Ok, I'm not surprised I am taking some heat for my statement. Maybe it is deserved. It just strikes me as being a stunt, and obviously it is because he said he planned it and even practiced it. What I am getting at is it seems every year somebody is having to do something to top the next guy, such as the whole driving into a tornado thing. I wonder where it ends? Do you guys really think this is good, and good for chasing? Perhaps I'll end up being in the minority on this one and take a hit, but I'm not going to lie and call something cool when I think it's just a ploy for attention. This is just my opinion...and you are welcome to yours.
As for Jim Reed, I don't know him, and haven't met him. I mean no disregard to him, and he's probably a great chaser. What I am judging is the stunt. It is that and not Jim that I called 'STUPID'. I an entitled to attack the concept and not the person - which I did.
My apologies if I have offended some of you with my direct opinion, perhaps I should have kept my opinion to myself; however it just occurred to me that it seemed everyone was Pro on this topic, and yeah while 'cool' I just thought there was another side to the topic that I thought was worthwhile to present.
EDIT: In retrospect, after a bit of reflection I realize Jim probably wasn't that close and therefore probably was never in much if any danger. There is a bit of illusion affect where if you have the camera back with a very large object in the foreground and you are in between the two it can make you look very close to the object. I've seen this with Geoff Mackley and others in front of volcanoes that are erupting where it appears they are practically in the volcano. For example check out:
http://www.emergency.co.nz/archive/etna.html. From that perspective it is a unique idea - and I agree pretty inventive and cool. It's still a planned stunt, but like many of you have pointed out - I suppose who cares if he isn't hurting anyone. Maybe I'll want to do my own 'stunt' someday - so I suppose everyone is entitled.
Mike S / Mike H - I've never personally attacked or insulted either of you in public. In fact, I was one of the first to rave and make a big deal about Mike H's pictures years ago, promote him on public forums, amongst friends, and have been a fan. Whereas it is true I used flamboyant language to describe my feelings about Jim's video initially I never intended to direct that at him personally. It was a comment about a trend in chasing I don't necessarily agree with. Alternatively both of you guys have made it personal and basically flamed me - even if it was a somewhat mild flame. This of course is against StormTrack policy as I understand it. You didn't really give me time or opportunity to see the other side of the argument, or change it since you quoted my text. Actually I quickly intended to delete my comment when soon after I felt my choice of words was too strong, but was unable to because of this. It's sad you guys felt the need to respond at the level you did. I could flame back, but of course it is against policy and I really don't want to be on that level.
