Comments on: Bad Kanye! Don’t Hate on Photographers!

By: Rex

Rex — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 22:18:47 +0000

You hit the nail on the head Ryan. The paparazzi exists because the public demands it. There lies the blame. These guys are only making a living off of celebrities who sign up for that kind of publicity.

Also agree that their photos are sh!t.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 23:57:29 +0000

The video is unclear what started it but that guy seems to be proud he had his camera damaged and is getting attention.

I can’t imagine how frustrating it would be to have cameras in your face every second of every day. It’s amazing that this doesn’t happen more often. Sure it’s still legal and I think public photography is fair game but not at the expense of interrupting someones business. Why are they allowed to swarm and get within inches of their face?

By: D

Thu, 11 Sep 2008 23:10:30 +0000

Yes. I wrote that whole “should be shot” thing before I’d had a coffee. So I suppose I didn’t really mean it.

Maybe I’m just jealous that these talentless jocks (when was the last time you saw a shot by a pap that made you catch your breath?) get to use top of the line gear that people who actually *care* about their photography can’t afford.

And I’d agree they wouldn’t do it if there wasn’t a staggering demand. It’s an circle of crap photography.

By: rygood

rygood — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 22:16:08 +0000

Awesome. A bit harsh, but I see where you are coming from. The tough part is there is the amazing ravenous hunger by the public for this kind of work, and its blown up is the last couple years. I’d guess its going to get worse before it gets better.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 21:41:50 +0000

I’d be amazed if the pap knew how to use his camera properly. Paparrazzi are a bunch of overpaid, under-qualified camera-monkeys who spend thousands on top-line cameras then take some of the worst photographs in professional photography.

Break their cameras? They should be shot.

By: rygood

rygood — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 21:38:41 +0000

Both good points guys. I think the bottom line is, wrong as it is, it’s still legal. Laws should be passed to protect people from this type of harassment. The problem is, laws like this are a slippery slope, and could be harmful to the “good” photography community. On top of that, lots of celebrities love the attention because it raises their profile.

A video is up of it now… You be the judge. Check out the video. I’d love to see the beginning of the confrontation to see what got it started.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 21:30:12 +0000

I personally think that many paparazzi deserves everything they get. Celebrity or not, nobody deserves the in-your-face treatment and I don’t understand why these types of photographers can get away with it. Who’s really the victim?

By: b.rett

b.rett — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 20:15:47 +0000

I agree totally that assault is wrong but in my opinion, paparazzi are the scum of the earth. I understand that they are photogs and they are trying to make a living but I have no respect for them or any sympathy for them when this happens. I have seen it before where they provoke the celebs to fire them up and get “good” shots and it makes me sick.

/rant

By: rygood

rygood — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 18:34:07 +0000

I agree totally. It is annoying and borderline harassment, and living in LA I’ve seen it first hand. These guys should be respectable, but regardless, still undeserving of a broken camera IMO, especially when celebs know from past cases that they will get sued and possibly prosecuted just like us common folk.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 17:20:55 +0000

For me it’s hard to take a side here. I think paparazzi (and that whole culture: TMZ, tabloids, etc) are an insult to photographers, and while we all know assault is wrong, it’s hard to say I’d be Ghandi if I was subject to that degree of harassment.