Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'ethics'.
I wanted to get some opinions from any fellow animal-rights-conscious/vegetarian/etc. photographers out there. I've only done zoo photography once (and never aquarium), many years ago, having since decided I wasn't comfortable shooting (or even visiting) animals kept in what must seem like prisons to a lot of them. However, it occurs to me lately that stock photography of zoos could potentially be used by those campaigning for the rights of animals. Thus, I'm thinking of changing my stance. But I'm wondering if it would be hypocritical to profit off animals in these conditions. And of course, the photos could also be used to promote the business of animal confinement instead of question it. But I do know in some cases zoos do good work to take care of animals that might be in danger otherwise. So I'm trying to weigh all the factors. How do some of you approach this?
I had another interesting ethics question last night. A serious road traffic accident caused the closure of a major road. Sadly, it turned out this morning that a pedestrian was killed and a driver has been arrested for causing death by dangerous driving. In the end I decided not to send the photos to Live News - but not on an ethics ground but simply because they are unlikely to sell. But, should I have taken the photos in the first place? I was given a hard time by a police officer who clearly disproved of me being there. He even told me I should not publish the photos until a statement had been issued by the police. - Which is of course not true. I take the view that if the photographs are in the public interest they should be taken, with appropriate restraint. The same issues arose over pictures of the Grenfell Tower. i guess it is really up to each photographer and the particular situation.