Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/08/03

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] WOW!
From: Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca>
Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 20:51:03 -0700
References: <11e.145b5810.2a7d7d06@aol.com>

Kim wrote & asked:
> Ted,
>
> First off, thank you very much for taking the time to help educate, share
> with me the views of a veteran photojournalist.
>
> A few more questions:
>
> <<Q>>> Is it that she's not telling a story?<<
>
> A To some degree, but these days everyone thinks they're photojournalists
with
>
> a collection of single pictures, which wasn't the meaning originally of
>
> photojournalist,  "a story teller with pictures generally on one subject
."
>
> And what we see in the pictures presented are a collection of photographs
>
> shot some what in "art fashion" instead, as what's considered
>
> photojournalism.>>

> So, traditional photojournalism is a series of photos, documenting one
> specific story  (does there need to be accompanying text for it to be pj
or
> are images simply enough. <<<<

Hi Kim,
Generally the picture stories were usually accompanied with text. But not
always, as many of mine had  little text story, but the pictures were well
cutlined with information.

>>If images themselves are allowed, must they be so
> clear so as to telegraph their
> "true meaning" or can they be...somewhat subjective, thus allowing the
viewer
> to draw their own conclusions?)<<<<

In the hundreds of photo essays, documentaries, photo reportage I've shot
both for magazines and the National Film Board of Canada the work was always
understandable and self explanatory without any hidden message.

If I were to shoot a documentary/reportage on the International boundary
between USA & Canada it was a story about pretty well all the facets along
that line from the Atlantic to the Pacific. In other words everything
happening along the line.

It would be laid out on a coast to coast story showing the borderline, the
people from coast to coast and everything in between.  Or it might be on
gold mining or the re-supply of the Arctic outposts by ice breaker and
helicopter.

But in each case it was a picture story about the subject and location. And
generally there wasn't room for artsy fartsy stuff! And they were always in
B&W. Occasionally a few rolls of colour would be shot only if it were a
colourful colour subject..

>>>>If images themselves are allowed, must they be so clear so as to
telegraph their
> "true meaning" or can they be...somewhat subjective, thus allowing the
viewer to
> draw their own conclusions?)<<<<

Viewers never had difficulty understanding the photography and photo content
as they were "stories by pictures" and not something using arty exposures
and non-understandable photographs.

Think of the work as telling a true visual story of any given subject
without viewers having to draw conclusions or draw out hidden messages.
Shooting for magazines was different as it was generally semi-news story or
hard news stories.

Also shooting for the daily newspapers was clean understandable picture
stories, on occasion we still see this work being done but using only 4 to 6
pictures.

> Secondly, why can't a series of single pictures (maybe each telling a
> different part) be considered photojournalism?<<<

That's done all the time in newspapers in the weekend sections where a
number of "news related pictures" are grouped together on a picture page and
this work is referred to as photojournalism. In fact these days many
newsphotographers call themselves "photojournalists." Sometimes to give
their position in life a higher meaning. ;-) As opposed to being a
newsphotographer.

Which quite frankly in my early days when asked what do you do?  I was
always very proud say, "I'm a newsphotographer and work for the Ottawa
Citizen."  Or whatever news gathering publication it might be at the time.

And today I'm still proud to say, at one time I was a newsphotographer and
hauled a big Speed Graphic with flash bulbs for several years!"

And not until I began shooting major documentaries and photo essays did I
begin using the term "Photojournalist" as a description of my photo
profession. And when asked today what am I? I feel after all these years and
the type of photography I do and have done, I've earned the right to say
"I'm a photojournalist who tells stories with photo reportage" ;-)

ted

















- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from "animal" <s.jessurun95@chello.nl> (Re: [Leica] WOW! art versus information)
In reply to: Message from Teresa299@aol.com (Re: [Leica] WOW!)