# Photographers are freaking annoying.



## Destin (Jul 10, 2011)

Alright, so I'm clearly a photographer. I've been an active member here for over a year. I'm sure you're wondering what the title is about then. To be clear, it's photojournalists I'm talking about specifically. Here's the scoop:

I became a volunteer firefighter about 6 months ago, and I've noticed a trend with all the local photojournalists that show up to our calls. They don't seem to understand a few concepts. 1 being that you stay out of the firefighters way while we are doing our job. Another being that, if we tell you to get back, GET BACK. And finally, whether you publish them out not, there is NO need to take photos of disturbing accident scenes, especially while the victims are still in the cars. 

I'm not saying everyone does it. But the guys in my area are absolutely ridiculous. My Chief is actually about to stop allowing them to come ANYWHERE near our scene, which he legally has every right to do since it isn't publicly accesible property once we close the road down. 

Sorry for the rant. It may be way off topic, and uncalled for here. I'm just sick of it.


----------



## usayit (Jul 10, 2011)

You are right... it is generalizing but many that seem to set the tone for everyone.   I've had numerous problems with amateurs and over zealous enthusiasts but I would expect I higher degree of professionalism from working photojournalists.  If it becomes a hazard to the well being to the people directly involved I too would just simply make the immediate area inaccessible... allow them to record the events from afar.  

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/photographic-discussions/181905-rant-photographer-swarm.html


----------



## Overread (Jul 10, 2011)

Honestly I think your rant is quite right in what you outline and I think its something not only people like yourself have noticed, but also those in the photographic world as well. It's not just the fight for the photo for the front of the paper, its the paparazzi type approach of those who are either greedy or those who are trying to be photographers (the evil weekend warriors ) who perhaps lack some of the training and certainly the experience to know what is proper and what is not -- in short without any mentor they've no ropes and thus rely on a more blinkered and personal vision toward their own self interest without taking into account those around them (somewhat, I suspect, spurred on by some in communities who feel that they must push their photographic rights upon others to ensure that they retain them in this world of restricted photography in the post 9/11 terrorist climate). 


You might want to try another approach though - at least for those of the locals who are professionals - and try to set up some small confrence type interactions with the local media groups and their photographers. To outline both your position at the time and your concerns. To give them a less blinkered view, whilst also reassuring them that they will get the photos they need in good time for the morning paper - but both without putting themselves (and others) at risk by compromising the safety of the scene; and also whilst respecting those involved in such incidents .

I think such an approach, whilst slower, would at least serve to show that you are not trying to work against them, but with them - respecting their job and work whilst getting the same back. Trying to fight them might only make the situation worse as they'll dig up their own legal excuses/reasons for their presence and some might (in the face of more restrictions) push further than they'd normally do and put themselves/others at greater risk at the scene.


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Jul 10, 2011)

Honestly I think your rant is quite wrong.

First of all, you are not clearly a photographer just because you have been a member for over a year. That just makes you a member for over a year. Really, would I be a race car driver just because I was a member of a race care driving forum for a year?

Second, "if we tell you to get back, GET BACK" sounds like you are on a bad power trip to me and nothing much more. If I'd listen to people like you I probably would never have been the PJ I became. Get over yourself.

Third, who are you to judge what photos there is a need for? A friend of mine's dad was a firefighter and had the most extensive and most gruesome collection of photos of what he called "crispy critters." Although he didn't shoot them to be published, he sure didn't mind showing them off and I'm still trying to figure out how to have them published... in a book.

Yes, I think those photos may actually make people think about the kind of crap they do. Like it or not.

Fourth, I'm just getting back from the biggest photo show there is and one of the photog being honored this year is one of the kind you love to hate. His name is Enrique Metinides and he has been shooting the kind of photos you are talking about for over a half century. Thank god he didn't let a little power tripper like you get in his way.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jul 10, 2011)

Cloudwalker pretty much nailed it.  I had typed out something close to that earlier, but hit the back button instead of the post button.  In any case, since he will probably get berated for his comments, I figured I would go ahead and post, too.

You say you are sick of photographers getting in your way...you know what I'm sick of?  Volunteer firefighters on a power trip.  I'm also sick of TSA employees who think they can touch me wherever they want.  I'm also sick of police who think they can break cameras and destroy evidence.  I'm pretty much sick of overreaching 'authority' figures on power trips.

The press and photographers are about the only thing that keep people like you in line.  I don't doubt that you don't like them and I can understand why.  They expose what you really are.  A self-centered, power tripping jerk who thinks because he is a part-time volunteer for a fire department he can curtail the constitutional rights of the public.

I don't know you and you don't know me.  Maybe you have had extensive training, know what you are doing, have experience in triage, have experience in casualty response, but what you come off as is somebody who lets their emotion take over during an emergency, can't control a situation without threatening people, and thinks that anybody else at a scene is stopping you from being able to do your job.  That's a cop out.

I seriously doubt you are having to push photographers out of the way to rescue people.  I seriously doubt the photographers are stopping you from doing your job.  You obviously don't like the type of pictures they are taking, but as a part-time government employee, you don't get to have an opinion in your current role.  Just because you find it distasteful has nothing to do with whether the photographer is actually impeding you from your duties or just taking photos.

Now, if, and it's a strong IF, a photographer is actually stopping you from being able to rescue somebody because of their behavior, or putting you or your peers in danger based on what they are doing, then they should be removed from the scene and arrested.  Since the thread title isn't, "I had a photog arrested today", I would guess that is not the case.

Basically, I think you are on a power trip, don't like what the photographers are doing on a moral level, and want to use your 'authority' to stop it.  I don't give you that right and neither does the Constitution.


----------



## Destin (Jul 10, 2011)

All I'm saying, us that when a photographer is within ten feet of a car, where we are performing extensive extrication, he has no need to be there. Even if it's only because he is putting his own life at risk because he doesn't have the proper protective clothing on. 

To make it clear, when we close a road down, it is no longer publicly accesible and therefore we have EVERY right to tell the photographer to get off of our accident scene because he is endangering himself, and getting in the way of our life saving operations. I have absolutely no issue with them coming in once the victims are extrcicated and gone, and we are just cleaning up. 

You think I'm on a bad power trip? Funny, I feel the same way about photographers who feel the need to exert their so called "rights" to the extreme. Let me make it clear: while emergency crews are on scene at ANY incident they were called to, that have EVERY right to throw out ANYONE they feel is getting in their way. Ive seen my chief throw a sheriff out because he was interfering with us doing our job. 

When it comes down to it, the rescue crew doing their job is hand down more important than a newspaper having good photos. Would you rather have a victim live and you miss a photo, or the victim die and you get a good photo? If you choose the latter you are a sick, sick person. 

Photojournalists can do their job just fine from 100-200 feet away and that's all there is to it. They have zero reason to get so close that we are having to walk around them to get back to our fire truck to get a tool.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jul 10, 2011)

Destin said:


> All I'm saying, us that when a photographer is within ten feet of a car, where we are performing extensive extrication, he has no need to be there. Even if it's only because he is putting his own life at risk because he doesn't have the proper protective clothing on.
> 
> To make it clear, when we close a road down, it is no longer publicly accesible and therefore we have EVERY right to tell the photographer to get off of our accident scene because he is endangering himself, and getting in the way of our life saving operations. I have absolutely no issue with them coming in once the victims are extrcicated and gone, and we are just cleaning up.
> 
> ...



It's not like we are talking about photographers asking you to move out of the way so they can get a shot.  Just do your job.  As far as having to walk back to your truck to get a tool, perhaps, in a time sensitive rescue operation, you should be trained well enough to grab the right tools to begin with?

Look, I've done casualty response, I've done triage, I've done the rescue ops and the CPR and the putting people out, I've been there.  Over half the people at any given scene are screaming, in a panic, are getting in the way, and have no idea what to do.  If you can't deal with a photographer then I think you may find your time better served volunteering at the local retirement home.  Things move a bit slower down there.


----------



## tirediron (Jul 10, 2011)

It's very simple:  If you are a responder at an emergency scene and someone is your way, regardless of whether they are a photographer, lookie-loo, or whatever else, you do your job.  If that means someone has to be "moved" to the side, so be it.


----------



## ladynikon (Jul 10, 2011)

Wow!! Just wow!!! I can not believe the disrespect shown to someone who is obviously concerned about the safety and well being of others!!! I highly doubt that a person would VOLUNTEER their time to help saves ppls lives and endanger their own just because they are on a power trip!!! My sincerest apologies to the OP!!!! Not everyone is this self absorbed and your work is appreciated.....by some anyway!!!


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jul 10, 2011)

ladynikon said:


> Wow!! Just wow!!! I can not believe the disrespect shown to someone who is obviously concerned about the safety and well being of others!!! I highly doubt that a person would VOLUNTEER their time to help saves ppls lives and endanger their own just because they are on a power trip!!! My sincerest apologies to the OP!!!! Not everyone is this self absorbed and your work is appreciated.....by some anyway!!!


My disrespect, and that probably is the right thing to call it, is to a volunteer who doesn't have the training or experience to do their job and wants to blame that on photographers.

Look, when I got out of the military, I was training people like the OP.  We taught people how to assess a situation, control the situation, handle triage, and rescue and treat personnel in much more difficult situations than a highway.  A photographer was the least of our worries.  The OP is whining and that is all there is to it.  The next time the OP is trying to rescue somebody while under fire, he can come back to this thread and tell me about how much a photographer bothered him.

It should be an easy judgment call as to what needs to be done to control a scene.  If you need to move somebody, move them.  If somebody is stopping you from doing what you need to do, get them out of there(and that includes other victims who are not seriously hurt, or friends, or parents, or other 'authority figures', like when the OP mentioned having to escort a sheriff off the scene).  It isn't just limited to photographers.

Part of the duties of an emergency responder is to take control of the scene to the extent necessary to effect a rescue.  This isn't that complicated, and it doesn't need a thread on a photography forum about how 'photographers are freaking annoying'.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jul 10, 2011)

Having worked as a photojournalist for three decades, I have been to my share of accidents, many of them I wish I had never seen. It is the job of the photographer to record what has happened, photographers should record the scene not be part of the scene.  The biggest problem these days, and it's society that has changed it,  everything has become "in your face photography"  I always stood back and shot with a longer lens, I still do, but now everyone is using ultra wides to cover everything. Watch TV,  in the past you rarely saw any tv crews, now all you see is the guy with the super wide in the face of who won, who died, whatever the subject.  I agree with Cloudwalker, but I do understand what Destin is saying.   The younger photographers don't understand the limitations that the older guys worked under, there was more respect given to the situation.  All the new guys see is an in your face shot as their stepping stone to greatness, I see it all the time, and it is frustrating.


----------



## ladynikon (Jul 10, 2011)

Well, I've never been in a position to train someone in a situation like this! I am just glad and thankful their are ppl who are willing to volunteer their time to save us civilians. Especially since I've been in the position needing to be saved in a (serious) car accident and I must say I would NOT have appreciated a photographer "reaping the benefits" of my unfortunate accident....wether they have every right or not!!! It's just mean!!! and honestly anyone who can stomach another persons  physical injuries  and not care about their emotional injuries and just keep shooting photographs is seriously wrong! And I would personally thank any chief for kicking them off the scene!


----------



## Destin (Jul 10, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> ladynikon said:
> 
> 
> > Wow!! Just wow!!! I can not believe the disrespect shown to someone who is obviously concerned about the safety and well being of others!!! I highly doubt that a person would VOLUNTEER their time to help saves ppls lives and endanger their own just because they are on a power trip!!! My sincerest apologies to the OP!!!! Not everyone is this self absorbed and your work is appreciated.....by some anyway!!!
> ...



Don't have the proper training? I've only been in the department a little over a year now, but in that time I've logged over 200 training hours in that time, on top of my full time job, and a fire call nearly every day. Sure, not a ton of experience, but that comes with time. 

If you knew ANYTHING about a time sensitive rescue operation, as you claim to, you would know that such operations are rapidly evolving, crap can change in the blink of an eye, and require a tool that you didn't need off the truck at first. No two accidents are EVER the same, and each one is going to require different tactics and tools to get the job done. Simple as that. No matter how much training or experience you have, You will never know what you need to get the job done until you look at the car up close and can see what type of damage it has sustained and how the occupants are trapped. 

I was just at the scene of a head on collision where we landed 3 mercyflight helicopters (this is the call that prompted this thread) and there were several small children along with 2 adults, severely trapped in the vehicles. A local photographer must have been in the area, and arrived about 5 minutes after us. He was about 10 feet from the vehicles, taking photos of a patient who was, at the time, unresponsive, and at the same time getting in our way. We were physically walking into him as we tried to move around the vehicle. It's not the first time we've had problems like this, and it's not just one photographer doing it. They seem to think that getting the photo is more important than the persons life. 

I don't care what anyone says a photographers rights are, there is no need for him to be taking photos of a patient who is, for all intents and purposes at that moment, basically dead. 

And as far as you're service, if what you claim you did is true, I give you great respect for it. But at the same time, I see things that you would never see on a battlefield, just like you see things I'll never see on the highway. When's the last time you watched a dead infant get pulled from a car, that was just hit head on by a drunk driver,  who walked away without a scratch. Granted I'm not getting shot at, but thats not the point.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jul 10, 2011)

Destin said:


> Don't have the proper training? I've only been in the department a little over a year now, but in that time I've logged over 200 training hours in that time, on top of my full time job, and a fire call nearly every day. Sure, not a ton of experience, but that comes with time.


  You said 6 months in your original post, now it's over a year?  Interesting.


> If you knew ANYTHING about a time sensitive rescue operation, as you claim to, you would know that such operations are rapidly evolving, crap can change in the blink of an eye, and require a tool that you didn't need off the truck at first. No two accidents are EVER the same, and each one is going to require different tactics and tools to get the job done. Simple as that. No matter how much training or experience you have, You will never know what you need to get the job done until you look at the car up close and can see what type of damage it has sustained and how the occupants are trapped.


I have limited experience with vehicle accidents and can understand that different types of accidents with different vehicles require different tools.  I'll admit I was a bit judgemental about saying that you should have the experience to grab the right tool for the job.  That was more a jab at you and was unnecessary.


> I was just at the scene of a head on collision where we landed 3 mercyflight helicopters (this is the call that prompted this thread) and there were several small children along with 2 adults, severely trapped in the vehicles. A local photographer must have been in the area, and arrived about 5 minutes after us. He was about 10 feet from the vehicles, taking photos of a patient who was, at the time, unresponsive, and at the same time getting in our way. We were physically walking into him as we tried to move around the vehicle. It's not the first time we've had problems like this, and it's not just one photographer doing it. They seem to think that getting the photo is more important than the persons life.
> 
> I don't care what anyone says a photographers rights are, there is no need for him to be taking photos of a patient who is, for all intents and purposes at that moment, basically dead.


  Whether you don't see the need for him to be taking some types of photos is not your call to make.  Those decisions were made over 200 years ago.  If he was interfering in the rescue op, you should have secured the scene and had him removed.  It's not that difficult.


> And as far as you're service, if what you claim you did is true, I give you great respect for it.


Everything I said was true, but I did leave out enough info for what I said to be misleading.  I served aboard the USS Nimitz and spent 14 months in the Persian Gulf.  About the closest we came to actually getting shot at was when Iran launched aircraft against us for about a week straight around lunch time...most of us figure it was just to screw with us and make us miss lunch since they would turn around when we lauched our aircraft.  I was part of our Damage Control Training Team, and I did respond to casualties, fires, burns, flooding, explosions, steam line ruptures, etc which happened more often than I would have wished.  Our ship was a big part of the combat operations, but as an Aircraft Carrier, most of the times we were pretty insulated from what was happening on the ground.


> But at the same time, I see things that you would never see on a battlefield, just like you see things I'll never see on the highway. When's the last time you watched a dead infant get pulled from a car, that was just hit head on by a drunk driver,  who walked away without a scratch. Granted I'm not getting shot at, but thats not the point.


You are right, I doubt either of us wanted to see the things we have seen, and you are also right that me having to use a fire extinguisher to put out a shipmate, and my best friend, or taking care of a fire, or flooding, or a steam line rupture, is different than having to pull out a dead infant from a vehicle.

I guess the point that I didn't make well because I was too busy judging you is that, none of these scenes are ideal.  We assess the situation, we control the situation, we do what needs to be done, but in the grand scheme of things, a photographer should not be one of the primary concerns unless we didn't do a good job with the first two steps.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Jul 10, 2011)

Rant threads are freaking annoying.








I should make one!


----------



## ladynikon (Jul 10, 2011)

^^^u totally should  lol


----------



## kwik (Jul 10, 2011)

Not trying to be a dick or anything, but dude, get used to it and get off your high horse.  I used to be a paramedic and a fire fighter.  Also a volunteer fire fighter in a small town outside of our city.  (Due to a lung issue I can't be a fire fighter anymore if your wondering)  Anyway man, people always follow the lights and sirens.  There will always be rubber neckers, followers and on lookers.  Again get used to that.  You'll never change it.  I honestly could give a **** less about the photographers and on lookers at the time of a scene.  I had bigger things to deal with.  The less you worry about the on lookers the more you'll be able to concentrate on your job and give the proper treatment to the people that need it.  And really, isn't that what your there to do in the first place?


----------



## morthncds (Jul 10, 2011)

Thank you Destin!! Firemen and police officers never get the respect they truly deserve. Whether you are volunteer or full time, my hat's off to you guys. As a brother of a fireman and a police officer, I know that you put your life on the line each and every day. Stay safe out there!!


----------



## kwik (Jul 10, 2011)

morthncds said:


> Thank you Destin!! Firemen and police officers never get the respect they truly deserve. Whether you are volunteer or full time, my hat's off to you guys. As a brother of a fireman and a police officer, I know that you put your life on the line each and every day. Stay safe out there!!



Are you kidding me that Fire fighters don't get the respect they deserve.  Ok the police thing I can get but the fire fighters.  HAHA Right.   They are probably THE MOST respected position and career that there is.


----------



## ladynikon (Jul 10, 2011)

kwik said:
			
		

> Are you kidding me that Fire fighters don't get the respect they deserve.  Ok the police thing I can get but the fire fighters.  HAHA Right.   They are probably THE MOST respected position and career that there is.



Obviously not the most respected! Unless u have confused some of these posts as being respectful...I hope none of you are ever in the position to be photographed at your weakest state cuz their may be no one to stand up for your rights as an injured human since "getting the shot" is clearly what's important here. God forbid someone remove a photographer from the scene...he, after all, has every right!!!


----------



## kwik (Jul 10, 2011)

Sure he has every right to remove a photographer and turn his back on the scene.  Go ahead.  My captain would have had my nuts in a vice if I ignored the scene of an accident.  Unless it's your job to remove them.  Don't worry about them.  Lady I'm afraid you may have mistook what I say as disrespectful.  I just think Destin came off quite wrong and a little, how do I say, power-trip-ish?  He is just going to have to get used to the photographers being there and concentrate on what the objective of his job really is.

My guess would be if he posted this thread on a fire fighter website the answers would be different.  but considering he posted a thread called "Photographers are freaking annoying" on a photography website he and as well as you should expect there to be a little back lash.  I don't go on to a ford website and say fords suck!  Go honda hahaha  The title of this thread will make people have their guard up before they even read the content.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Jul 10, 2011)

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...egal-question-rant-volunteer-firefighter.html

*IRONY*


----------



## ladynikon (Jul 10, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:
			
		

> http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/general-shop-talk/237687-legal-question-rant-volunteer-firefighter.htmlIRONY



Interesting...


----------



## kwik (Jul 10, 2011)

*HA!*:lmao:


----------



## jake337 (Jul 11, 2011)

Classic....


----------



## Derrel (Jul 11, 2011)

"I just joined the volunteer fire dept. and the assistant chief asked me to be the "official" FD photographer."

And yet, you claim you have a year's worth of experience there...


----------



## ClickAddict (Jul 11, 2011)

Derrel said:


> "I just joined the volunteer fire dept. and the assistant chief asked me to be the "official" FD photographer."
> 
> And yet, you claim you have a year's worth of experience there...




 -------  See edit below -----

Not defending or attacking the original post, but "just" is not a clear indication of time.

I just ate usually mean in the last hour or two, whereas I just started working at company abc could easily mean a few months. When dealing with events that perhaps only change every few years (I just move to Town, Just started a job, just got married...) It would not be a stretch to use it even after 6 months. 

Also if it's been like 11 months or so, most would agree saying he's been there a year would also not be a stretch. We would all round it up at that point.

So I don't think there's necessarily a "caught you lying" situation here.

-------- Edit; addition comment -----

I stand by what was posted above, but just reread where he said he's been with them 6 months in his original post.  That would be contradictory.  (Unless he has 6 months of experience elsewhere which he is including in his year)


----------



## Destin (Jul 11, 2011)

To correct the time issue: 6 months of being an active member, about 8-10 months being a junior member before that, when I was under 18, but I wasn't allowed to go near the scene, I just did fire police. 

My previous thread was referring to me taking photos, but obviously AFTER my job on scene was done, and we were in te cleanup stages....

I'm done arguing this, it's not worth my time.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jul 11, 2011)

Sounds like more info is coming out...so, basically, you just turned 18 a few months ago?


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Jul 11, 2011)

Destin said:


> I'm done arguing this, it's not worth my time.



...and that's how rant threads go.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jul 11, 2011)

What happened to Photographers are freaking annoying?  Now it's a discussion on volunteer fire fighters, emergency rescue workers, onboard ship medical triage, all of which I admire and have great respect for, but when you guys all start trying to one up each other it is annoying. Who give a crap if he's been doing it for six months or a year, he's doing something that most of us don't do, both you guys have.

Back to the regular programming, "freaking annoying photographers"  Do they have the right to photograph accidents, fires or crime scenes?  I already made my statement on the subject.


----------



## Derrel (Jul 11, 2011)

Destin said:


> To correct the time issue: 6 months of being an active member, about 8-10 months being a junior member before that, when I was under 18, but I wasn't allowed to go near the scene, I just did fire police.
> 
> My previous thread was referring to me taking photos, but obviously AFTER my job on scene was done, and we were in te cleanup stages....
> 
> I'm done arguing this, it's not worth my time.



So, you just turned 18 years old. Hmmm....Maybe a few more months in the world of grown-ups will clarify for you the appropriate roles of professional journalists, photojournalists, and television reporters as they relate to fire department calls on public roadways. And maybe a few more months of being a grown-up will show you what it's like to be on a power trip where emergency workers try and flex muscles they really do not have, and your rinky-dink department get sued by a media outlet with vastly more lawyers and money than your "chief" can possibly manage to combat, and he finds himself out of a job.


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Jul 11, 2011)

To the OP: if you're ranting this much only 6 months into your public safety career... quit now. It only gets worse, and in 5 to 7 years, you'll find yourself stressing over the rampid stupidity, and becoming a jaded bitter ***** because of it. Ask me how I know.


----------



## Destin (Jul 11, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> Sounds like more info is coming out...so, basically, you just turned 18 a few months ago?



yeah. age shouldn't matter. I've had proper training, and I've learned from guys that have up to 50 years of experience in the Fire service.


----------



## analog.universe (Jul 11, 2011)

Age doesn't matter for a lot of things, but the older you get, the more stupid the rest of the world gets... best not to stress about it too much  : )


----------



## memento (Jul 11, 2011)

i agree with the OP. the modern day 'paparazzi' are more than annoying, they are flat out dangerous.
case in point,

YouTube - &#x202a;Tour De France 2011 Stage 9 car crash. Fletcha & Hoogerland.&#x202c;&rlm;

a french tv crew trying to get ahead.. to 'get the shot' no doubt.
it's amazing how many douche bags with a camera are right up in someones face seconds after they crash and the team dr's have to push them aside to get to the rider. 

it was mentioned earlier and i agree.. if some jerk is in the way, use one of your 'tools' to move him! and his camera! oops. sorry.


----------



## Josh66 (Jul 11, 2011)

memento said:


> i agree with the OP. the modern day 'paparazzi' are more than annoying, they are flat out dangerous.
> case in point,
> 
> YouTube - &#x202a;Tour De France 2011 Stage 9 car crash. Fletcha & Hoogerland.&#x202c;&rlm;
> ...


...That didn't really look like an accident to me.

It looked pretty intentional.    ...Seriously though, it did.


----------



## memento (Jul 11, 2011)

when he saw the tree, he should have slammed on the breaks instead of into the leaders of the TDF!


----------



## gsgary (Jul 11, 2011)

If you stand out of the way in the shadows you don't get the shot


----------



## memento (Jul 11, 2011)

if you stand in my face, you dont get the shot either. you get a broken lens.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jul 11, 2011)

If you stand back and work with long glass you get the shot and not punched in the face.


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Jul 11, 2011)




----------



## molested_cow (Jul 11, 2011)

The fire department of the city I live in consists about 90++ % volunteer fire fighters. All are volunteers except administrative and higher management folks. They work just like full time guys, except on their own time without pay.

I've been in a one-day fire training just to get a taste of what it's like, and it is definitely not something to be taken lightly. Doesn't matter what you do or how you do it, safety is the top priory. I'd assume that most of these local photo journalists that the OP is referring to don't have the full concept of the importance of safety. When I photograph events, my urge is to dive right in. For an accident scene, that's not the best thing to do.

What happens when the photographer gets hurt? Will it be the fire fighter's liability because "he has failed to take control"?

I'd say if the fire fighters are still at work trying to control an accident scene or put out a fire, photographers should stay out of their way as much as possible. When the scene has been controlled, they can do what they want.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Destin (Jul 11, 2011)

memento said:


> when he saw the tree, he should have slammed on the breaks instead of into the leaders of the TDF!



They allow way too many media vehicles in the TDF, someone is going to get killed one of these days. Although, I would LOVE to be a photographer on the back of one of the motorcycles, since I'm a cyclist myself.


----------



## Derrel (Jul 11, 2011)

ChristopherCoy said:


>


:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Jul 18, 2011)

molested_cow said:


> The fire department of the city I live in consists about 90++ % volunteer fire fighters. All are volunteers except administrative and higher management folks. They work just like full time guys, except on their own time without pay.
> 
> I've been in a one-day fire training just to get a taste of what it's like, and it is definitely not something to be taken lightly. Doesn't matter what you do or how you do it, safety is the top priory. I'd assume that most of these local photo journalists that the OP is referring to don't have the full concept of the importance of safety. When I photograph events, my urge is to dive right in. For an accident scene, that's not the best thing to do.
> 
> ...


 _Destin likes this.
_

One does not need to be a firefighter or to have taken one day of training to know what firefighters do and the importance of what they do. Assuming, that is, that one is of reasonable intelligence. And, yes, there are idiots out there. Idiots are everywhere but, that includes the fire department itself, doesn't it?

Destin's rant was way off base and he got slammed for it. Live and learn. Maybe. Hopefully. And btw I see no disrespect for firefighters in anything that was said. Only disrespect for Destin who, imho, deserves it. Why is he ranting against a photographer or two who didn't respond to his BS order instead of ranting against the 50-70 cars that did not get out of the way of his FD vehicle on the way to the scene?

Destin, eighteen (it kinda rhymes, doesn't it?) thinks he is God. At the very least, the god of fire and crashes. Well, he isn't. And he needs to get over himself in a hurry. Or he'll be the next firefighter who becomes a firebug...

In my 12 years as a PJ/war photog I saved quite a few soldiers lives just because I had more combat zone experience than your average GI rotating through the meat grinder... Someday, one of those hated PJs may very well save Destin's life. He had better make his peace with how life works.


----------



## unpopular (Jul 18, 2011)

No. I'll take it even further. Nearly all photographers are annoying. They all either think they're gods gift to the art world, or they hate art to the extent that they visually regurgitate the same images of half dome endlessly and not even bother to comment about, or even berate those who try to do anything else.


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Jul 18, 2011)

unpopular said:


> No. I'll take it even further. Nearly all photographers are annoying. They all either think they're gods gift to the art world, or they hate art to the extent that they visually regurgitate the same images of half dome endlessly and not even bother to comment about, or even berate those who try to do anything else.





Bitter! Party for one please! Bitter... your table is ready.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jul 18, 2011)

unpopular said:


> No. I'll take it even further. Nearly all photographers are annoying. They all either think they're gods gift to the art world, or they hate art to the extent that they visually regurgitate the same images of half dome endlessly and not even bother to comment about, or even berate those who try to do anything else.



I don't believe that all photographers are annoying, some do believe they are a god on earth with a camera. As a photographer I can be more grumpy than annoying, I believe in the abilities I have using a camera.  I think you have issues within your own personal life that have caused you to become unpopular within the tiny mind you possess.  You are probably a facebook, forum joiner, and whatever else comes along in search of artifical friends that you can complain to, when in the real world these same people don't care who you are and are willing to add you to their friend list in order to chase a larger number of facebook friends, that if invited wouldn't show up to virtual party  hosted by you offering free beer and women.


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Jul 18, 2011)




----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Jul 18, 2011)

ChristopherCoy said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > No. I'll take it even further. Nearly all photographers are annoying. They all either think they're gods gift to the art world, or they hate art to the extent that they visually regurgitate the same images of half dome endlessly and not even bother to comment about, or even berate those who try to do anything else.
> ...


Not worth responding too.


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Jul 18, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Not worth responding too.




Who? Me, or him?


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Jul 18, 2011)

ChristopherCoy said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > Not worth responding too.
> ...


His post.


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Jul 18, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> His post.




Perhaps... but I don't get to use the 'bitter table for one' line very often. It was a perfect opportunity. LOL


----------



## Rekd (Jul 18, 2011)

I'm a bit late to this, but let me just say... this is the funniest thread I've read here in days! :lmao:

To the OP: Get over yourself. It's not "your road", even if you stopped traffic from passing through. You've got a serious superiority complex and its going to get you (or someone else) hurt. Could be from being distracted and getting hurt, or it could be by getting punched in the face by a pissed off photog that you thought you could push around. 

Just do you ****ing job and let those responsible for recording what you're doing, do theirs. :twak:


----------



## Destin (Jul 18, 2011)

Rekd said:
			
		

> I'm a bit late to this, but let me just say... this is the funniest thread I've read here in days! :lmao:
> 
> To the OP: Get over yourself. It's not "your road", even if you stopped traffic from passing through. You've got a serious superiority complex and its going to get you (or someone else) hurt. Could be from being distracted and getting hurt, or it could be by getting punched in the face by a pissed off photog that you thought you could push around.
> 
> Just do you ****ing job and let those responsible for recording what you're doing, do theirs. :twak:



Actually, while the fire dept. Is on scene the scene is OURS. If that includes a road, the road belongs to us, for all intents and purposes, while we are there. We control who does what on it, and who is allowed where. This is the way it has to be for us to do our job. Its not a superiority complex, it's raw fact. 

Beyond that, we have the power to enforce it. Any firefighter who is certified fire police has the power to arrest you for disobeying his order while on our scene. Legally, if my chief (notice, I'm not saying myself, so don't say I'm on a power trip) wanted to be a dick, the photographer could have been arrested for trespassing and impairing the job of a first responder because he didn't leave when asked to. 

I have absolutely no issue with photographers who do their job right and stay out of our way. Heck, I freelance for a local online newspaper sometimes if I'm near a scene when something happens outside of my fire district. But photographers need to stop thinking that the world revolves around them, and take a few steps back, attach a longer lens, and keep shooting.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jul 18, 2011)

Destin said:


> Rekd said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You'll never last another 6 months.  Either your department will fire you or you will quit.  You aren't cut out for emergency response.  And I say that as somebody that has been there.  I wouldn't want you at my side.  You have a lot of growing up to do.

Just my opinion.  Hopefully, you prove me wrong.


----------



## unpopular (Jul 19, 2011)

imagemaker46 said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > No. I'll take it even further. Nearly all photographers are annoying. They all either think they're gods gift to the art world, or they hate art to the extent that they visually regurgitate the same images of half dome endlessly and not even bother to comment about, or even berate those who try to do anything else.
> ...




You sure can draw a lot of conclusions about me from a half paragraph rant. But I think that my post has more to do with the fact that people on this forum and those like it cannot muster even a single comment on a photograph unless it's of ducks or sunsets or yet another lonely road disappearing to the horizon. If it's outside a cliche, it seems to be a mystery to you fancy snappers, and you're left spouting mental error codes! Bitter, maybe. But at least I'm trying.


And seriously guys, save the cutesy graphics for 4chan.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Jul 19, 2011)

You actually have that backwards. 


But good job insulting the very people you expect to get critique from.


----------



## jake337 (Jul 19, 2011)

imagemaker46 said:


> If you stand back and work with long glass you get the shot and not punched in the face.



I think one problem is, alot of people just won't spend the cash to get the equipment needed to do the job properly and safely.


----------



## mjhoward (Jul 19, 2011)

jake337 said:


> imagemaker46 said:
> 
> 
> > If you stand back and work with long glass you get the shot and not punched in the face.
> ...



Would that be the Fire Department in this case?  We've already got a post saying they wanted OP to be their Photographer and wont spend the money on anything but a point and shoot.  Will the OP be the one getting in the other firefighters' way and annoying them now?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLOwQImdmsY


----------



## jake337 (Jul 19, 2011)

mjhoward said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> > imagemaker46 said:
> ...



Just speaking in a general way...


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jul 19, 2011)

unpopular said:


> imagemaker46 said:
> 
> 
> > unpopular said:
> ...



I personally don't have the time to look at every single image that is posted on this forum, I occationally make comments on the photos, if I like it I may or may not say anything. I don't comment on bad photos.  I offer suggestions if I believe it needs one.

 When I read "nearly all photographers are annoying"  that helped me draw a conclusion about you from five words, I didn't need the paragraph.  Being as 99% of the people on this forum are amateurs, many don't have the experience or photographic skills to offer any helpful suggestions for fear of being dumped on by people like you.  These are the people that shoot pictures of flowers, birds, dogs and cats, so they will comment on what they like.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jul 19, 2011)

jake337 said:


> mjhoward said:
> 
> 
> > jake337 said:
> ...



This is true, I shoot sports so I need longer faster lenses than most would consider buying.  Lots of people do buy 200mm-300mm and I think it's a great idea to have a decent long lens.  Everything has become "in your face" now, it started years ago but getting worse with camera phones, etc.  I just prefer to stand way back, do my thing without bothering people or getting in the way, it's how I learned to shoot, it's how I shoot sports, and from a safety issue, it applies to sports as well.


----------



## Destin (Jul 19, 2011)

mjhoward said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> > imagemaker46 said:
> ...



Funny, if you read that thread properly, you'll see that my department wont buy more than a point and shoot, and they wont let me use my camera. I happen to have a D80 and a 70-200 2.8, which, last I checked, is more than adequate to get the needed shots and stay out of the way, if they would let me. 

I refused to use their point and shoot, because of the fact that I would have to be right on top of the scene, and because it takes CRAPPY photos. 

Get your facts straight next time. Your acting like I'm trying to hide that thread or something. I could care less, I have nothing to hide, look through it as much as you want. While your at it, facebook stalk me and run a background check. You won't find anything.


----------



## skieur (Jul 19, 2011)

Destin said:


> All I'm saying, us that when a photographer is within ten feet of a car, where we are performing extensive extrication, he has no need to be there. Even if it's only because he is putting his own life at risk because he doesn't have the proper protective clothing on.
> 
> To make it clear, when we close a road down, it is no longer publicly accesible and therefore we have EVERY right to tell the photographer to get off of our accident scene because he is endangering himself, and getting in the way of our life saving operations. I have absolutely no issue with them coming in once the victims are extrcicated and gone, and we are just cleaning up.
> 
> ...



Legally photojournalists have a right to be at an accident scene and certainly closer than  100 feet away as long as they are not in the way of firefighters doing their job and implying that photographers are in the way if they are closer than 100 to 200 feet from the scene is patently a great stretch in imagination and spin that would be tough to prove in court.

On the other hand, case law has shown that a victim has an expectation to privacy while being attened to by a paramedic etc., even if he/she is in a public place.  So photos of the firefighting, rescue efforts, police or firefighters are O.K. but when it comes to victims, it may depend on the particular details of the shot.

skieur


----------



## Destin (Jul 19, 2011)

skieur said:


> Destin said:
> 
> 
> > All I'm saying, us that when a photographer is within ten feet of a car, where we are performing extensive extrication, he has no need to be there. Even if it's only because he is putting his own life at risk because he doesn't have the proper protective clothing on.
> ...



Right. Legally the photojournalist does have the right. However, and I'm only speaking legally here, the IC (incident commander) who is in most cases a Fire Chief, can tell ANYONE they are not allowed on the scene, for pretty much whatever reason he decides. It's his scene, and he controls all aspects of it. I'm not saying the photog doesn't have the right, just that the Chief's call overrides the photojournalists right in this case, because the Chief is in control of a life safety operation. 

My chief's new policy, is that we don't allow members of the media in until the scene is stabilized and secure, meaning that the victims are extricated and en route to a medical facility, and/or the fire is out, etc. Basically, once our life safety role is done, he will allow media inside of our perimeter to take photos/video. May not make the media happy, but we've had issues with them, and this is how he's taking care of it. It's his call to make.


----------



## mjhoward (Jul 19, 2011)

Destin said:


> mjhoward said:
> 
> 
> > jake337 said:
> ...



I've got my facts straight.  You act as if I was 'attacking' you, I made a point against your FD, not you.  Someone stated that 'people just won't spend the cash to get the equipment needed to do the job properly and safely', which was more than likely directed at the photojournalists.  The point I was making, was that perhaps the Fire Department is ALSO not willing to spend the money on the proper equipment to get that portion of the job done 'properly and safely'.  You just re-enforced my point by reiterating that the FD wouldn't get you anything more than the point and shoot they already had and wouldn't allow you to use your own equipment.  What does it matter what equipment you have, if you're not allowed to use it while photographing on the job with them?   Wether or not it would literally be YOU shooting for the FD and getting in everyone's way was beside the point.  19 year olds get it.  Facebook stalk you?  Are you still in High School?


----------



## Destin (Jul 19, 2011)

mjhoward said:
			
		

> I've got my facts straight.  You act as if I was 'attacking' you, I made a point against your FD, not you.  Someone stated that 'people just won't spend the cash to get the equipment needed to do the job properly and safely', which was more than likely directed at the photojournalists.  The point I was making, was that perhaps the Fire Department is ALSO not willing to spend the money on the proper equipment to get that portion of the job done 'properly and safely'.  You just re-enforced my point by reiterating that the FD wouldn't get you anything more than the point and shoot they already had and wouldn't allow you to use your own equipment.  What does it matter what equipment you have, if you're not allowed to use it while photographing on the job with them?   Wether or not it would literally be YOU shooting for the FD and getting in everyone's way was beside the point.  19 year olds get it.  Facebook stalk you?  Are you still in High School?



Haha alright, sorry for the confusion on that then. My fire chief and board of
Directors just won't spend the money on it because our job is to save lives/property, not take photos of it. I agree with them totally. The photos only get used for our annual slideshow and occasionally for documentation purposes (license plate/vin numbers, etc, for filling out paperwork later. So quality photos aren't a concern to them. I've come to agree with them new as time goes on. 

And haha, no but I'm on Facebook as is most everyone else. I worded it like that because... That's just simply what it is. Employers do it. Law enforcement does it.   Creepy ex girlfriends do it.... You get the point... Lol


----------



## Rekd (Jul 19, 2011)

Destin said:


> a Fire Chief, can tell ANYONE they are not allowed on the scene, for pretty much whatever reason he decides.



I snorted. :lmao:


----------



## Destin (Jul 19, 2011)

Rekd said:


> Destin said:
> 
> 
> > a Fire Chief, can tell ANYONE they are not allowed on the scene, for pretty much whatever reason he decides.
> ...



I'm not saying I agree with it. I mean, I do, if the Chief keeps a level head and doesn't abuse the power, because he needs to be able to control the area. Most chiefs in my county are good about this, and only throw people off if they are doing something pretty stupid. It's just the way it is. Like I said, I've seen a Sheriff thrown off of our scene. It's a rapidly changing enviroment in which the Chief doesn't have time to waste trying not to piss people off.


----------



## Rekd (Jul 19, 2011)

I think you're misreading something here Sport... 

The Chief does, on occasion, "throw people out". But it's not because he is "keeping a level head", it's because he is pretty limited as to throwing people out for "whatever reason he decides".   

As for a Sheriff's Deputy getting tossed, doesn't surprise me one bit. If anyone spends some time next to a scanner and monitors the different departments when they interact on the scene you'll find a glorious abundance of "RAWR!" from all parties involved. It's hard to catch, but if you get a chance to see it in real life it's even better. :greenpbl:


----------



## skieur (Jul 20, 2011)

Destin said:


> skieur said:
> 
> 
> > Destin said:
> ...




Legally, the incident commander or chief has the responsibility for the resources and staff under his command at the scene and perhaps related staff from other departments and services depending on the situation.  However this does NOT extend to the media or the general public.

Any decision by the IC regarding the presence of the media and the general public must be directly safety related and I would predict that most courts would say that your chief has stretched his "authority" too far if he is waiting for the fire to be out and the victims on route to the hospital.  In my area, this would bring about a court case very quickly on the rights of the press at an incident that affects the general public.

skieur


----------



## unpopular (Jul 22, 2011)

imagemaker46 said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > imagemaker46 said:
> ...



What exactly makes you think I'd "dump" on people? I might disagree, and voice this disagreement to get a better understanding of the critics POV, but this is hardly "dumping" on someone. and I try very hard to make it clear that this isn't my intentions.

The photographs I am talking about aren't amateur shots, and moreover I am discussing the feedback that these images typically receive - endless praise but with very little discussion - and the more cliche'd, the more praise these images receive. I understand that people new to photography do not yet posses the vision, confidence and skill but it's not the clear amateur I am speaking of - it's the feedback that these technically "perfect" visual cliches generally receive.

Photography and photographers I think are in a "dark age" where the same old studies are being regurgitated, and photographers are living vicariously through one another rather than creating anything of artistic or even journalistic importance.

If you don't believe me, take a trip through Yellowstone and observe photographers huddled around one another for the exact same, "award-winning", iconic shot. There is something specifically annoying about this.


----------



## unpopular (Jul 22, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> But good job insulting the very people you expect to get critique from.



No worries. I already gave up.

Have fun with the ducks!


----------

