DON'T BE THIS GUY

[PAUL50]

So we are now talking a minibus load of photographers. Hmm. Sorry, but maybe he doesn’t travel around the country or world taking photographs. This could have been the “one” for him.

I see. According to you then, that makes it ok. Hmmm, really.

 

[PAUL50]

I want to add a "locals" perspective for folks who have never lived in tourist areas where armies of visitors appear at certain times of the year and take over the countryside or shoreline or whatever, often with no regard for the environment or the people who live there full time.

Who knows, there could be something more than meets the eye to what is happening in this picture. This guy could be a local who doesn't want you to be happy and wishes, that, as a group, everyone left and never came back.

Maybe he was unapologetic because he did it on purpose to drive off the elks and the photographers. Photobombing your shots and producing images of panicked animals fleeing the scene as quickly as possible may be exactly what he had in mind.

I've lived various, sometimes remote places, that attract large numbers of seasonal tourists. Most locals who did not profit from tourism, wished that the tourists stayed in Chicago or LA or NYC or sometimes whatever city in the lower 48 that they come from, would go home and never come back. Sometimes locals who wish tourists never took over their countryside take action and do this kind of thing on purpose to get the point across that they don't want tourists in their community.

In the fishing world they move their boats in front of other boats right where people are casting and anchor and turn up the music and party. Sometimes they waterski around boats to drive away all the fish and toss the people fishing around with the wake of the ski boat. Jet skis speeding around in circles driving off fish and wildlife is pretty common since those annoying things have been invented. Sometimes it's because the operators are clueless, other times it by intent. Get out of my fishing spot, tourist!

In the hunting world people urinate and leave cigarette butts around hunting blinds or the bait so that the deer or whatever won't come near them. Sometimes it's amateur hunters who don't realize that animal's sense of smell is their strongest sense and other times it local sending the message "go home, we don't want you here". On opening day nonhunter locals sometimes randomly fire their weapons or set off fireworks at sunup to drive the deer or whatever into hiding.

There seem to be many examples posted in messages here of behavior with the sole purpose of sending the same message to photographers who flock to areas like the elk farm preserve in Pennsylvania or Rocky Mountain areas to recreate Ansel Adams most famous shots with a few thousand of their closest friends.

I'm not condoning any of it. The point is that the next time someone pulls up and parks their car directly in front of a group of tripods all pointed in the same direction it may not be an accidental social faux pau. Someone seemingly intentionally driving off the critters you are trying to photograph might be exactly what they had in mind when they entered the water, as in this case. They may be figuratively giving you the finger.

It maybe because they have to pick up mounds trash left by tourists every season after they go home. Maybe it's the congested traffic tourists bring to the paradise countryside's that are their homes or wilderness trampled by mobs. Or maybe they are tired of visitors leaving designated public areas and trespassing on private property.

Expecting cooperative behavior from people sending the message that they do not want you there just isn't ever going to work. And as is pretty noticeable from many of the remarks here and the original image, lots of tourists also wish that certain other tourists went home and never came back.

I want to add a "locals" perspective for folks who have never lived in tourist areas where armies of visitors appear at certain times of the year and take over the countryside or shoreline or whatever, often with no regard for the environment or the people who live there full time.

Who knows, there could be something more than meets the eye to what is happening in this picture. This guy could be a local who doesn't want you to be happy and wishes, that, as a group, everyone left and never came back.

Maybe he was unapologetic because he did it on purpose to drive off the elks and the photographers. Photobombing your shots and producing images of panicked animals fleeing the scene as quickly as possible may be exactly what he had in mind.

I've lived various, sometimes remote places, that attract large numbers of seasonal tourists. Most locals who did not profit from tourism, wished that the tourists stayed in Chicago or LA or NYC or sometimes whatever city in the lower 48 that they come from, would go home and never come back. Sometimes locals who wish tourists never took over their countryside take action and do this kind of thing on purpose to get the point across that they don't want tourists in their community.

In the fishing world they move their boats in front of other boats right where people are casting and anchor and turn up the music and party. Sometimes they waterski around boats to drive away all the fish and toss the people fishing around with the wake of the ski boat. Jet skis speeding around in circles driving off fish and wildlife is pretty common since those annoying things have been invented. Sometimes it's because the operators are clueless, other times it by intent. Get out of my fishing spot, tourist!

In the hunting world people urinate and leave cigarette butts around hunting blinds or the bait so that the deer or whatever won't come near them. Sometimes it's amateur hunters who don't realize that animal's sense of smell is their strongest sense and other times it local sending the message "go home, we don't want you here". On opening day nonhunter locals sometimes randomly fire their weapons or set off fireworks at sunup to drive the deer or whatever into hiding.

There seem to be many examples posted in messages here of behavior with the sole purpose of sending the same message to photographers who flock to areas like the elk farm preserve in Pennsylvania or Rocky Mountain areas to recreate Ansel Adams most famous shots with a few thousand of their closest friends.

I'm not condoning any of it. The point is that the next time someone pulls up and parks their car directly in front of a group of tripods all pointed in the same direction it may not be an accidental social faux pau. Someone seemingly intentionally driving off the critters you are trying to photograph might be exactly what they had in mind when they entered the water, as in this case. They may be figuratively giving you the finger.

It maybe because they have to pick up mounds trash left by tourists every season after they go home. Maybe it's the congested traffic tourists bring to the paradise countryside's that are their homes or wilderness trampled by mobs. Or maybe they are tired of visitors leaving designated public areas and trespassing on private property.

Expecting cooperative behavior from people sending the message that they do not want you there just isn't ever going to work. And as is pretty noticeable from many of the remarks here and the original image, lots of tourists also wish that certain other tourists went home and never came back.

Having lived in numerous areas that are seasonal tourist meccas I have never seen or even heard of the behaviors you’re so good at describing. Where I’ve lived the local populations of each such area went out of there way to accommodate the seasonal visitors because it meant money coming into the local economies whether directly or indirectly benefiting everyone in the community and, as a rule, these folks were welcomed by the “locals.” Your argument bears no relation to the situation I’ve described and so is irrelevant to the current discussion. Read all of what was written and you’ll see the discussion concerns only one rude and obnoxious individual out of a number of otherwise well behaved and respectful photographers who were attempting to share an experience respectful of each other, the environment, and the wildlife. My point is don’t be the lone jerk who ruins it for all. That’s all, and that is my fact pattern, and my opinion.

 

[O]

Several years ago I was bow hunting on the edge of a wilderness area. This was the first time that I had been there. The road that bordered the wilderness area had a bow hunter every fifty feet! I was shocked. These guys were all just fine with the dangerously over crowded conditions. Me, not so much. I found a trail into the wilderness area and left them to stake out the road. The next year I hunted the same wilderness area but entered from a completely different location. For an entire week the only other human I saw was my wife.

From year-to-year you have no idea what the human herd will do so just do your best to execute your own plan.

Absolutely great point, i find so many humans really spoil things at times so i have taken a much more selfish aggressive tactical stance with a lot i do, but above all i always respect the wild life.

Doing landscapes in NZ at the WANAKA tree, used to be awesome shooting subject and conditions, along comes the bus load of foreign tourists, no regard for anyone just stand in front of you, then the climb on the fragile branch to get a selfie, the tree is now permanently damaged, its the most photographed iconic tree in NZ.

Is it the tourist's at fault, no, they were predictable in their actions.

I blame the authorities for not doing something about it like putting a fence up along the shore line well back so people couldn't walk out to and climb the tree, its still would serve a purpose for photography.
Here in our Botanical gardens the paper daisy's are out in force each year and it draws thousands of visitors, people step over the small rope lay flat on the bed of daisy's for a selfie for social media, the daisy's are trashed in a matter of days thanks to social media, sadly its all monkey see monkey do.

Only an opinion

 

[O]

Devils advocate..... you were likely in his shot too. If he wanted a shot from that angle, which could be a better angle, who should move? If you set up in a spot does that give you sole rights to everything that could be in your frame? It's unfortunate that we sometimes get in each others shots but Im not sure anyone can claim the rights to anything but the space between the lens and subject. A good compromise would be both of you moving to the left of frame a bit. I just dont think its realistic to expect everyone to keep all that real estate clear in and along the creek.

With further thought......

A lot of what you say is correct, also social media has really exposed many beautiful location and subjects to the masses who in many cases show no regard for the environment or wild life.

The more i think about "That Guy" here in, i think he got in, got the kill shot and i assume got out of the water quickly, i admire his effort to even get wet to get that shot so he earn t it, many circumstance deserve many different considerations, would i have done what he did ?

I would have needed to actually be there to understand the actual circumstances, considering the others were shooting from a poorer direction and back of the animal in the shadows then most likely Yes, but from the shore line with a longer lens, my priority would be to respect the Elk not so much in these circumstances the other group of photographers.

Paparazzi shooting = best in and daring gets the money shot, sometimes it may offend others, sadly that's the world we live in, however Photographic protocol is something i follow depending on the circumstances and rarity of the opportunity and what others are actually doing.

But yes there is some scene in what you have said.

Only an opinion

 

[Wes Peterson]

With further thought......

A lot of what you say is correct, also social media has really exposed many beautiful location and subjects to the masses who in many cases show no regard for the environment or wild life.

The more i think about "That Guy" here in, i think he got in, got the kill shot and i assume got out of the water quickly, i admire his effort to even get wet to get that shot so he earn t it, many circumstance deserve many different considerations, would i have done what he did ?

I would have needed to actually be there to understand the actual circumstances, considering the others were shooting from a poorer direction and back of the animal in the shadows then most likely Yes, but from the shore line with a longer lens, my priority would be to respect the Elk not so much in these circumstances the other group of photographers.

Paparazzi shooting = best in and daring gets the money shot, sometimes it may offend others, sadly that's the world we live in, however Photographic protocol is something i follow depending on the circumstances and rarity of the opportunity and what others are actually doing.

But yes there is some scene in what you have said.

Only an opinion

If you look the OPs shot is at 190mm.... Im not sure the guy in the water is any closer to the subject than the group of photogs. Like you said tho, its tough to pick a side in this scenario because I dont know all the factors including the geography of the location.

 

[Anjin San]

In some photos yes, others no. And in some cases, under contest rules, you either may not be permitted to do it, or it changes the category under which the photo may be submitted.

You can pretty much always crop, right?

 

[O]

You can pretty much always crop, right?

Yes I Agree, I feel cropping him out will help to make it a slightly better picture anyway

Only an opinion

 

[PAUL50]

You can pretty much always crop, right?

I could, but I was not concerned with that photo. I took it, and used it, to demonstrate what the guy did. The photo is otherwise a throw away. Numerous additional nicely back lite shots were compromised by the guy’s presence that cannot be cropped out, because he’s partially blocked by the bull or others of the herd. Of those shots, some can be ”shopped out,” some cannot.

 

[O]

If you look the OPs shot is at 190mm.... Im not sure the guy in the water is any closer to the subject than the group of photogs. Like you said tho, its tough to pick a side in this scenario because I dont know all the factors including the geography of the location.

I hear you.


I do a lot of Rodeo and Surfing photography and i have to deal with crowds and other photographers often getting in the way of each other no doubt as i get in theirs LOL, i have to just deal with it best i can.

Some photographers set up with tripods and a small base camp and some command the whole area, they get way back with their 600 plus TCs or 800mm lenses and stand their like VIP sentinels as they pan up and down the beach and surf catching the action, in this case photographic etiquette is for me a non event, i get in and do my thing and its their problem to deal with it.

If someone is shooting from close down at the waters edge i respect that and walk behind them or stay out of their way.

Above all i am always respectful of others as much as possible but if the opportunity is there with the window being open i will get in quickly and take a chunk of real estate for that killer shot if the situation is not utilized fully, then i move on quickly.

If i am with a group, of course I respect the situation and keep it tight and use the glass to reach that perfect shot, or i ask would you mind if i step in quickly for a shot then i move back with a thank you.

Its a balancing act.

Only an opinion

 

[O]

I could, but I was not concerned with that photo. I took it, and used it, to demonstrate what the guy did. The photo is otherwise a throw away. Numerous additional nicely back lite shots were compromised by the guy’s presence that cannot be cropped out, because he’s partially blocked by the bull or others of the herd. Of those shots, some can be ”shopped out,” some cannot.

Its disappointing and upsetting when this happens, only you know the full circumstances, I can only go on the image i see which is really not fair,
your added detail above changes the circumstances somewhat, i guess portrays the person in the water as being ignorant to wild life photography and others.

I think here we call them social media tourists, sadly i have had to deal with them so much more often.

Only an opinion

 

[Wes Peterson]

Having lived in numerous areas that are seasonal tourist meccas I have never seen or even heard of the behaviors you’re so good at describing. Where I’ve lived the local populations of each such area went out of there way to accommodate the seasonal visitors because it meant money coming into the local economies whether directly or indirectly benefiting everyone in the community and, as a rule, these folks were welcomed by the “locals.” Your argument bears no relation to the situation I’ve described and so is irrelevant to the current discussion. Read all of what was written and you’ll see the discussion concerns only one rude and obnoxious individual out of a number of otherwise well behaved and respectful photographers who were attempting to share an experience respectful of each other, the environment, and the wildlife. My point is don’t be the lone jerk who ruins it for all. That’s all, and that is my fact pattern, and my opinion.

Last year the locals in Benezette Pa hired a dog trainer to come in and use dogs to run the elk out of the locals yards in preparation for the "elk season" The locals are getting sick of people stopping and blocking the roads and walking onto their property for photos.

 

[PAUL50]

Last year the locals in Benezette Pa hired a dog trainer to come in and use dogs to run the elk out of the locals yards in preparation for the "elk season" The locals are getting sick of people stopping and blocking the roads and walking onto their property for photos.

I don’t doubt that there are tourist areas mishandling whatever the attraction might be that draws seasonal attention and disturbs some locals, but that is not the point of the thread that I began. See, comment #1, above. If you, and others, would like to discuss tourists disturbing local communities, which is relevant to photographers, I suggest another thread be started, instead of using this much more limited thread, the thrust of which is/was/should have continued to be, the rude, unethical behavior of one photographer disrupting the shoot of numerous other photographers wholly unrelated to tourists disrupting local communities.

 

[Patrick M]

The point to take away is: Be respectful of others.

 

[PAUL50]

The point to take away is: Be respectful of others.

Agreed

 

[Viathelens]

Actually that shot makes me laugh because he was willing to go into the water knee deep and get soaked, not something I'd do unless it was maybe the shot of a lifetime, certainly not for any elk shot. He obviously did not care who was shooting what or where, he just wanted to get his shot. It's a thing for some photographers and I consider it a "dance" at times as I weave around and through crowded settings to get my shot without getting in any one's way. There often seems to be at least one guy who does this at every shoot setting and, yes, it is rude but it is also one of the things we have to deal with. I know I've accidentally gotten in the way of someone before and I was apologetic about it as it was unintentional. Perhaps this guy just got carried away in the moment but there was no way to apologize when he realized his error.