"To Disclose Or Not Disclose?
That Is The Question!"
It usually goes something like this. The host or guest shows a gorgeous landscape photograph, which might be very unusual or stunningly beautiful. The other individual then asks where the photo was made. The photographer refuses to identify the location on ethical grounds which he or she says that if the locations was disclosed, it would attract too many other photographers, be potentially destructive to the site and eventually ruin the natural beauty. A very ethical decision, or is it?
If you have a suspicious nature, one could also make the case the photographer doesn’t want to disclose the location of his or her magnificent work of art as he or she doesn’t want anyone else finding out where it was made as then others will make similar images. In other words, the real motive is self-centered and greedy and not the above styled ethical dilemma.
Where do you stand on this issue? Here are some things to consider.
The decision to disclose or withhold the location of a magnificent landscape photograph can carry several pros, cons, and ethical considerations, depending on the photographer’s values, the location itself, and the impact of sharing the information. Here are some key aspects that may need to be considered:
Pros of Disclosing a Location:
1. Inspiration and Education:
• Sharing a location can inspire other photographers and nature enthusiasts, fostering a community of shared passion for the outdoors and photography. In other words, sharing is a virtue and a generous gesture.
• It provides an educational opportunity for others to learn about the beauty and ecological significance of the area. Most photographers are sensitive to the inadvertent or wanton destruction of nature and don't do it.
2. Economic Support for the Area:
• Publicizing certain locations, especially those whose local inhabitants are struggling financially, can bring tourism, which may benefit local economies, including guides, businesses, and conservation efforts.
3. Encourages Conservation:
• With the right messaging, sharing a location can raise awareness of conservation efforts or the need for environmental protection. It might just be that if the site becomes popular, it will get the attention of the authorities who then can potentially designate the location for protection.
4. Collaboration and Innovation:
• By disclosing locations, photographers can encourage collaboration, leading to new ideas, techniques, and perspectives in landscape photography. It may be that the location poses specific challenges that encourage teaching others so they can better photograph in similar situations.
5. Provide opportunities that otherwise would not be available:
• Another consideration is that most hobbyist photographers don’t have the time nor money to repeatedly explore a wide variety of locations and would be greatly assisted by knowing some of the best places to photograph nature.
Cons of Disclosing a Location:
1. Overcrowding and Environmental Impact:
• Publicizing a once-quiet or pristine location can lead to over-tourism, which may cause significant environmental damage, such as trampling of sensitive vegetation, littering, and disturbances to wildlife.
2. Loss of Serenity and Uniqueness:
• Over time, a location may lose its charm due to the sheer number of visitors and photographers, diluting the original sense of discovery and solitude.
• Unique shots may become less valuable as the location becomes overly photographed.
3. Damage to Sacred or Culturally Significant Sites:
• Some natural locations may hold cultural or spiritual importance to Indigenous or local communities. Over-publicizing such sites may lead to disrespect or damage.
4. Risk to Personal Safety or Equipment:
• Certain remote locations may be dangerous, and disclosing them without proper guidance or warnings could put others at risk.
Ethical Questions:
1. Should the Environment Be Protected from Public Knowledge?
• How much responsibility does a photographer have in preventing environmental degradation? Some argue that certain fragile ecosystems are better left undiscovered by the general public, while others believe that sharing can raise awareness for preservation.
2. Respecting Cultural and Spiritual Significance:
• Is the location culturally sensitive or spiritually significant? Consulting with local or Indigenous communities may help avoid promoting tourism to places that should remain protected or private.
3. Gatekeeping vs. Public Good:
• Does withholding the location perpetuate a form of “gatekeeping” where only a select few benefit from the beauty and photographic opportunities? On the other hand, is it selfish or short-sighted to reveal the spot if doing so risks long-term harm to the place?
4. Impact on Local Communities:
• Will increased attention bring about more economic opportunities for the local community, or will it cause issues like overcrowding, rising living costs, or pollution? There’s a balance to consider between benefiting a region and overburdening it.
5. Exclusivity in Art vs. Accessibility:
• Is the photographer’s goal to protect their unique art by limiting access to certain locations, or should everyone have the chance to experience and capture the natural beauty of the area?
Ultimately, the decision to disclose or withhold a location should be carefully considered, balancing personal, environmental, and social impacts. Transparency and education about environmental stewardship may allow photographers to share some locations responsibly, while other fragile or sensitive sites might need to remain undisclosed for the sake of preservation.
I am in the non-disclose camp. Two reasons: do we need to go out an put our tripod legs in the "holes" of the original artist? And we already see far too much damage and vandalism of our natural world. Common sense and respect for nature are sadly lacking in too many people. Some places just cannot support hordes of people.
ReplyDeleteI would consider myself in the non-disclose camp because the "pros" of revealing a location are mostly aspirational and hoped for, while the "cons" are more likely to be or become real (based on my perception of how so many people, including many who consider themselves photographers, have been documented as behaving in culturally or environmentally sensitive sites).
ReplyDeleteRegards,
Ken
I am in the disclosure group. Recreating an image would be extremely difficult. Season, weather, time of day, camera settings, editing, and other issues make it difficult. Don’t think that people aren’t driving the road daily and seeing the sight. They see it. Just no interest in making an image of it.
ReplyDeleteBroad approximate locations and clues is best. I think anybody who wants you to essentially setup the shot for them doesn't have their heart in the right place. I also think some super cagey people about location are worried you'll get a better shot than them or you'll discover how fake and impossibly composited their shot is after they've passed it off as a single frame.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment. Interesting thoughts. I can’t disagree with you. ~Dennis
Delete