Shot after Nightfall

     From my title you might be guessing that this blog post will be about an actual shooting. In some way, this assumption is right. Let me explain...
    
    The way one interprets a photograph can vary between cultures. There are different formal and aesthetic qualities about a photo that make it what it is. Because of this, the idea of content never seen in the exact same way.
    There has been an uproar on photography and how it is used after death. Some questions that pop up are:

1. When is the "proper" time to take a photo of someone who is deceased? (this can include the skelton)
2. What types of photos could be seen as more ethically pleasing?

The main argument in a article I found is: "Is it right to take images of bodies?" A photo is something that can hold a lot of memories for someone. It is a material object that contains much value for the individuals related to the content and even the photographer. Soldiers are seen as victims to people when their photograph is taken after they pass; it is an insult. From another perspective, a photo of a fallen solider could lead as an archive or something that brings light to the fights they have fought.
     "In Belgium, it's acceptable to film the dead from Waterloo but not from WWI." That quote from the article can be seen in many different aspects. A question could be brought up to state what line has to be crossed in order to present an ethical fallout of a photograph; preserving the dignity of the individuals is said to be held at a high standard. The question of what dignity means could be brought up into question and what the borders are around it.
     An archaeologist was quoted saying "The archaeology of the dead gives us a vivid insight into this [the past] without being ghoulish; and images of the dead should be part of our knowledge as much as wartime photographs of the battlefields..."These photographs tell a story and show a realistic idea of how the past was. Knowing that a photograph could lead to an identification could change one's mind about whether taking photos of the dead is permissible or not.
    I personally feel that if a face is not shown, it would be easier to see a photo of someone who died many years ago but at the same time, I feel as if their life wouldn't be as honoured as it could be. It's hard to say whether or not photographing the deceased is right or wrong because it is hard to find the fine line that stands between.