Do think images of war are necessary to provoke change?
Personally, my view on this may be slightly one-sided due to my profession. When you’ve witnessed first hand what war/conflict or whatever word you choose to describe it. It’s horrendous. No words can describe things I’ve seen, friends I’ve lost and injuries sustained both physically and mentally. So to say pictures provoke change, in today’s world I believe they have and will do. Public support has been key over the last decade.
Both press and military media photographers have been able to show so many sides of conflict/war. Good the bad and at times ugly sides. It’s a business whether people agree with what I say. Wars create work and money by employing people to support be that locally employed civilians to military procurement companies. Images taken portray life on the frontline at time harsh but at times it shows life isn’t that bad and soldiers can be enjoying what it is they are doing. Creating a safer place for people to live and work.
Do you agree with Sontag earlier view that horrific images of war numb viewers’ responses?
I sort of agreeing and disagree with this one. Looking back through the history of war images that are horrific there’s a side that does numb the viewer as over the times it can be viewed as normal. This is only until something changes. Be it the trench warfare and shell shock. To individuals being in contact with mustard gas.
Vietnam and children running away with horrendous burns caused by napalm, or worse still the use of agent orange.
Screenshot David Bailey Afghanistan BBC circa 2010
What I believe changes individuals view is when the image is of a young soldier or child. I recall David Bailey’s portraits from troops in Afghanistan he took. Some left as boys and returned as men aged by conflict and war. These images I believe change peoples perspectives I don’t believe it’s numbing. They provide the viewer now with a connection to emotions soldiers feel I believe.
I thought id like to add to this part from a personal perspective. Images from conflict are at the time the ones you see in the papers. Soldiers have been capturing life on the frontline for decades. Please see a small selection of what I have taken over the years from circa 2007 – 2010. The good times and the bad.
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
Bibliography
Bailey, D., Interview, A., & 07.10.10, I. (2010, October 8). David Bailey – Afghanistan Interview 07.10.10. YouTube. Retrieved January 11, 2020, from https://youtu.be/kAW3303Xl2Y
What difference does colour make to a genre that traditionally was predominantly black and white?
Fan Ho approaching shadow circa 1954
Fan Ho approaching shadow picture was originally a colour staged picture. By manipulating it in the darkroom adding the strong diagonal shadow and in black and white works better than colour. This would not have the same desired effect had it been in colour.
B&W for me give the image a kind of lift and feeling to it. Although some may say it is dull and lacks drama, I tend to think it adds to the drama.
Colour has a part to play in modern-day photography but to be honest with you I’m not a huge fan in street photography unless I’m shooting in the dark hours or areas of neon lights, where i will still try to get a dark contrasty shadow or silhouette within my frame. Colour seems to make the subject pop more.
Picadilly Circus 15 Nov 19
When you compare the likes of Martin Parrs images in his Only human exhibition he placed on last year. I visited this during my EYV learning journey. His colourful images pop and make the subject stand out, whether he’s isolating one single colour or multiple colours to enhance a subject there is something i enjoy with his pictures.
“In black and white you suggest, in colour you state,” – Paul Outerbridge Page 55
“When you photograph peolpe in colour, you photograph their clothes. But when you photograph peolpe in black and white, you photograph their souls!” – Ted Grant page 57
Can you spot the shift away from the influence of surrealism (as in Cartier-Bresson’s work)? In today’s world, I find it quite hard to find if there is or has been a shift.
How is irony used to comment on British-ness or American values?
The irony within the images at the time i believe speaks for itself. From the quintessential Englishness of Martin Parrs pictures to harsh realities of Don McCullins images of the UK going through the ages. Looking to the US and the images from the Robert Franks Americans shows how irony can be both subtle and frank. If you look at today’s images from Brexit to who running for the Presidential elections and Donald Trump’s tweets and his media team. They add and thrive in the irony of his at times staged images i believe.
Biograpghy
Duckett, B. L. (2016). Mastering Street Photography (pp. 55, 57).
During my EYV journey, I wrote about Martin Parrs ”Only Human” London exhibition he put on. Going through this part of the journey and mentions the term Irony I thought about some of his classic quintessential British images he captured.
I later found this BBC4 documentary he produced circa 1999 ”Think of England”. Now we venture into a new decade as this film was built the year before the start of the new millennium it’s strange in a way to look back to that time. It has quite a humorous feel to it. It captures the classic side of those hardcore elements of society from the rich to the poor and those that have strong ties to the country. This is England.
Although it’s only 20 years, you can see a shift now in society, but I don’t think this is shown in today’s photography. Martin Parr has an eye for capturing both the realism and moment within his pictures. Although his photographs are not what I would take, they are intriguing and visually stunning when looking beyond the lens. A picture does paint a thousand words.
I shoot probably 85% of the time using the in-camera Fujifilm Acros film simulation which is black and white. I really enjoy seeing images in BnW. This for me is stronger than colour. Colour for me works best at night. I believe BnW tells a better story of what it is your trying to capture. These images were taken between Blackfriars Bridge and the Tate Gallery London.
From a personal perspective I like the B&W image more than the colour. These are SOOC unedited or cropped.
Photos over the years have been used to both manipulate the truth and hide the lies. What one person sees within the image another can perceive as something completely different.
What is in the image
who is in the image
anything else in the frame
where is it
why has it been taken
who’s taken it
what’s is it’s intended use
is this political
is there any financial gain
who stands to win from it
who stands to lose from it
Westminster terror attacks March 2017
I remember seeing the above image and reading so many social media posts and tweets about it. These images are being reported more and moreover in the coming years. There must be at least 90% if not more than having a mobile device that takes both photos and film. Social media accounts let you post both types of media and send these images to live feeds as it unfolds.
Only the other week as London was hit with Terror again. People filming and taking pictures as the story unfolded.
Some called the public figures heroes for the actions they displayed. While the policeman that shoot and killed the terrorist was called trigger happy by some. It’s only to easy to say something else to what’s being portrayed or captured within the picture.
Dearden, L. (2019, December 6). London Bridge Attack ‘hero’ Who Fought Terrorist With Fire Extinguisher Named As Convicted Killer. The Independent. Retrieved December 8, 2019, from https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/ [assessed 20191208]
Part Two Context and Narrative BA HONS in Photography OCA 