Getting the Public Onside
RM, don't let one buffoon tar all enthusiasts with the same brush.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Area 51
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well here's some of the sort of thing enthusiasts posted:
I've never understood the level of vitriol and hate which seems to get poured on people just because they happened to be 'in the right place at the right time' to film/ photograph a event. Pretty much ever since the camera was invented people have been taking photographs (and later film) of events which they felt were news worthy and might be of interest to other people who didn't witness the event in person.
Do the people who get their panties in such a knot switch off the tv if there is a documentary showing such clips as the Hindenburg crash or the Abraham Zapruder JFK assassination film or the myriad or documentaries there have been showing the Twin Towers day where nearly 3000 people lost their lives? I doubt it. So why the attacks on fotogs who have the 'good fortune' to be on the fence line when something more 'marketable' than usual happens.
I'm guessing its mainly down to jealousy that while they were stuck in the office someone else was having a day out and got to film something that they knew the 'red tops' would snap up for cash money. In my view there is no conflict of interest in being saddened that someone lost their life and recording the event in a photograph which someone subsequently buys off you. If you have a camera you should be recording the the important events and if you happen to record an event that others are interested in then you should be sharing those pictures. And if someone is willing to pay you for those photos then good luck to you.
If you think the photos being published is in bad taste then don't look at them and don't buy the product of those that do publish them.
And this:
As this thread has turned from reporting the death of the engineer and morphed into a discussion on the rights and wrongs of one photographer's actions......
To those of you complaining ( and worse ) about his actions :
Depending on your age :
What did you do when the events of '9/11' were unfolding, or when the photographs of the aircraft impacts ( and the people jumping from the building ) were published?
What did you do when the capsizing of the Herald of Free Enterprise was being shown, or the images were published in newspapers?
What did you do when the events of Bradford, Heysel & Hillsborough were unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
More recently, what did you do when the events in Grenfell were unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
What did you do when the Air France Concorde incident was unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
There are many, many other similar events I could cite, but you should get my gist by now.
Did you turn off your televisions & complain about the published images?
If so, good for you.
If not, then in my opinion you're sanctimonious hypocrites.
Now, many did rightly criticise the actions of the photographer, but is it any surprise that having shown no obvious contrition for his actions or donating money to charity, the said individual and those who condone his actions have done damage to the view serving personnel have of enthusiasts in general.
I've never understood the level of vitriol and hate which seems to get poured on people just because they happened to be 'in the right place at the right time' to film/ photograph a event. Pretty much ever since the camera was invented people have been taking photographs (and later film) of events which they felt were news worthy and might be of interest to other people who didn't witness the event in person.
Do the people who get their panties in such a knot switch off the tv if there is a documentary showing such clips as the Hindenburg crash or the Abraham Zapruder JFK assassination film or the myriad or documentaries there have been showing the Twin Towers day where nearly 3000 people lost their lives? I doubt it. So why the attacks on fotogs who have the 'good fortune' to be on the fence line when something more 'marketable' than usual happens.
I'm guessing its mainly down to jealousy that while they were stuck in the office someone else was having a day out and got to film something that they knew the 'red tops' would snap up for cash money. In my view there is no conflict of interest in being saddened that someone lost their life and recording the event in a photograph which someone subsequently buys off you. If you have a camera you should be recording the the important events and if you happen to record an event that others are interested in then you should be sharing those pictures. And if someone is willing to pay you for those photos then good luck to you.
If you think the photos being published is in bad taste then don't look at them and don't buy the product of those that do publish them.
And this:
As this thread has turned from reporting the death of the engineer and morphed into a discussion on the rights and wrongs of one photographer's actions......
To those of you complaining ( and worse ) about his actions :
Depending on your age :
What did you do when the events of '9/11' were unfolding, or when the photographs of the aircraft impacts ( and the people jumping from the building ) were published?
What did you do when the capsizing of the Herald of Free Enterprise was being shown, or the images were published in newspapers?
What did you do when the events of Bradford, Heysel & Hillsborough were unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
More recently, what did you do when the events in Grenfell were unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
What did you do when the Air France Concorde incident was unfolding, or when the images were published in newspapers?
There are many, many other similar events I could cite, but you should get my gist by now.
Did you turn off your televisions & complain about the published images?
If so, good for you.
If not, then in my opinion you're sanctimonious hypocrites.
Now, many did rightly criticise the actions of the photographer, but is it any surprise that having shown no obvious contrition for his actions or donating money to charity, the said individual and those who condone his actions have done damage to the view serving personnel have of enthusiasts in general.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
A lawyer was a passenger on the Seabourne ship that was attacked. He took photographs from his cabin when others had obeyed the order to go to muster stations. He then sold the pictures. I met two other passengers who deplored his opportunism.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: ON TOP OF OLD SMOKEY
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you have to list your ego as a separate item in the weight&balance calcs? I'm just bemused at the degree of hubris required for someone to start throwing insults at those who are already supportive of Military Aviation...
PDR
PDR
