The state of PJ Today - was: BD's Re: [Leica] So for... -

[bdcolen at comcast.net (B. D. Colen)]

Actually, I'd like to suggest that the advent of the web has caused a
blossoming of PJ work, and has given photographers at virtually every size
newspaper opportunities they really never had before to do interesting work.
Way back when - "in the day," as you whippersnappers would put it" - I chose
to make my way as a reporter rather than as a newspaper photographer because
I came to the conclusion that newspaper photography would get very old, very
fast - grip and grins, sunsets, fires, etc. etc. over and over and over.
Because in those days, while Life, Look, etc., and Time and Newsweek were
still publishing interesting work, most daily photojournalism was pretty
mundane. Today, however, even the lowliest daily has a website, and many run
photo essays on those sites. And when it comes to the major papers, look at
the stuff the Times, the Post, and many others produce. Often only one or
two shots will make it into the paper, but a dozen or so may show up on the
web. And newspapers aside, there are any number of websites carrying first
class photo journalism.

I think that we - and I very much include myself in that "we" - remember a
Golden Age that never was. Yes, Life, Look, etc. published some great work
by some great photographers. But the average Life picture story was a sad
joke - go back through some old issues. 'Life Goes to The Prom;' setup
shots, posed and lit to a fare-thee-well. The "Country Doctor" and "Yankee
Papa 13"s were few and far between.

Yes, young photographers today are definitely getting screwed by the
magazines and the agencies, who want, and are getting something for very
little and next to nothing. The staff jobs are non-existent. And that may
ultimately reduce the number of people trying to make careers in
photojournalism.

But the past is past - and in some ways that's for the good. And I suspect
that there will continue to be high quality photojournalism for many years
to come. Remember, as a general rule - of course there are exceptions - the
people who have the time to do allot of posting on the MPA or PMA, or
whatever A list, bitching about the end of photojournalism, are not the
people off in Iraq, or Eastbejesus, shooting their butts off. :-)

B. D.


On 5/7/06 5:03 PM, "Scott McLoughlin" <scott@adrenaline.com> wrote:

> So is the sorry state of affairs based on a lack of photographic talent?
> As if pubs would publish more extensive PJ work ("essays") if it were
> available?  Are all the PJ photogs out there young stringers just trying
> to get that one image that might make the front page?
> 
> Scott
> 
> B. D. Colen wrote:
> 
>> You know what, Tina - they've always been the exception. The people doing
>> work worth thinking about for more than five minutes - in any field of
>> endeavor - are always the exception.
>> 
>> 
>> On 5/7/06 4:40 PM, "Tina Manley" <images@InfoAve.Net> wrote:
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>> At 04:35 PM 5/7/2006, you wrote:
>>> Whilst, sadly, I have to agree with you on a day-to-day basis, there
>>>    
>>> 
>>>> are still some great photojournalists out there who produce superb
>>>> images under extremely arduous conditions. We must not lose sight of
>>>> their work by writing them off.
>>>> 
>>>> Gerry
>>>>      
>>>> 
>>> Of course, you are right, Gerry.  But every day they are the
>>> exception more and more instead of the rule.
>>> 
>>> Tina 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>    
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>  
>>