Bride dies at "trash the dress" shoot

[Michael_4514]

It always amazes me how many people form strong opinions based on a headline or a very cursory set of facts.

Here is a more detailed article with photos. The girl slipped and fell into a river with a strong current. Very sad story indeed.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...oto-shoot.html

[Michael_4514]

Yes, in the USA civil courts the photographer would be held partially responsible and rightfully so.

As one who makes his living in the USA civil courts, I doubt very much that the photographer would face any liability had the accident happened, say, in New York.

[jp]

Ok, the science geek in me has to vent... The dress doesn't weigh any more in the water than it does out of the water (same for Esther Williams' killer bathing suit). Now, getting out of the water with a sodden dress may be a problem, but being pulled to the bottom by a dress made heavier by being soaked isn't an issue.

I suspect the "trash the dress" turnabout was more due to drag in a fast moving body of water than anything else. People in shorts and t-shirts occasionally get knocked down and carried over waterfalls by what seems to be a manageable current so I imagine a wedding dress could be much worse.

The mass of the dress won't change, but it's weight can. (weight being what moves the indicator on a spring tensioned scale)

I used to be in the lobstering business and we had two types of traps, wooden, and wire. Wooden ones were about 5-10 pounds heavier (wet oak lathes compared to plastic coated wire), so wire ones were preferable for handling above water. In the water, the wooden ones were far easier to lift from the bottom by their rope. (they have bricks built in so they sink). The much lighter choice of trap above water is far heavier underwater because it doesn't displace much water.

If we ourselves were to fall in , removing our apron and boots were said to be important to reduce drowning risk, even though salt water makes all things more buoyant; I've never swam in apron and boots, but I suppose a big wedding dress could be equally risky especially in fast water. A waifish bride would probably be apt to sink even without heavy wet clothes.

[Brian Ellis]

Yes, in the USA civil courts the photographer would be held partially responsible and rightfully so.

Nonsense. We don't have nearly enough facts to know what liability, if any, the photographer would face.

[Sevo]

If we ourselves were to fall in , removing our apron and boots were said to be important to reduce drowning risk, even though salt water makes all things more buoyant;

Cellulose has 1.5 times the specific weight of water, so it won't even float in the Dead Sea (1.2 times the density of water). The apparent lightness of cotton cloth comes from the high air content in its volume. Once the air has been fully displaced by water, you can pick up your clothes/towel from the bottom. Been there, done that...

[BrianShaw]

Nonsense. We don't have nearly enough facts to know what liability, if any, the photographer would face.

Which was exactly the point in post 27.

The Brian's agree... thus it is so.

[RichardSperry]

Which was exactly the point in post 27.

The Brian's agree... thus it is so.

Post 27, you state that opinions on the matter of photographer liability should be confined to a court room, and not discussed here.

Then ignoring the previous sentence, you then to go on to state/imply that the photographer was a participant in her drowning. It post 30 you emphasize your belief that the photographer participated in her drowning.

This other Brian is saying something different here.

[Vaughn]

The Photographer:

She had her wedding dress on and she said, "take some pictures of me while I swim a little bit in the lake,"' he said.

'She went in and her dress got heavy, I tried everything I could to save her.'

From the same article:

Lying on rocks, these are the bridal gown and high-heeled shoes worn by a newlywed woman who was killed when she fell into a river while posing for photographs.

Real estate agent Maria Pantazopoulos, 30, drowned after her dress got wet and she was dragged into the river near a 'violently' rushing waterfall in Canada.

Weird...

[Helen Bach]

Robert,

Pick up an empty 42-gallon contractor trash bag.

Then fill it with water and try to pick it up. (336 pounds, for those who don't want to calculate it.)

If any container or substance takes on water, and that water cannot drain freely and instantly, then
anyone picking up that container or carrying that substance must carry the weight of the water.

- Leigh

I think that Robert's point was that the weight of water in water is zero, in the sense that a 42-gallon trash bag full of water weighs the same when it is in water as the empty trash bag does in air (actually it weighs less).

[Leigh]

I think that Robert's point was that the weight of water in water is zero, in the sense that a 42-gallon trash bag full of water weighs the same when it is in water as the empty trash bag does in air (actually it weighs less).

Yes, when the saturated dress is underwater, so is the bride.

When the bride tries to stand wearing the saturated dress, the dress (and the water) are out of the water.

- Leigh