Photographs or video tape taken of any event or potential disaster could later turn into vital evidence for any ensuing enquiry. In this case the person taking the pictures was not to know that the vessel was to sink or that there would indeed be loss of life. Therefore, the comments made above are completely "out of order". (Thumb)
Mclean, thank you for that and I can accept that although we share a common world (and on here a common language), there is always scope for seeing the same thing from different viewpoints. A person seeing it as taking a photograph of someone obviously enjoying the sight of a ship in distress would indeed reach the conclusion, as you did, that it was a bit sad. On the other hand, someone seeing it (maybe as many on here will see it) as a picture of a ship in distress, taken by a photographer who has to cope with people invading his space at the crucial moment, will assess it quite differently.
All in all I do take your point and clearly from your assessment it was poor form by the photographer, although I hope that the other (second) interpretation is also a possibility.
What was the obliterated one doing to earn such codemnation?
As for photograhy, I would do the same.
The recording of events at sea is the recording of history at its most primary source. As someone with an involvement with the study of history I see that as a proper thing to do.
my thanks to those who took the series and to Umborne pirate for sharing them with us