MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: Bateleur on November 30, 2008, 07:13
-
You are standing on a bridge over a jammed up highway, photographing the line of cars that's inching forward slowly. Your camera is on a tripod and you're using a long lens, so it's attention-getting.
A driver, below, stares up at you curiously as he begins to pass beneath the bridge. As he's looking up, he fails to see the car in front has stopped and runs 'crash!' into its rear end.
No one is hurt - it's a low-speed collision - but both cars are quite badly damaged and steam comes out from under the bonnet of the rear car (he's obviously punctured his radiator.) The occupants of both cars get out and start discussing the crash beside the road.
What do you do?
-
are images of a car crash good stock-photos? I guess I should go to the nex highway bridge ;D ;D :o
hm, I think its the responsibility of the driver to watch the traffic... but I would put my camera away....
-
I'm a first aider so I'd pack my camera away and wait to see if I need to go and help anyone, but if they start waving crowbars at me I'll vanish away, while I'm a helpful little being I'd feel no guilt at the accident, the driver should be concentrating on the road, taking the blame would just give people a reason to start cases against anything interesting on their route.
I don't ever take crash photos though, I do tend to have my camera in my hand in the car and I'll always put it down if we have to go past an accident, I'm old fashioned I guess and I don't feel right taking photos of others misfortune.
-
Given that nobody was hurt I'd probably keep taking pics, but of the now-much-nastier traffic jam and not the accident. What you're saying couldn't really happen though, as "inching forward slowly" and "quite badly damaged" don't jibe.
-
I'd ask if they were okay and then ask if they would like to sign model releases. Then I would ask the victim if they would like to buy images of the accident for insurance purposes. ;D
-
What you're saying couldn't really happen though, as "inching forward slowly" and "quite badly damaged" don't jibe.
I disagree. You can do a surprising amount of damage to a car travelling at no more than a walking pace.
A few years ago I was waiting to enter a roundabout. I inched forward and stopped again as someone came hurtling around it at high speed.
A 'boy racer', in a BMW, immediately behind me, probably thought I was going, roared forward and was unable to stop when I did. I guess there was no more than a metre between us, but he hit the back of my car (a Renault Espace) hard enough to rupture both his radiator and oil cooler. There was oil and water all over the road, and his car was immobile. It had to be towed away. The back door of my Espace was wrecked and couldn't be opened.
No one was hurt.
But ... anyway ... the reason I posed the question was because it raises interesting ethical points. I wondered what the consensus was.
-
I agree with Einochi. And not only would I take no photos, I wouldn't even watch the scene any further.
There used to be quite a lot of trouble in Germany with people stopping and staring at accident scenes, even producing new accidents. When there was a bad flood in the south, members of the public took day trips down there to watch, take photos, and make videos of people fighting against the water in the streets. I think it's human to want to know what's going on and to have an urge to stop and stare to find out, but as long as I'm sure nobody needs my help, I'll look away and carry on.
And as the photographer, I wouldn't take the blame either. It's the driver whose responsibility it is to keep his eyes on the traffic.
-
Hate to admit it, but if the situation was right my first thought would be to get some pictures of it. ;D
But depending how bad the collision was, I'd definitely walk over and see if there was anything I could do to help.