Shouldn’t your intent be to visually advance the story for the reader and not disorient them. I can see how Matt finds the composition interesting and likes the color but the images fails to communicate anything about foreclosure. I love ya Erik, but I got no love for this image.
Not necessarily Carson, because I believe the image can be as much about the photographer as it is the subject. Maybe a publication should just run a picture of a house with a foreclosure sign in the front as to make sure the viewer has no chance of visually interpreting the image for him/herself.
When it’s about the photographer it’s art and not photojournalism. I’m not saying a photojournalist has to shoot visually simplistic photos to communicate. You can make an artistic image that communicates. The best photos seamlessly combine the vision of the photographer and the content of the subject matter they’re covering to effectively convey the story. Photojournalist should put their own egos aside and realize it’s not about them. It’s about communicating and if the photo fails to do that it doesn’t work.
Comments 7
Not entirely sure why, but this really appeals to me. Very nice.
Posted 31 Jul 2008 at 9:19 pm ¶Not entirely sure why, but I really like this. Interesting composition and nice color I suppose.
Posted 01 Aug 2008 at 1:31 pm ¶Thanks Matthew. My intent was to disorient a viewer with a tilted horizon and jarring lines. I hope it conveys that message.
Posted 03 Aug 2008 at 3:30 pm ¶Shouldn’t your intent be to visually advance the story for the reader and not disorient them. I can see how Matt finds the composition interesting and likes the color but the images fails to communicate anything about foreclosure. I love ya Erik, but I got no love for this image.
Posted 06 Aug 2008 at 8:42 pm ¶Not necessarily Carson, because I believe the image can be as much about the photographer as it is the subject. Maybe a publication should just run a picture of a house with a foreclosure sign in the front as to make sure the viewer has no chance of visually interpreting the image for him/herself.
Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 9:06 pm ¶When it’s about the photographer it’s art and not photojournalism. I’m not saying a photojournalist has to shoot visually simplistic photos to communicate. You can make an artistic image that communicates. The best photos seamlessly combine the vision of the photographer and the content of the subject matter they’re covering to effectively convey the story. Photojournalist should put their own egos aside and realize it’s not about them. It’s about communicating and if the photo fails to do that it doesn’t work.
Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 9:47 pm ¶A thoughtful and persuasive argument. Well said, David.
Posted 07 Aug 2008 at 10:12 pm ¶Post a Comment