Brianna Vogelzang: Participant vs. Professional Photography
October 26, 2011
In a unique class, Visual Communication and Social Change, 4th-year students explore and contrast the images of professional and “participant” photographers; try to discern the impact of various forms of visual media on its target audiences; and read authors who promote participant-photography and those who are critical of it, as they attempt to answer questions such as, “Do media professionals distort the stories of the poor and dispossessed? Can participant-photography make a meaningful impact given the amateur photographer’s lack of training and experience?” Read their initial analyses and join the conversation.
Participant vs. Professional Photography by Brianna Vogelzang
In recent years, ‘professional journalism’ has provided us with photographs that leave us speechless. They are the visual aid to the stories of war, famine, genocide and violence. Professional photographers are sent all over the world to document real happenings and not only visually report but educate the public about what is happening in faraway countries. It takes a lot of time, effort and courage to willingly put oneself out of their element in order to capture a photograph, however, the majority of the time photojournalism is responsible in providing the more serious or negative reports. For example, some of the most memorable photographs come from the moments directly following 9/11. They are important because 9/11 is important – not because of who took them.
As stated earlier, the technology of today has drastically changed who is able to be a photographer. Jim Hubbard, in his piece, “Everyone is a Photographer,” states “Anyone can take a picture – all they have to do is press a button.” Arguably, it takes more to make a picture great, but the mechanics and methods remain at a constant. Citizen journalism, a term used to describe individuals who, whether using cell phone or consumer pro cameras, record events that they consider newsworthy, shows us that the availability and ease that technology of today provides means to capture moments that are not necessarily images that show up on the news but instead are hung on the walls of our homes (Hubbard 1).
The figure behind the camera is not as important as the one in it. Though there is a talent and great photography is a true art form there are and will continue to be photographs taken by amateurs that still captivate and convey meaning. A picture is not worth a 1000 words, it is worth the explanation of its context.
Written by Admin · Filed Under For Students
I totally agreed with your point that “a picture is not worth a 1000 words but the explanation of its context.” Both professional photographers and amateurs convey meaning to their photographs, but meanings of their photos are different. The amateurs might want to convey a meaning to the photo which it can impact the public. On the other hand, professionals might want to attract more advertisers through their photos. The meaning of a photo is all depends on the intention of the photographer.
That’s a really interesting thought regarding the impact of technology. It makes sense, of course, that technology would impact photography. Photography is certainly a technical practice, but you’re right that it goes beyond that- technology really does open the medium to the general population. I can see how technology doesn’t just improve the quality of photography, but also the breadth. Great thoughts, thanks!