Welcome to episode 40 of The Circle of Confusion, the professional photography podcast.
The Prodigal Son has returned, but not for long. We kick off with an update on the printing of Peter’s first book.
We also discuss Apple Macbook Pro and the environment, and Canon have a problem that they need to get a grip on.
We refer back to some comments and updates on the Olympics in respect to the portraits by photographers and the camera gear.
The rest of our discussion centers on the topic of documentary photography vs. photojournalism vs. street photography.
To hear episode 40, hit the play button below. You can subscribe to the podcast via iTunes. We’d love it if you did.
Apple & the Environment.
Apple has notified the EPEAT that it is withdrawing its products from the EPEAT registry because their design no longer meets the standard requirements of “disassemble-ability”. The standard requires that external enclosures, chassis and electronic subassemblies shall be removable with commonly available tools or by hand, which is not the case with the new MacBook Pro. Will this have a financial impact on Apple’s sales ?
Canon Grip Problem
Canon have found a problem with some EOS650D/Rebel T4i: a chemical reaction from the rubber hand-grip can cause an allergic reaction. What Canon are saying is that the chemical zinc bis (N,N’-dimethyldithiocarbamate) is not used in the production of the camera but is a potential by-product of a chemical reaction between other substances found in the grip. A larger than normal amount of rubber accelerator was used in the production, which could potentially cause this chemical reaction. Click on this Link to see if your camera is from the effected batch
Paper Paper
All this for Peter’s book
You can Link Here to Peter’s Kickstarter book project to see more images and a short video of the printing process.
Street Photography
Here is the link to Bruce Gilden’s approach to street photography that Roger was talking about. Watch the video and then read the complete article on the BJP website, especially the comments.
Bruce Gilden “Head On”, presented by British Journal of Photography from Olivier Laurent on Vimeo.
The Question: Is Photography Art?
Your Answer: Post your answers in the comments.
And finally, to keep Roger happy, you can listen to his podcast on Documentary Photography here
FREE SEGMENT FROM DYNAMIC RANGE EPISODE 2
We produced an abundance of great content for episode 2 of Dynamic Range. We can’t possibly include it all, so we’ve decided to give you an entire segment for free here. It’s offered in full HD, and will play automatically at HD resolution in full screen mode. If your broadband connection is having trouble with that, click the little gear icon near the bottom right of the player to choose a lower res.
If you like it, why not buy the full episode? It’s available here: Dynamic Range Episode 2.
What do you think?
As ever, we’d love to hear your views and get your feedback.
Disagree, agree or have a completely different take on what we’ve discussed? Please get in touch by leaving a comment or emailing us at mailbag@circleofconfusion.ie.
Also, if you see or know something you think we’d be interested in discussing on the blog, we’d love to hear from you too.
Blatant plug for our wares
Don’t forget, you can purchase episodes of our landscape photography video series Dynamic Range for just €9.95 each, and as a bonus, the pilot episode is just €4.95! You’ll receive the download link via email as soon as you’ve completed the purchase.
Of course photography is art, as it can be interpreted any which way the viewer sees fit. You might take a picture for a particular reason but when ii view it i see something different
Thanks for your comment Tim and I agree with you 100%
Not trying to be Arty Farty as I said in the podcast but here is my Mission Statement :
I am an Artist not a Photographer.
I don’t take photographs, I make images.
@Tim – Thanks for taking the time to contribute, Tim.
You may have guessed from the podcast that I, unlike Neil, don’t agree with the statement “Of course photography is art”. I think we’ll have a really good discussion on the podcast in a couple of weeks’ time, when Peter is back. It should be fun and insightful.
You describe Bruce Gilden’s photography as rape ….. a tad strong! I don’t have the balls to take shots the way he does, and how many people still alive have photographed the Yakuza!! Whether you agree with his ‘in your face’ approach or not, the result can really work. There’s something about that kind of sudden close up that gives the viewer a whole lot more. Some of his best work will be viewed with fascination in 100 years time.
@Mark – Thank you for following up Mark on this conversation.
You are right. “Rape” is a very strong word. In this context it is, as you have highlighted, not appropriate.
While it reflects the strength of my feeling, in retrospect I wish I’d chosen a different word.
I do, though, stand by my feelings towards Bruce Gilden’s approach. In particular, I find the way he ambushes people in the video that we’ve embedded in the show notes objectionable. In my opinion (and I must stress that I’m speaking only for me here), I don’t think that has anything to do with documentary photography. He is imposing himself rudely and abruptly in the lives of his subjects. He shows no respect for his subjects, he merely startles them and pops off a flash in their faces. To me, this has nothing to do with documentary photography as I view it.
You mention his work photographing the Yakuza. I think, but I don’t know, that he didn’t use the same tactics with them. I suspect that if he had, he would no longer be among us.
You do lay in front of me a challenge. I should try to get Bruce Gilden on The Documentary Photographer Podcast. It would make for an enlightening conversation, don’t you think?
-Roger-
Roger, as ever, always a great response. My goodness, Roger Overall interviews Bruce Gilden, I’d buy front row tickets. You’ll have your hands full in that interview. I have a contact on the west coast who knows Gilden, if you struggle to get a response, let me know. Kind regards, Mark.
Really interesting conversation about documentary vs. street photography. For me the distinction is the use of the images and narrative, a single image taken on a street will often raise more questions then give a story and often there is nothing to accompany the image. But a series of street images of a specific city/activity say, would be ‘documenting’ that city. I think the same could be said for landscapes, what many would consider a distinct genre, but then if I were to photograph the same cliff over a period of years to explore the impact of coastal erosion (jeysus how exciting does that sound?), that I would consider documentary photography.
Photojournalism and travel photography could be seen as the same thing, but the use and narrative the photographs are given makes the distinction. Both distinctly documentary because their presentation will be with accompanying text. Is this a picture of children playing in a far away location or is it a picture of children playing despite the background of poverty in their country.
The Bruce Gilden argument is also a great one. I love so many of those types of photographs because they capture what could never happen if permission was asked up front (unless we start to construct photography ‘hides’ on the high street). I enjoy a bit of street photography and do some candids but nothing in the form of acrobatically jumping in front of someone. The ‘rape’ comment was light hearted but lets be completely fair about this, just because a photographer has the right to photograph someone in a public area doesn’t offer comfort to the person that’s just been strobed mid-step.
Eric Kim is an interesting example of a photographer that does this but applies a code of ethics (i.e. deletes photographs on the request of the person should they object). He might make for an interesting interviewee.
Photography as art? Definitely. It can evoke an emotion in the viewer through techinique (lighting etc.) in the same way that painting and cinema can. Of course there’s a lot of sh*te photography but then I’ve seen four year olds painting what could pass as a Van Gogh, so like any art-form it is open to opinion and debate.