Which one would you prefer and why?

These two pictures were moments captured at the recent Olympics held

in Athens. They are both dissimilar in the emotional moment they

portray. As qualified and professional photographers, I would like to

read and discuss your views on what qualities these still images have

over the film footage of the same moment. Or on the other hand does

the film footage offer more about these two specific event.<div></div>

I am not a qualified or professional photographer, but for me the main difference lies in the fact that a photograph is <i>spatial</i> in its emphasis while video is more <i> temporal</i>. Thus these mediums have quite different sorts of appeal although there is not necessarily a distinctly defined line seperating them. The photograph lets one contemplate - ponder on the legs of the bystanders visible on the top of the frame or the absurdily joyous emotion on the face of the sprinter - things which in the video format might have been superceded by the impact and sweep of the event.

<p>

Is painting better than sculpture? I don't know but they are different.<p>

 

-A

the fixed photos allow the precise moment to be etched in the viewer's minds...but it

should needs to be a good moment especially with attention spans ever shortening

I prefer stills because they emphasize one single moment, which I choose. Movie is a substitute for being there too and much harder to make for one single man.

Each instant in time and the image of that instant may in itself show us something that expresses some point to ponder. It may be mood, color, or something. In a photo of the instant we can view and arrange our thoughts on the item, compare it to some memory fragment and build the photo to something more.

In motion film or video, we have no time to resolve those issues. We must on the fly try to fit them into our thoughts by merging the images in a stream that will create a parrelle stream inside us.

Each powerful, each art in its oun right.

I supect that video is more powerful at an emotional level as it washes over us in a wave of images that we must ride on to its end. where a single photo causes us to tear it apart and sink in to a single moment.

I am a movie buff and love being pushed around by great cinimatography, but find that at times I want to stop the motion to view that perfect moment.

John,

First of all, you're changing the image by writing this:

"These two pictures were moments captured at the recent Olympics held in Athens.

They are both dissimilar in the emotional moment they portray."

The text is subversive and adds too many more variables to what I'm seeing is a

simple query...if you want to test this, I'd think you'd have to present images and film

of the same moment without explanation to two seperate test audiences and have

them write explanations of the events depicted in which ever medium they are

looking at...then compare those for acuracy against the "truth".

 

If you're trying to get at the "qaulities" that film and photos have in the subjective

opinion of a bunch of photographers, I'm sure you'll get a slanted opinion here: we

are for the most part photographers.

Photos are easier to remember in detail than film.

Photos allow us to see a single moment...something we can not do in our "real"

experience of the world.

I'm sure there are more...

I also prefer still photos because they make people use their

imagination and think - what was before the picture was taken, what

was after... And at the same time video propose ready answers instead

of questions.