Where Should Photojournalists Draw the Line?
After having the basics of audio gathering pounded through my skull via someone reading off of a handout for the third time in as many semesters I started to get a little upset at first, but then more inquisitive of how my peers perceived this.
And what I’m referring to is the multi-tasking nature of the photojournalist. As the media evolves, so does the photographer. I don’t question that thought what so ever. But how much is fair to be expected of a professional photojournalist in terms of what kind of media we’re expected to gather?
After my professor explained how some people think it is a good idea to velco strap a mic to your wrist when gathering nat and ambient sound for a multimedia project, I started to get this image of a one man band player. You know, the guys who’d walk around with a bass drum strapped to their back, cymbals between their knees, harmonica on their chest, etc? Are photojournalists going to end up like that?
Without question, multimedia is becoming a staple in the industry and I love its presentation abilities. But I hear people talk about gathering stills, audio, and video is quickly becoming the norm as well. And for the most part, it is talked about as being done completely by one person, or at least one person having the ability to capture all three media. How does a person go about carrying all the gear needed to capture just those three media forms? I mean still camera equipment alone can bog a person down.
But imagine a person carrying two camera bodies, a lens on each camera and another strapped to their person somehow to provide the variety of angle expected out of a photo story, an audio recording device that can range in size from as small as a cell phone to as big as a textbook, a mic for nat and ambient sound, a wireless mic for conducting interviews, and a video camera on top of all of that. What happens when the next big thing comes around and we’re stuck carrying another ten pound piece of equipment?
Where do we, as photojournalists, draw the line? Or do we even draw one at all? Is it right to look an editor in the eye and tell them that they’re demanding too much and they should fork out the travel expense budget money to send an extra person to assist?
There are technologies out there that will make things easier, such as the Canon 5D Mk II, that can capture still and video and have both be top quality, but for most of us, something like that is out of our price range once the camera and the software to edit the output of that camera are taken into account. (I’d probably have to not only buy the camera and the video editing software, but I’d also have to buy a laptop capable of running the software as I’m not sure my PowerBook G4 has the gas to do it.)
So what do you all think. I really want to hear back on this.
3 Responses to “Where Should Photojournalists Draw the Line?”
You make an interesting point matt. Where does it stop? WILL it stop? I think we are at a point in a transitional phase where we may be phasing out the still camera. Remember the newspapers in the harry potter books/movies? They may seem farfetched now, but so did digital newspapers at one point. Still photos have always, throughout the existence of photography, showed something that no words could properly tell, but with the 5D Mk II and other state-of-the-art equipment, stills may become a side game. Videographers are already using frame captures from video footage as stills. I think the market will sway more towards a video-first market, taking stills from the video if/when needed. It may not be how it goes today, but technology has this tendency to change rapidly and phase out old tech really quickly. Along those lines we also make stuff much smaller. I think future photogs will carry one video camera with a lens or two that and maybe a mic. The whole thing may be about the size of camera’s today. Who knows. Heck – maybe they will revamp the entire institution of media before our days are done.
Even as much as I love doing multimedia, I can’t see us switching to a video-first mentality. I mean, portable 35mm video cameras have existed since at least the 1930s, and journalists haven’t had to shoot exclusively video yet. Admittedly, the cost of entry has significantly declined with the digital age, but that doesn’t mean the end of the still image.
That said, we will be shooting more video, even if it’s just on the side. The 5Dmk. II was really just the first generation of that; you’re going to start to see low-end consumer DSLRs with video capabilities probably around PMA next month. And they’re going to be very affordable.
The only problem I see is the design philosophy people have taken with cameras. Professional cameras have gotten a hell of a lot less portable. My Leica IIIc from 1947 can fit in my pocket, but the D3 and 1D feel like they weigh a ton (especially with a decently fast zoom attached). This seems to me to mean that cameras, while they may (almost certainly) be able to do everything we need them to in the future, are going to be a lot more of a pain to carry around. That’s probably the worst of it.
As more and more established print media environments struggle to figure out new revenue streams to make money, I doubt that you will see a shift away from having to wear so many hats, and even if they figure out how to make money again, if they start getting one person to do it all, they probably won’t cut into their profit to split the duties back out amongst multiple people again. Just my thoughts on the subject.