Re: [Leica] Tina's pictures

[Eric Welch <ewelch@ponyexpress.net>]

At 05:47 PM 4/11/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Now you've really got me curious Eric.  You've vehemently disowned any
>pretensions to photography for art's sake.   You're not the kind of
>photographer that Harrison is but describe yourself as an erstwhile
>photojournalist (currently working as an editor) and if I understand this

First off, this is not a criticism of Harrison. Okay? I like his work. I'm
just referring to the kinds of pictures on his web page vs. mine. And I
have to correct myself, we are probably not that different, maybe we are.
But I am only referring to his pictures on his web page. Is that clear?

There are differences between "editorial" photographers and "news"
photographers. Take a look at Harrison's pictures. Highly lit, carefully
composed editorial style photographs. Wonderful stuff, I might add. There's
a lot of crossover between what he does and what I do, but there is a
significant difference.

I do classic documentary photojournalism. I do not light my photos unless I
absolutely have to. Fill flash some times, but it's only to open up
shadows. I rarely ever light anything but portraits (I did two days ago by
leaning a lamp over to create some side light) unless the light requires me
to. And I never set up a bunch of lights to fill up a room with light
except gyms for basketball. And it's not artistic lighting in gyms, it's
just basic light.

Those are some of the basic differences between that style of photography
and mine. So don't expect my pictures to look like his web pictures. I just
don't have the time, or the desire to light my pictures. Why? Because
lighting quite often destroys the spontaneity of the situation I am
photographing. The subject moves, and I'd have to move the lights, and miss
the moment.

I'm sure he does that kind of photography too. But looking at Harrison's
web page (which is what the person told me to do to get some sort of
"enlightenment" - my word, not his) causes me to assume that the criticism
implied in the message was that my pictures are deficient because they
don't come up to the standards of Harrison's pictures. I can light things
too. I am capable. I just choose not to, nor does anyone else choosing to
work in the photojournalistic style I am accustomed to - and  which
benefits greatly from using Leica.

Not all of his pictures are lit, obviously, and they show his skill as a
photographer. But that's not what I heard in the "take note Eric" comment
and the words that proceeded that comment.

>I guess the question then is how many and what kinds of photography are
>there and do you fit into any of those categories.  Or put another way, just
>what is it that your photos aim to do?

To be literal, there are as many photographic styles as there are
photographers. But don't confuse editorial photography with classic
documentary photojournalism. They are two different animals, with a lot of
overlap, but require completely different approaches, and intents. Some
people cross between the two. Most freelancers have to. Not many people can
work in the style we newspaper photographers do and survive in the "real"
world of editorial freelancing.
==========

Eric Welch
St. Joseph, MO
http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch

How do I set my laser printer on stun?