to die for?
Greg Locke
...forwarded with Keith's approval.
>Return-Path: <mori...@direct.ca>
>Date: Sun, 28 Sep 1997 12:33:06 -0700
>To: Greg Locke <greg....@nf.sympatico.ca>
>From: Keith Morison <mori...@direct.ca>
>Subject: Re: to die for?
>
>>At 08:58 PM 27/09/97 -0700, Keith wrote:
>>
>>> To the point -
>>> I entered both single images and a multi-pic in a POY contest.
>>>During the open judging of afterthe furstcuts were made, I noticed that
>>>none of these images made it this far, even though there were only about a
>>>dozen ttal entries in multi-pic.
>>> When I asked one of the judges about this he responded that the
>>>pictures were obviously taken at a mock battle and therefore did not count,
>>>and were thrown out because of this. He also said - after looking at my
>>>portfolio - that the pix I have in the portfolio should be removed for the
>>>same reason. It should be clear that at no time had I ever tried to pass
>>>these off as being 'live war action.'
>>>
Greg replied:
>> On this point alone. I think the logic is that it is not NEWS
>>photography if it is pictures of a staged event. Even though, in the broad
>>category, it was about people in your community undergoing "professional
>>training". It is no different then going to a theatre performance...
>>
>> This could have potential if you are doing a FEATURE essay about the
>>theatre itself, but not if its portrayed as a normal daily event.
>> It's all in the approach taken with the story.
>>Having not seen your pictures I can't comment on the actual work.
>>
>>regards,
>>Greg
Keith followed with:
>Greg,
> Please understand that I was not looking for comment on the work,
>neither was I saying that the images deserved a top three placing in the
>POY.
> Also understand that it was the WCNPA POY, where is basically one
>multi-picture category and the Ted Grant picture-story category (which was
>designed to promote on-going personal projects.) This means that news,
>feature, and sports multi-pic packages are judged together. The pictures
>are judged with brief captions read, which clearly indicated that it was an
>excersise.
> as far as being a staged event ... I disagree with the analogy of
>the theatre. The event was not staged to show off the skills of the
>soldiers, rather to test the skills. Beyond the media, there were no
>members of the public there, nor wasthere any 'brass' beyond the base
>commander there. This was not an event for show. The media was invited
>along to improve the perception of what the forces do in our area.
> Had you likened it to an inter-squad game at the end of hockey
>training camp I would have agreed with you. A photo spread on training camp
>woud - at most papers, I beleive- run in the sports pages where a photo
>spread on professional wrestling would and should not.
> As far as staged events not being news ... does that mean that
>press conferances, rallys, marches, pickets, demonstrations and the like
>are not news? I guess more people work for feature papers than newspapers
>these days. I guess the house that was burned down by an arson is not news
>either.
> But this is the general point I am getting at - what make s a news
>photographer a news photographer. In the course of working at a daily a
>newspaper photographer will shoot EVP's and person with thing pictures,
>cute kid features, the local fair, tons of sporting events, and a
>smattering of spot news. Very rarely in the line of work does a newspaper
>photographer risk their life.And the reality of it all is that the vast
>majority of work for dailies is of staged events or even of events we have
>staged ourselves (can you hold your cat that almost drowned for me?)
> In many ways I've often thought the term photo-journalist a bit
>pretensious. But it is surely so if it is meant to imply that you will risk
>your life for the pictures AND that people who toil away documenting every
>day life don't count. Just think of what would happen to the CAJ if the
>same rules applied to our word based counterparts.
>
>cheers,
>
>Keith Morison
>freelance newspaper photographer
>Vancouver BC Canada
>p.s.
>Greg, I noted thatyoudid not mail this to thelist ... I think the
>discussion is of interest (perhaps I am wrong) and I would ask you to
>forward this to the list.(as ithas your response and my re-buttal)
>
>ALSO, if you want to get more of an idea about me andwhere I am coming
>from, visit my on-line portfolio at http://www.docker.com/~morisonk any
>comments would be appreciated in a private e-mail.
>
>
>
Greg Locke 2 Mullocke St
greg....@nf.sympatico.ca St. John's, Newfoundland
greg...@ibm.net Canada A1C 2R5
(I would show you the safety features...but we have none!)
Ken Koller
>The statement made on nightline that news photographers (or was that
>photojournalists)cover events that may get them killed has made me start to
>wonder about where people draw the line.
Again, why I didn't think the Nightline piece was all that realistic. I
doubt that 90% of photojournalists in this country will ever find
themselves in the "line of fire" in some war zone, or even put in a
situation where there is a chance they will get killed. (Of course you can
get nailed with a field hockey ball and get killed, you know what I mean)
The heart of photojournalism is the small daily paper, the guy who works 50
hours a week for less money than he deserves, and never gets any
recognition. Yet, according to Nightline, "photojournalists" are all now
are these gritty, tough people who photograph only war, famine, and put
their lives on the line everytime they go out to shoot.
> How do others feel about this? Do we chop our community into
>Photojournalists, news photographers, and other sub-cultures? Does a
>tourist taking a snapshot become a photjournalist when they almost get
>run-over by a car?
I think too many times, a photographer is judged on how many stamps he has
on his passport. We've all argued this before, how International subjects
seem to win the awards, get the attention, while Joe Small-town is lost in
the shadow of the big guys. The profession for me is definately segregated
into these catergories, and a few others. Just becuase your press card says
Sigma and you have more frequent flyer miles this year than I do in my
life, doesn't mean that the photography the little people do isn't any less
important to them of their subjects. Personally, I think a photog, who's
covers his community very well, is much more of an asset than someone who
goes somewhere to shoot people they won't ever see again, a nameless
subject before moving on to the next world hotspot.
Tom Burton
In a message dated 09/28/97 12:12:50 AM, mori...@DIRECT.CA wrote:
>When I asked one of the judges about this he responded that the
>pictures were obviously taken at a mock battle and therefore did not count,
>and were thrown out because of this. He also said - after looking at my
>portfolio - that the pix I have in the portfolio should be removed for the
>same reason. It should be clear that at no time had I ever tried to pass
>these off as being 'live war action.'
> It was an assignment from my city desk, that was about people that
>live in our area doing something different in a neighboring community
>(inside our delivery area.) This is what I feel working at a daily is all
>about. (not neccisarily what it SHOULD be all about, but that's another
>topic.)
> How do others feel about this? Do we chop our community into
>Photojournalists, news photographers, and other sub-cultures? Does a
>tourist taking a snapshot become a photjournalist when they almost get
>run-over by a car?
Your photos seemed to have served the primary purpose - showing the readers
something that is happening in the community. If they don't fit into a
photojournalism contest then, so what? There's more to life.
As far as subdiving the community of photographers - it happens continuosly.
Note the recent hand-wringing over the papparazzi distinction. And the
question of what is a White House photographer. Or are you a "real" news
photographer is you do illustrations. We love to catgorize. And then
sometimes we find something that doesn't fit our preconceived ideas and we
are confused. Hence the platypus . . .
Tom Burton
The Orlando Sentinel
Steven Frischling
I'd have to say something said a while ago, contests are offen "pissing
matches" of what is and is not a valid photo. Although I do however
aspire to win a Pulitzer one of these days? Why? Probably so I can
make my Mom & Pop proud since they always ask when I am going to choose
a real career. ("Hey we saw your A.P. Photo of the President & First
Lady in The Times this morning, it's is great your hobby lets you go to
those place"....explaining my job is like smacking my head with a
brick--If my hobby pays over $28.5k a year on average what should a
fulltime job pay?)
I almost never enter photo contests, although I have had my images
entered by others, such as an agency or publication. I have had some
odd expierences with contests. You said that your photo was rejected
because it was an exercize, I had the opposite. An agency submitted
about 6 photos to a contest for Rescue-Disaster images, 5 photos were
taken durring actual rescues, including photos of USCG rescuers over a
stack of body bags the night TWA 800 crashed just outside the morge,
these men(boys really) are holding each other and holding in tears, a
few shots were taken inside or on the roof of structure fires......the
photo that was selected and won the contest was taken durring an airport
crash rescue drill. The whole event was set up, and the images
presented as a staged-drill event. It won for best representation of
rescuer at work. Maybe my stand point, I'd prefer to see someone elses
bad photo durring a real event selected that my good photo of a staged
event in this catagory.
Photography is not about what is real, but what is seen and or
envisioned. PhotoJOURNALISM is about what is seen and what is reality.
If the photo shows the story & is dynamic & you are happy it is a winner
photo. If the photo informs and shows what is taking place it is a
winner. In your case if it shows the strengths and the weeknesses of
what the young soldiers are to face when they leave the training ground,
and it is presented as a mock-event, then if the photo is dynamic I do
believe that it should be allowed to be judged.
For the Pictures of the World contest (on AOL) I entered 8 photos, 5
were photos that required I put myself in danger in one way or another,
the photo that placed 3rd is taken of a little girl at a Memorial Day
Parade about 10 blocks from my front door. It was in my backyard , no
danger, no risk, no real story, but it happens to be one of my favourite
photos.
Contests are what you make of them, and how much stock you want to put
in someone elses opinion of your work for the purpose of granting a
prize. Photography to me is personal.
Sorry for the rambling
Happy Hunting Y'all (or place politicaly correct ending here)
Steven E. Frischling
Freelance Photojournalist
New York City
1(800)662-5306
-No One Gets Out Alive, It's Only Life After All
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com