Re: [Leica] re: The Decisive Moment is gone

[Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca>]

From: "John Collier"
Subject: Re: [Leica] re: The Decisive Moment is gone


>You still are not addressing the fact that often
> the presence of the photographer is the catalyst in many interactions
> in the world. Interactions that would not have otherwise occurred.<<<

Hi John,
Whoa son lets get it straight... it isn't "photographers!!!"

It's the big bad Television machine that's the catalyst and igniter to
action happening! Hey they can't have the big News at 6pm if nothings going
on, ERGO they tweak people to get a roll going of something.

I mean at demonstrations where nothing was happening but people standing
around whining..... before the TV networks arrive and when they did it was
"WHAMBO ALL HANDS ON DECK IT'S ACTION TIME !!!!"  And within a few moments
rocks are flying, store windows are being kicked in and screaming morons
come out of this previously quiet group doing their thing.

But the TV cameras and crews arrive and all hell's happening in a few
minutes. I'm sure there are a few other photogs on the LUG who've
experienced this very thing during an assignment.

 But lets keep it straight, it isn't a few Canon, Nikon, Leica users who
rile the crowd to get crazy it's those TV folks 99.9 % of the time as the
demo people want their faces and actions on the screen.

>>I am not saying photographers/observers cause the world's problems but
they
> often are the straw that breaks the camel's back so to speak.<<<<

Please state clearly whom you are speaking of... blame the right people and
it isn't the stills guys! It's always TV!!! Please make an effort to
understand! A clutch of newspaper wire photographers wouldn't excite a riot
in the middle of Afghanistan, let alone an old folks home.

> There is the famous story about when the troubles first broke out in
> Northern Ireland after the civil rights marches. The world press showed
> up and nothing was happening so, according to the story, they paid some
> kids to start throwing stones at the British soldiers.<<<<

And yep the world press turned up alright and the action started because TV
TV TV need action, like things happening, things moving, things flying in
the air, cars burning, windows smashed as it all makes for wonderful footage
at 6 on the screen! It isn't the stills guys! Sure we may shoot it, but we
don't instigate it because what the hell is one little front page picture in
a newspaper going to get for the demonstrators, NADA!

However! The big screen will insite other riots if necessary!

> There are now many cases where violence is orchestrated for the press.
> The press is told where to be and, presto, spontaneous violence of an
> irresistibly photogenic nature occurs. Presumably if the press didn't
> show much of it might not happen.<<<

This type of "demonstartion timing for the media" is an automatic thing in
the middle east all the time.

> Some would like to say there is a difference between the two above
> scenarios and others of us have a great deal of difficulty seeing any
> difference at all.<<<<

Those who wish to do dirty deeds during demonstrations have learned how to
play TV crews and networks like a fine tuned violin for maximum action even
though they plan phoney out pourings for effect. And it's extremely
effective, because TV requires action. So the more stone throwing they get
on the screen the better they feel their cause is being helped.

But once again ...it isn't the Nikon, Canon, Leica folks this demonstration
stuff is planned for.

So what we have going in this discussion is a few things , photojournalists,
their actions and effect, TV and coverage staged or otherwise and setting up
still pictures supposedly demonstrating "real life moments."  Right or
wrong.

By the number of the topic heads this is getting to look like a bigtime
round table beer discussion! ;-)

ted


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