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
