View Single Post
Old 3rd July 2019, 05:51 PM   #38
David
Keris forum moderator
 
David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,012
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Via Dixiane
When it come to journalists, due to my experience in former Yugoslavia i know that they like to show things according a certain "angle".
Hi folks. Photojournalist here. I have also spend years teaching on the subject in college level programs. So please allow my (hopefully) informed perspective.
Firstly i must hotly debate that journalists "like to show things according a certain "angle"". We "like" nothing of the kind. I would never argue that journalists do not from time to time get caught cheating. People are people and some just don't think the rules apply to them in any field. But it is the aim and goal of the profession on a whole to present straightforward and unadulterated news always. The fact that journalists are summarily dismissed when they are caught misrepresenting their images should be evidence of that.
This said, the ethics of journalism developed and evolved over a long period of time. What was considered allowable in the 19th century was not necessarily the same as the early 20th. By the time of the great days of publications like Life magazine stronger ethics were employed. By the end of the 20th century they were even more strict. Then digital photography came along and the game changed again.
So when we look at Roger Fenton's work we need to understand it's place in the history of photojournalism as the very first extensive photographic coverage of war to be published in newspapers. We also need to consider the equipment used. Large format view cameras with glass plates using a collodion wet plate process. This required that the emulsion placed on the plates be done in the field and that the images be processed immediately after, meaning that besides the large camera, tripod and numerous glass plates he also travelled with a light-tight wagon filled with chemistry. These plates required vey long exposure times of up to a minute so capturing action was out of the question.
I have little doubt the Fenton set up the cannon balls in his "Valley of Death" image (which btw, was not taken in the same location as the classic charge of the Light Brigade despite its name). He began his career as a painter so was quite used to adding or subtracting content from his images at will and back then there really were no rules about what was acceptable to do in the field of journalism. It is therefore very likely that Fenton, who was already hampered by his equipment and process from producing engaging images that illustrated the war, felt that more cannon balls in the frame would indeed help convey the horrors of the battlefield better.
This kind of questionable ethic continued into the Civil War. Some may be aware of the now infamous image by Alexander Gardner known as "Sharpshooter in the Devil's Den". In this image Gardner actually dragged the body into place and placed the rifle at a prominent angle for the final image. Times were different then.
But again, to be clear, none of these practices are acceptable in the today's world of journalism. When they do happen they are the exception and they are quickly called out by the journalistic community and those photographer's careers are generally left in ruins, dependent, of course, on the severity of the offense.
Attached Images
 
David is offline   Reply With Quote