Photojournalists who envelope themselves in the world of global happenings abroad risk their lives on a day to day basis. They work to specifically bring light to the realities of conflict, through capturing warfare of the country and its people to filming the surrounding reactions that the conflicts trigger.
A French photojournalist, who goes by the pseudonym Mani, has captured the current turmoil between the Syrian government and rebel fighters, which has been plaguing the country, during a recent trip to Homs. His documentation of the horrors abroad, which is shown above, is authentic and frightening. The footage is eye-opening and jaw-dropping
Mani puts himself in the midst of the shelling and combat, while his experience effectively and scarily represents the fear that innocent citizens in Homs have been facing on the daily.
An excellent and powerful video, this.
I, in line with the (ex-?)Guardian photographer, Dan Chung, do think that it is in video where the future lies. This, in a few minutes, tells so much more and informs better than (I don’t know how many) photographs ever could.
I am more interested in seeing this (and being INFORMED) than looking at ‘epic/iconic’ photographs that (only) capture “the moment”. With recording facilites on cameras now having become better than just acceptable, I wonder how many photographers will primarily turn to video in the near future and leave the taking of stills as a second choice.
Wolfgang, I agree with you that this video tells a great deal but I don’t think it necessarily informs better than a photograph, or a plethora of photographs, ever could.
When photographers, especially photojournalists like Mani, capture “the moment,” there are so many factors that play into the newfound existence of that particular image. What was going on? Who was there? What were they doing? Photojournalists specifically work to establish their own individual, crazy powerful medium through photography to tell a story by the environment — politically, socially, geographically, whatever the case is — that surrounds them. With that said, photographs capture MORE than just the moment. They capture every single characteristic that contributes to the making of history, especially photographs having to do with politics and warfare.
While the footage is powerful and definitely put some perspective on the chaos abroad in Syria for me, all this footage is, in reality, is a lasting series of photographic images that have sound. You’re right that recording facilities on cameras have advanced impeccably, but I am not so sure that many photographers will turn to video as their number one choice for capturing moments… photographs have a tendency, I believe, to live on. They become memories, heirlooms, and resources for the future… Video kinda gets lost in the shuffle.
@Ryan
Having worked on the picture side in newspapers for many a year, I might, deep down, agree with what you say, but I am still VERY sceptical as to the future of photography – at least in photojournalism – with regard to it being THE medium to be used to not only convey information but to also produce a lasting emotional impact on the viewer.
I see a film vs. digital parallel here, one struggling to survive, and one pushing the other out of the way.
After having watched Dan Chung’s videos (see link below), I asked myself if I perhaps would have preferred to see photographs instead of (his) videos, and if they would have “done the job better”, and I came to the conclusion that I preferred the videos.
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9982656990/no-future-in-photojournalism-interview-dan-chung
Time will tell.