Road cycling is a brutal sport where the physical demands are relentless. Athletes must endure harsh weather, reckless fans, all the while the risk of a massive accident constantly lurks.
There are many debates about ethics in photography. One such debate is around making money on photos that show human suffering. It could be appropriate, but there are a few caveats you should consider before selling such work.
Photographer and YouTuber George Muncey of Negative Feedback recently set out on an ill-fated adventure in film scanning. He went out and bought the cheapest 35mm film scanner he could find online—the DIGITNOW! 135, which costs a whopping $60 on Amazon—and tried it out so that you don't have to.
From time to time when I read about Street Photography, I hear the opinion that street photographers exploit people on the street by taking their picture without asking. This opinion raises some valid questions about the ethics of Street Photography, but also shows the double standards we follow in the media.
When photojournalists capture images of human suffering around the world, they're often accused of being coldhearted and of exploiting those in need. The media organizations and charities that send them out draw similar criticism, but they argue that these negative stories help bring attention to issues that would otherwise be ignored and that they help encourage charitable giving.
Due to the sensitive nature of these types of stories, organizations generally tread very carefully when putting out requests for photos and footage. However, that's not always the case.
Here's a powerful video shared by The Economist a couple of years ago that features acclaimed British photojournalist Don McCullin talking about his 50 years of photographing war, atrocities, and human suffering. (Warning: it contains disturbing images.)