Is it all that bad?

<p>Hi guys, this is my very first post!</p>

 

<p>'Type in Documentary Photography into Google Images and immediately a world highly saturated with extreme violence and despair fills the screen. Is this really a true representation of the world that we live in? In Photography (and everything else for that matter) we seem fixated on the extreme. Our vision is constantly bombarded with images of war and famine to the point that we begin to believe that there is little else. But we are only shown so many of these pictures because we have this craving for negative stimuli. We can never get enough.</p>

 

<p>The most beautiful things are often right under our noses. To me at least, the local cheese rolling festival can provide photo opportunities that are just as revealing about the human condition as a scene of domestic violence can. Don’t get me wrong, I understand that these things require focus but so does the cheese festival.</p>

<p>Seize the opportunity. Take photos of the cheese festival. Stand out from the crowd.</p>

<p>I must tell you this very thread is a little bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. You are complaining about all the negativity and yet you continue it by dwelling on the negativity. See how it works!</p>

<p>Negative images stand out. Just like bad news. There are plenty, plenty, plenty of positive images. Look through the documentary forum even on this site. You'll see street fairs, kissing, lovemaking in parks, all sorts of things. Yet, you may well step back from it remembering more of the negatives you've seen. Who's to blame?</p>

<p>Go where the light is if that's what you want. It's there to be found.</p>

<p>Documentary has a long tradition, and it's not about the beautiful things that are under our nose. I'm not saying you and others can't expand on that, but what you see is there for a reason.</p>

<p>I wasn't complaining, I was just asking the question of why it is the way it is. Why do negative images stand out over positive ones when they are just as thought provoking and engaging? I think that its an interesting debate.</p>

Is the work documentary or a kind of commercial photography, the purpose of which is to toggle eyeballs?

 

Happy news doesn't sell.

<p>I understand that there are plenty of positive photographs out there, I have recently started a blog thats dedicated to it. I think I started the blog in the first place because I felt that a lot of this work wasn't getting the publicity it deserved and I found it hard to find places that showcased it. I just think that its a shame that these great photographs often get overlooked by images of death and suffering when to me they are equally as important. Years from now I would hate for people to look back at images of today and that is all they see.</p>

<p>I am mainly talking about Documentary here, rather than press or commercial, although to some extent it applies to all. Documentary belongs to a different arena to press. Its job is not to sell newspapers. To me, the role of Documentary is to simply document all facets of the world that we live in. I feel that the work being done is disproportionate to reality.</p>

<p>Perhaps it's because we have so many good things in our lives 'we' relish wallowing in the violence and despair you highlight - 'we' even have entertainment where we can participate in a form of virtual ritualised violence, slaughter and mayhem.<br>

Check out the Pulitzer prizes for photgraphy - there seems to be specific reward for the most heartrending/despairing journalisitc images.<br>

I wonder which would get more hits - a photo of the winner at the cheese festival, or a photo of somebody who was killed by a falling cheese at the cheese festival - I know where my money is.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>The most beautiful things are often right under our noses. </p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />Photography should be about beautiful photos, not beautiful subjects.</p>

<p>Lazy photographers, who are not open to new experiences and who lack the imagination to think in ways not approved by the mainstream marketers of culture. </p>

<p>Once 'culture' became a commodity, it then became just another product that could be placed into pre-fabricated boxes. If it doesn't fit in the box, it is no longer 'culture', no longer 'Art'.</p>

<p>Of course its about beautiful photos, but surely that starts with the subject. Again, im mainly talking about documentary because that is where my background is.</p>

<p>Documentary photography and the newspaper are both about reality. There are also a great many more words in the newspaper about negative things than there are about positive or neutral things. I call myself a documentary photographer: but my pictures of blacksmiths at work (ordinary reality) do not sell as well as pictures of street demonstrations (extraordinary reality) or extreme poverty (unhappy reality). When I am pessimistic I feel convinced that Schadenfreude is involved here.</p>

<blockquote>

<p> surely that starts with the subject</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, it starts with the photographer. Anything can be the subject of a beautiful photograph.</p>

<p>That is an interesting point. As photographers we obviously have to make money and we can do this much better focusing on the extraordinary and unhappy reality, which feeds the whole system. <br>

Obviously I don't know which work you feel most passionate about but i am sure that there are a lot of photographers who wish that they could make just as much money photographing the ordinary reality because that is where their passion lies.<br>

But as you say, unfortunately there isn't as much demand in today's society.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>'No, it starts with the photographer. Anything can be the subject of a beautiful photograph.'</p>

<p>Sorry i don't know how to do quotes properly yet.</p>

<p>You are basically reiterating part of my point to begin with. If anything can be the subject of a beautiful photograph, why is there so much reliance on extraordinary and negative reality? Photographs that are just as telling and engaging can be captured walking to the shops.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think to many documentarians and artists, human suffering is a passion that demands to be told. Walking though the shops is not (for many, though it certainly can be for some).</p>

<p>There's probably some tie in to the strong religious roots of and connection to art. Suffering and spirituality are connected and the derivation of the word "passion" (which is certainly related to art) is Christ's suffering on the cross.</p>

<p>I think it may be more difficult and more of a challenge to express suffering than to express joy. Again, that's likely not universally true but seems to be true for many. Perhaps much suffering is done alone and more joy is experienced as shared. Photographers and artists can be a lonely bunch.</p>

<p>These are simply hypotheses, not claims of fact.</p>

<p>But I definitely don't think it's just about what sells. I think there are serious, personal, and very human reasons why suffering, negativity, hardship, and violence are explored by people.</p>

<p>Any good existentialist, from Sartre to Nietzsche to Heidegger, will tell you that fear is a significant human motivator. We are drawn to things we fear and we get in touch with a lot through our fears.</p>

<p><em>I feel that the work being done is disproportionate to reality.</em><br>

Whose reality are you referring to? Roughly half the world, probably more, is either hungry or underfed. Disease, war, and suffering are widespread. Start with that "reality" and see how distorted your sample is.</p>

<p>Research of violence over the ages* shows that we are living in a period of lesser violence. However, news fixates on the shocking or emotional and it seems easier to communicate hate and violence than love and pleasure. In Medieval villages, murders occurred at a greater rate than any modern jurisdiction of a developed country, but there were relatively few news media of the time.</p>

<p>You have to look elsewhere and a bit harder for reports of happy interactions of men. If and when they are reported they are on page 22 and in a small column. I am excluding mass events like cities or institutions winning sports titles or successes by sports heros; those happy events are felt uniformly and by many, and they are thereby priorised in the news. </p>

<p>* The Better Angels of our Nature, by Stephen Pinker, Penguin Books 2011 ISBN: 978-1-101-54464-8 (Pinker is a Harvard University professor of psychiatry)</p>

<p>Zane makes a good point. War, disease and suffering are indeed the reality for most of the world. They must be reported and publicised if something is to be done to lessen them. I made a mistake in my earlier post. I should say that -- in my experience -- most publications <em>do not</em> want pictures of extreme poverty. They prefer pretty embroidery and shiny new gadgets and decorated chocolate cake.</p>

<p>Maybe we have generalised too much here. There is considerable variation between countries and also within individual countries. Besides that, things have changed over time. In India at least, the leading dailies are more into fashion and high society and entertainment and whatever keeps the advertisers happy. The unpleasant and the ugly tend to be ignored. Something like <em>Brave New World</em>. But of course road accidents and burning buildings are reported, with illustrations.</p>

<p>Perhaps it can be said that deviations from the normal are relished, but anything that points an accusatory finger towards the social order (or the world order) is carefully kept out. Dorothea Lange, for instance, would find no takers today.</p>

<p>"Anything can be the subject of a beautiful photograph" may be the key. Is photography an end in itself or is it to be seen as another way of depicting reality? For Scott and others of us who are part of the documentary tradition, the answer is obvious.</p>

<p>I just type in Documentary Photography in Google Images and I get a series of "documentary photography" (as they claimed themselves to be) and what I got are:<br>

coffee break, Faith, Father and Son, Flood, Freedom of children, Smile, Hardwork, Housework, Lost generation, Man and Sulfur, New technology, Rally, Rural moments, Simple Life,The Trio<br>

<a href="http://www.examplesof.com/photography/documentary.html">www.examplesof.com/photography/documentary.html</a></p>

<p>Isn't that a nice balance? I don't see much of violence</p>

<p>I think it's a bit too simple to seperate documentary from press photos. What was already said about bad news selling, well, switch on the TV and you'll see it all the time. Documentaries add the in-depth, thorough examination of what is behind the news... so, it goes behind the scenes of the bad news. What could worry more than that, though: if you'd see a documentary about all happy, well-fed people in nice houses, good weather.... wouldn't you get very weary? Wondering "where's the catch"? I would.</p>

<p>In some documentary series on really sad subjects, there can be positive photos. The strength of people in dealing with the situation, the small but real hopes for a better future, and so on. It's not only what the photographer brings to you, it is also how you decide to look at it.<br>

Is a photo of a flying eagle a majestic animal, or violence about to happen as he dives down and takes his lunch?</p>

"Years from now I would hate for people to look back at images of today and that is all they see"

 

I think sales of digital cameras is around the 100 million mark per year now. I don't think the total includes phonecams, keychaincams etc. It is no exaggeration to say photos are being taken by the billion. We cannot know what people in the future will see of our photographs, of those billions, nor can we know what they will think of them.

 

"I felt that a lot of this work wasn't getting the publicity it deserved"

 

This is your main point, I think. You want a higher profile for certain work. Welcome to the marketplace.

<p>Don - Yes I think that is probably my main point so thank you for clarifying that in my head haha! There is so much powerful and revealing photography out there that doesn't focus on violence and suffering but I don't feel that it gets the same recognition because of that. I believe that a key role of documentary photography is to reveal something about the human condition. I get that people often reveal deep things about themselves when pushed to the brink but people reveal amazing truths about their nature in all kinds of different situations. They are just perhaps harder to capture.<br>

John- Have you taken safesearch off because thats not what i got?!</p>

 

<p>Scott, I think you have a reasonable project and need/desire in wanting different kinds of images from what are being offered. I'm not so sure you're right that positive images are harder to capture. Above, in thinking out loud, I suggested that negative images might be harder to capture, and I'm rethinking that due to my reaction to your statement. I think significant images are hard to capture and good photos are hard to make. We are saturated, and always have been, with mediocre images, images that don't convey human truths or emotional honesty. Doing that is hard, whether it's an expression of joy or sorrow, celebration or mourning, beauty or violence.</p>

<p>Something I try to keep in mind is that there's a fine line, and I think this is what Jeff was getting at earlier. Violence may be horribly ugly and yet a photo of a violent act can have a certain kind of beauty. Likewise death is often sad, and yet a beautiful photo of someone in mourning can be created. Often, the emotions of the moment and of the subject are <em>transformed</em> by a photograph. That's when sorrow and joy, violence and beauty can become less dichotomous.</p>

<p>Awe can play a role here. I am awed by birth and awed by death, in awe of violence and in awe of great charitable acts. Awe, wonder, curiosity, are all somewhat neutral approaches to emotions which tend to have negative and positive connotations to them. A photograph can capture the awe, wonder, curiosity, and thereby transcend the usual emotional dichotomies we might often set up. Aesthetic appreciation sometimes looks for that move away from dualities.</p>

<p>Some really great points guys that have really got me thinking. I think over the next few days I will write an expansion to my initial post on my blog :)</p>