The problem with photojournalism today is that not enough people have something to say. They're simply pushing content, devoid of meaning or feeling, out into the universe. Let's be honest. There's a lot of crap out there. So much that it's cluttering up my head space.
There's no such thing as objectivity. Everything you do, every choice you make is subjective. Go with that. When will you learn that by having a point, by taking a side, you will find a way to deeply connect with someone. Don't be afraid to put yourself out there. Say what you want to say, how you want to say it.
Find your voice. Then, use it.
Well said. Though let me ask this - how do you reconcile that with the grind of newspaper work? Or is it a balancing act, sometimes pushing out those pictures, other times actually speaking with your own voice?
ReplyDeleteAs I find myself searching everyday for the photography that speaks to me, that guides me on my way... I must ask three questions. Composition, Emotion, Light? If all three exist, the photograph in question (depending on the objective observer) suceeds as a successful photograph. Thus is the challenge to all great photography (photojournalism) to succeed in all three.
ReplyDeleteAll photographers are challenged by those three words, to accomplish all in one photograph. Light, Composition, Moment (mood, emotion etc).
Subjectivity vs. Objectivity.
How you go about capturing the image, your past, your influences is the basis to how one photographs, how it's captured, the light, the composition, the moment. But it is the objector that will critique the image in question to say...Is there emotion (or lack there of)? Is there composition? Is there light? Also is there truth in the image? Truth to the subject?
Or is it a vision upon what the photographer is experiencing? Truth is the basis to the reality of photojournalism, and I'm not even talking about Photoshop.
Being subjective, basis on own's beliefs, accomplishes photographs such as Jill Greenburg's of John McCain for The Atlantic. Is there truth in the image? Is it honest? You decide.
My answers may not be the answers you are searching, but they are objective answers.
Mike-
ReplyDeleteThat's a good question. I have a 80/20 rule. 80% of the time I shoot for myself. The other 20%, for the paper. Keeps me happy and feeds the beast. Over the years I've started getting smarter about how to sell my pictures, and always remind editors that our readers aren't as stupid as they think they are. Once you find your voice though, it's surprising how quickly you learn to use it, and how loud it can be.
In this increasingly visual society where people are inundated with hundreds if not thousands of images a day, you'd be surprised how easy it is to get one of "my" pictures in the paper -- if only for a different look, if nothing else.
Editors that take a chance on something, and realize that it's ok to take a chance on something and maybe make a mistake on running something one day because the paper comes out again tomorrow are a lot easier to work with. And as with anyone, editors can be trained.
Heidi-
ReplyDeleteYou're right, but schools are pumping out these kids who are mere clones of some great Magnum photographers who do silly things like tilt the frame to make something seem interesting. They are forgetting the basics. If a photo has any of the three keys to success (light, moment, composition) then it's a good photo. Two of the three and it's great. All three and it's one that's going to stick. Sadly though, with all the emulation, it's become more about style than substance.
And for the record, I think honesty is far more important than objectivity.
Fantastic Rays and colors.. nice shot
ReplyDelete