Working in the Digital Age

We all should take a minute to realize how much cameras have evolved. There have been so many technological advances within the last couple hundred years. But what is really amazing is the fact that it has evolved so much more especially since 1990. The features that cameras have now are so advanced compared to what they used to be. I chose to research the Wifi-Enabled DSLR because there is such a difference from the Wet Plate Collodion that I previously researched.

Photo by: Briana R. Prince 
Image Source:https://bree365.wordpress.com/category/camera-used/canon-dslr-eos-xsi/

The Wifi-Enabled DSLR (digital single lens reflex) has the ability to publish an image on the internet almost instantly. The cameras take high quality images with the best cameras to take images up to 21 megapixels. They come in many different models some made simple, and others more complex. The price of cameras have changed, and these cameras are reasonably priced compared to the price cameras used to be. This gives people the opportunity to have a camera that is just like a smartphone, but with better image quality. Having these cameras brings up many advantages for photojournalists. As Professor Nordell says there is the "ability to take digital photos and transmit them digitally". The DSLR is a camera that has that ability. It is often that photojournalists are racing to get that one picture up for the world to see and for many of them it can determine how well they do in the field. These cameras allow photojournalists to post quickly or have the image on hand when they need it right to the internet or backed up to a storage cloud. Another advantage to having this camera is the size of it. The DSLR is not restricting when it comes to taking the picture that you want.

These technological advances have given photojournalists many opportunities. It has also hurt the industry in some ways. These high tech cameras allow for high quality photos. Photojournalists also have the ability to put their photos out for the world to see immediately. The disadvantage to having these easy to use cameras is that anyone can pick one up and take a great picture. There are many great images taken by everyday people and that can take away from a photojournalists job. Some companies hire these everyday people to cut costs while still getting quality photos; this can be described as "leveling the playing field". Although a lot of the media is controlled by the same sources, photojournalists do have the opportunity to show the quality photos in other ways. With the DSLR photojournalists have the ability to post other images online and to blogs.  This allows photojournalists to really express their photos that aren't necessarily shown in the media or newspapers.

Photo by: Quinn Jacobson
Image Source: http://www.cpacphoto.org/classes/introduction-to-wet-plate-collodian-2/

When I researched the Wet Plate Collodion process, it made me realize how many restrictions the photojournalists had. The process required a dark room then developing the picture took so much skill. I still believe that taking a quality photo does take a certain skill set but not nearly as much time and effort as it used to. Photojournalists are able to post the picture or print it out in a newspaper almost instantly. The color image by Briana R. Prince is taken by someone who just takes pictures for fun. The photo is interesting and has a lot of unique aspects and great quality. The Wet Plate image by Quinn Jacobson has so much detail and the image also has great quality. Now what is the difference? It's what is going on behind that photo. In the image that Prince took, the subjects are moving and the exposure time was adjusted to capture the picture. The other picture the subject is not able to move or else the quality would not have been that well. In a video explaining how the Wet Plate process has so many technical aspects. This process does not allow someone to just walk outside and take a picture. The Wet Plate also cannot produce a colored image. There were still many famous photos using both types of cameras, They both have the ability to produce high quality and detailed images.

The Art of Photojournalism

Photo by: Jacob Riis

Image Source: https://prophecypanicbutton.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/oh-say-can-you-see-ii-1-and-a-little-child-shall-lead-them/

Year Created: 1890

Texture:

There are many textures in the image. This helps to really define certain aspects of the image. The children are sitting on broken pieces of something and it helps to show the conditions of which they are working. The texture of the wood in the background shows how old the buildings were.

Depth of Field:

The depth of field really makes you see the other parts of the image. This is taken in the slums of New York City and the background really helps to portray that. If the image was just on the children it wouldn’t show that they are sleeping on a barrel and sitting on broken material. Instead of just showing them, you really see why the picture was taken the way it was. The image has the right depth of field to show everything that is important in the image.

Is the image black and white or color?

Back in the 18^th century photojournalists did not have the ability to take a photo that had color in it. Although the photo had to be in black and white, I think that it gives the photo more of a meaning. It makes the photo have a dramatic effect. It does show how things were back when children were working in these conditions.

Why did you choose the image?

I chose the image because of the meaning behind it. All of the magazines during that time would print ads advertising stores. Those stores would have children right from New York City working endless hours to make their products. The image shows the other side of the advertisement and how the other people were treated on the other end of the spectrum.  It makes me feel sorry for the children and angry for the company for using children to make more money.

Photo by: Elliott Erwitt

Image Source: http://www.cameranaked.com/FamousPhotos.htm

Year Created: 1950

Rule of Thirds:

Automatically my eyes go to the right of the image. The rule of thirds also shows the separation between the black and the white water fountain by having the white side on the left of the image. The man is showed drinking from the black water fountain all the way to the right of the photo, where his whole body isn’t even in the image.

Abstraction:

This image is so much more than just an African-American drinking from the black water fountain. This is representing segregation right before your eyes. The image has one fountain, and then a huge space to where the next fountain is. It is just giving the world an idea of what it was like during those times. The white fountain is so much larger and higher quality than the other fountain. It goes to show how much people were treated so differently during those times.

Keep It Simple:

Although there are a lot of different things to think about in the image, it is kept very simple. It’s as simple as black and white. This showed so much with barely anything going on. The meaning of the image is not that simple but the photojournalist did an excellent job of making the picture for what it is. There is such a simple image with such an extreme meaning.

Subject’s Expression:

The subject’s expression is pretty relaxed. He seems to be leaning over and glancing at the other side of the image. He looks like he was turning around, but does not look overly posed. The image is blurry so it is hard to tell the exact expression of his face but his body language is towards the other water fountain.

Why did you choose the image?

I chose this image because it really gives people an idea of what it was like during the times where segregation existed. I think it shows how unfairly African-American people were treated even after slavery ended. It brings out a lot of emotions for me and it really makes you think about the issues that our country was dealing with at that time. This is an important image that people should see.

Photo by: Thomas E. Franklin

Image Source: http://www.worldsfamousphotos.com/tag/911/

Contrast Appropriate:

The image shows a great amount of contrast. The rubble is contrasting with the color in the image. The background really makes the flag and the firemen stand out. It is not an extreme amount of contrast but enough to bring your eyes right to the firemen and the flags.

What feelings does this image create?

This image brings out a lot of emotions. This image helps to create the feeling of hope and perseverance. This was another tragedy our country had to go through and again we got through it by showing our pride for our country. This can bring up so many emotions for different people.

Does the image remind you of any work of art or photograph you have seen?

You could compare this image to the soldiers raising the flag in World War II. In both photos the men serving our country are bringing the American Flag up from the rubble and raising it the way it should be. You could consider the people in these photos heroes in different ways. In both of the images both subjects are fighting for the people in our country.

Quality of Light:

This image shows a good amount of light. It is not too much or too little but shows all of the colors realistically. The amount of light coming from the rubble helps to show the colors on the flag and on the firemen’s suits. The photographer did a good job of making sure that too much light was not let in even though it was during the day.

Why did you choose the image?

 I chose this picture because I remember this day in history. It was emotional just like this picture of the firemen. This really shows what our country is all about and how we never give up in such a tragedy like this. I also picked this image because I wanted to show the difference between the black and white images and color. Even though the black and white image like this in World War II had contrast, this photo really shows all of the colors and puts emphasis on the main subjects.

Pre-Digital Photographic Technology

The way photographs have evolved is truly amazing. Learning about what people went through to take photos and publish them makes me appreciate pictures so much more. One type of photography that I find very interesting is the Wet Plate Collodion. These photos had high image quality but had a lengthy process to develop them. In the video The Wet Plate Collodion Process, the instructor says that it is very important when developing the plate to make sure you do not keep it soaking for too long. The plates should be developed for15-20 seconds. It is so important to keep the image in for the right amount of time because the image will end up distorted if the time is off. There are also important chemicals to develop the picture. The reason this type of photography can be dangerous is because of the chemicals and the cutting of the glass.

Photo by: Unknown
Image Source: http://www.photographica.nu/unk257.htm

There are many technical aspects when developing a wet plate collodion. First you have to cut the glass and make sure it’s clean. This is done with cyanide. In the video The Wet Plate Collodion Process the instructor uses black for positives and white for negatives. Then you need to do the flowing to make sure that there are no defects in the glass. It has to soak in a bath of different chemicals for 3-4 minutes in order to have the glass ready for the image. Lastly, the glass has to be sensitized. By the end of the process, the photo needs to be fixed and changed from a negative to a positive. There are many specific steps that make it difficult to get a quality image but it is all about light exposure.  “The popularity of the wet plate process was short-lived” according to the article by Joseph Smigiel, the wet plate wasn’t very popular but is being brought back by some art photographers. The wet plate was very popular around the time of the civil war. The hard part about having doing wet plate is having a dark room to do the photography. This type of photography needs to be studied and takes a long time to be perfected. This process was quickly replaced by the dry plate process.

            Photojournalism has changed so much since society starting taking photos. The photojournalist profession has done a whole 360 going from wet plate photos and artists drawing pictures in newspapers to digital photography. This allows photojournalists to instantly publish a picture or have it developed. The way photojournalists used to have to carry equipment and to capture the image was a long process. For example, the photojournalist Robert Fenton has a picture with his assistant on his wagon full of equipment. Modern day photojournalists have more high-tech equipment that makes it easier to capture a higher quality image. George Eastman changed the world for photojournalists by inventing dry plates and roll film. In Professor Nordell’s video he explains that Eastman worked on the half-tone process that came out in 1897 by photojournalist Thomas Platt in New York. This opened up new doors to the way the public saw photos and were able to see different tones. Society thought the images were very high-tech. Just imagine what they would think today if they saw the way we capture and publish images.

Photo by: Jenna Costa

            After taking my own picture, it makes me realize that we have it so easy. I can simply take a picture with my Smartphone and post it for everyone to see. The picture doesn’t need developing or to be put on glass. With pre-digital photography there was such a process to actually see the image. Now with just a click of a button you can see your picture and have full access to it. When I took the picture on my phone I could see the image I was going to take. If you were to use an older camera you would not be able to see what you were taking a picture of. I also took a lot of pictures that were almost frame by frame which made it easier to pick an image that I really wanted. One could compare this to the first motor drive that allowed for 10 pictures per second. By the 1980's auto focus was introduced. Today, most of us can do this on our phones. The digital photography allows for more enhanced image quality rather than what pre-digital provided.  

Can Photographs Change the World?

 Photo by: Thomas E. Franklin

Image Source: http://www.worldsfamousphotos.com/tag/911/

The photo of the firefighters raising the flag affected me in many different ways. The image is so emotional for so many people and really showed what our country was all about. I was young when the attacks on the Twin Towers happened but I still remember the day perfectly. My parents told us not to turn on the TV until there were there with us to explain what happened. When I saw the image of the firefighters it brought back all of those memories. It made me think of everything that happened after 9/11 and how emotional it was. It really made me realize the fight our country put up to save everyone they could. It made me realize that we do not give up, no matter the circumstances. It helped me see what was really going on at ground zero. The photo is moving and I’m sure it is for many other people too. It is an image I will never forget.

  Photos have a huge effect on our world. But do they change the world? In my opinion photos can influence someone’s perspective on the world and make them change in some way. This can lead to changes in the world but a photo does not directly change the world. It is just like Johnathan Klein said that photos cause “provoked reactions in people, those reactions have caused change to happen”. The images help contribute to the changing world. There are many famous photos that are said to change the world. But how do you measure that? It is from the reactions of the people that are measurable. A picture that really shows this is the one of Earth from outer space. The picture did not change the world, but it changed society's perspective on what our world really looks like. It was a moment in history that we will never forget and it may have lead to a change, but the picture itself did not change the world.

Photo by: Apollo 8
Image Source: Dailymail.com

There is an example of some photos that have swayed many people’s opinions. One example of this is Boris Yeltsin dancing after his speech. The famous Pulitzer Prizewinning photo was said to help Yeltsin win the election. The image did not directly change the world but Yeltsin winning the election could have changed the world. The image altered people’s opinions but the people acting on that what was what helped to make a change in the world. Johnathan Klein says that we all have a choice, we can either look away or we can act. This is important when thinking about if an image changes the world. Does the image go and act on what is happening? It’s us that make that choice not the image.

There is no doubt that pictures have an effect on society. But society only allows us to see certain images. The government censors almost all of the pictures that are put into the public. Professor Nordell mentions a famous quote to help explain what censorship can do. He says “if a tree falls in the woods and no one’s around to hear it, did it make a sound?” The government controls what can be shown and what can’t be. There are 6 companies that control 90% of the media according to Business Insider. There is so much constricting information because of the big companies that monitor the media. As Professor Nordell states there is a rising of internet publishing. This weighs out the big companies controlling what is in the media. The internet helps to give freedom to photojournalists to really show the images that they want to. One example of this is war photos. They can sometimes be very graphic and need to be controlled. Johnathan Klein says that “Images caused government to change their policies”. I think that that statement is true because they made images censored because of certain things society was seeing. In the 1960's during Vietnam the government allowed many graphic images to be displayed and that influenced society on what to think about war. Ted Rall explains the images of Vietnam with "A stream of media reports and images describing spectacular carnage suggested that the United States was embroiled in a brutal, dehumanising struggle." This is just another one of the reasons that the government censored images to the public.