Photojournalism

‘I have been a witness, and these pictures are my testimony. The events I have recorded should not be forgotten and must not be repeated.’ - James Nachtwey

In a nutshell, the essence of photojournalism is having images that tell a news story. They will have a certain timelessness, objectiveness quality but ultimately a narrative. It is only natural then that war photography, natural disasters and human suffering has been prominent over the 100 years

At a first glimpse it is hard to really distinguish how photojournalism is distinctly different, for both can document people from a very candid situations, and both show society as its most honest and raw moments. However there are some differences between the two. Photojournalism is ‘reportage’ and the editors and publishers have control over what is published. A photojournalist may not have control over his photos, he/she does not have the ultimate say. He/she may shoot things that he thinks will be more likely to be published - rather than to what he thinks should be published. So, the real difference lies in the fact that (and I quote) ‘In the end street photography becomes how you see the world...’

I direct you to this video of a photojournalist, to give you an insight into his life

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lew1Fii5xXE

The Golden Age

The introduction of the Leica camera was what I think really gave life to Photojournalism. From the 1930s Newspapers/Magazines built up readership by the dominant use of photos. These include -Life magazine and the Daily Mirror. I would thoroughly recommend visiting http://www.life.com/ because they really do have the best photos of daily news stories!

Given the intense political situations and wars that have occurred over the last 100 years, it is understandable that photos would feature so heavily in the news. They could capture the life, the death, and the emotions of so many people. This and the rising interest in celebrities, which seems to dominate modern life, has meant some of the most iconic photos have been taken in this period. What's more was the photos were printed with the photographers name and so they became household names -something nowadays fewer photographers are obtaining I think.

Ethics of photojournalism

What are the things you have to consider when you are taking these kinds of photos?

Firstly take a look at this photo


You may recognise this, and you may know something about it. If you don't then take a couple minutes to ask your self these questions
1)What is happening in this photo?
2)Should the photographer have taken this photo/is it ethical?
3)Should the photographer intervened?
4) What would you have done?
5) Is there a greater cause that would justify this photo?

This photo was taken by Kevin Carter, but for the explanation, shall direct you to this video, and you will realise that not everything is clear cut as it seems. There is no straight answer...and it doesn't always end well for all involved.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDOxDRUNBBQ


So as a photojournalist you have to decide what to shoot, how to frame and how to edit your photos. You have to be sure of your role as a photographer. It is ultimately unfair to in a sense 'shoot the messenger' the photographer is there to show the world what is happening. If the world doesn't like what it see then that is not the photographer's fault. It is not the photographer's fault that there is famine in suffering the world, and even if they tried to help one person they have photographed, they cannot help them all. When Kevin Carter Committed suicide, part of his surviving suicide note, is harrowing, describing the things that would haunt him. I can't really imagine what it would be like seeing some of the things they see first hand.

However your role as a photojournalist has got to be honest, and not portraying things out of context or use manipulation. That includes digital manipulation or manipulation of the scene in front of them (something which has cause controversy, particularly with war photography) Editors can change something without your control, that it is the publication that should also take responsibility for ethics for the photos it chooses to print.

To look for photos that have made a major impact on the world then look here - but please be wary, some of these are not for the faint hearted.

http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0309/lm_index.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/05/in_pictures_50_years_of_photojournalism/html/12.stm


For the Guardian's take on photojournalism read this article here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2010/nov/16/criticism-critics-photography-susie-linfield

The death or rebirth of photojournalism?

New technology has made photojournalism much more accessible and widespread. If you think how difficult it was for early photographers to not just take photos, but to travel the world, then it was pretty exclusive. With small film cameras like the Leica, and the invention of DSLR coupled with widespread travelling it is not surprising photojournalism was taken on by many. Despite this, in the modern day it is a profession that has changed, it seems like is much harder to make it as a professional Journalist. When you are working freelance, spending you're life travelling, with competition from so many other photographers, you can see why it can be very difficult to become a photojournalist. However at the same time there will always be a need for striking photos, and with that a need for professionals to report on stories in order show the world what is happening. People may have thought that with the advent of photography that paintings would die out. However this is not the case. Photojournalism is arguably the most thought-provoking, harrowing, and important form of photography the world could have. That is why I believe there is no death of photojournalism, and why I have such respect for those who do endanger their life in search for the truth.

I always enjoy it at new year when the whole year is presented in photos by boston.com. Check out last years ones, they really are amazing!
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/12/2009_in_photos_part_1_of_3.html


The big names


Henry Cartier Bresson, 1908-2004
The father of modern photojournalism, I won't say too much about him because he deserves a whole post on his own!

Robert Capa, 1913-1954,
He is the co-founder of Magnum agency (which also deserves a post on its own) with Henry Cartier-Bresson and others.
He covered 5 wars, and tended to disregarded technical aspects of photography and went for dramatic photos
Check out some of his photos here on the Magnum site
http://www.magnumphotos.com/Archive/C.aspx?VP=XSpecific_MAG.PhotographerDetail_VPage&l1=0&pid=2K7O3R14YQNW&nm=Robert%20Capa

The quote that I put in at the beginning I found on James Nachtwey's website here:

http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/

His is one of the top current photojournalists, and the photos which you can see on his website are fully deserving of all the awards that he has won, especially when he has survived a grenade attack while in Baghdad.

For another modern photographer check out Steve McCurry's website

http://www.stevemccurry.com/main.php

There are many more, but here's the opinion of somebody else's

top 10 photojournalists check out this site:

http://www.digitalphotographybasics.com/the-top-10-photojournalists-of-all-time/

Featured Photographer – Ansel Adams

The negative is comparable to the composer's score and the print to its performance. Each performance differs in subtle ways.

Ansel Adams

It would hardly be worth discussing Landscape photography (or B&W photography) without mentioning Ansel Adams. Born in 1902 in San Francisco, his photos have become some of the most recognised and awe-inspiring landscapes ever taken. His most well known shots were taken at Yosemite National Park, California. Having visited Yosemite myself it is very easy why he came back time after time to take photos all year round. The park is home to some spectacular waterfalls, valleys and some of the oldest and largest trees in the world. In fact these Sequoia trees are up to 1800 years old and some are large enough to drive cars through the (removed) middle – which is what they have done. It is not hard to see how, with this type of scenery, Adams would have fallen in love with nature, hiking and taking photographing the beautiful vistas. In 1948, on reflecting on his first experiences of the Yosemite and nearby Sierra Nevada, he wrote:

“That first impression of the Valley – white water, azaleas, cools fir caverns, tall pines and stolid oaks, cliffs rising to undreamed –of heights, the poignant sounds and smells of the Sierra...was a culmination of experience so intense as to be almost painful. From that day in 1916, my life has been colour and modulated by the great earth-gesture of the sierra”

According to his biography on his website, it was 1927 which was significant marker in his photographic career. It was then that he took his first ‘fully visualised’ photos in Yosemite and flourished under the patronage of Albert M. Bender. It was soon after this that Adams began to flourish, and develop is style of ‘straight photography.’ The effect he was able achieve with this was that the ‘clarity of the lens was emphasized, and the final print gave no appearance of being manipulated in the camera or the darkroom.’ It was not long after this that he and fellow photographer - Edward Weston- founded the f/64 club, dedicated to this straight photography style.

Through the coming decades Adams attained a high level of notoriety and success, however beyond that, it was his technical ability that really set him apart. His love of theory and practical experience lead him to become consultants to major camera companies.There is much more to say on the life of Adams, but I feel that is his photographs that really do the talking, that show his skill and ability to, with clarity, convey the scenery around him. Ansel Adams lived until 1984, and left a huge legacy to the photographic world, I would say that he was a true master of his craft.

It has been recently thought that lost negatives are believed to those of Adams which were thought to be lost in a fire. Although the family have dismissed the photos (won't stand to make any money off them!) the negatives have been verified by experts. Read more here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10784539


Check out the Ansel Adams website here

Street Photography + the Law

"All photography is propaganda” – Martin Parr

Street Photography, a form of documentary photography, is essentially shooting photos of people in public places. The beauty of it is, is that the candid subjects are being captured to show something natural and unposed. The quality that I find in street photography is a certain rawness of reality, of the people shown, of a particular place, at a particular period of time. This is akin to holding up a mirror on society.

When you think of street photography you typically think of B&W photos, and despite the most classics ones having been taken between 1890-1975, it continues today to be one of the most interesting forms of photography go out and take, or the most evocative to view. In the past, the true greats have taken their photos with their 35mm Leica but nowadays street photography is being taken by everyone even with their camera phones – a phenomenon called iphoneography (see - http://www.iphoneography.com/ )

The challenges with Street photography are that you are shooting people on the move; things can unfold very quickly. You have to be able to capture the pace of everyday life, by using fast reactions and thinking to capture that great moment. This is why a simple set up of minimal equipment is key to street photography. Similarly what can be difficult is that you are not in a studio – you cannot control what is going on around you, and this candidness can be difficult and frustrating but at the same time can be so rewarding. Due to the fact that your subjects are the public, you have the question of permission to ask -shoot first, ask later? Or ask first then shoot? Or don’t ask for permission at all? There are certain advantages to all 3, such as if you’re asking them first they will be almost posing for you, but there really isn’t any right or wrong answer. However I would say this: let common sense prevail – avoid shooting people who don’t want to be photographed.
Taking photos with an SLR can be approached in two ways. What can be inconspicuous is the telephoto lens, which allows you to take photos of people from a distance, without them being aware that you are there. This means that the resulting shot is completely natural. Although it is up to personal preferences, this method of shooting may mean that you are slightly detached from the situation and are too far away and gives scope for more blurry photos the more you are zoomed in. I would say also that a longer lens can make you more conspicuous, kind of like the paparazzi.
The other approach which is also recommended is taking shots with a wide –angle lens, allowing fitting a lot more in, and taking some pretty nice street portraits. However you have to be much closer to your subject, and if you do consider it a downside, it means they will probably be aware of you taking the photo - although this may not matter in the end. Because I would consider being inconspicuous as possible is key.
I would say try the second approach, but ultimately do what you are comfortable with. Inconspicuousness is the key (not suspiciousness) shoot with minimal equipment. This is why in terms of film cameras; rangefinders are perfect for street photography. They are light, silent and inconspicuous – perfect for waist level shooting. Waist level shooting can give you an advantage over bringing the camera up to the eye mainly because people won’t be expecting it. They will not think you’re actually taking photos.
I would generally say don’t try to hide your camera and dress ‘normal.’ Find the scene, preset your camera (focus and settings) wait for the moment, bring your camera to shoot. I would say as events may unfold, shoot a lot so that you have more possibility of capturing that special moment. When taking your photos of people, one piece of advice that might seem trivial is to smile lots. I don’t know why, but it can do wonders if someone has noticed you taking a photo.

I would say that as street photography involves capturing people – you need to be up close and become a participant in the action. It often involves invading personal space so crowded events in big cities make good situations to shooting. Similarly at bigger events people are less likely to mind you taking a photo. If you were to take a photo of someone in a lift then they probably will mind you taking a photo, but in the context of a busy event people will not probably mind as much. I would also say, try and make your photo tell a story – and you might find that story in the photo only after you have taken it – otherwise having a photo which is open to interpretation is also great. Try sharper shots with higher ISO and faster shutter speeds and also blurred shots with slower shutter speeds. Most Street shots are B&W but never forget colour!
For more tips check here: http://digital-photography-school.com/20-quick-street-photography-tips

For me street photography doesn’t come easily – for you have to be quick, inconspicuous and your moment of opportunity to take a great shot may pass you within an instant. However when Garry Winogrand was asked how he felt about missing photographs while he reloaded his camera with film, he replied "There are no photographs while I'm reloading." This, a very optimistic way of viewing street photography is certainly true, for there are always more things to take pictures of even if you miss something. Garry Winogrand is considered to be a truly legendary photographer. So much so that he is famous for photos that he had never developed himself; when he died he left something like 2,500 rolls of undeveloped film, with a total of 300,000 unedited images. This is a staggering amount, I’ve read that he took about 10 rolls of film in one day, and with that amount I’m not surprised he got so many good shots. The photos of his Leica show that the image film has been worn on the the press plate of the camera – now that is crazy. See here: http://www.cameraquest.com/LeicaM4G.htm
I have also read this account of a workshop that someone took with Winogrand shortly before his death, this is a fascinating read! http://www.photogs.com/bwworld/winogrand.html I would also suggest you check out the flickr group dedicated in his style - http://www.flickr.com/groups/winogrand/
I would guess I am more used to taking time to compose a picture, making sure I have it right and after some time I will have my photo. I feel that Street photography has to be far more rapid and perhaps more intuitive, by following your instinct. After all, from all the quotes I have read from the big names, I get the sense they weren’t interested in the technical aspect, but merely taking good photos.
One aspect that you must be aware of is the Law, especially when taking photos on the street. I would firstly like to say that according to photographernotaterrorist.com that the law that has been causing to many problems is in fact suspended. So please read the next section which I wrote before this came into effect, just to be aware of what people had to go through and to know what your rights are should you for some reason get stopped.
"There is no legal restriction on photography in public places, and there is no presumption of privacy for individuals in a public place.”

Watch this video for a ridiculous example of the confusion cause by the terrorism act.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ea8m8DMvQ9I

Recently there has been much highlighted in the news about police abusing their powers and photographers being forced to delete their photos in the name of preventing terrorism. It is therefore important you should know your rights, if you were ever to find yourself in this kind of situation. The Terrorism Act 2000 is the law that you should be aware of – this is the one that allows the police to search you, but only if they have reasonable suspicion that you are a terrorist. It is important to note that professional photography is not allowed in Parliament square, Trafalgar square and all Royal Parks. However it is not an offence to take photographs of frontline uniform staff, and the act of taking a photo itself is not enough to warrant a stop & search. Similarly, if in a public place, people do not assume a right to privacy – although it is of course courteous to ask before taking a photo of someone. For further reading I direct you to http://photographernotaterrorist.org/

& http://www.urban75.org/photos/photographers-rights-street-shooting.html For a recent case, and an interesting read, check this article out:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/officers-claim-they-dont-need-law-to-stop-photographer-taking-pictures-2012827.html

Panoramic Photography

"The world just does not fit conveniently into the format of a 35mm camera"
W.Eugene Smith

Panoramic photography is a wide format form of taking photographs. You are using specialist equipment or a series of photos to convey an extended field of view. While there are no real formal divisions between wide angle, and panoramic, you could say that wide-angle refers to the lens you are using, but doesn't have to mean it is a panorama.

Panoramas are at least twice as high as they are wide (a ratio of 1:2), and are usually in the from of a long strip. Unfortunately these are usually quite frustrating to view on computers as they are generally not going to be able to fit the whole thing on screen, So I reckon they're best viewed in printed form, on the wall of an art gallery, although seeing it on a screen really allows you to zoom in on one aspect of the photo.

The most common type is the stardard horizontal panoramas where you are capturing wide landscapes. You can also get Vertical ones, for example of skyscrapers. Although very compressed, and resized this photo <---- is a vertical panorama I took recently in Rome You can also get a clockwise panorama whereby you take a series of photos methodically in a clockwise fashion to build up a photo. There are also circular panoramas - where you take 360 degrees worth of photos and link the ends to form a circle - rather like this photo here -->




So what kind of equipment would you need for panoramic photography?! Well you can get hold of specialist equipment -cameras that rotate slowly and have an extended sensor but the majority of panormas are formed using a simpler method. If you have a 'fixed camera' like the Hasselblad Xpan then you would be able to take wonderful panoramas.

With the advent of digital technology and photo-editing software people are now able to seamlessly 'stitch' several photos together to form one panorama. The great thing with this is that you can even just have a simple compact camera to do this - they often come with software/settings that can aid you in taking panoramas.

Tripod can be very useful - but are not essential. If you want to get a very precise panorama - particularly if you're shooting in 360 degrees then you will want to use one so that the first and last photos line-up. You can also get special tripod heads that allow you to take panoramas more easily. but I think that you don't always need a tripod, and so long as you judge it right you can get a great panorama like this - you will probably have to do a little bit of cropping later on.

The sort of lens you use to take a panorama is really up to you. However taking photos with a wide-angle will mean you will need to take fewer over all - the only drawback is that everything will seem further away.

You should always try and overlap your photos by 30% in order to make sure your panoram turns out right and avoid putting key features in the overlapping area (although this is obviously sometimes unavoidable.)

You should avoid extreme lighting because this can cause a difference in light levels in your panoramas when they are stiched, making them very obvious that they are serparate photos. Photo-editing software however will sometimes correct this and make the scene look even.
So you should try and keep your photos even , get the correct exposure over all of your photos. One tip that could help you if you're using a DSLR is to use the AE-L (autoexposure lock) to help you.

I find the easiest way to stitch photos together is to use Photoshop (file --> automate --> photomerge

But a dedicated program like Autostitch would work very well, all though you have to pay for it:
http://cvlab.epfl.ch/~brown/autostitch/autostitch.html

Hugin is one that I have used before - it takes a little getting used to, but it does the job!
http://hugin.sourceforge.net/

Panotools (free) is another one, but i havent used it myself. http://sourceforge.net/projects/panotools/

Theres also Pandora plugin for GIMP http://www.shallowsky.com/software/pandora/
but again i haven't used that either