Post by: OmerV on February 02, 2019, 07:17:20 am
The author starts by giving a date to the beginning of photojournalism which can be debated but it is a quibble. It just facilitates framing the essay into a manageable space.
By way of The Online Photographer:
https://witness.worldpressphoto.org/photojournalisms-first-century-79645873e363
Post by: RSL on February 02, 2019, 07:46:24 am
Post by: OmerV on February 02, 2019, 09:39:07 am
Interesting stuff, Omer. Unfortunately it's a bottomless argument.
Well Russ, I guess photojournalism in your part of the country is good and thriving, but here in Tucson it is a ghost of what it was.
The conglomerate news media owners are responsible and the sad part is that most folks seem not to care.
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 02, 2019, 09:57:02 am
It usually helps one’s post to quote a paragraph that encapsulares the point.
Post by: RSL on February 02, 2019, 10:33:14 am
Well Russ, I guess photojournalism in your part of the country is good and thriving, but here in Tucson it is a ghost of what it was.
The conglomerate news media owners are responsible and the sad part is that most folks seem not to care.
I think real photojournalism died back in the days when the great mags like Life and Look went tits up. It's never been able to recover. In a lot of ways, WW II was the apex. Photojournalism during that period was a mountain that overshadowed everything that followed. I still remember riding my bike down the streets in the middle of the night loaded with copies of the Detroit News, yelling "Extra... extra... read all about it." The photographers who covered that war, guys like Gene Smith, were giants who made their followers look like midgets. Though there were later revivals: things like HCB's coverage of Ghandi's funeral. But it was all downhill from there.
Post by: OmerV on February 02, 2019, 11:04:08 am
I think real photojournalism died back in the days when the great mags like Life and Look went tits up. It's never been able to recover. In a lot of ways, WW II was the apex. Photojournalism during that period was a mountain that overshadowed everything that followed. I still remember riding my bike down the streets in the middle of the night loaded with copies of the Detroit News, yelling "Extra... extra... read all about it." The photographers who covered that war, guys like Gene Smith, were giants who made their followers look like midgets. Though there were later revivals: things like HCB's coverage of Ghandi's funeral. But it was all downhill from there.
I disagree, Russ, but it may not matter now. Still, I'm sure younger photogs will find a way to interest people on photojournalism again, even if the likes of you and I don't recognize it as such.
Too long.
It usually helps one’s post to quote a paragraph that encapsulares the point.
But Slobodan, you're not running the show. ::)
Post by: Patricia Sheley on February 02, 2019, 11:24:43 am
Post by: OmerV on February 02, 2019, 07:08:56 pm
There was the largely unknown by name, Ernest Withers, but those indelible Till era memories likely would not exist outside of the Memphis area without his photojournalist work. Yet, and I'm also feeling, that may be in part because he himself was black; his work was passionately excellent.
I had not heard of Ernest Withers until now. And you are correct Patricia, his work is very good(looked him up.) The cut of photojournalism job opportunities may, unfortunately, impact "minorities" and women in particular.
Post by: petermfiore on February 03, 2019, 08:50:11 am
The cut of photojournalism job opportunities may, unfortunately, impact "minorities" and women in particular.
How is that? Curious why you see it that way. To me it's a universal issue.
Peter
Post by: jeremyrh on February 03, 2019, 10:15:48 am
I think real photojournalism died back in the days when the great mags like Life and Look went tits up. It's never been able to recover. In a lot of ways, WW II was the apex. Photojournalism during that period was a mountain that overshadowed everything that followed. I still remember riding my bike down the streets in the middle of the night loaded with copies of the Detroit News, yelling "Extra... extra... read all about it." The photographers who covered that war, guys like Gene Smith, were giants who made their followers look like midgets. Though there were later revivals: things like HCB's coverage of Ghandi's funeral. But it was all downhill from there.
As I mentioned elsewhere, there is a new exhibition here in London of the work of Don McCullin. I don't see him as a "midget" in any sense.
Post by: RSL on February 03, 2019, 10:43:27 am
The problem with war coverage is that war on the ground is always the same. I see McCullin doing a rerun of Gene Smith's rough, dirty-looking soldier, and I realize MdCullin isn't trying to ape Smith; he's simply recording what's there. But the Gene Smith picture that sticks in my mind is the one of the Marine holding the dying baby. I've never seen another combat photographer produce anything as striking and heartrending as that one.
Post by: OmerV on February 03, 2019, 12:21:45 pm
How is that? Curious why you see it that way. To me it's a universal issue.
Peter
If you are suggesting by 'universal issue' as being inclusive without exception of gender and race, then, if only you were right. The revelations last year of abuse by photographers suggests our industry is too slow in acknowledging its homogenized hegemony. Of course there are exceptions, yet even here at LuLa, women are woefully under represented.
NOTE: I'm not asking for debate on the lack of female participation within LuLa. That issue deserves its own separate Coffee Corner forum topic.
Post by: petermfiore on February 03, 2019, 12:37:42 pm
If you are suggesting by 'universal issue' as being inclusive without exception of gender and race, then, if only you were right. The revelations last year of abuse by photographers suggests our industry is too slow in acknowledging its homogenized hegemony. Of course there are exceptions, yet even here at LuLa, women are woefully under represented.
NOTE: I'm not asking for debate on the lack of female participation within LuLa. That issue deserves its own separate Coffee Corner forum topic.
Universal means all...At least in my world it does.
Peter
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 03, 2019, 12:56:20 pm
... NOTE: I'm not asking for debate on the lack of female participation within LuLa...
Don't think of an elephant... don't think of an elephant... don't think of an elephant...
The solutions is simple, really. From now on, all posts on LuLa must be 50% by women. Voila!
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on February 03, 2019, 01:23:00 pm
The solutions is simple, really. From now on, all posts on LuLa must be 50% by women. Voila!
I foresee difficulties with enforcement, Slobodan. Alternate words, perhaps?
Jeremy
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on February 03, 2019, 02:13:18 pm
The solutions is simple, really. From now on, all posts on LuLa must be 50% by women. Voila!I believe that half of my genetic material was supplied by a person of the female persuasion.
Does that mean I'm qualified to comment? ???
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on February 03, 2019, 02:51:36 pm
... Alternate words, perhaps?
Alternate worlds? ;)
Post by: Rob C on February 03, 2019, 03:06:17 pm
Post by: jeremyrh on February 03, 2019, 03:23:45 pm
Hi Jeremy,
The problem with war coverage is that war on the ground is always the same. I see McCullin doing a rerun of Gene Smith's rough, dirty-looking soldier, and I realize MdCullin isn't trying to ape Smith; he's simply recording what's there. But the Gene Smith picture that sticks in my mind is the one of the Marine holding the dying baby. I've never seen another combat photographer produce anything as striking and heartrending as that one.
Well, maybe Mcullin would agree with you. From today's paper, in interview with DM and Giles Duley:
Looking to the future of photography now, we are a culture saturated in images: are mobile phones and Instagram a menace?
DMcC Not a menace at all. Take the white helmets who risked their lives in Syria: phones were the only means of us getting information out. Photojournalism has had its day, though. When did you last see a really serious great set of pictures? Newspapers, even great newspapers, they’re almost running tabloid-type material of film stars and footballers and crap like that.
GD Photojournalism has died because the outlets are just not there, but photography has evolved into something else. Citizen journalism is great. It’s great that anyone can take a picture. “Image fatigue” is a phrase that gets used a lot, but I don’t think it’s true that people cannot still feel the impact of an image. You put me into a school, which I love, and I show one photograph and tell the story and you’ll see these 15-year-old kids in tears. It’s not that people have lost the ability to take imagery in, it’s that they see so much and out of context. But if you [look at] it in the right space, let people have that time, then a black-and-white photograph, with those eyes, somebody looking at you, it has the same impact it has always had.
Post by: Telecaster on February 03, 2019, 04:53:57 pm
-Dave-
Post by: Rob C on February 03, 2019, 05:58:40 pm
I just don't believe there will be little colonies of earnest seekers after truth spending time fighting the system, a system that, in the end, provides much of what keeps things going, if in different directions to those some may prefer. But it's the global movement, the kinetic energy that counts and keeps what there is functioning, not the little ripples of dissent. Unless, of course, things get to the level of Venezuela, or like that. By which time it's too late.
Post by: OmerV on February 03, 2019, 07:26:48 pm
That turns gathering news information - as reader - into hard work, and anything that's hard work gets put onto the back burner unless it's a hobby or sex.
I just don't believe there will be little colonies of earnest seekers after truth spending time fighting the system, a system that, in the end, provides much of what keeps things going, if in different directions to those some may prefer. But it's the global movement, the kinetic energy that counts and keeps what there is functioning, not the little ripples of dissent. Unless, of course, things get to the level of Venezuela, or like that. By which time it's too late.
Hmm, keeping this somewhat photographically, I'm reminded of the movie Mephisto with Klaus Maria Brandauer.
Post by: Alan Klein on February 03, 2019, 08:34:46 pm
They have a section called "Lens" https://www.nytimes.com/section/lens
NYT twitter https://twitter.com/nytimesphoto?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
Post by: Ivophoto on February 04, 2019, 02:36:20 am
NOTE: I'm not asking for debate on the lack of female participation within LuLa. That issue deserves its own separate Coffee Corner forum topic.
Soon as you started this topic I will add my 5 Cents.
Post by: OmerV on February 04, 2019, 07:34:30 am
I think the NY Times still does a pretty good job with photojournalism and photo essays despite being somewhat biased.
They have a section called "Lens" https://www.nytimes.com/section/lens
NYT twitter https://twitter.com/nytimesphoto?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
Yep, the New York Times has kept photojournalism as an integral part of the publication. Unfortunately in smaller community news it seems not.