Cotty, > Personally I don't think morality is an issue. I think it's about > personal comfort and the law. > > ... > > If shooting (stills or video) in circumstances such as these is > uncomfortable then the outcome is obvious - one will not do it, and > probably think very little of those that would. That's okay by me, as I > have a mortgage to pay and a place in hell guaranteed :-)
You speak like a true professional journalist or video (stills) operator which it turns out you are. <-- This is *not* insult, rather opposite thereof. It is only a matter of one's own personal perception. Consider, Cotty. I drove today at work and approaching a crossing I heard an ambulance's siren. Instinctively I turned to look in the mirror (I have slightly wider custom inside mirror) only to realize that nothing was in there. Meanwhile the ambulance was entering the crossing on the red so that I almost hit it as I was going on green in the direction perpendicular to that of ambulance entry. It was in front of me. Well, I did avoid a very unpleasant event and in a moment the ambulance took off and I hope no harm came to the person that had to be treated. I was rather uncomfortable after that. I still am. Probably what happened is perfectly fine and should I be a taxi driver, I wouldn't pay much attention to it. But I am not. Again, it is a matter of one's own perception. When I received my 31 limited the terror attack happened in the view distance from my office. I took few shots but they were very bad. I did not dare to come closer for obvious reasons, but if I had a long lens, I might have taken better shots. But then again, this was different eventuality. What I am trying to say is that I consider your point of view perfectly valid although I wouldn't dare take this kind of shot myself. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
