Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'ethics'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Alamy Forum guidelines and announcements
    • Forum guidelines
    • Announcements
  • Alamy discussion and community support
    • Introductions
    • Portfolio critique
    • Community support: ask the forum
    • Stock photography discussion and contributor experience
    • Alamy Quality Control and technical talk
    • Let's talk about pics
  • Suggestions and ideas
    • Alamy
    • The Forum

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests


Alamy URL


Images


Joined Alamy

Found 5 results

  1. 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?
  2. 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.
  3. Hey all, Last weekend I came across a real nazi BMW R75 motorcycle and sidecar with a machine gun (all in great conditions) and got some editorial shots which I've submitted on here (all accepted). I'll be able to post one or two of the images tomorrow when it's up but I have no issues with pulling them. My question is would anybody ever use any of my images for hate-related media / extreme right-wing propaganda? Secondly, is it ethically dubious for me to license such images? I know some photographers capture WWII re-enactments, I have no issues with any of that. Looking forward to your opinions on the subject. Thanks
  4. I'm a U.S. Army photographer who has just discovered that this site has over 1,000 of my photos for sale. In many cases the photos aren't even credited to me. Content created by me as a U.S. military photographer is public domain, but this seems highly unethical. Especially since all the same photos for sale here are available for FREE to anyone on DVIDS. Also - since photographers get 50% of the profits here when can I expect my check?
  5. I am wondering what adjustments/functions would be considered digitally altering a photo by most people. It would include Alamy stock, Alamy news, or photo contests. Are there three different standards with three different requirements.. I have a friend that feels any manipulation of digital photos is taboo for photo contests and I believe almost anything I can do is acceptable. She and a lot of other people apparently believe that you can only do what used to be possible in a darkroom. So, what would be crossing the line for all the various purposes of a photo? I would like to get everyone’s opinions on what in particular would be changing the truth of a photo for whatever end use it is intentioned for. As software for digital manipulation becomes more sophisticated it is very hard to judge how much manipulation is too much.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.