Risky Behavior and UW Photography

[Larry C]

Steve Irwin will definitely be missed in terms of his entertainment, and his educational value regarding behaviors of wild creatures. Certainly, his cause of death was a rarity. I hope people will learn a healthy respect for nature from his work as well as his demise. I just think as photographers, it gives us a little pause to think about what is reasonably safe and what is flat out stupid when we're trying to get that great shark shot, or shooting a Humpback up close and personal, etc. Know thy subject, and keep your distance.

 

[fdog]

No matter what the environment, you can't make great images without being there.

All the best, James

 

[Storm]

Know thy subject, and keep your distance.

The latter is great advice, the former, as it applies to wildlife, may be impossible. The creature that let you get close for the first shot, may bolt or attack when you go in for the second shot.

That's one of the things we can learn from Steve Irwin's unfortunate death. You might know the biology of an animal, but you will never know its reaction to your approch...studied behavior may give you some guidelines as to their probable reaction, but you never really "know".

No matter what the environment, you can't make great images without being there.

And being getting there and staying there coudl be a one way trip.

 

[drbill]

Your post bothers me more.

Steve lived life on his terms and did more for the enviornment than if you post a million times.

"His terms" were not always the best for the animals. I saw Irwin as interfering significantly with the species he claimed to be interested in protecting. Although on occasion I do interact with species I film, I certainly wouldn't emulate some of what I saw on his shows.

Of course my condolences to his family and friends.

 

[cerich]

"His terms" were not always the best for the animals. I saw Irwin as interfering significantly with the species he claimed to be interested in protecting. Although on occasion I do interact with species I film, I certainly wouldn't emulate some of what I saw on his shows.

Of course my condolences to his family and friends.

I grew up in the country(farm family),most likely because of that I'm a little more "tolerant" of what some may consider as "interfering" with animals than others. Steve grew up in a zoo so was pretty much the same. I draw the line at hurting a animal, upsetting it for a few minutes doesn't bother me....

 

[f3nikon]

"His terms" were not always the best for the animals. I saw Irwin as interfering significantly with the species he claimed to be interested in protecting. Although on occasion I do interact with species I film, I certainly wouldn't emulate some of what I saw on his shows.

Of course my condolences to his family and friends.

Good point. I was hit with a hand full of lionfish spines as I tried to push the animal to a more pleasing coral background while video taping. Good thing I was wearing gloves, because I did not even see the spines hitting my hand all I saw was the arched back of the animal, but I did feel the pain after the dive.

Mr. Irwin's (may he rest in peace) methods were aimed more for the camera, to get close up and personal with the animal. This was a freak incident, we have to remember that they are still wild animals.

My condolences to his family and friends as well.

 

[RonFrank]

I grew up in the country(farm family),most likely because of that I'm a little more "tolerant" of what some may consider as "interfering" with animals than others. Steve grew up in a zoo so was pretty much the same. I draw the line at hurting a animal, upsetting it for a few minutes doesn't bother me....

There are many views on what is best for animals, and marine life. My Cuz is a marine biologist, and unfortunately to study the marine life she specailizes in (deep) the end result is generally the death of the animal. Is this cruel, is the knowledge gained from the study of specimans of greater importance than the life of one critter? Well, from the critter's standpoint I'd say no. But there is a bigger picture in that armed with knowledge we have a better chance of understanding and perserving the world we live in.

Steve's behavior certainly was not passive towards the anmimals he loved. However I'd argue that the message he was communicating and the education and rescue services he both funded, and provided was more valuable than the temperary distress of the critters he interacted with.

Maybe not all will agree with his approach, but the end results were effective.

 

[alo100]

I hope you're wrong. Aside for VERY rare occurences, we've got all the protection we need to be observers of the underwater world. Start outfitting divers in "kevlar" skins and we'll start to see all kinds of people molesting animals. We are in their world; we should be vulnerable if we do foolish things.

I can see your point,
to me, the capability to portect ourselves and the behavior of molesting other animals
are orthogonal; still, I know what you mean. Respecting other creatures is important.

 

[Storm]

There are many views on what is best for animals, and marine life. My Cuz is a marine biologist, and unfortunately to study the marine life she specailizes in (deep) the end result is generally the death of the animal. Is this cruel, is the knowledge gained from the study of specimans of greater importance than the life of one critter? Well, from the critter's standpoint I'd say no. But there is a bigger picture in that armed with knowledge we have a better chance of understanding and perserving the world we live in.

Steve's behavior certainly was not passive towards the anmimals he loved. However I'd argue that the message he was communicating and the education and rescue services he both funded, and provided was more valuable than the temperary distress of the critters he interacted with.

Maybe not all will agree with his approach, but the end results were effective.

The main difference between what your cousin does and what Steve Irwin did is night and day. Your cousin advances hers and thus collectively our (I assume she publishes her findings etc) knowledge of nature and natural history. Steve Irwin was not a scientist. He did not advance our knowlegde of his subjects, merely introduced them to those who prefer to get their education via the TV, rather than reading up on the subject.

Your cousin add to the genreral weatth of knowledge and biologist have developed over the many years of study. There was very little information about his various subjects on the few "Crocodile Hunter" shows I watched that I hadn't previoulsy read in books or magazines like Natiional Geographic, Canadain Geographic, Wildlife Journal, to mentione a few, not to mention the many online and e-zine resources, and of course the actual published scientific studies.

I would also argue that the message could just as easily been out out there without the over the top man handling aspects. His media machine did reach many who might never open a book, or really care one way or the other about wildlife , but even then, were they watching to learn or, like some who watch racing just to see the crashes, to see what he would do next or if he wold get bitten, etc.

As to his funding and support endeavors I have nothing but the utmost respect and admiration for his efforts. I also would place him high above the mark as far as many celebrities go, in that he made substantial contributions to those endeavors.

 

[Shasta_man]

<<He did not advance our knowlegde of his subjects>>

You don't know what you're talking about.

First, Steve was working with animals and traipsing around the outback long before he ever was put on TV. Steve didn't care a lick about promoting himself. His entire interest was in protecting wildlife so it will be here in the future. His way of doing that was by pointing out the amazing things about animals so that people in the city will take an interest and make the effort to protect the animals. It was the media machine that stuffs Pirates of the Carribean and Disneyland and SUVs down your throat that picked him up and pumped it to the world, for their purposes.

And Steve worked on all kinds of scientific studies of animals and their habitats. He'd just completed work in Northern Australia.

Whether you talked to him face to face or he was on camera, he WAS ALWAYS that enthusiastic. Not to buy his T-shirt but to go out and think about the fact that any creature you see is more than a expendable object with no thoughts or feelings.

And I watched him since the beginning and he didn't molest creatures. Did he drag crocs out by the tail to capture them? Yes. But you have to. What did he do with them? Moved them to some safer location. Any animal I ever saw him work with he treated with respect and awe and put it back where it was.

Steve wasn't about TV or comparisons to how we think people ought to act. He was interested in the animals. He just got a chance to use TV to help support himself and spread his interest.

I mean, who the hell would turn down a state funeral? Who would wear khakis always?

I'm sure I'm not changing any made up minds but forget about all these pretensions when you're considering Steve.