Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/09/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Did they think that there is medically indicated cosmetic surgery ? (I don't mean plastic or reconstructive surgery). I know, they'll say that us infectious disease docs are just jealous 'cause we don't have a gimmick. I can tell you that in the Southeast, it's a lot easier to get a facelift than it is to get into an internist as a new patient. Allen >Steve: > >You mean there are doctors who do surgery just to make payments on >their wives' BMW's ? For shame. If I'd have said such someone (most >likely Paul) would have called me cynical. :-P > >walt > >Steve Barbour wrote: > >>somehow I keep following this thread and thinking of the difference >>between those surgeons who do surgery to save lives, and those >>surgeons who do unnecessary surgery... >> >>Steve >> >> >>On Sep 8, 2005, at 8:39 AM, Ted Grant wrote: >> >>>Neil Schneider offered: >>> >>>>>You have to give the media credit for getting the story and the heart >>>>> >>>wrenching images out. We may not always do it perfectly (and you are in >>>that "we") But we do work at our jobs with compassion also.<<< >>> >>>G'day Neil, >>>Well yes the story is beyond the imagination of most and it should >>>be covered. But the media of today have evolved into a howling >>>pack of "images first and who cares! Get them no matter who >>>suffers, but get them!" >>> >>>However, read my lips carefully... "NOT ALL OF THEM" and you are >>>included in "not all of them." However when one caught FOX TV and >>>CNN there main focus, as always, is on the grimest material they >>>can find. The stills shooters, if let in enmass would be like an >>>invasion of cockroaches scurrying around looking for their visuals >>>flashing in the faces of those most suffering. >>> >>>And yes many newsphotographers do show compassion for subject and >>>use care in photographing suffering souls. But there are more and >>>more of the "worst rat-pack" types evolving partially because the >>>digital era has made it possible for these types to become part of >>>the previously clean honourable profession as a newsphotograher. >>> >>>When it was "film only" we'd shoot, know how to soup film, make >>>prints in the bathroom of a hotel and know how to operate wire >>>photo machines. And with that, it eliminated the mental midgets of >>>today who because they have a digital exposing machine of some >>>kind, claim to be "media." And with many of these people it's >>>more a "thrill of the kill" in getting some sort of exposure and >>>having it published, than anything to do with the honour of being >>>a news photographer with compassion. >>> >>>>>>Gosh Ted, so beautifully laid out with such calm reasoning. Perhaps >>>>>> >>>>FEMA should have just let you in there with your super >>>>quiet Leicas, sans flash, for it looks like you might be the only >>>>one to shoot such a sensitive story.<<< >>>> >>> >>>Unfortunately good sir I think you maybe a tad facitious, as there >>>are many far better skilled than I at that kind of subject. >>> >>>>Sounds like you don't give any credit to anyone else for knowing >>>>how to handle a situation like this except experienced >>>>photojournalists like yourself.. Shame on you for such an elitist >>>>attitude, <<< >>>> >>> >>>Now Neil you know better than that, as I've had my ass shot off on >>>more occasions than I'd care to admit, but that's all part of >>>being a news-photographer amidst ones competitors. Goes with the >>>territory. However, in this case a photojournalist with experince >>>would be far better, or lets say should be, than the cell >>>phone-p&s digi camera pack . >>> >>>>>and shame on >>>>> >>>>government agencies who try to control what the rest of the world >>>>is entitled to see. Yes I said entitled. A tragedy of this >>>>magnitude, which was most likely caused by government cutbacks, >>>>and is now trying to be hidden from public scrutiny by that same >>>>government, should be exploited to its fullest.<<< >>>> >>> >>>Quite right, it shouldn't have been covered up if that was and is the >>>case. >>> >>>>Why do you suppose there are so many photojournalists from >>>>around the world there, as you say "like a battery of paparazzi". >>>>Think they're just there for the body pictures........or could it >>>>be that >>>>there is so many world wide media organizations now that its >>>>inevitable when anything major happens.<<<<<< >>>> >>> >>>Well it's logical they are there in such huge numbers because of >>>the magnitude of the disaster. And the advent of the big stock >>>agencies now prodcing a great deal of photography to out market >>>the general wire news services. >>> >>>>Do you like controlled, government embedding, with censors >>>>approving every image to its sensitivity values.<< >>>> >>> >>>Well embedding if you like began in seriousness for the Iraqi >>>invastion so it could be controlled. And I do not agree with >>>governemnt censorship at any time of any subject. >>> >>>>Do you really believe the US President is forbidding the caskets >>>>of dead soldiers to be photographed to spare the families, or to >>>>spare >>>>his own image. Everyone remembers Viet Nam and how the press >>>>"lost" that war for the US.<<,, >>>> >>> >>>This is a subject as a non-American I am not at liberty to comment on. >>> >>>>And those poor souls trapped in the Superdome simply because they >>>>didn't have the means to leave the city. Do you really believe >>>>that >>>>they don't want to vent their anger over this, to the first >>>>camera or reporter they see. Sure, there were pictures of >>>>unidentified bodies in the arena.<<<<<, >>>> >>> >>>Sure they should vent their anger or whatever comment they wish to >>>make as freely as they can. But that has nothing to do with still >>>photgraphers and we're discussing photography and photographers. >>> >>>>It showed the deplorable condition these people were kept under, >>>>the lack of food, water, medical care. I wonder what would of >>>>happened if >>>>these images were never shown. How many more bodies would have >>>>been piled up. Babies, dead from dehydration in their mothers >>>>arms.<<<< >>>> >>> >>> >>>>You have to give the media credit for getting the story and the >>>>heart wrenching images out. We may not always do it perfectly >>>>(and you are in that "we") But we do work at our jobs with >>>>compassion also.<<<< >>>> >>> >>>We media people generally manage to circumvent " governement >>>control " if you like some way or other, not always as fast as >>>we'd like. But what many government bureaucrats never learn is... >>>"the tougher they try to control the media, the tougher we become >>>at getting the story. If for no other reason than doing an end >>>run around them to see what they're hiding or didn't do >>>correctly." >>> >>>But in some cases control is necessary. The coverage in the >>>Superedome could have been done so simply with care and compassion >>>on a "pool" basis. Simply using the most experinced photographer >>>or two and TV crew to shoot inside. Then whatever is shot belongs >>>to all. >>> >>>However, that may not work in your country as the media would end >>>up fighting amongst themselves with court orders etc to decide >>>whom was selected to shoot. Then by the time the company lawyers >>>and court got finished, NO would've been re-built! Still no >>>pictures! >>> >>>ted >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>Leica Users Group. >>>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Leica Users Group. >>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information