The Shot That Isn’t Worth Your Life
Photography safety risks are the growing pattern of injuries and deaths that occur when photographers and influencers ignore clear hazards in pursuit of dramatic images at dangerous photo locations or during wildlife encounters, instead of treating risk assessment photography as essential to every shoot and accepting that no picture is worth serious physical or legal consequences. On August 10, a 20-year-old man, Zachary Nicholas Mertens, fell to his death while taking a picture at a 177-foot waterfall after climbing over a barrier and crossing the creek above the drop. This single tragedy is not an outlier; it sits squarely in a worrying trend where Gen Z outdoor explorers are getting into increasing trouble while chasing “Instagrammable” content. The harsh truth is that many of these fatal or near-fatal images are not even compelling photographs—they are high-risk stunts for low-return pictures.
Waterfalls, Cliffs and the Illusion of a Better Angle
The story of Mertens at South Falls is a brutal lesson in how composition myths can kill. He climbed over a safety barrier and walked across the creek directly above the waterfall to pose for a photo, then fell—authorities believe he took the risk to get a dramatic view down into the torrent. Influencers and casual visitors often assume that being closer to the edge means a more powerful image. In reality, waterfalls and many landscapes are visually stronger when shot from a safer distance, where their full context—the plunge, the pool, the surrounding forest—can be framed without flirting with a lethal drop. The article that reported his death argues that from atop, the perspective rarely does these landmarks justice, and that shooting from afar would not only have been safer but likely produced better photographs. Chase impact in your frame, not in your hospital records.
Wildlife Encounters: When Curiosity Turns into a Bite
The same recklessness is spreading through wildlife photography safety. Various outlets have reported influencer Tayane Dalazen being bitten by a nurse shark while swimming off a coastal area on an organized shark-diving trip. According to the BBC, in under a year no fewer than three influencers have been attacked by sharks. A journal study cited in that report found that both influencers and photographers are less likely to follow safety instructions. On land, the pattern repeats: a photographer was seen chasing an owl around a field and refusing to stop, and a stag in a busy park was shot after attacking a man who got too close. Long telephoto and super-telephoto lenses exist precisely so we can get close visually without entering an animal’s space. Yet even with such lenses, the rule should be blunt: if the animal’s behavior has changed, you are too close and need to back off.
A Practical Risk Assessment Framework for Photographers
Treat every shoot like a miniature expedition. Before you climb, wade or approach, run a mental risk assessment. First, read the scene: barriers, warning signs and obvious hazards like fast water or slippery rock are not suggestions; they are non-negotiable limits, as South Falls’ upper viewpoint barrier was for Mertens. Second, ask whether the composition you want truly demands your risky position. Often, stepping back a few meters reveals a stronger frame that includes the landscape rather than your dangling feet. Third, with wildlife, judge behavior: if an animal becomes agitated, shifts focus to you, or changes its routine, you have already crossed a line and should slowly retreat. Finally, factor in legal and ethical fallout—trespassing, disturbing wildlife or ignoring safety briefings can lead to fines, bans or forced animal culls. A good photograph should never rely on you breaking the rules that protect both people and ecosystems.
Safer Composition and the Mental Shift We Need
There is a creative way out of this spiral. Strong landscape work often comes from recognizing that distance can be your ally: framing the full height of a waterfall within its forest, or placing hikers as small figures against sweeping terrain, can deliver impact without deadly exposure. Close-ups still have a place—leaves against tall trees, details on a trail—but when getting close is extremely risky, it is time to rethink the shot altogether and search for a frame from a few steps farther back. For wildlife, let long lenses do the “getting close” and watch the animal’s behavior as a hard limit. The mental shift is simple, but uncomfortable: admit that some shots are not worth it. If a composition demands that you cross a barrier, wade above a waterfall, or push a wild animal’s tolerance, the real creative choice is to walk away. Stories like Mertens’ death and Dalazen’s shark bite must become warnings, not templates.
