by Amy Weston/Wenn.com via NY Mag
To borrow a line from The Clash, “London’s burning”. And the photographs of the mayhem are stunning. The above shot here is by Amy Weston/WENN.com, as seen in NY Mag. (That image and a bunch more images from NY Mag here).
I’ve been been near riots of this magnitude on two occasions – Paris in 2005-6 and Seattle WTO riots – neither of which I photographed. I’ve also seen a guy get hit by a car and had my camera at the ready but did not shoot. And plenty of other things that I’ve not wanted to photograph. As a pure photographer, only-career-I’ve-ever-had guy, I’m not sure what’s in me that doesn’t pull me to want to shoot so many of these photos, even when I’ve had the chance (like this post). I’m deeply moved by such images -ala London riots, or trama, or the war in Afghanistan. Often times these images are so important to our culture, but at other times it’s shallow and cold to shoot them. I’m especially conflicted with the images coming out of London.
How about you… When do we shoot? When do we help or decide not to spread the horror?
UPDATE: Interview with the photographer (Amy Weston) that captured the stunning photograph in the earlier post below in an article over here at my Google+ page …offers some insights into what she was thinking and plays well with the ongoing discussion here on the blog and over at my Google+ page. (Add me to a circle if you’re G+ing so I can meet you too).
I agree that you can never stand by someone in need with the excuse, “I’m taking a photo.” At the same time these events (and others like them) must recorded. Coming from Birmingham (an English city hit by the riots), there must be records so that people can learn and understand them later – politicians, media, residents, and future generations of children. Its not easy but must be done because images, like the one who posted, are so powerful.
Don’t have any answers, but share the same internal conflict in many situations I’ve found myself in overseas with http://www.silentimages.org/ Do I whip out my camera to capture the horrifying, shocking moment of a young girl being prostituted on the streets of Kolkata or how about the two-year-old who’s on the risk of death from starvation in Cambodia? I find that while I, too, appreciate compelling, thought-provoking images of world events, I also (for whatever reason) seem to want to put my camera DOWN in those moments and just be present. Maybe it’s because I know that with my camera to my face I tend to hide behind the lens instead of live fully in the moment. Maybe it’s because somehow it seems to exploit the reality of what my eyes are seeing … or that I’ve seen too many before me do so. Or maybe it’s just some strange internal way that I’ve been made to tick.
Whatever it is, it’s refreshing to see/hear the conversation begin on a larger scale in the photography community. Thanks for initiating it!
I personally think that when it is not a life or death situation then you should shoot (photos that is). On 2 occasions i have been at events where somemthing has sparked up and i did not shoot: On both occasions the police asked as the offical photographer whether we had any images.
You have to remember that even if you not directly helping sort out the situaton you are helping the course of justice.
It is a dilema. I can see a need for some of the photojournalistic images but at the same time I see photographs of some situations and have thought to myself, “the photographer who took this could have been helping this person instead of taking their photo”. I guess the view is the photo can help in other ways.
I think this shot is amazing, it’s unfortunate that London has “caught fire” but I don’t think that it should stop photographers from capturing shots like this to remember such a tradgic event in history.