Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Interesting interview with award-winning photojournalist and videomaker Dan Chung here.
Quote "I don’t really see a future in photojournalism, if I’m completely honest, as a way to earn a living. But also there are a lot of creative opportunities with moving images that you couldn’t possibly dream of doing with stills. I’m surprised though that relatively few other photographers have made that conversion."
So, for those who are interested in the photojournalism side of things, are you shooting more video these days and less stills? ![]()
I don't think there can be any doubt that, as the news media moves farther and farther away from print and into broadcast (especially web), moving images will increasingly become the "stock in trade" of photojournalists.
But I wouldn't mind betting that, in 50 years time, the images used by historians to define 2012 will mainly be stills. Video is great for reportage; stills are great for dramatic archive.
.
I hate to disagree with the eminent Mr Chung but I think photojournalism is okay , at least for a few years.
Everyone has been bleating on about video for about 10 years now and while lots of newspapers websites are using little video shorts now, they are not paying enough (if anything) to make the investment in kit and the time taken to create them worthwhile - so people are simply not doing it. To make a 2 min video clip to a really good professional standard can take a couple of hours or shooting and editing and working photojournalists simply do not have that luxury.
Dan, thanks to his reputation and position at the Guardian, has carved out a niche for himself that allows him time and freedom to 'do his thing' with video. Unfortunately (although I love his work) he is not representative of most working photojournalists out there.
I remember sitting in a meeting 10 years back and someone said something along the lines of 'in 5 years time we'll all be running around with super high res video cameras on news jobs and grabbing stills'............. well, it still hasn't happened 10 years on! Were it not for the existence of TV news crews then he might have a point but we cannot compete video-wise with a full news crew and a sat-truck / ediiting suite!
I love being a photographer but to be honest if it does end up us doing more video than stills I will find a new profession, I simply don't derive any satisfaction from working with video.
Regarding the amateur vs pros arguement - well it's simple enough, it's up to the pros to remind our editors why they employ us by doing the best possible job possible on every job we do! Anyone can do an okay job of something with a bit of luck, being a pro is about delivering time after time after times and not dropping the ball.
Long live still photography (in one form or another)!
I presume he is referring to the growing use of 'amateur' photos pushing the pros out of the game, rather than a shift to online video versus print?
But I thought that this comment was interesting:
Quote: I’m constantly amazed by the fact that amateurs seem to do a much better job of adapting to new ways of working than professionals
In other words, adapt or die. Because if that is the case, there will not be much of a career in video-journalism either.
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.















