MickH
Well-known
or... For pleasure.
I can't understand why it is so difficult or contentious for folk to admit that they take photographs for fun/interest/the entertainment of others or in other words personal gratification.
What is all this "nobility" crap (sorry Jon) I mean garbage? Blimey, take some snaps and stop trying to justify it. If photographing starving bankers troubles your conscience take snaps of something else.
Nh3
-
Absolutely!
I'm sure Jon gets a kick out of his work as I do with mine.
Back to Nh3's problems about photographing starving bankers.
He had no qualms trying to "ridiculise" an innocent guy smoking while wearing sunglasses.
@Nh3. Ask yourself "What would Saint Salgado do?"
I can only wonder what his holiness would have done. Perhaps in his infinite wisdom he would have done the same thing, who knows.
This really comes down to the essence of photography. Do you just sit there or you record the world around you at any cost?
Honestly, I don't know.
steamer
Well-known
I guess I was thinking about photo-journalism in terms of this particular story, the economic meltdown, and in particular being a photo that an editor or page builder could pull to illustrate this story.
I've had to do this myself in the past when working on the business page of a newspaper and most recently with this crisis on TV news, and pictures of "panicked" stockbrokers exist mostly in the imagination, while pictures of tote boards either up or down have little power--breaking financial news is very hard to represent photographically.
In Japan when there is an economic crime we get a photo of the building and footage of plain-clothes police carrying boxes out of the building.
Just one more point I find curious, the OP says: Photographing a famine would be informative, photographing downtown stock brokers in panic is gloating.
Why is this? Do you feel closer to stockbrokers than starving children? Or are you actually gloating about stockbrokers and don't feel good about it?
To reference another thread on what is appropriate subject matter; seems a bit like pictures of a naked 12-year-old in Sidney are vile porn, while a photo of a naked 12-year-old in the Amazon jungle or say Indonesia, they are just National Geographic.
I've had to do this myself in the past when working on the business page of a newspaper and most recently with this crisis on TV news, and pictures of "panicked" stockbrokers exist mostly in the imagination, while pictures of tote boards either up or down have little power--breaking financial news is very hard to represent photographically.
In Japan when there is an economic crime we get a photo of the building and footage of plain-clothes police carrying boxes out of the building.
Just one more point I find curious, the OP says: Photographing a famine would be informative, photographing downtown stock brokers in panic is gloating.
Why is this? Do you feel closer to stockbrokers than starving children? Or are you actually gloating about stockbrokers and don't feel good about it?
To reference another thread on what is appropriate subject matter; seems a bit like pictures of a naked 12-year-old in Sidney are vile porn, while a photo of a naked 12-year-old in the Amazon jungle or say Indonesia, they are just National Geographic.
Last edited:
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
I agree.
A photo of mine in the New York Times would not have any impact whatsoever.
A photo on my site, or in my local small-circulation newspaper, does often make a difference.
We do not all need to photograph wars, we can to photograph day to day life and suggest to people how it could get better.
In an election the main parties will be speaking about international policy, but the voter may well vote for the candidate who fixed the streetlight nearby.
Last edited:
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
I don't know where the 'nobility crap' is coming from, but there is a long and strong tradition in photography of 'documentary'.
We choose whether to photograph fields of pretty lavender, or fields of car wrecks.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Be fair: I did say it was reprehensible, though I should have said 'understandable' rather than 'reasonable'.
It's a common enough human reaction that there's a specific word for it in German, Schadenfreude.
And there's the old saying, 'pride goeth before a fall', which is not too far from the same thing.
Cheers,
R.
Berliner
Well-known
I don't think it's predatory... I just don't want to see another photo of a business man with his head in his hands, in front of a ticker-tape...
I'm off to complete my 'social unrest/post economic meltdown'-shelter...it's stocked with booze and ciggarettes...I mean canned goods and water...
I'm off to complete my 'social unrest/post economic meltdown'-shelter...it's stocked with booze and ciggarettes...I mean canned goods and water...
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
Speaking as a currently working pro press photographer and equally keen happy snapper I can only agree with the sentiment quoted above. There need be no distinction between pro and amateur if you have an urge to photograph something then do so, and to the best of your ability. If your images are telling they will be seen and if they are not they will be lost amongst those that are.
Photography is a language, so speak and try to speak eloquently
Gumby
Mentor
On the financial front... I think you might be right, Fred. But instead of the word "convinced" I would have used the word "duped". The sad thing is that the "money" most folks lost never was real money!
Nh3
-
The markets rallied today and it seems the worst of the financial crisis is over.
williams473
Well-known
I've just been laughing each day, not at the progressively dismal financial news, but at the horribly predictable photos agencies like AP run. If it's a good day, it's a group of frenetic brokers crowded together looking hopeful, if it's a bad day, it's the same group, but dispondent now, with their head in their hands or staring at some board of numbers in disbelief. News photography is the worst, just out in front of Sears portraits for originality. I wouldn't lose any sleep over not emulating the same boring stuff.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Gumby
Mentor
I'll bet it is really the same negative, they just flip it to go from 'happy' to 'sad', or 'sad' to 'happy'.
Chuck Albertson
Well-known
Quite right, and I think photographing the current economic turmoil takes a lot of imagination. Bank runs are done over the phone or on-line these days, so you rarely see people lined up outside branches to withdraw their money. The same for people watching the stock ticker.
If I lived in the Southwest, I'd be photographing some of the instant ghost towns that sprung up during the junk-mortgage frenzy---they look like those faux neighborhoods the government built on the Nevada Test Range for atomic bomb tests, and they well illustrate what happened the past few years. Look for details, like the eviction notice on the door of a small business that went bust, or "Price reduced!" stickers on real estate for-sale signs.
You can always shoot a photo of someone carrying a box filled with their personal effects out of an office building, whether you upset the person or not, but after a while one looks pretty much like the rest. If you want to put a face on it, find someone who's working two or three jobs just to make the rent, and get to know them.
Nh3
-
With all honesty I'm sick and tired of this whole financial crisis thing. A month ago everything was fine and now suddenly the media is trying to make this look like the end of the world. Every small layoff, every drop in the stock market, even closing of a freaking toy company in china is headline news now.
Yes, there is a crisis but its not the end of the world. Why the media is so full of **** and sensationalistic trying to blow this crisis out of proportion and mostly for political reasons is beyond me. Yes, there is a crisis, but the response by almost everyone out there is disgraceful and tantamount to hysterical overreaction.
Yes, there is a crisis but its not the end of the world. Why the media is so full of **** and sensationalistic trying to blow this crisis out of proportion and mostly for political reasons is beyond me. Yes, there is a crisis, but the response by almost everyone out there is disgraceful and tantamount to hysterical overreaction.
FrankS
Registered User
You obviously don't own any stocks.
This is a big deal, and millions of people's lives are/will be effected.
This is a big deal, and millions of people's lives are/will be effected.
pesphoto
Mentor
Nh3
-
The market has been going up and down like a new bride's pantie for a month and now, and if "Joe the plumber" still has not sold all his stocks and wishes to make a quick buck in this sort of market then I hope he loses everything.
People used to work hard and make money, then they played the stock market and suddenly feel that they're entitled to make money on the stock market which is basically gambling.
... I'm beginning to have second thoughts about my original idea when I started this thread.
Last edited:
Fedia
-
I think in order make a successful photography in such situations, besides the other skills of a good photojournalist is very important the innocent appearance of a photographer itself and the use of small, inconspiquous equipment is crucial as well.