Group items tagged

Death as Contributing Background By Dennis DunleavydennisdunleavycloseAuthor: Dennis Dunleavy See Author's Posts (20) Recent Posts * The Intelligent Machine: The Camera in the 21st Century * What Should Power Look Like? * Photojournalism in an Age of Contrivance * Rush of Innovation in Photographic Technology Shows No Sign of Slowing Down * Do Embedded Photojournalists Actually Work for the Pentagon? Dennis Dunleavy teaches and writes about visual culture, digital photography and ethics, new technologies, and society. For more than 20 years, he worked as a correspondent and photojournalist across the U.S., Central America, and Mexico. Today, he is an associate professor in the Department of Communication at Southern Oregon University. He is the author of The Big Picture blog. in Photojournalism on May 27th, 2008 The body is lifeless - embedded into the concrete and dust that once was a school. Framing the faceless gray form, a handful of Chinese soldiers in green camouflage gently sweep the ground around her. There are five soldiers, two with shovels, one pointing at an object inches away from a limp hand. The viewer is forced to look down upon shadows and rubble. We do not know this person. She is one of thousands of victims from the earthquake that shook China to its core two weeks ago.

Photojournalists Are Getting Artsier -- But Is That What Audiences Want? PDF Print E-mail Written by Dennis Dunleavy Monday, 04 February 2008 ImageWalter Benjamin once suggested that there is no single, absolute, or correct interpretation of a picture, since every viewer brings something unique to the process. At the same time, photojournalistic conventions often constrain how a viewer responds emotionally and intellectually to pictures.

Playing "god" in a digital age: The thin line between art and the subjectivity of photojournalism Jarle recently commented on the post "Crazy light", in which I wrote: "We are constantly challenged to make scenes that are less than interesting, more interesting." The question that this raises, however, is when and how are the conventions of honest visual reportage bent for the sake of making images more compelling? Jarle continues: Correct. We all strive to make our photos more interesting. But, ethically and philosophically speaking, isn't this in direct conflict with the "our pictures must always tell the truth" mantra? There's often a thin line between photojournalism, "art" and subjective, commentary photography. And, playing the devil's advocate, what's the difference between adding motion blur in Photoshop and using a slow shutter speed? I'll start out by agreeing with much what Jarle has said here. From a purist perspective, "Straight" photography should be a style of photography that records what the eye witnesses without elaboration or embellishment. For the most part, this form of photography, what is photojournalism today, has remained pretty much true to form. At the same time, it is possible to find quite a few examples of photojournalism from the 1980s to the present day, that deviate from the normal conventions.

It wasn't all that long ago when I was interviewed for Black Star's terrific new project on photojournalism ethics. The book could not come at a better time for an industry that is trying to redefine itself in the face of public cynicism and distrust. Here an excerpt from the text. Photography has always been about manipulation....Even the smile is a form of manipulation, because it may mask the true feelings of the subject."