It's actually an ethical question, please do not read the bottom, read it in order:
You are in Florida, Miami to be specific. There is chaos all around you caused by a hurricane with severe flooding. This is a flood of biblical proportions. You are a photojournalist working for a major newspaper, and you're caught in the middle of this epic disaster. The situation is nearly hopeless. You're trying to shoot career-making photos. There are houses and people swirling around you, some disappearing under the water. Nature is unleashing all of its destructive fury.
Suddenly you see a man floundering in the water. He is fighting for his life, trying not to be taken down with the debris. You move closer… Somehow the man looks familiar. You suddenly realize who it is. It's George W. Bush!
At the same time you notice that the raging waters are about to pull him under. You have two options--you can save the life of G.W. Bush or you can shoot a dramatic Pulitzer Prize winning photo, documenting the death of one of the world's most powerful men.
So here's the question, and please give an honest answer:
Would you select high contrast colour film, or would you go with the classic simplicity of black and white?
2006-12-09 09:36:40 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
i'd go w/black and white. why waste the more expensive film.
2006-12-09 09:40:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
WTH haha I guess. What a question. I would go with the high contrast colour film because it will be able to portray every single thing going on. You can probably feel as if you were there if you used colour film. This event seems too outlandish to just use simple black and white.
2006-12-09 17:46:29 · answer #2 · answered by treehugger06 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
ROTFL! Definitely use some high contrast color to take the shots before and after you jump in to save his life! You must admit that even though President Bush has had his issues in office, he is funny and likable! I think that he should have surrounded himself with better advisers during his two terms. But, despite it all, I hope God blesses him!
2006-12-09 17:53:46 · answer #3 · answered by T Tom T 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'd drop the camera and save him and then take pictures of him after you saved him..I would do the same for anyone inn the world..If you think George Bush is the problem, your not getting the picture anyway.....BIG Love Kevin
2006-12-09 17:42:35 · answer #4 · answered by sckreet 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I guess if you're a Bush hating, Anti-American photojournalist with no concern for human life, that would be funny.
2006-12-09 17:45:00 · answer #5 · answered by cornbread 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Depends on what is in my camera at the time. I'm damn sure not going to take the time to change it and miss the opportunity to shoot the winning photos. The way he runs this country I'm not sure I would take the time to save him anyway.
2006-12-09 17:58:16 · answer #6 · answered by burnettebreeze98 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I'd not even have time to think of film, My upbringing would only allow me to save him, no matter who he is. Because it could be me and I'm sure he would do the same.
2006-12-09 17:55:24 · answer #7 · answered by lennie 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Whatever was in my camera at the time...anything just to get the photo.
2006-12-09 17:41:21 · answer #8 · answered by Sunseaandair 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
LOL...thats mean!
classic black and white would probably make it look more dramatic...
2006-12-09 17:44:28 · answer #9 · answered by i have issues 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Definetly High Contrast Color! I would want that shot in living color!
2006-12-09 17:46:54 · answer #10 · answered by John M 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋