screaming camel stuck in river

I've had a quick look at the author's portfolio, as well as

the uploaded photos of the (moral?) critics of this photo.

Puh-leez. Ya'll just must be jealous. :)

 

Seriously, this collection and story behind it should be

considered for NG. It's amazing. Thank you!

I wouldn't jump in and help,- without understanding the behaviour patterns of camels before hand!

Good Question, Nick Dolan.

 

It all depends: If the water were too cold, say, in the Arctic, I'd probably go for the pulitzer, unless it were night and I had no flash, in which case I would try to save the poor soul. Unless I didn't like him, for instance if I had pushed him in, as if maybe he had tried to kill me, and we struggled, ending up with him in the water. Would I save him then? probably not. Actually, in that case, I wouldn't even go for the photo. I'd just be thankful it was him in the water, and not myself.

 

Now, if this were a public swimming pool, different story. I would go for the pulitzer, hands down, figuring someone else would be more able to save him while I was shooting. Besides, I wouldn't want to get my camera wet.

 

As for film speed in either case, probably 400. With all the splashing and moving around I'm sure it would be better than lower speeds. I could push it, or pull it, too, depending on the need.

 

The real question here is not what film speed to use, but would I use a fresh roll of film, or one with images already on it. That is, if I came upon a man drowning while out shooting, would I save him, or would I take the shot with a fresh roll, or would I use the film still in the camera? Or, would I use one of the other camera bodies? And what lens would I use? I think these would be a much more serious issues because, for example, what if I did need to modify the processing. Would I risk the rest of the roll in order to process the drowning shots properly, or the other way around? What if, in my haste, I dropped the short focus lens while scrambling to fix the telephoto. Yes, I know: a zoom would solve this, but I'm not a zoom fan. Anyway, you see my point here: I'd be in a turmoil in that case. I'd probably miss the shot trying to figure out how to make it, the guy would drown, and, with my luck, I'd get arrested for not helping, and kicked out of my camera club for missing such an opportunity. So, my conclusion is that I hope I never have to decide, and that if I ever happen to come across someone drowning, that I don't have my camera with me.

 

Now, to really make this question sticky, what if it were a woman drowning, not a man? And what if she were old, not young, or vice versa. What if she were from another country? Or a different race? Or religion? What if she, or he, were a member of an opposing political party? Would these questions weigh in my mind?

 

What a swirl of conflict I would be in! Good thing in this case it was a camel.

 

Good question. Thanks for making me think and sort out my priorities.

This image (and the entire shoot) has been touted here as being worthy of

National Geographic. Anyone who's ever worked with NG would know this shot,

indeed this entire folder, would hardly get a second glance from a NG picture

editor. It might if it were in color and lit differently. This style of fill flash is not

real popular at NG. Far too obvious. But then, this isn't National Geographic, is it?

 

The very thing so many seem to think "makes" this picture is something most

picture editors would reject out of hand - the eye contact with the camera -

which makes it look posed. As if the photog said to the man, " hey, look over

here!"

 

Don't get all riled. I'm not saying the photog did that. I'm just saying the facial

expression says that. Evidently, a lot of people agree something is not quite

right about the guy looking into the camera. I'm just going by many of the other

comments above and my own opinion.

 

As to the ethical dilema of putting down the camera to help a dude save a camel

- I'd say, hell yeah - IF you define ethics as what's good for the greatest number

AND, IF you need that camel to ride out of the desert AND without it you'll die on

foot, AND IF this photog were the only other available help around; then MAYBE

you stop shooting. OTHERWISE - if you're there covering a story as a PJ, you

shoot and keep shooting. (I wonder where the pictures are of the results of this

fiasco?) IF IF IF it were a drowning PERSON, who would otherwise die without

YOUR HELP, then you put down the camera. A camel in a sea of camels with a

river of camel jockeys? No way! Just shoot.

 

But there ARE better pictures from this folder. And NONE of them are exposed

with fill flash like this, so they all appear muddy and washed out. My guess is,

this one "reads" online better?

 

I guess I disagree with the majority here. So goes the war.

It is an excellent photo. In a sense, I can't wait for the week to be over. By now, I dread seeing the dying animal. One can almost hear his rasping last breaths.

But, life consists not only of the ideal and perfect, but also of the saddest moments. It is at our peril that we EVER forget this!

The only reason NG wouldn't look at this twice is because it would make most of their photography look weak by comparison. Maybe if he had added phony silk threads out of the camels back, or claimed that it was a lost species of camel, or had gicven the herdmaster a red hat to wear NG would like it better.

Just a short note... I have seen a lot of better shots than this in NG of course, but I have also seen a few that were not as good as this - to me. I have read some posts saying that there were other pictures in the folder that were better to describe what was happening here, and I think that's obviously correct. But then again, some pictures are meant to answer questions and some pictures are meant to raise questions. I'd say that this one belong to the second category. I tried to read this man's expression, and there was a lot to read about him and his life, and a lot less to read about the incident at the river. When I saw this, I decided not to ask this picture to tell me the story the other pictures did. I tried to see as much as I could in his eyes.

When we say that a picture "must stand on its own", what do we mean exactly ? That it should tell us the story of the camel in the river ? I don't think so. It should simply tell us A story that we enjoy seeing and that helps us to understand something about what ever. I believe we must listen to what the picture has to say, rather than asking it to tell us the story we suppose it should tell. The other pictures were telling a slightly different story about camels and men. This one, to me, is more of an environmental portrait. We see a man try hard to do something. It's not overly informative about the action that's taking place, but it isn't really about the action either - more about an expression on a face. The title is in that sense a bit misleading.

Aesthetically and technically, I think this picture is clearly the best in the folder. To those who may object to the flash, here, I would just ask this question: how would you do better given the amazing 6 or 7 f-stops contrast you have in this scene. No flash would mean that the camels would be blown white and the face almost totally black - if you pose for an average -; or one of the extremes would suffer even more - if you pose for highlights or for shadows. The zone system would of course help, but to which extent...

Many other pictures in the folder lack sharpness or DOF or light somewhere, though many are very good too; but we have to rmember also that the other shots in the folder are faster action and therefore more difficult. This one, I think, is artistically excellent, and that is probably why the Elves chose it among others. Perhaps also because it was a good intro shot before entering the other story - the one about the action. Anyway, a well deserved POW imo. But it's a picture about a human being. The real story beyond this whole series is still about human beings and their way of life, and the look at the camera lets us try to see his life in his eyes - no more, no less. Regards.

Just browsed all pictures of the week and my first impression is this one is best. Captures and communicates the moment so perfectly that a title is absolutely unnecessary. Truly emotional expressions of beast and man. Works big time because they are isolated from the rest of the action. Other images from the same event have more detail but less feeling (are the guys trying to slaughter the animals or save them?). Not this one, though... Small details also help a great deal, I like the wound above the camel's eye. BTW, is that some guy's butt behind the man?

Perfect!

One of those pictures which really capture a life...

Most amazing indeed and such a sad tale.... r.