Five prominent photographers talk about the importance of film in a world of digital imaging. Speakers include: Steve McCurry, Chris Usher and John Sexton. Held at the Helen Hayes Theater in New York City on November 2, 2006.
Happy New Year. If you, like most people, were wrapped up in holiday planning the entire month of December, you might have missed that Time magazine has named “You” (I admit, it is a collective You, sorry) as the Person of the Year in 2006.
It is referring to Web 2.0 and web-generated content, saying “In 2006, the World Wide Web became a tool for bringing together the small contributions of millions of people and making them matter.”
On the cover was one of those mirror stickers that you see in some of the funnier Hallmark cards, you know, the kind where you can’t really see anything. I thought it was a cop out to name “us” with all the events of 2006. I imagined it would be a soldier, or a whole division of the military. I mean these guys and gals are being killed every day. If Time wanted to be edgy, by naming a collective group, how about all our troops or the troops’ families. Or someone crusading for peace. I think that would have been a more prudent choice.
Oh well, it can’t be undone. It’s us. It’s all of us that contribute to citizen journalism in some form which includes bloggers, of which many of us have started in 2006 or have commented on or read, at the very least. I still feel uneasy about the designation though. For one, there was no prize, no awards show, no fancy dinner or a big check. Second, I feel uncomfortable being looked upon as a collective anything, especially by a group of editors that no doubt are part of the “You” too. I feel like part of the borg on Star Trek, The Next Generation.
Perhaps participating in the information age has meant success to one-time start ups like YouTube and MySpace, but has it really made our world a better place?
In our case, the photography industry, like the entire media profession, is very affected by the way the information tide is turning. Nobody really knows if the ease of getting or seeing photos on whatever and sharing them online will help or hurt us. For now, the popularity of the image, whether moving or still, is the glue that is making communities stick to their computer screens and adding to the success of citizen journalism as a whole. Oh, and congrats on your win. -a.s.
Do you ever catch yourself looking at a photo covered in tragedy and think it’s beautiful. I felt guilty when I saw an exhibit on Hurricane Katrina at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City last weekend. Robert Polidori’s large chromogenic print series called, “After the Flood,” was the most artistic work I’ve seen to come out of the disaster. Usually, I’m not fond of post-disaster photos posing as art. Many times you can still see traces of death. But the exhibit of 20 near-life-size color photos taken between September 2005 and April 2006 was different for me. It was cathartic and full of symbolism.
Drawing upon his background as one of the world’s premier architectural photographers, the photos were all taken with a large-format camera and close attention was given to composition. Going address to address (each print is named after the home’s or debris’ address), Polidori used ambient light and long exposures to encapsulate the mood of heaviness in the air, paralleling the heaviness of heart felt by those affected by the disaster.
While the photographer has an accompanying 331-page book of the same name, the platform of display on the grand museum walls really highlighted the beauty found in the details of tragedy. “After the Flood” is exhibited at the Howard Gilman Gallery now through Dec. 10. The small gallery was filled to capacity the entire two hours I spent there. Onlookers seemed shocked at the bounds of destruction and sometimes stared at any one photo for minutes.
The exhibit is a journey through the leftovers of human existence in homes that have become like other planets - inhabitable ones at that. I felt a little odd looking at people’s most personal effects, without their knowledge, like a noisy neighbor. But you begin to realize that despite the obvious absence of people in every photo, the belongings help you put a face or personality with each home. The personals give the photos their true meaning and depth. When you realize this, it is moving.
A definite comment on the “fragility of life,” the exhibit is also a celebration of the resilience and immortality of human beings - of their souls and personalities through the survival of their artifacts. Belongings such as clothing, toys, religious mementos, framed photos, cereal boxes and board games were magnified on the huge prints. The enlargement of the possessions and their randomness throughout showed how each homeowner may have suffered financially, emotionally or even physically. The tumble of furniture, rotting wallboards, mud-caked upholstery, phones left off the hook and stopped clocks, seemed to tell the story of a bigger picture though - the story of the power of nature over man.
Despite the gray coating of debris on just about everything, the prints had leaps of vivacious color provided by a very strange source. The rich colors came from the existence of mold, as it climbed up the walls of bedrooms, kitchens and living rooms, in such vivid greens, pinks, yellows- it was as though artist Jackson Pollock had a hand in it. The toxic allure of the bright pathogen may symbolize the lure of New Orleans itself - and why many chose not to leave.
See the show if you can. To view photos from the exhibit, visit, http://www.metmuseum.org/special/new_orleans/images.asp
-.a.s.
Rising for Day 2 of the Expo was like having to eat a slice of warm homemade apple pie topped with vanilla ice cream - even with the lack of sleep. Out of my hotel window, a morning view of Times Square , with the pink hues of sunrise muting out the bright lights, was all the inspiration I needed. No cars were present, only a few people scurried to work on foot. I couldn’t wait to return to the photo utopia of PhotoPlus.
I was fresh off the previous night’s Kodak event at the Hayes Theater where pros talked about their latest projects to a crowd of about 100 feasting on Asian-inspired hors d’oeuvres. (listen to a podcast of the event soon). I stood armed with my podcasting equipment among white table linens covered with square white candles and rolls of film as centerpieces and listened to Steve McCurry, Chris Usher and John Sexton champion the use of film. And I was certain that film was not dead.
But today, I would find out that other greats were perfectly happy to completely transfer to digital and testify that the quality of their work has improved as a result. I admit I was shocked to hear famed-celebrity shooter Greg Gorman talk up digital at the Canon booth. At first, Gorman said, “I don’t think that digital makes you a good photographer,” adding that he looks for “cohesiveness” in student’s work. However, after he went through dozens of black and whites of the most famous people in the world, taken in a pre-digital age mostly with a Hasselblad, he pulled out the trick. A set of digital photos taken with the Canon M2 and 1DS. The crowd of spectators which overflowed onto the expo floor, listened carefully to his musings. I think many of us began to feel like we were parishioners ready to convert to a new digital religion. Still, Gorman himself wasn’t a convert until a few year’s ago. It was difficult to imagine that during the onset of digital in 1999, he thought the technology was “a good excuse for poor photography.”
According to Gorman, his sharp, poignant digital portraits with little or no background were able to look like that with little ambient light because of the quality of digital gear today. Reflecting on the first time he used the new Canon on a cloudy New York day, Gorman said, “I could not believe how digital saw light at such a low luminance…Film could never do that. Now I get the spontaneity of digital capture, with the quality of a 35 mm.”
Assignment Photographer Ami Vitale paralleled Gorman’s comments as she spoke about her projects around the world in the Nikon booth. She uses the Nikon D200 and D1X for her shots in war-torn countries and remote areas of the world. Vitale talked about the importance of keeping her shots organized when overseas and uses the online archiving software of Photoshelter, which exhibited at the Expo. She explained the benefits of using digital when you’re in the middle of India with one bag of gear. She only brings with her two bodies, two lenses and no tripod. At her talk, there was a question by a United Press International guy who had been in the previous day’s talk about HP’s alliance with the humanitarian organization CARE. Again, he asked the same question. Do villagers and tribal people sign releases or do they get a cut of her profits? Vitale answered, “No, I consider myself a journalist, not a commercial photographer.” The question is an interesting one though.
By the time I left the show floor to return to Washington , I began to feel that digital for professionals is here to stay. It is being used in place of traditional cameras and film by some of the best shooters in the world. But film is not dead either. The theme: we are lucky enough to be alive in a time when the medium and technology is evolving to something new. But just because we rent DVDs, doesn’t mean we stop listening to the radio.
As I walked off the floor for the last time and saw a picture-perfect view of the city’s skyline turning pink as the sun set, I thought about my first session of the day and how it changed my idea about what pictures could do. The session was “Watching the World Change: The Story of 9/11.” Photographers David Friend, John Labriola, Kelly Price and Jonathan Torgovik showed photos from that harrowing day on a theater-sized screen to a sobbing audience. As tears dripped onto my notepad, I realized I hadn’t gotten over the day, and neither had others. The photos taken by these photographers captured the last moments of many people. The speakers explained how photos offered catharsis for many of the victims’ family members.
Photographers are a special breed, they wear their hearts on their sleeves, and they enter each day like a sponge - absorbing all, whether good or bad - for the common cause of exposing life. I imagined the courage it took to hold the camera while descending the World Trade Center stairs on the morning of September 11, to photograph colleagues, firemen and employees, yet knowing that for some it would be their last picture. When you consider this, it’s not important which is better . . . film or digital. The important thing should always be the subject. (See Web site for the full story soon).
It’s been a whirlwind of a time since I hit the New York City pavement on Thursday at 9:48 a.m. , fresh off the 6:35 a.m. train out of Union Station in Washington , DC. The Jacob Javits Convention Center is crammed with the likes of all those who have an affiliation with photography, and I must say, it’s a wonderful thing.
It’s too bad this contained, imaging utopia isn’t real life though. For the place is a celebration of beauty, real life and the technology, retailers and educational institutions that get it to that level. Although it is still too early to predict the actual number of participants, I got word that management is indeed pleased with the turnout, with numbers exceeding last year.
I can attest that it is difficult to stroll on the exhibition floor as all lanes are crowded arm- to-arm with photographers, press, sales people and pr reps. Like tourists in a new city, many stroll the show with their eyes looking up, not paying attention to the road in front of them. There’s less a sense of buzz, but more a sense of intrigue with the products this year. People are eager to collect all the information that is humanly possible to stuff in the vendor-provided shopping bags.
The staff of Studio Photography and PTN magazines is here, including Editors Alice Miller and Diane Berkenfeld, who are, in their own right, queens of efficiency in the media-marinated marsh made up of hundreds of vendors.
Like peddlers pushing their wares, there’s something particularly old-fashioned about a show like this where people from all over actually get to talk to each other, without some kind of cyberspace connecting them. Participants actually get to chat and have good-ole traditional sit-downs. Ironically, all this conventional goodness takes place in the interstitial spaces within millions of dollars of cameras and technical equipment. The paradox seems to be akin to a world at peace.
A few of us had a tête-à-tête with Kostas Mallios, senior director for Microsoft’s office of the CTO and Rich Media Strategies. He explained their thrilling plans to roll out their Vista operating system by late January and IView by February. He called Vista “super stable” and added, “It took between 3 and 4,000 people working on this for five years to get it out and with good reason.” It will “blow out of the water” the concept that Microsoft is not “graphically sexy,” he said. Mallios named a number of well-known shooters, such as Steve McCurry, who have made the switch from Mac to PC with this technology.
Sinar Bron Imaging has modified its popular Sinarback 54 M to the Sinarback 54 MC model, according to the company’s Program Coordinator Jessica Conrad. Its new version, just put on the market, is actively cooled with Peltier and a fan, which prevents it from, “overheating,” she said. The fan also allows for a significant reduction in noise. Also, the Sinar Hy6, a joint venture with Franke & Heidecake and Jenoptic is set to be released in the U.S. by the early second quarter of 2007. The rolling body, medium-format camera covers the 6 x 4.5 and 6 x 6 formats.
Sony’s booth was a theater of organized chaos, with many camera samples to touch and feel. Impressive was the new Alpha series - a100 digital SLR camera. One of the highlights is a proximity focus, a lens that will focus no matter where it is placed.
A real hit was the LiveBooks booth. The company which creates editable portfolio Web sites for professional photographers had pros walk-through their sites with participants on big screens. They also offered portfolio reviews by reservation. “I can do everything with this,” photographer Colin Finlay said.
A large and colorful Adobe theater greets participants as they enter the show room floor. One course on tap Thursday was “Special Effects for Creative Professionals using Adobe Photoshop” presented by Photographer Seth Resnick. Adding to the event’s electricity, “I just arrived five minutes ago from the airport,” he said.
The sold out course sessions of the day: Light without Light and The Art of the Portrait.
Finally, the most moving part of my day: An announcement by the Hewlett-Packard (HP) Company that they have made an alliance with the humanitarian organization CARE. The group works to fight global poverty and has been working with HP in recent months to produce the “I am Powerful” exhibit. It’s a call-to-action campaign to help empower women in poverty around the world. See the full story in a future story on the new event.
Other highlights: Canon’s face-detection technology cameras that employ an algorithm to identify a face no matter what else is in the background, smaller cameras jamming in more mega pixels and GPS cameras that save the time and GPS locations of shots.
When I was 19 and in college, which was a while ago, I remember when a “real” model visited a friend of mine on campus. The model was beautiful and skinny. I noticed how the men looked at her, even my boyfriend. When we all ate in the college cafeteria, she would have a cup of tea and not much else. And the girl really smoked a lot. She told me it kept away the cravings. As innocent as it may seem, this is the first time it occurred to me how one could work to look like those girls on the cover of Vogue magazine. Was this beauty actually attainable, I wondered?
I was a cross country athlete and in good shape, but it never occurred to me to eat less and I could look better. This idea seemed to seep into my consciousness more and more. Finally, I tried to cut down on food. After few days, it became difficult to function in my busy life. I thought maybe if I took up smoking that could help. But I hated the smell of cigarettes and the way it made my hair, clothes and room smell. And I was a runner. A no-brainer, right? So I came to my senses and gave up trying to look like a model.
I’m older now and still love the beautiful photos in Vogue. But, I know this is just an ideal being portayed. A dream being sold. Many young women, however, get sucked in like I almost did.
A recent ban on skinny models during Madrid Fashion Week has brought to light this issue. The shocking move caused a media blitz last month. This is the first time in the world there’s been a ban like this. While spearheaded by the Spanish Association of Fashion Designers, the ban did not translate to fashion shows in London , Italy or Paris . Some in the U.S. were outraged by the ban.
Cathy Gould, of New York ’s Elite modeling agency, said the fashion industry was being used as a scapegoat for weight-related illnesses. “I understand they want to set this tone of healthy beautiful women but what about discrimination against the model and what about the freedom of the designer?” she asked, adding that the careers of naturally “gazelle-like” models could be damaged.
No photographers were quoted about the ban. I wondered why? Shouldn’t photographers get involved? Well, I recently surfed some pro-anorexia web sites. Here, girls swap “thinspiration” on how many hours or days they can make it without eating or eating very little. They also plaster fashion photos of rail thin models on the sites to inspire them. Some are completely gross. They post ad campaigns and photos of sub-zero size actresses too. Others put these photos on their cell phones for motivation. Here’s a real entry on one of the web sites:
“Every time I see some food, I look away. It’s hard, but when I feel weak, I look at a picture of Mischa Barton that I loaded on my mobile.”
It is difficult to know how exactly the “thin machine” gets perpetuated. What is easy is who has access to women susceptible to this disease. Photographers are in a unique position to spot problems and can be leaders on this issue.
In 2005, Adi Barkan, an Israeli photographer and model agent, became aware of the pervasiveness of anorexia when he interviewed 12,000 females, ages 13 to 24, in a televised search for Israel ’s next supermodel. He estimated that between 35 and 40 percent of the aspiring models were anorexic. This persuaded him to launch a crusade to combat it within his industry.
I will leave you with a Sept. 06 ad I found on Craigslist.org written by a U.S. photographer searching for “Extra Thin Models.” It should strike a nerve if you read between the carefully-crafted lines:
“Models Who Eat Carefully:
We live and work in a world focused on glamour, fashion and appearance. Many people have struggled with self-image issues that result in selective or restrictive eating.
As a fine art and professional photographer, I have many years’ experience of documenting peoples’ lives. This is a documentary project that seeks to–gently and with dignity—portray this silent struggle in the lives of everyday people.
Many people are timid about revealing this about themselves. However, if you restrict what you eat, or focus on not eating often, I would like to invite you to participate in this photography project. I am a professional, and approach my work and subjects with respect and dignity.
A few more details: All ages are welcome. No nudity is involved. All responses to this posting will be confidential. This is not a paid position; however, I always provide free professional prints, and possibly other photographic services, in thanks for your help.”- a.s.
When I learned that Annie Leibovitz came out with a new book and that it had pictures of her partner, the writer Susan Sontag, and her father after both had died I thought it sounded grim. For starters, I don’t much like seeing bodies at wakes. To capture it in pics for all posterity seemed distasteful at the very least. But I always admired her work and her judgment. So when I found out she was going to speak locally, at the D.C. bookstore, “Politics and Prose,” I had to go and hopefully get an answer as to why she took them and chose to publish them in “A Photographer’s Life, 1990-2005.” Moreover, I knew I’d finally get to see the pictures that reviewers were trying so hard NOT to talk about.
What a turnout. When I arrived more than an hour prior to the event, the 200 chairs were already filled in the tiny bookstore/coffeehouse and floor space for standing was limited. I managed to find a small plot up front and sat on the carpet. While waiting, I entertained myself by answering the questions of some cute over-60 ladies on how to work their digital cameras, how to turn the flash on, how to take it off, etc. I wondered if many knew what they were in for. Sure, they knew the artist took stunning portraits of celebrities, but did they know they would be getting to know the real Leibovitz. Why she took pictures of dead people she loved and put them in a book. I admit I was a woman obsessed. But the concept mesmerized me.
I sensed intuitively that this book was different from many of Leibovitz’s, something more personal and invasive. For starters, there were nudes of the photographer herself, done beautifully.
From my space, I had to twist my neck a bit to see the screen which undoubtedly would display her photos. Then, like a miracle, one of the ladies I was helping offered to give me the seat she was saving for a friend who was unable to make it. As I happily settled in, the store announced that they weren’t letting anybody else in. They were filled to capacity.
Now I have met mayors, a governor or two and even a U.S. president but I felt so excited for this event - in an intuitive way like I was about to be part of something rare and special and be inspired in a way that I hadn’t in a long time.
While waiting, I flipped through Leibovitz’s gigantic tome, so heavy they have to charge $75 for it. I turned the pages gingerly, careful not to touch the images themselves. Most of the personal work of her mother, father, sister, children and Sontag, was in black and white. That lent a certain dignity to it all since they were real people not stylized celebrities. The truth was there raw “in black and white” as they say. Most of the celebrity shots were in color. Maybe they needed color to be more genuine.
So about 6:55 p.m., in walked Leibovitz, unassuming, slight, quiet. She was dressed head to toe Manhattan chic. Black V-neck sweater, layered over a grey tee, black pants, rimmed glasses. She was slimmer than I imaged and seemed shyer.
Lucky for us, she would read selections from the intro in her book while showing slides on the wall. It took her a while to get comfortable. She needed a stool so she could see the screen. They 86′ed the obtrusive podium set up for her. She almost sat on the floor. Finally, they found her a chair so she could begin. I was hoping my answer would be on its way.
Just as she began, though, I flipped to the Sontag pics taken after she died from cancer. They were in color. Printed small . . . in a contact sheet style . . . in a series. The 71-year-old Pulitzer Prize-winning author looked peaceful and stunning. It showed her lying on a bier, wearing makeup and a favorite dress she bought in Milan. I imagined what it would be like to be with Sontag as she lay there motionless. To spend time with her in that way, taking some time to say goodbye and pose her for her last photo?
I thought about this too as I saw photos of Leibovitz’s dead father, joined by his wife and daughter in his bed. I began to understand. It seemed to me like the most honest thing you could do and most courageous. Capturing the moment most feared by us. To spend time with someone you love in the moment you dread. Not rushing their passing. Experiencing the moment and then immortalizing it with the camera. Birth is a photo-significant moment. Why not death?
To take the day to say goodbye seems like a luxury to me now. The photos are not grim. You already had a lifetime of hellos with the person. Goodbye deserves some time too.
(For more, see imaginginfo.com’s full news account of the event under this week’s online exclusives)
Most of us believe photography should be used for the greater good. Ideally, we hope our images expose viewers to the world’s injustices, creating awareness of poverty, natural disasters, disease, famine, the toll of war, etc.
In a way, a photographer’s lens serves as the eyes of humanity: keeping tabs on remote areas of the world or even a corner of our neighborhood that we can’t see.
Photos also document the beauty of our world: the details of real life. The creases of a woman’s face. The intersection where volcanic fire streams into the ocean. A white wedding on a clear June morning. Images can fill us with inspiration and calm.
Photography is power.
Then, there is the flipside. A lens used for evil.
According to recent Boston Globe article, a Clinton , Conn. couple was charged with child pornography involving a girl who wanted to be a model. The husband, Robert Gamble, 59, was a professional photographer who began taking pictures of the girl when she was 13, telling her that photo sessions would help her modeling career. She was rewarded with new clothing and increased privileges, which were taken away if she refused to participate.
Eventually, the girl was photographed fully nude. When she turned 16, the contact between the two became more intimate, the article said.
This is not the first time, of course, that a camera has been used like a loaded gun—poised inflict pain.
Another incident occurred on Sept. 20. A 22-year-old photographer was arrested after allegedly exposing himself to several female students at a Calif. high school during a senior picture session. While the district had its own photo studio, a rare amenity in schools, he was employed with an outside studio contracted by the district. The incident even prompted school officials to mandate all future student and classroom photos be taken in-house.
Hiding the behind the lens of a camera is no excuse for criminal activity and it hurts the credibility of all photo professionals. What safeguards, if any, can the industry do to protect children from this type of behavior? Should those who deal with children in their businesses be required to apply for a special permit? Go through a background check?
What can our industry do to protect the naive who are lured by the promise of fame and fortune?
It’s a tough one. Such measures may seem hefty, but at least should be examined by us. True, photography is powerful. But that power can be easily misused in the wrong hands. –a.s.
Next week: When is a close-up too close?
