No picture
"Nicholas Neville, 7, shields his face in an act of embarrassment from the camera before rapidly changing his mind, as he plays in leaves in Whiteford, Md., Tuesday, Nov. 9, 2010."I've been trying to meet up with friend's and family before heading back to Utah on Monday.
Yesterday was no exception as I ventured up north to K's sister's house for dinner. I was early, so I spent 20 minutes hanging out with her nephew, Nicholas, who at the time was playing in the leaves with his bike.
It's funny how a seven-year-old's personality can change in a heartbeat. The minute I walked up he wanted nothing to do with me making pictures of him. But almost instantly, he was all about posing and acting goofy. He wanted nothing more than to be showered by the attention of my lens.
During editing of the take, the above picture reminded me of an image I took last year of a kid a moment after he crashed his bicycle. It's almost scary how familiar these two pictures are. The above being a reaction to my camera - shielding of the face in act of embarrassment - while the latter was another spontaneous moment where pain following a crash was the focus of the picture.
The two pictures got me thinking about our presence as photographers during assignments. Obviously the above was a reaction to my presence, which I guess you can say, I influenced the reaction. But for the latter, would the kid have continued to jump his bike if I wasn't there? What if I wasn't shooting pictures at the time, would he had landed it? Would he have covered his face during the crash if I wasn't there?
At what point do we change what happens simply by being there as a documenter of the scene?
As my friend Monica said, we are apart of these moments, but have some say in how much we are, our approach and actions can dictate that. And when we feel the action has been done solely for our sake in an image, then it's left on the cutting room floor.
It's something to think about. There are many variables and the topic can be discussed to no end in my opinion. In the meantime, we as photojournalists continue uphold strong ethics and continually police ourselves. But that shouldn't stop us from still taking pictures of moments that happen, whether they're publishable or not in the newspaper world.
Thoughts?
posted by Patrick Smith at 1:11 AM
3 Comments:
Hey Patrick. This is a really good topic.
When I was younger I thought the "fly on the wall" approach was the only real way to work as a photojournalist. But what I started realizing is that telling people to "just ignore me," made everyone a little uncomfortable. -- including me.
That's just me. Of course the fly on the wall approach -- or the FOTWA -- works beautifully for some people. What I've noticed is that those people have a much quieter presence.
As a working photographer, It's important to understand how you effect a crowd. This will ultimately give you an idea how you can effectively do your job. Me, I'm a big, beardy guy. I'm hard to "just ignore." And if I really try to act invisible I become that creepy beardy guy with the cameras in the corner. AND NOBODY WANTS TO GIVE THAT GUY THEIR NAME.
The important thing to remember is be WHO YOU ARE while you're working. Nobody respects a fake, am I right?
So, If you're quiet and unassuming and can blend in with the furniture, so to speak, then theFOTWA probably works best for you. But if you walk into a room and everyone cranes their head to look at you, because you have such a LOUD PRESENCE introduce yourself, ask questions, be nice, tell a few jokes, and get in there. be part of the mix.
Now, will being part of the mix effect the subjects and the scene? of course. But make your case known. I actually started using a line you introduced to me, Patrick. I ask the subjects to "act like I don't have a camera." So, what that means is, acknowledge I'm here, feel free to talk to me (read: don't ignore me) but when I start making pictures just keep doing whatever it is you were doing. What I've found is that they get over having a photographer on scene much faster. ...and it's not as weird.
Here's the bottom line. Our job is to record history, not recreate it. So, as long as you're not asking someone to do redo something, or HEAVEN FORBID, fake something, you're fine. But the truth is, the reality of the situation was altered the moment you said, "Hi, my name's Patrick Smith... I'm here to make some pictures" It's no big deal. Your job is to make sure its as real as it can be.
Hey Patrick. This is a really good topic.
When I was younger I thought the "fly on the wall" approach (or the FOTWA) was the only real way to work as a photojournalist. But what I started realizing is that telling people to "just ignore me," made everyone a little uncomfortable. -- including me.
As a working photographer, It's important to understand how you effect a crowd. This will ultimately give you an idea how you can effectively do your job. Me, I'm a big, beardy guy. I'm hard to "just ignore." And if I really try to act invisible I become that creepy beardy guy with all those cameras in the corner. AND NOBODY WANTS TO GIVE THAT GUY THEIR NAME.
So, If you're quiet, unassuming and can blend in with the furniture, so to speak, then theFOTWA probably works best for you. But if you walk into a room and everyone cranes their head to look at you, because you have such a LOUD PRESENCE introduce yourself, ask questions, be nice, tell a few jokes, and get in there. be part of the mix.
Now, will being part of the mix effect the subjects and the scene? of course. So will the FOTWA. But make your case known. I actually started using a line you introduced to me, Patrick. I ask the subjects to "act like I don't have a camera." It lets the subjects acknowledge I'm here, and that they should feel free to talk to me (read: don't ignore me) but when I start making pictures to just keep doing whatever it is they were doing. What I've found is that they get over having a photographer in their face much faster. ...and it's not as weird.
Here's the bottom line. Our job is to record history, not recreate it. So, as long as you're not asking someone to do redo something, or HEAVEN FORBID, fake something, you're fine. But the truth is, the reality of the situation was altered the moment you said, "Hi, my name's Patrick Smith... I'm here to make some pictures" It's no big deal. Just keep it as real as you can.
Matt,
Thanks for the reply. I totally agree with you. David and I talked about it last night and the conclusion was that this post was driven by me "thinking like a newspaper photographer."
Simply put, the child in the leaves made me feel really uncomfortable because he hid from me being there with a camera. And it rightfully should make me feel that way due to the ethics we uphold everyday at work. But that shouldn't stop us from still documenting the moments that occur whether done because of our presence or not. Much is the same if some blatantly said, "take my picture." Our ethics tell us not to take the picture, but what should stop us from still snapping one even if we know it's "wrong" and it's not going to be transmitted or published?
Post a Comment
<< Home