on 11-03-2015 01:34 PM
on 11-03-2015 04:28 PM
Don't get me wrong, Polks, my instinct would be to do the same as you.
on 11-03-2015 04:28 PM
on 11-03-2015 04:31 PM
I am just sorry that I opened this thread
on 11-03-2015 04:40 PM
Apparently, he was waiting in hope that the vulture would open its wings - it didn't.
on 11-03-2015 04:44 PM
@lionrose.7 wrote:Sorry I agree with Polks, I am a mother and I could not bare this, dont touch the kid then but bring her some food.
I would perfer to see a photo of some one feeding that child.
yes but would it sicken enough people to take action ?
on 11-03-2015 04:50 PM
@bluecat*dancing wrote:I think that we might have a definition of what "staged" is. To me, it means to place specific items in a specific place . The photographer had nothing to do with where the child or the vulture were.
that's what staged means to me as well.
on 11-03-2015 05:10 PM
on 11-03-2015 06:47 PM
@polksaladallie wrote:Nothing would have stopped me from scooping up that child (BTW it was not a baby) and taking him/her to safety.
Do you not understand that there are thousands and thousands children like that in that area; how many would you pick up? This one just happened to be near vulture, which made it so much more powerful shot than starving child in arms of its mother. If you picked up that child it would mean kidnapping it, and as already pointed out, your misguided action would most likely have only hastened the child's death. And you would have left behind the other x many children in the same condition.
It reminds me of American soldiers who liberated concentration camps, and gave the starving people cheese and chocolate, which killed them. There are times when you just have to step back, and not be emotionally involved; if you cannot do that you cannot do your job.
on 11-03-2015 06:57 PM
on 11-03-2015 06:59 PM
it beats me how anyone can call that a great shot let alone award it a prize.
a suffering dying child with a vulture hovering over it should never be seen as a photo opportunity.
He couldn't touch the child but he could have guarded her instead of trying different angles until he found the perfect shot.
And don't anyone trot out the old spiel that he did it to highlight the plight of starving children