I’m reminded of something Dave LaBelle wrote about in his book “Lessons in Death and Life.” He mentioned someone saying he photographed people from the womb to the tomb & everything in between. (He was a longtime newspaper photographer and then instructor) He explained it wasn’t if a photograph was made, but how one went about it. I agree, I feel it’s important to document ment life & history, even when tragic. But, I’m also a former newspaper photographer (still shoot assignments here & there) turned landscape photographer & it does not leave you. I think you somewhat agree. Now the drone issue, ya, they are a nuisance and dangerous in these situations.
I know it's not exactly the same, but I had a similar feeling when I visited Dachau concentration camp last year. It just didn't feel right for me to take my camera out. Although it is a historical memorial site meant to be visited—unlike a wildfire—I don't think it should be treated as a mere tourist attraction.
Thank you, Brian! This info about drones impacting firefighting response should be on local news everywhere in these massive areas of fire and fire risk. The impact of these fires goes way beyond the actual fires' destruction. Here in Michigan, we are living with the health effects of air quality with smoke-filled skies. I follow this Detroit Free Press site daily ( https://data.freep.com/fires/ ) to see how bad the air will be for the day. If you zoom out, you can see the fires all across North America. The long-term effect is loss of forests that create the very oxygen we all breathe. This climate disaster is not a photo op. I deeply appreciate your awareness and notice to other photographers.
Your decision not to photograph the wildfires raises an interesting philosophical question about the role of the photographer. Sometimes the most meaningful creative decision is choosing not to document an event at all. It forces us to ask whether every moment needs to be captured, or whether some moments are better experienced than recorded.
Before legions of "citizen journalists," very few people in any given location had the resources to document events and share them on a large scale. Years or even decades later, historians would comb through family photographs and local newspaper archives to reconstruct what had happened. Today, those same events can be seen around the world in less than 24 hours.
I remember my training as a journalist in the early 1980s: Never become part of the story. Never be the story. Don't get in the way, especially if your presence changes the situation you're documenting. The best journalism often happens when people forget you're there.
Many citizen journalists never received that training. Their incentives can be very different, often rewarding attention and engagement as much as documentation. Being part of the story has become common, and sometimes the goal. Hunter S. Thompson's gonzo journalism intentionally blurred the line between observer and participant. What was once a deliberate literary style now, in some ways, resembles the everyday reality of social media.
I have great respect for you to document from a distance and to remind people of the dangers firefighters face. They don't need others in their way unless it's critical. You have made the right decision as a creative photographer, one who is not required to brave the fires to document them as part of the firefighting team.
I’m reminded of something Dave LaBelle wrote about in his book “Lessons in Death and Life.” He mentioned someone saying he photographed people from the womb to the tomb & everything in between. (He was a longtime newspaper photographer and then instructor) He explained it wasn’t if a photograph was made, but how one went about it. I agree, I feel it’s important to document ment life & history, even when tragic. But, I’m also a former newspaper photographer (still shoot assignments here & there) turned landscape photographer & it does not leave you. I think you somewhat agree. Now the drone issue, ya, they are a nuisance and dangerous in these situations.
I know it's not exactly the same, but I had a similar feeling when I visited Dachau concentration camp last year. It just didn't feel right for me to take my camera out. Although it is a historical memorial site meant to be visited—unlike a wildfire—I don't think it should be treated as a mere tourist attraction.
Thank you, Brian! This info about drones impacting firefighting response should be on local news everywhere in these massive areas of fire and fire risk. The impact of these fires goes way beyond the actual fires' destruction. Here in Michigan, we are living with the health effects of air quality with smoke-filled skies. I follow this Detroit Free Press site daily ( https://data.freep.com/fires/ ) to see how bad the air will be for the day. If you zoom out, you can see the fires all across North America. The long-term effect is loss of forests that create the very oxygen we all breathe. This climate disaster is not a photo op. I deeply appreciate your awareness and notice to other photographers.
I use fire.airnow.gov to follow the air quality readings. You can see the smoke plumes and all the sensors that give readings across the US.
The parting shot is stunning
Great photos, Bryan!
Your decision not to photograph the wildfires raises an interesting philosophical question about the role of the photographer. Sometimes the most meaningful creative decision is choosing not to document an event at all. It forces us to ask whether every moment needs to be captured, or whether some moments are better experienced than recorded.
Before legions of "citizen journalists," very few people in any given location had the resources to document events and share them on a large scale. Years or even decades later, historians would comb through family photographs and local newspaper archives to reconstruct what had happened. Today, those same events can be seen around the world in less than 24 hours.
I remember my training as a journalist in the early 1980s: Never become part of the story. Never be the story. Don't get in the way, especially if your presence changes the situation you're documenting. The best journalism often happens when people forget you're there.
Many citizen journalists never received that training. Their incentives can be very different, often rewarding attention and engagement as much as documentation. Being part of the story has become common, and sometimes the goal. Hunter S. Thompson's gonzo journalism intentionally blurred the line between observer and participant. What was once a deliberate literary style now, in some ways, resembles the everyday reality of social media.
I have great respect for you to document from a distance and to remind people of the dangers firefighters face. They don't need others in their way unless it's critical. You have made the right decision as a creative photographer, one who is not required to brave the fires to document them as part of the firefighting team.
Deep respect for saying this. Thank you. 🙏
Need to share this with my "kind of" daughter in law who is a photojournalist out in Portland, OR for OPB! Thank you, Bryan!
I think working photojournalists assigned to cover fires is another story.
Curious ... is that because they are hired to keep people informed?
https://www.opb.org/article/2026/07/22/wheeler-county-firefighters-landowners-wildfire/
Yes, it's their job to cover the fires.
You're absolutely right, thanks for sharing
I agree