Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thoughtful and well said, Rob. You're right. The combination of video and words is much better at conveying a stories and complex information. But I think there is a somewhat different role for still photos, partly because photos stay around and shape our feelings over time. Yes, they create "atmosphere"; but they also convey information and shape emotional responses, attitudes, relationships, points of view. In many ways, I don't think of photos as "hammering" at us as much as reminding us who we are, what we do, how we relate, and what's around us. For example, still "nature" photography -- including Hubble images, space missions, medicine and science -- are a powerful shaping influence. In general, I suspect still images from environments outside our immediate experience (big, small, or in between) act on us like a "mantra" -- slowly urging us to shift our understanding and attention. That, I think is the strength of photos on the web and in various forms of print media -- newspapers, magazines, brochures, flyers, etc. that continue to flow through our lives on paper and electronically. Their power explains why I suspect more people today are making money on still images of all sorts, not just PJ or people. - --Gib [You wrote] Gib - That would be good news for anyone trying to make a living with images. It's my feeling, though, that while pictures are terrific conveyors of atmosphere, so to speak, they're not very good on information. They really only show you how things look. Plus, there are strong limitations to what they can show. Example: a month or so ago I was commissioned to shoot a story about prostitution here in Modena. The story was quite complex, about trafficking in underage girls and the international structures that support the trade. But how do you photograph this? It's just not possible. At most you can photograph a few pimps, some girls, clients trawling past, etc. Even that is close to impossible - or was in this particular situation. But my point is, the pictures cannot tell the story. They can only illustrate it. Since so much of the oppression operating in the world is structural, that is, embedded in the structures of everyday life, and doesn't focus into significant moments which can be photographed, I think photography's potential for being a language even for dealing with this range of subjects is pretty limited. I do love photography and believe in its potential for telling stories, but I'm more and more aware of its limitations. I think still photography can potentially produce images which literally hammer into your retina so you can't look away or forget them. That's its strength. But words/video are essential complements to deliver the "whole" story. Oh well, it's late and I'm going on again! Ciao, Rob. Robert Appleby and Sue Darlow Via Bellentani 36 41100 Modena Italy Tel/fax [39] 059 303436