Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/28

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Video vs still
From: "Gib Robinson" <robinson@sfsu.edu>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:54:48 -0700

Thoughtful and well said, Rob.

You're right. The combination of video and words is much better at conveying
a stories and complex information. But I think there is a somewhat different
role for still photos, partly because photos stay around and shape our
feelings over time. Yes, they create "atmosphere"; but they also convey
information and shape emotional responses, attitudes, relationships, points
of view. In many ways, I don't think of photos as "hammering" at us as much
as reminding us who we are, what we do, how we relate, and what's around us.
For example, still "nature" photography -- including Hubble images, space
missions, medicine and science -- are a powerful shaping influence. In
general, I suspect still images from environments outside our immediate
experience (big, small, or in between) act on us like a "mantra" -- slowly
urging us to shift our understanding and attention.  That, I think is the
strength of photos on the web and in various forms of print media --
newspapers, magazines, brochures, flyers, etc. that continue to flow through
our lives on paper and electronically. Their power explains why I suspect
more people today are making money on still images of all sorts, not just PJ
or people.

- --Gib

[You wrote]
Gib - That would be good news for anyone trying to make a living with
images. It's my feeling, though, that while pictures are terrific conveyors
of atmosphere, so to speak, they're not very good on information. They
really only show you how things look. Plus, there are strong limitations to
what they can show.
Example: a month or so ago I was commissioned to shoot a story about
prostitution here in Modena. The story was quite complex, about trafficking
in underage girls and the international structures that support the trade.
But how do you photograph this? It's just not possible. At most you can
photograph a few pimps, some girls, clients trawling past, etc. Even that
is close to impossible - or was in this particular situation. But my point
is, the pictures cannot tell the story. They can only illustrate it.
Since so much of the oppression operating in the world is structural, that
is, embedded in the structures of everyday life, and doesn't focus into
significant moments which can be photographed, I think photography's
potential for being a language even for dealing with this range of subjects
is pretty limited.
I do love photography and believe in its potential for telling stories, but
I'm more and more aware of its limitations. I think still photography can
potentially produce images which literally hammer into your retina so you
can't look away or forget them. That's its strength. But words/video are
essential complements to deliver the "whole" story.
Oh well, it's late and I'm going on again!
Ciao,
Rob.
Robert Appleby and Sue Darlow
Via Bellentani 36
41100 Modena
Italy
Tel/fax [39] 059 303436