Down Range Photographer

[techres]

I remember an article somewhere about a popular training outfit that put photographers downrange.

Will see if I can find it.

We had that thread, and explosion, and fight, and flames. And Fenway had to poke...

Basically it comes down to two sides:

A: That is the stupidest thing any of us should do. It reduces the safety margin to near nothing, risks a life and does so all in pursuit of a glamorous picture of tacticool glory. These guys need to get over themselves.

B: If you trust your skills and know your firearm, this is not dangerous nor is it a violation of the 4 rules. It is merely a breaking of the 180 degree rule that is so ingrained that we think there is a 5th rule and that is it's own tactical danger. We need to get over ourselves.

I understand B, but fall into A because I don't see the need to balance the risk.

 

[Shay]

Techres, you gloss over the fact that there is actual training value that can't be had in other ways. In this specific instance it may be about the photographs, but that is a distant secondary issue in most formal training.

 

[jblomenberg16]

The guys over on ARFCOM had a hay-day with that, and the photographer has made his way into many of the "photo-shop this" threads.

 

[VUPDblue]

The guys over on ARFCOM had a hay-day with that, and the photographer has made his way into many of the "photo-shop this" threads.

...and into my avatar...

 

[techres]

Techres, you gloss over the fact that there is actual training value that can't be had in other ways. In this specific instance it may be about the photographs, but that is a distant secondary issue in most formal training.

Oh, I did because the picture is what we are looking at. Pami and Lars have spoken very convincingly about why breaking 180 in self defense training is an important part of training to the point that some schools and instructors include it as a critical part of what they teach. It obviously was very meaningful to them, and somewhat of a breakthrough in Pami's training.

I still think the best solution to this debate is to get some of that training myself so I can better judge it!

But, for a picture? I have difficulty with that and hope we don't see some kind of AD/ND and a wounded or worse photographer on the ground one of these days. That would be a shame.

 

[jblomenberg16]

...and into my avatar...

Yep!!

 

[techres]

My wife also points out that when the photog moved left, the shooter tried to too. He looked very uncomfortable with that!

 

[Walt_Jabsco]

Look, if you want good photos of firearms use, someone has to go down range. I'm a professional photographer and I wouldn't hesitate a moment to go downrange and take shots as long as I knew and trusted the shooter.

Photography isn't as simple as setting a camera up and hoping for the best. Excellent photos require someone behind the camera, making all of the necessary adjustments. If that means standing three feet in front and to the side of a shooter, it's a reasonable risk.

 

[Dryden]

Oh oh.

 

[bwframe]

Hope that shooter knows his pattern.

I'm thinkin' he does;
DVD Trailers!

 

[HCAman]

That would only impress another idiot....I wonder if they're both from the same village ?

I always thought that each village only had one idiot....

 

[Jay]

I always thought that each village only had one idiot....

Well either the photog, or the shooter both qualify.......

MY opinion, of course

 

[Shay]

http://www.youtube.com/v/dLy3xABAsEc&hl

Pay special attention at 2:31 of the video.

 

[BUCK HINKLE]

stones that guy has some huge stones

 

[Seancass]

Geez, look at all the rich people in this thread who have money to throw away on target stands. Some of use have to hold targets for our friends. It's called sharing. Plus you don't burn any ammo when it's your turn to hold the target. I can't believe how you people won't even CONSIDER a new concept.

 

[Hatchrooster]

Their ain't no way I'd do that.He's crazy.

 

[techres]

Look, if you want good photos of firearms use, someone has to go down range. I'm a professional photographer and I wouldn't hesitate a moment to go downrange and take shots as long as I knew and trusted the shooter.

Photography isn't as simple as setting a camera up and hoping for the best. Excellent photos require someone behind the camera, making all of the necessary adjustments. If that means standing three feet in front and to the side of a shooter, it's a reasonable risk.

I understand, and the pics I can take with my tripod setup stink.

That being said, this photog looked far more comfortable with this than the shooter. Some accidents happen when people are focussed on something other than safety and this photog was focussed almost exclusively on the shot, not the line between the shooter and the target. Add photog tunnel vision, and a shooter allowing himself to be pushed into discomfort - but going ahead anyways and there is some groundwork for disaster.

This time might be fine, and the next, and the next, and then one time they go for just a tiny bit better than the last 3 tiny bit betters and then...

That would be my concern.

Have I reduced my own safety margin a tad getting a shot? Yep. I took this last week as a test using a camera held over to the side but I was still in front of 180:

The rifle was unloaded, no person was directly in front of the barrel, the ammo locked up, etc. But technically...

So, I get both sides. I just think that once the rifle is loaded and the photog is inching ever closer to death, there is a point where the question becomes:

Is this shot really worth it?

 

[Sasquatchhunter]

That shotgun looks like its pointed right at him. lol

 

[JohnP82]

WOW that guy is an idiot!!!

 

[scheesman]

Guess I don't see the problem. The photog is obviously a professional, and it's a professional shoot. Just look at the lighting and wireless remote trigger. It may be an "idiot" thing for one of us to do it for a buddy, but as a professional I'm sure he's removed as much risk as possible to complete his job.