How (Insert Choice From List Below) Cost One Photographer a Chance at an Iconic Vietnam War Photo
- Forgetting to take off the lens cap.
- Forgetting to cock the shutter.
- A dirty lens.
- Dropping your camera in the mud.
- Dead batteries.
- Having to wait while your batteries recharge.
- Forgetting to bring spare batteries.
- Changing your memory card.
- Forgetting to bring a spare memory card.
- A corrupted memory card.
- Forgetting to bring more film.
- A broken lens.
- A broken camera.
- Not knowing how to work your camera.
- Forgetting to bring a spare camera.
Somehow, there is an assumption that the human could not be at fault. If only the equipment had not failed in some way, this photographer would have been just as famous as the other guy. Right?
We see no evidence whether this guy is a good photographer or not. Why do we assume that he was a good photographer and that he was prevented by his equipment.
Wait a second? Wouldn't a good photographer have planned for contingencies? Wouldn't he have brought back-ups? So, then, he wasn't a good photographer?
How about luck? That has nothing to do with it?
This all begs the question of whether having a good editor, news agency, magazine, publisher or agent behind you had anything to do with it. If both photographers took identical photos but one of them was shooting for Newsweek or Time Magazine but the other one was shooting for the East Bumfuk Daily Register wouldn't one of those guys have a better chance to become famous?