Joop Swart Masterclass, Tom Kennedy write up
Written by duckrabbitMy own views about the power and benefits of multimedia fusions of still photography with audio and video were challenged by others who claimed that film, print media, and gallery walls still afforded more creative control over content messages and superior aesthetics to that offered by digital media. While I see multimedia fusions as opening the possibilities for deeper, more complex story narratives, some of my fellow masters saw the fusions as degradations of the intentionality of still photography when practiced by highly skilled professionals. Tom Kennedy
Author — duckrabbit
duckrabbit is a production company formed by radio producer/journalist Benjamin Chesterton and photographer David White. We specialize in digital storytelling.
Discussion (4 Comments)
Very interesting, but for all the wrong reasons, imho.
“Another set of pitfalls they see is the torrent of visual images produced by amateurs or professionals of limited talent in the current environment. As Giorgia said, the glut of bad images flowing across the world daily, “threatens to cancel our history.” Her concerns were echoed by others who expressed concern about the intentionality of the photographers and whether or not they had any kind of social awareness of how their work was actually shaping the audience’s view of the world.
Implicit in this view is the idea that quality storytelling offering a fuller view of our contemporary history can only be provided by professionals. Such photographers have made it their life’s work to master the craft of photography and bear witness effectively to the key moments in life’s unceasing flow so that the audience can learn fundamental truths about the human condition from their images. Anything less from a content or aesthetic perspective contributes to visual pollution that threatens to obscure a clear view of our current reality as a species profoundly shaping this planet’s future possibilities.”
He then goes on to say that the above may seem elitist. May? MAY? ‘Our history is being cancelled because too many amateurs and poor pros are taking pics’? What utter nonsense. Arrogant, pompous nonsense. There are also suggestions that pro photographers are above the internet, as pics look a lot better on gallery walls. maybe they do, but where’s your bloody audience? And why, why oh why do all these photojournalists think it’s all about them, their bloody ‘vision’, their non existent careers, their superior way of telling you the same old same old? IT ISN”T. It’s about the story, stupid. I don’t care how a story gets to me. I want the story, whether delivered by a pro, an amateur, or a one legged myopic monkey.
There you have it..they are not listening to you unless you are a talented pro: “Anything less from a content or aesthetic perspective contributes to visual pollution that threatens to obscure a clear view of our current reality as a species profoundly shaping this planet’s future possibilities.”
Honestly. You couldn’t make it up. Gave me a good laugh though, so I’m grateful for that.
I read this whole thing earlier on and was really quite shocked by some of the views expressed in that group. This is meant to be the creme of young photojournalists plucked from all over the world yet they come across as so ignorant, and yes arrogant. They all sound about a hundred years old…total luddites.
I find the argument about only shooting film ridiculous…horses for courses, use what you want, but surely it’s the message and not the medium that should count.
To be hung up on the idea of books and galleries at the expense of other media forms…well in the journalism side of the photography business it’s just daft. Like he says in the piece, it makes you wonder who people are photographing for, and the answer is clearly their own ego. If you’re covering issues that matter and people are trusting you with their stories, then I think you have a duty to get your work seen by as many people as possible. I’m talking about journalism here, obviously. Otherwise, what’s the point?
To be hostile to multimedia…well we all know that’s just stupid.
And to moan about amateurs? FFS. what an ignorant waste of breath. just get on with your own thing, stop looking from side to side and quit the bitching
ok, just realised he’s talking about the teachers and not the students.
sorry students 🙁
well, if these are the attitudes of photojournalism teachers today then heaven help us
I think to be fair some of the concerns about using digital platforms are about them being (or perceived as) more constricted in their ability to present images.
‘…the highly-templated approach of image presentation in digital formats like websites, pointing to the “click and move” sequencing of images that characterize so many slideshows and image groupings. They saw the groupings offered in print and on gallery walls as affording more opportunity to shape eye flow and place emphasis on specific images within a sequence, thereby perhaps deepening and clarifying the content message of the photography in a more profound way.’
This would appear to be a technical issue, which should be easily overcome. Whether based in snobbery or fear I can’t say.
Although I agree with you all that there appears to be a high level of elitist protectionist snobbery displayed here, and that multi-media has potential for better communication of issues, it is worth noting that digital platforms, and to some extent ‘citizen journalism’, remain the preserves of relatively well off middle classes. As such, hard copy prints can reach a wider, less economically well off audience. An example of this is the work done by Drik in producing exhibitions in public spaces frequented by working class communities. Not that this is the reason the reason the ‘masters’ were moaning…
Rob
The Rights Exposure Project