The really difficult part of this project is deciding what I need to address next. I'm seeing so many relevant things that I'm literally in the middle of four separate essays on topics ranging from ethics and philosophy to technique and equipment. Fortunately, the answer came with a blog post from one of my students, Gary Rhodes, an ACU senior currently interning at the Odessa (TX) American.
| "I have to admit this scares me. ...I welcome the use of video in conjunction with stills but I don't want to be replaced by or turned into a videographer." - Gary Rhodes |
Gary's uneasiness is understandable and not that uncommon in this entire video discussion. You shouldn't think of it as being turned into a videographer. Think of it as your camera is getting a serious upgrade.
We're actually dealing with the ongoing evolution of the camera and the continued expansion of the storyteller's toolset. I'll resist the usual Speed Graphic-to-35mm comparison and point out the great advances this industry made during the 1980s. Who could forget the joys of processing C-41 in the Wing-Lynch and running color prints through the EP2 print processor? Maybe you had a chance to use the grandfather of all neg scanners, the Nikon Coolscan. Maybe your paper had the resources to buy a Kodak RFS 2035 or a Leaf Scan 35. Some early adopters used the bulky Kodak DCS-100 for a while. And if you were really lucky, someone thought you were worth the $17,000 it cost to get you an AP/Kodak NC-2000. Looking back, the period of scanning negatives was very short. Once it became apparent that digital technology would allow us to keep our familiar 35mm SLR form factor, the scanners and chemicals were history.
The transition to video is a unique situation because it presents a significant departure from the current landscape. But I would argue that it's not as different as some might fear, again referring to the current landscape. Many newspapers are publishing still image slideshows on their websites. Often created in Flash or with Soundslides, these packages bring the still image into the rich multimedia environment of sound and motion, typically including natural audio recorded during the assignment or interview. Not only is this great journalism, it's a perfect example of an industry embracing technological innovations and exploiting them for the good of the story. Shooting and editing the video story merely takes the storytelling to the next level.
In today's media marketplace the newspaper is more that just a print product. The Internet, along with partnerships and cross-media ownership, means that content will be used across multiple distribution channels. The content gatherers and producers of the future must be capable of working with whatever new tools the medium demands, or offers, depending on your perspective. This presents economic realities which must be considered. When your employer, that content-creation-distribution-company-formerly-known-as-a-newspaper, wants stills and video from the same assignment, they're not going to send two people. It wouldn't be cost-effective. They will send one person capable of shooting either, or both. Eventually, the only photographers getting hired, or keeping their jobs, will be those willing to expand their toolset.
The video initiative is a well-planned and closely-monitored precursor of what will be a much broader adoption. It's going to happen. And from what has been demonstrated so far, it's being designed in a way which most still shooters would appreciate. As a matter of fact, it's being designed at the Dallas Morning News by still shooters. Among the concerns often expressed is the fear that the photojournalist will be asked to carry a video camera along with his or her still cameras, and be asked to provide a full battery of stills and a two-minute video essay. Unfortunately, this sort of thing did happen in the experimental stages at some publications several years ago, and we know now that compounding the responsibilities only compromises quality.
Photojournalists at the Morning News are not being asked to carry and shoot with two cameras on a single assignment. Nor are they being asked to hang up their Mark-IIs for the Z1U. The tool used is the one that's best for the story. The assignments can come through a variety of channels, but they will typically come out of a collaborative effort between the photojournalist and photo editors. A couple of the more senior video shooters, for example, keep a close watch on the editorial assignment grid looking for story and photo assignments which might produce good video. When I was discussing this very subject with photojournalist Ron Baselice, he informed me how he had a still assignment that very morning and a video assignment in the afternoon. When I asked if it was difficult to 'switch gears' between assignments, he quickly told me there "was no switching...they're both the same." To some, I know this may sound a lot like, "there is no spoon," and maybe it is. But it's also an example of how they're doing things in Dallas. Project director David Leeson draws no distinction between those who shoot video and those who shoot stills. "We're not videographers," Leeson says. "Videographers shoot weddings. We're photojournalists."
4 comments:
One of the ethical and/or operation challenges is who decides which tool or storytelling technique is best? That question may be answered only through experience.
A very good question, I think I often forget that telling story is not all about me. The stories are not mine. As a result I find it difficult to adapt to new ways of telling stories. I think the best story telling technique is one that informs the audiences truthfully (what is true?) and take them to the stories directly.
This is interesting and maybe helps me a little. I am and have been for several years been battling with the fear of full convergence and transformation. I really like Leeson's quote, no matter what, you are still a photojournalist, just with different tools. I really like that it is, at least at the DMN, not a full transformation and that stills and still cameras are still largely utilized. I am very interested in Mr. Pybus' point and could find that very hard to determine sometimes. Thank you for doing this Cade, and I hope to see everything when you finish.
Brian
There is a huge difference in covering an event as a photojournalist rather than a videographer. But I just wanted to add that videographers shoot more than just weddings. I see videographers as storytellers, archivists, recorders of events.
Post a Comment