A few weeks ago I linked a story to my Facebook account. It was an opinion piece entitled “Art Lessons for Obama” by Judith H. Dobrzynski posted to Forbes.com. I thought it might inspire some interesting conversation about art in times of economic distress. Being that I work on a photography magazine, and being that the majority of my Facebook friends are artists in their own right —granted I haven’t hit the five hundred mark like my editor (popularity has never been a virtue of mine)—I thought it might be a hot button issue. However, my artist-friends apparently had more important things to worry about—like their shrinking 401ks and their eternal abhorrence for Anne Coulter.

Maybe I was being presumptuous in thinking that art deserved equal time in the spotlight. If I couldn’t even get other artists to read a link about Putin drawing in pastels for a St. Petersburg cultural group, then the “a” word must really be a dirty word, especially when there are bigger issues at hand, like the Wall Street meltdown. Then I watched the Academy Awards, and listened to Penelope Cruz talk about art as a unifying agent, and even cheered when the Slum Dog Millionaire kids climbed the stage, and finally remembered my point… Is art all we have? Just thinking about some of the artists I know, and some of the artists I’ve studied, and their somewhat sporadic, somewhat maddening nature, it’s almost funny, or maybe even scary to consider art as the last stabilizing force in a world gone awry. However, artistic expression is the single most loyal counterpart to human existence since well, we’ve existed—so maybe I’ve just put myself in my place.

President Obama allotted $50 million to the National Endowment for the Arts in his economic stimulus plan. Amidst some of his toughest critics was Rep. Jack Kingston of Georgia, who, as an even tougher critic of the arts said “I just think putting people to work is more important than putting more art on the wall of some New York City gallery frequented by the elite art community.” Mary Chapin Carpenter questioned this statement in the Washington Times, “according to Americans for the Arts, Mr. Kingston’s congressional district last year had 778 arts-related businesses that employed 2,663 people. Are all those people in his district who work—professionally or as volunteers—in the fields of painting, dance, photography, singing, writing, filmmaking, pottery, poetry writing, computer design, art, architecture, history, acting, stage design and crafts part of the elite?”

I think not Ms. Carpenter. Our entire industry from capture to print to sales is in one way or another reliant on the arts. And though the photography industry doesn’t have an Academy Awards, we should still remember, while walking our own red carpet of trade shows— from Photoplus to WPPI to PMA— that art isn’t just an afterthought. It is the thought. Now, as I step down from my soap box, I want to ask for your opinion… How does art fit into your life?

As record crowds gathered inside the National Mall to witness Barack Obama take the oath of office, shutters snapped. From cell phones to point-and-shoots to DSLRs, it seemed everyone wanted to have their finger on the pulse of history, quite literally. Even people with front row seats on the steps of the Capitol took in the Inaugural action through their viewfinders and LCDs. One of my favorite take away images from the day was of Malia Obama collecting snapshots of her father with her grape colored Kodak Easyshare.

As I settled into our khaki-colored conference room to watch CNN’s coverage of the Inaugural proceedings, I noticed that one of my coworkers had begun recording the screen with her point-and-shoot. Sitting in my bluish-gray swivel chair, ducking acerbic comment after snarky quip from other smarter editors about Michelle Obama’s dress and Cheney’s wheelchair, I wondered: Has the entire country gone snap-happy?

CNN’s Photosynth technology, enabled via Silverlight, was another, albeit more advance way of historicizing the moment. Adjusting the resolution, color, and brightness, the software offered a 3D picture slideshow of multiple still images. My father and I watched the post-game highlights that night, as CNN’s political correspondent blew up images, displayed panoramic views, and explored interesting angles with a single touch. My father and I exchanged glances as we witnessed the far-reaching possibilities of technical innovation. Indeed, technology has come a long way since the days of waiting for Life Magazine to arrive.

I recall a friend that once told me about a Japanese emperor that traveled throughout Japan and wrote Haikus in order to document what he had observed. Maybe the photos that we collect from moments seen and vaguely remembered are our form of haiku; a way of stamping our fingerprints onto the thick canons of cultural history, and saying “I was there.”

See what our web editor, Alysha Sideman, captured from the crowd, as our on-site reporter here: www.imaginginfo.com

When I asked my mother what she wanted for Christmas this year, she answered: “The Best of Bread album.” Bread, if you’re wondering, was a pop-rock band in the late sixties and early seventies. Their major claim to fame was two hit singles entitled “It Don’t Matter to Me” and “Make It With You.” On Thanksgiving, she asked me to take a “few Polaroids” of the family with my Canon XSI. The point, if you’re still searching for one, is that the likelihood of my buying a Bread album is about the same as the likelihood of my taking a Polaroid with my XSI. In fact, the likelihood of taking a Polaroid with Polaroid film is diminishing exponentially as this month winds down, being that December marks the final month of the company’s last production year.

Of course my mother didn’t know that when she asked me to produce instant pictures on a moment’s whim. But can you blame her for using terms like “album” and “Polaroid” when she should have said “CD” or “photograph”? The only thing I blame my mother for is listening to Bread… As for her inaccurate colloquialisms; words like “album” and “Polaroid” are cultural touchstones. They’re part of a vernacular that will most likely outlive not only my mother’s Baby Boomer generation, but my own. We’ve already seen the Polaroid name lauded in the chorus of OutKast’s catchy tune “Hey Ya,” which instructs people to shake their bodies like Polaroid pictures. You don’t get any more infamous than that…

And no matter its cultural significance, Polaroids, like albums, will be a technology of the past come January 2009. Though the company’s white-bordered prints will be on sale through next year, it will stop making instant film by December 31, 2008. The impact of the company’s decision to end production, which was heard most volubly in the art world, beginning some months ago, was also echoed in the commercial blogosphere on message boards and in “Save Polaroid” campaigns on Facebook along with other social networking sites. The subject of many art projects and a staple in commercial photography, Polaroid film was a quick way—and often the only way—to test the shooting environment. And in creating an on-site demand, you could even argue that it initiated a digital market.

I thought that Polaroid deserved more than just a cameo in the movie “Memento” or a name dropping by my mother to eulogize its departure. It has influenced our businesses and our personal tastes, and we should recognize its legacy—our roots.

How did you use Polaroid film—did you create unique Polaroid or Emotion transfers? Do you have an altered SX-70 image or just a favorite print that marks a particular time in your life? Did you use the positive/negative type of Polaroid film and print from the negatives? Are you a 20×24, 8×10, or 4×5 shooter? Let me know by commenting to this blog, or emailing me at tara.propper@cygnuspub.com.

“Colors, like features, follow the changes of the emotions.”—Pablo Picasso

“Orange is the happiest color.”— Frank Sinatra

If colors, like features, mark our emotional fingerprint, what does your camera say about you Mr. Serious Photog shooting with a charcoal-black body? Huh?

Granted, there aren’t many pro cameras on the market today that come in Vintage-Violet or Pumpkin-Pie Orange, but you should never say never… Especially when never came this year at photokina in the form of a G1 DSLR by Panasonic—the new G1 offers photogs a choice between black, red, or blue. And though professional cams don’t come in as many colors as their point-and-shoot counterparts, the new Panasonic designs are one step in a colorful direction; however they aren’t the first…Hasselblad released colored camera bodies almost a decade ago with their 501 series, which came in black, yellow, red, green, and blue. They haven’t continued the trend in recent years—which brings me to my next question…Is there even a professional market for colored cams?

The jury is still out on whether lens color effects capture and exposure…Do Canon’s white lenses make that much of a difference in solar heat absorption? I’m not sure, but I can say with ease that the lighter lenses probably made more of a difference in Canon’s marketing campaign than anything else. So what about the colored bodies? With the success of colored point-and-shoots, companies are trying to take advantage of a good thing. As the women’s market expands, will colored pro cams become all the rage? Or does the color craze begin with point-and-shoots and end with bridge cameras? Surely there isn’t any real technical advantage worth noting other than, well, the fact that they’re easy on the eyes; and if they’re prettier, maybe more people will want to look into their lenses? We can only hope, right?

So what’s your favorite color cam? Are you more traditional—do you have a soft spot for the standard black? Do you like to mix it up with blue? Or are you willing to stand out with red…On our homepage, you’ll find a survey asking what camera color you prefer—check it out, and give us your opinion…

As of tomorrow, I’m editorless.

Off to Cologne Germany for photokina next week, my editor is abandoning our windowless office for beer, bratwurst, and photography. The world’s biggest trade fair for the photographic and imaging industry, photokina 2008 should be especially interesting this year, given the universally unstable state of the economic union. I couldn’t think of a better time to put on your shades, stock your photo-bags with lenses, DSLRs, and media cards, and hop on an international flight (remember to pay for your peanuts) en route to less frantic pastures.
With 160,000 visitors from 140 countries, imaging professionals from around the globe will find a most lucid window into the photography industry. And you can find additional portals into the world of photography by checking out Cygnus photokina news (which you can also read on www.imaginginfo.com), our two-addition onsite publication distributed at the show. While I’ve been doing most of the grunt work here, editing press releases and laying out pages, I’ve had a chance to get a sneak peak at what awaits dealers, professional end-users, and photo enthusiasts, and though I’m bound by NDA’s, what I can say is that there’s a lot to take in, digest, and learn. And one minor request for all attendees unbound by their windowless offices (I’m envious): When you return back to the states with product intrigues and creative ambitions dancing in your head, don’t forget to put that optimism into your business, your outlook, and your art—we all can really use it right now…

Last week I attended the Long Island Photo Workshop, held in Smithtown, NY. Its 30th year as a wellspring of photographic knowledge for instuctors and students alike–all professional photographers, the Workshop featured industry notables including Joseph and Louise Simone, Hanson Fong, Gary Small, Fay Sirkis, Janice Wendt, and Dave Black. Courses ranged from “Professional Digital Imaging” taught by Gary Small, which highlighted techniques for using Photoshop, to “Light is the Greatest Influence” led by Dave Black, and “Mastering the Techniques-How to Be a Complete Photographer” instructed by Hanson Fong, who covered 10 classical bridal poses, flow posing, window lighting, infrared B&W, and Hi-Key Lighting. Each workshop enjoyed the intimacy of a small class with a hands-on approach to photography.

In fact, my personal experience at the workshop couldn’t have been more hands-on, and I mean literally. I started my day off sitting in on portrait pair Joseph and Louise Simone’s “Create Your Own Signature” class, which covered the gamut of everything portrait related from how to work with subjects under carefully monitored lighting to refining rules of composition, and using the subject’s personality to express itself through live demonstrations. As I watched the Simones in action photographing a family, focusing in on the tiniest of details, which included changing a young girl’s hair style (she couldn’t have been older than seven) to a half-up-do, little did I know that I would be next.

When I introduced myself to Joseph and Louise Simone between breaks, the two insisted that I pose for a portrait. Remembering that my own grandfather had once told me that I wasn’t photogenic, I dropped my head, and half embarrassed/half flattered replied “I’m not a model.” The Simones in unison answered, [I’m paraphrasing now], “that you don’t need to be a model to pose for a portrait— it’s more about capturing who you are, and not about putting on a pretense.” And, in fact, after my modeling session, I can now assuredly concur, but still blushing from the initial shock, I tried to laugh off their suggestion. All I needed was a little soft encouragement from my editor… And there it was, just when I was ready to shrug off the entire request as a mere pre-noon ego boost, my editor bestowed some tactful words of wisdom, which sounded something like: “I wish I could smash your head open and get into your brain, so that you would understand that if the Simones want to photograph you, you let them do it!”

So there I was getting primped and powdered. My experience as a model–I am going to use that word in conjunction with myself as much as possible here–gave me a deeper insight into the world of portraiture. Until last week, my photography work was limited to behind the lens and behind the computer, writing, shooting, reading, editing, press releases–ugghhh, but being the subject for a portrait shoot stretched my perspective to new lengths of understanding.

One of the purest forms of photography–yes I said pure–portraiture is too often misunderstood. Though some may decry it for the ostensibly ‘manufactured’ or ‘arranged’–these are words I’ve have heard thrown around the industry–aesthetic; the produced look, the contrived lighting, the rigid postures and poses, I would venture out onto a limb here, and say that the adjectives used above would most likely describe a bad portrait. For my encounter with the medium was nothing short of, dare I say, comfortable! Yes, there is a science to capturing a portrait; one that expresses the subject or the intention of the shoot through the framework of the lighting, background, camera position, and pose, but it should not interfere with the sincerity of the image itself.

As Louise Simone took my hand into hers, massaged my fingers and sculpted them into a delicate masterpiece, and as Joseph stood behind the camera snapping shots with a cat-like subtlety, I found a simple peace and flexibility within this ambiance of structure and precision. It was as if I was calmed by my faith in them; they gave me their vision, and we created that reality in the images they shot.

If I had to define the end-product which hangs on my living room wall next to a Goya print, I would say that it is a candid portrait. And no, I’m not being ironic when I use the word candid–the photograph captures more than just a girl in a red dress posing for a picture; what that is, I can’t say, but I can assure you there is something more…

So what I’ve taken from the Long Island Photo Workshop, or more specifically, what I’ve learned from the Simones is that if you look at a portrait, and there isn’t that “something more” then the naysayers are right, it’s just a manufactured scene with contrived lighting…but if you ever find yourself staring into the character of a given photograph, rooting out a certain mystique in the shapes that envelop the scene, astounded by the eloquence and multidimensionality of the subject looking back at you, then most likely you are staring into a portrait…

Last month I had the opportunity to see the world. If you’re wondering whether I went on some multiple country world tour, or just returned from Disney World’s 11-country-buffet at Epcot Center, you can rest assured that I did neither. Instead, I saw the Real World—and I don’t mean MTV’s pseudo reality-television show. What I did see, though, was untainted by a hotel view, a television screen, or a ten-foot grinning Mickey Mouse. It was candid and sincere, and it was a display of press photography from the 2008 World Press Photo exhibition.

I was invited by Getty Images to cover the event for our website (you can find the story in our Online Exclusives section), and was made a witness to the many different realities of the people showcased on the clean walls of the United Nations building. My experience seeing a world unscathed by a political pundit’s quick-speak, or a news network’s agenda, was for lack of a more exotic description, simply eye opening. Though the realities of those subjects that I watched from a distance that night, with a pen in one hand, and a pig-in-a-blanket in the other, seemed unreal in the context of my own, sheltered reality, I also saw a world shared by people in significantly different places, but who unknowingly affected one another. I have not been able to quiet that vision since.

I thought of that vision again this morning when my web editor asked me about my blog topic; she was putting together this week’s newsletter and needed to know what I would be blogging about. Forever in the throws of procrastination, I embarrassedly asked her if she had any ideas. I received an email with three appropriate topics along with a 1pm due date. The items she sent me were: “UK Government to Discuss Photography Guidelines with Police”; Brangelina’s Baby Pics; and “Astronaut Photography Researcher: A Space Journal.” Never one to discuss science before noon, I sat at my chair staring at the remaining two topics which were indignantly staring back at me. Brangelina’s Baby Pics vs. UK Government to Discuss Photography Guidelines with Police. My thought-process was as follows: “The Brangelina story is national, and I have an American readership. Do British people read my blog? Is the term ‘British people’ politically correct, or are they people of the UK? Press Photography, Brangelina…”

It went on this way for some minutes, and then my eyes scanned a couple of lines in the UK story:

“The announcement was made in the House of Lords on 16 July after Lord Rosser submitted an oral question on public photography rights. Addressing Lord Bassam of Brighton, who represented Her Majesty’s Government in the House of Lords, Richard Rosser said ‘Is [Lords Bassam] aware that magazines for photographers are reporting that photographers, including professional press photographers, are being challenged by police and private security guards when taking photographs in the street and other public places?’ He continued: ‘Photographers are sometimes filmed themselves; they are told to move on or asked for their name and address. They feel that they are being harassed.”

Right there, the last line: they felt that they are being harassed…stuck with me. I again returned to that feeling I had the night of the World Press exhibition; it was as if my conscience was harassed by those images.

Like the pictures of the body bags returning home in droves from Vietnam that my parents always told me about, these images of soldiers, citizens, women and children in Iraq was my first uncensored glance into a world unclaimed by popular media circuits, but of which was my own, and it was affecting my reality again. Press photography is the last of a dying breed of mediums that showcase the truth. Irrespective of eloquent sloganeering, good lighting, and convenient historic narratives, it is a vision and a reflection of ourselves and our world. If I didn’t step foot into the United Nations building that day, I most likely would have been blogging to you about Brangelina’s baby pictures. Before you read my next line, stop a minute, as I did when I wrote it, and think about that.

I say let the photographers do their job, because if we don’t, then the only news items we will find in our own industry and in, dare I say, contemporary culture as a whole, will be Brangelina’s new baby photographs.

First there was Napster. Then there was that darn fashion over-statement that I like to call the “Che” effect, which is also known as the over-worn Che Guevara t-shirt movement. It was everywhere: Che Guevara at fashion week, Che Guevara at the “Hills” premiere, Che Guevara on a posing, peace-besmirched Paris Hilton—you get the picture… And what next you ask? What other life-altering innovation have the kiddies grandchilded into our youth obsessed world? One word: Facebook.

The brainchild of Mark Zuckerberg (24) who later enlisted his roommate at Harvard University Dustin Moskovitz (24), Facebook in its infancy was more of a dating “Who’s Who” for the Ivy League scene around the country, enjoyed by college students from Stanford to Columbia to Yale, and then to, well, you get the picture… It later expanded into what it is now the social-networking mammoth that the 60 million of us on the site, have all come to know and compulsively check behind our bosses backs (I’m 23—I’m not above it)…That’s why I was shocked when my boss, my publisher, sent me a link to none other than, dare I say, Facebook. Was this a setup? Was he trying to catch me in the act? Run for cover, the sky is falling!

After I got over my initial paranoia by walking past my publisher’s office several times with a “Yes, I’m doing my work smirk,” and receiving the “Yes you still only have a thirty-minute lunch break” return smile, I went back to my desk and opened the link. To my surprised relief, I uncovered that, well, Facebook isn’t just for shameless, self-indulgent stalking purposes anymore, and is in fact a pretty good way to connect with people within our own industry.

Profile after profile of photographers linking to their websites; retailers promoting their companies; and manufacturers plugging their products are just some of the findings I happened upon. When I asked my publisher, Ian Littauer why we—the imaging group—are on Facebook in the first place, he answered that it’s to expose Studio Photography, PTN, and imaginginfo.com to “photographers that might not be familiar with our brand,” which also includes younger photographers and retailers new to the industry scene, and who surely have a Facebook account. Indeed, the site has grown in the four years since it became a regular face on most of our computer screens, evolving from guilty pleasure to green light for new businesses and industries like our own, to expand our presence and influence in a community of likeminded people.

So in the end, I’’m happy to say that my music-file sharing, Che Guevara t-shirt wearing, Facebook surfing cohort got something right the only way we know how: without moving a muscle, just a couple of fingers…

Check out our Studio Photography, PTN and imaginginfo.com groups on Facebook!

On what is supposed to be a life-changing day for five couples and their families instantly evolves into a life-altering moment in history. Within a flash of Wang Qiang’s shutter, the Church of the Annunciation, the site where many brides are photographed with their grooms outside the antique seminary doors, was reduced to ashes. A relic built under the direction of French priests 100 years ago, the Church of the Annunciation, which is a Catholic seminary outside the city of Pengzhou, collapsed just ten seconds after the 7.9-magnitude earthquake that affected 15 million in central China, felt its first tremble on the morning of May 12th. The white, castle-like structure, spotted with acid-rain scars and bruised from the many landslides it outlived, an anomaly to the mountainous greenery surrounding it, stands as an ominous forewarning dressing the background of Wang’s first photographs documenting the disaster. “I shouted to people, ‘Run! Run!”‘ Wang said to the Associated Press Thursday night by phone. “The ground shook and we couldn’t see anything in the dust.”

He began photographing the couples, still in their fineries, speckled with dust from the rubble and wearing expressions of scared surprise. “When the dust had settled, everyone stood up and realized they were all safe,” Wang said. He captured images of residents escaping the avalanche of debris, relief workers driving people to safety, and the many buildings quickly crumbling into brown clouds of powder. The photographs can be viewed on the CNN website www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/05/22/quake.wedding.ap/index.html?iref=mpstoryview#cnnSTCText

And like his bleak surroundings, Wang too was instantly transformed from wedding photographer to photojournalist. “I shot these photos out of the instinct of a photographer,” he said.
An instinct that, in the face of danger, confusion, and personal tragedy, turns towards the disaster, and armed with little more than a camera and a pair of eyes, freezes that moment in the hope of enlightening the larger public with an empathetic awareness that can only be gotten through art and the human subject—a motivation that, inspiring all photographers, makes them an integral part of creating a collective memory, a personal history, and a cultural consciousness.

The need to capture and document a human experience as it is unfolding, lives within every photographer whether a portrait artist, a commercial shooter, or a photojournalist. I chose this item, because I think it defines what a photographer is: A storyteller who explains a process that took place in real time, and thus makes tangible the reality of our own time.
–Tara Propper

Let’s hash it out. We’ve all seen, heard, and dealt with Mileygate 2008. And although most of us are ready to forget it just as quickly as it has inundated our industry sphere, we must recognize that one of our own is undergoing unworthy media flagellation. As we all know, Annie Leibovitz is a world-renown American portrait photographer known for such images as the famous John Lennon and Yoko Ono Rolling Stone cover taken in 1980, as well as countless other celebrity portraits. Recently, Leibovitz photographed actress and singer Miley Cyrus for a spread in Vanity Fair magazine. The images produced from that shoot are the newest fodder for what has become a media upchuck of everything sensationalist and irrelevant. Leibovitz was lambasted by Disney, along with other media circuits denigrating the photographs as both provocative and mismanaged.
A photographer known for her close collaboration with subjects, it was no surprise when Leibovitz issued this statement: “I’m sorry that my portrait of Miley has been misinterpreted. Miley and I looked at fashion photographs together and we discussed the picture in that context before we shot it. The photograph is a simple, classic portrait, shot with very little makeup, and I think it is very beautiful.” Vanity Fair also defended the images, maintaining that “Miley’s parents and/or minders were on the set,” said a spokesperson for the magazine. The pictures are part of a full-length interview featuring the tween queen and her father, the country singer Billy Ray Cyrus who appears with his daughter in some of the photographs. A Disney insider told The New York Times that “unfortunately, as the article suggests, a situation was created to deliberately manipulate a 15-year-old in order to sell magazines.”
In response to the media outrage, Miley Cyrus issued this response: “I took part in a photo shoot that was supposed to be ‘artistic’ and now, seeing the photographs and reading the story, I feel so embarrassed. I never intended for any of this to happen and I apologize to my fans who I care so deeply about.” A starkly different tune than the one she sang a week earlier, praising Leibovitz’s artistic vision: “Annie took, like, a beautiful shot, and I thought it was really cool. That’s what she wanted me to do, and you can’t say no to Annie. I think it’s really artsy.”
However overblown this entire incident may seem in the grand scheme of things, it is necessary that we, as professionals, acknowledge the fact that we too are faced with similar issues in our own professional lives. Granted, we aren’t all photographing movie stars, but nonetheless: how do you gauge that fine line that separates what you deem art from what others might perceive as exploitative or even perverse? Can we learn anything from this media blitzkrieg befallen on an industry stalwart or is it all just one big waste of time?
– Tara Propper