March 15, 2011 by pmelcher.

It used to be that photojournalism could be done by everyone. Lately, this seem to have shifted.

When Bob Capa decided to go cover the Spanish civil war, he took with him ( or was it the opposite ?), photographer Gerda Taro. Probably because she died much earlier than Capa ( in 1937), her work is less extensive and much lesser known.

When Margaret Bourke - White photographed the Death Camps at the end of World War II for Life magazine, no one cared if she was a woman or not. Her images told the story and that was that.

Today, more and more, it seems that photojournalism wants to define itself by its gender. More and more, do you see cooperative, workshop, panels, etc for women photographers only. As if your gender was  influential in your photo-journalistic process . Who are we trying to fool ?

I have worked with many, many women photojournalist and I can tell you that if i hadn’t known, I would have never been able to tell the gender by just looking at the images. There is the same talent, or lack of, whether you wear a skirt or not .

It seems that political correctness has now started to reach the shores of the previously sexless island of photography. It appears that some people, with a highly develop social conscience, want you to know what sex was that photographer whose picture you admire. As if it made any difference.

Readers hardly read a photo credit, so why would they care ? Photo editors, the talented ones at least, a gender blind as long as the story is perfectly visually told. So who is behind this and why ?

And if was this was such an issue, why not create a group for black photographers, Jewish photographers, Muslim photographers, gay photographers, or left handed photographers ?

It is bad enough that photographers find the need to categorize themselves in one activity ( Sports, fashion, news, celebrity, etc..) but now they will also have to pick an appropriate social group ?

Why ?

To protect their photographer group against other photographer groups ? Or to make some kind of stupid statement that women photographers are better than men photojournalist ? or have more sensibility ? or are more tuned in other people misery ? Or is it to influence women photo editors to hire women photographers first because of gender wars ?

This self segregation of an already endangered species of artisan is not only ridiculous but pointless and harmful. It will only lead to creating a unnecessary distraction to those who only want to create, publish or view great images.

Posted in magazine, Waste of time, celebrity, No sense, editorial, photojournalism, news | Print | 1 Comment »

February 11, 2011 by pmelcher.

No slightly blurry, underexposed images. No, “look at me, I took these pictures with a broken down Holga standing on one foot” pictures. No, “I am so much more important than the story I am photographing” reportage. No, “look at my Lego skills dude”. Nope.

100 % pure photojournalism. This year World Press Awards are a photojournalism feast with a buffet of the highest quality. Sure, there are more independents than agency photographers ( who cares ?)  . Sure, little Getty images in favor of much more Panos ( I wouldn’t bury Getty just yet). Sure, much more color than Black and White. But that is irrelevant. The World Press Awards is not a crystal ball.

I would question the decision of using a portrait photograph as the number one winner. Not because the image is bad nor that the subject is not worthy. Not at all. I would question it for its potential consequences. Now, every photo reporter in shorts is going to think that the best way to cover a story is to take a bunch of people, stick them in front of a white wall and declare it photojournalism. This trend  is already plagging countries like France and this might make it more universal. Regardless, that should not be the jury’s problem.

I love the slap in the face given to AFP and Getty by attributing Daniel Morel Haiti’s images a well deserved award. I am sure they considered the little girl image as a first prize for a long time.

Not sure, finally, about the Google Street award. Isn’t that a funny subject for a magazine to put together but really not a World Press award contender? Furthermore, aren’t we fringing on copyright infringement here ? I suppose that was the World Press jury “social media” moment.

Now, if magazines ( especially in the US)  would only have the talent to publish more stories like these, the world would be a perfect place ( well, almost). If publishers worldwide would recognize how important these images are to their publications and pay a decent price for them, that would be heaven. Until then, we can hardly say that Photojournalism is dead ( or even dying for that matter). Congrats to all the winner and a double cheer to the talented jury.  ‘Nough said :

Posted in TIME, license, magazine, Social Media, photojournalism, wire service, news, editorial, slideshow, getty | Print | No Comments »

February 2, 2011 by pmelcher.

I was going to write a post on how selfish people in this profession had become. How, or so it seems, that there is no such thing as a photo community or a photography brotherhood but rather masses and masses of individuals looking after their own personal lives with stubborn fierceness and dedication.

The biggest irony, was I about to write, is that most, like  news, wedding or nature photographers, are deeply  committed in documenting the world for others. So how could they be so selfish?

Well, mostly by accepting jobs for so little retribution :  Doing 4 of 5 hours of shooting, including editing, captioning and transmission for $250, often leaving on the table their right to any further license fees. Or photo agencies ( can we still call them “agencies” anymore ? Doesn’t an agent represent the best interest of the people it represents ? ) agreeing to monthly subscriptions fee that end up being a few dollars per image.

Isn’t the thought behind these agreements as simple as : “The hell with everyone, I will accept those prices so at least I can get some money” ?

That’s what I was going to write about. And then, I fell on an article where someone was quoting, or so they thought, Ralph Waldo Emerson . I paraphrase here : ” If every man acted in its own best self interest this would be Paradise on earth “. And then I realized.

This industry is not selfish enough. If it was, if everyone was acting in its own self best interest alone, then we would never see this decrepitude of pricing.

Unlike other related industries, like music or movies, the photography world has not been challenged by disruptive technologies. It embraced, for the most part, digital much faster and better than any other industry. It was not pushed around by new distribution platforms or free file sharing of the magnitude of a Napster or  Bit Torrent. Sure, stealing has been made a little easier, but so has finding stealers. Besides commercial stock, it has not been overwhelmed by crowdsourcing and probably never will. Sure, there will always a lucky citizen journalist here and there but none will end up shooting the cover of Vanity Fair magazine.

So what gives ? Why this pricing depression ?

That’s because in the process of accepting a pricing for a job or a license, each thinks not about the value of the image, the intended usage, the budget available and the consequences, but rather, they think of the Other. What  would the Other do? If I do not accept this price, will I loose the job/license to the Other that will accept it? Then shouldn’t I accept it so the Other doesn’t get it ?

The Other being, of course, the competition. As soon as the photo industry started to guessing about what the other would do, it started loosing its grip on pricing. And the sliding downhill continues. Because, like a self fulfilling prophecy, the Other did accept that price because they thought you would…So now you know they will, so you will too.

The wheel is in motion.

The buyers will not complain. They actually will play in your paranoiac game as they will tell you either : “but that’s what we always pay” or “Everyone else has accepted that price” .

This could be stopped quite easily. If everyone started publicly stating whenever they got a good price or when they refused another because it was too low. Making a clear statement : “yes, we will be undersold”. “Because pricing is not what I am/ We are about ”

You can replace less jobs/less license with more high paying ones. Quality can trump quantity. It’s a viable business model too.

But mostly, it could be stopped if everyone ceased to  think about the Other and  started to act in its own best self interest. Nothing else. If everyone priced themselves according to their value instead of what they think the Other ones value is, than this would cease.

As Ralph Waldo Emerson also said :

Every man has his own courage, and is betrayed because he seeks in himself the courage of other persons.

Posted in license, technology, commercial stock, photojournalism, finance, news, editorial, transaction, Microstock | Print | 2 Comments »

October 29, 2010 by pmelcher.

You know what’s funny ? I’ll tell you what’s funny. By continuing to put so much financial pressure on photographers and photography, the media will loose it’s source of imagery .

With declining space rates and assignment rates, increasingly obscene rights grabbing bordering on copyright infringement, unacceptable usage agreements and overall disrespect of the photography trade, publishers are literally pushing the photo industry to look for new revenues, and respect, somewhere else.

Already photo agencies like VII with news and X17 with celebrity have entered the publishing arena in direct competition to those who used to be their best clients. Others are aggressively investigating how to license images to the million of blogs worldwide while others, like Black Star for example, have left the editorial world almost entirely in favor of the greener pastures of the corporate world.

Independent photographers do not bother approaching publications  anymore for assignments and have long gone with either NGO’s or Foundations. Even new technology companies like Mediastorm already make most of their revenue from foundations/NGO’s. We talk a lot about the desertification of entire regions of the world, soon we will see the same happening in the editorial landscape: Magazines, whether on Ipads or not, filled with nothing more than text and lonely generic images. Textbooks forced to use the same images over and over because there are no more “image suplliers”, preferred or not. Not far is the day when, calling on the phone, a photo editor will hear over and over” Time magazine who ?”.

It is not the will of anyone in the photo trade to cease doing business with publishers. However, the business conditions are becoming so unbearable that they have no other choice than to look elsewhere for revenue. And overall respect.

There will always be photographers because it’s not a job, it’s a passion. But like any passion, it needs to be fed with substantial income. In it’s short history, photography has had a strong love affair with the editorial world. Now the editorial world is treating it’s favorite mistress as an old whore. The bond is being broken.

However, it is not like photogrpahy doesn’t have anywhere else to go to be treated as a princess again. The internet has opened new revenue streams and while it is still a wild west, it promises a lot of new beginning. A lot of new love stories.

There is really no logical reasons for this change in attitude. Publishers have seen a lot of pressure on their industry, certainly, but none brought forth by photography. However, if circulation goes down, it’s photography that pays the rough price. Cuts are made, because, unlike electricity, it is deem unessential for the survival of a magazine. Almost as if, completely rid of the cost of photography, a magazine or book would actually do better. Well, soon, that might just become reality.

With licensing fees coming close to insulting, there will be no one to take those images anymore. No one to shoot wars, politics, archeology or even movie premieres. No one left to service them with their needs. Just an obscenely huge amount of crowd generated images of everything that doesn’t really matter. Pretty, certainly, but of no interest. It will be cheap, but useless.

For now, the old whore still clings to its lifelong lover in the hopes of a change of mind. But for how long?

And yes, you are right, it’s not that funny after all…

Posted in magazine, celebrity, technology, Newsweek, Good Enough, license, mediastorm, finance, editorial, TIME, Search, multimedia, news | Print | 3 Comments »

October 5, 2010 by pmelcher.

It’s not there yet but it is certainly starting to look like one. The Morel Vs. AFP lawsuit has all the ingredients of a circus stage, without the tent.

Morel, if you remember, shot some images of the earthquake in Haiti, put them of Twitter/Twipics, only to see them taken by AFP to be sold world wide. Both parties are now suing each other, provoking many public debates, to which we would love to add our voice.

To be a photojournalist is to be a witness.  Those who become the best of the best and pursue a life time career in photojournalism are driven by one passion that is stronger than photography: The urge to report what they see. Photography is only a vehicle to that passion.

Thus, how can one be surprised that a photojournalist would use social media ? It is a witness tool. Jean Francois Leroy, Kriegmaster of Visa pour l’image, self-proclaim Pope of Photojournalism,  has been decrying the lack of space in magazines devoted to these images. Yet, in an interview in the BPJ, he criticizes those who use social media as a vehicle for their images, including Morel. In a nutshell, he is happy Morel got his pictures stolen by AFP. That will teach him, and others, a lesson. He probably believes that photojournalism belongs only in the pages of magazines and in his Festival. Nowhere else. How so quaintly XX th century of him. Can someone hand him a computer and show him how it works ?

While Morel pavlovian’s reaction was to, of course, share his image with the world (Not AFP) via Twitter, it was also AFP’s duty to take that image and distribute it. Let me explain: Similar to a photojournalist, a wire service intravenous gut reaction is distribute images that show a news event. As quickly as possible. Not only because of the competition, but because of the urgency of breaking news, especially in the first few hours when little or no visuals are available. AFP did not take that image out of greed ( they are partly owned by the French government and will probably never go bankrupt). They took it out of duty. They, also, had to inform the world.

Morel and AFP were build to work together. They think the same way. Except, in this instance, they had not reach any agreement and both acted on instinct.  Who was right, who is wrong?

Let’s do an experiment. Put a table full a brand new Ipads in the street with a sign next to it saying ” Free, Take one”. Sit next to the table and wait. What will happen ? People will come to the table, read the sign, see you next to the table and ask you ” Can I take one ?”.

On the Internet, because no one is visible, no one asks anymore. You take. Everybody takes. No questions asks. Regardless if you have an contact info clearly marked. It’s a free for all. Especially photography. It is one of the most used asset of the internet, yet no one thinks they should pay for it, let along ask permission.

And this is where AFP is terribly wrong : Regardless of the terms and conditions of Twitter/Twipics, they should have asked. Common Courtesy.

They should have resisted their instinct and remain human : just ask for permission.

Instead, they turn to their sharks lawyer and desperately try to make a legal case of what should be a human courtesy case. The worst is that other photographers seem to take their defense and claim proudly ” The law is above human courtesy”. That is sad.

No “terms and conditions”, whatever they are, should prevent one company, one individual to politely ask another the permission to use a photograph. Ever. No one should hide behind these “Terms and Condition” and forget the most  basic laws of human interaction.  Especially if they have a common goal : Inform the world.

Considering the financial discrepancies between the two parties, it is quite obvious that AFP will prevail in this issue. That is the way law works in the  USA ( well, the world actually). The one who throws the most money on a trial wins. Laws are made for the rich and powerful. Quite frankly, it is not that important.

What is important is the role of social media and photojournalism. Twitter has been many times labeled as  the new journalism destination for breaking news ( see the Hudson plane landing, Iran,  Michael Jackson death, etc). It has become faster than news outlet, including the wires.  The confusion comes from misinterpretation of what social media is : A end product and not a distribution platform.

Morel, and many like him, use social media as a means to inform the world.  Morel posted pictures on Twitter/Twitpic for the world to see. AFP does not beleive that Twitter/Twitpic can do that properly. They still think  that, in order for the world to see these images, they had to go on the AFP wire.

What is important here is that AFP are, like JF Leroy and others, misunderstanding the role, the reach and impact of social media. Morel lives in the present, they live in the past.

Everything else is a comedy.

Posted in magazine, copyright, technology, Tweet, Corpocrates, Social Media, license, Search, editorial, law, transaction, wire service, photojournalism, news | Print | 1 Comment »

September 14, 2010 by pmelcher.

So, what do you do when you have a problem ? Burn everything ? Apparently , that is the new solution.

A year ago, French photographer, Jean Batiste ( sorry, couldn’t find his last name), decided that, in order to protest the harsh financial conditions some photographers face, he would burn his images. You can see the dramatic video here :

The result ? A lot of sympathetic press coverage on a slow news day and not much more. After all, if his images don’t sell, why would any care what he does with it ? Furthermore, he might have scanned all of them, making the burning of negatives ( remember those ?) barely symbolic.

He wanted to bring the attention of the French government on the fact that he was making little less than minimum wages with his pictures due to the financial mistreatment of photography. The French Government did not particularly react as they had to deal, like so many others, to a global meltdown of the economy. The financial trouble of a lonely photographer was no match to the global collapse of our banking system.So what does this Jean Batiste do ?

He is at it again. This time, he wants all photographers to join him in burning their negatives at the footsteps of a statue of Nicephore Niepce, the inventor of photography. Located in the remote town of Chalon sur Saône, somewhere in France, the event is schedule for January 11, 2011.

Surely, this is no Koran burning and it is doubtful that it will receive any of the obscene amount of coverage that we have recently seen. It is neither the self immolation of a monk, as we had dramatically witnessed during the Vietnam war. This is the tantrum of a unknown french photographer who like many of his fellow citizen cannot think of anything better than blame the government for his hard time and demand that they hold his hand.

We are aware of at least two photographers currently about to be evicted from their houses because they cannot pay their bills anymore. Do you think they are burning their hard drives in their back yard hoping Obama will notice ? No. They are hard at work trying to reinvent themselves in an extremely difficult time. Do they complain, bitch, cry, and kick. Sure.

But they certainly have no attention to walking in Washington demanding their rights to make a decent living. You know why ? Because they feel extremely fortunate to have been a living on a trade they love. Because they knew from day one of embracing this life that they would hit bumps and roadblocks.

Because they love photography too much to burn it.

Posted in license, copyright, Waste of time, No sense, finance, editorial, transaction, news | Print | No Comments »

September 12, 2010 by pmelcher.

Just when you thought it was safe to go outside and shoot again, a new threat has appeared. Under what seems like a very benign press release lies another attempt from Getty to turn the photography world into it’s own private playground.

This is the press release :

“Getty Images, Inc., has signed a multi-year agreement with McClatchy-Tribune Information Services (MCT) to license its award-winning editorial imagery from their network of McClatchy and Tribune papers. From today, the strategic relationship will provide customers around the world with access to imagery captured by one of the most-respected news conglomerates, McClatchy-Tribune Information Services, and enables Getty Images to offer the most comprehensive editorial imagery for U.S. and world news, entertainment, sports, business and lifestyle.“

Seems like another one of these distribution agreements that Getty already has with a thousand plus companies and it is. Until you know what was the motivation behind this deal :

McClatchy and Tribune papers own 30 daily newspapers in 29 U.S. markets.. These local newspapers like to cover local news. Among the local news are, of course, local sports teams. At first, Getty images, owner of mutli deals with sport leagues like the NBA ( BasketBall), MLB ( Baseball), USGA ( Golf ), USTA ( Tennis) , NHL (Ice Hockey), and so on, tried to get  “local” photographers out of the games. After all, in Getty’s perspective, they are the official photographers for these sports and thus should be exclusive.

Especially since McClatchy  newspaper then licensed those images via MCT to other newspapers and via agencies to the whole world.

That didn’t work. You cannot prevent local newspapers to cover local sports . Just imagine if the Chicago Tribune would not be allowed to cover a Bulls game ? or a White Sox game ? The whole foundation of US democracy would have been in shamble.

So what did Getty do? They went to McClatchy and said, let us do your distribution of images. Why ? so we can grab your sports images and add them to our own coverage, or sit on them, thus making us practically exclusive on all these sports game. Except for AP and Reuters who have yet to understand against who they are fighting.

Sports photography is big business and shows no sign of slowing down. Getty images is on the path to controlling every image that you will see coming out of a US sports competition, and everything around it. ( remember, Tiger Woods first public appearance ?)

This is not about fair competition anymore, where the best image wins, this is becoming a real monopoly. Heard that, Justice department ?

Posted in newspaper, license, magazine, finance, editorial, news, law, getty | Print | No Comments »

August 5, 2010 by pmelcher.

After you put on you dancing shoes and you are ready to spend some of the alcohol funneled energy you have kept for hours during the endless official ceremony, there is someone watching you very closely. Because soon, you will be offering them food for camera. That incredibly volatile moment that only he or she can capture in a millisecond flash and transform into a lifelong memory.

Sure, it’s your friends wedding party, but somehow, you are going to be the star.

It’s not that you want to take the spotlight. Someone will put you there. Despite yourself.

If you though wedding photography is that boring catalog of posed photographed in a park at sunset time, think again.  Thanks to the shifting media economy and more particularly, the demise of thousands of newspapers worldwide, the wedding photography trade has never looked better. You just don’t see it.

A multitude of jobless yet extremely talented local photojournalists have left their police scanners behind in favor of the sweeter sounds of 80’s disco inspired DJ’s to document, for  a fee, the lives of the common. The result is quite amazing :

These are the winners of the Wedding Photojournalist Association (WPJA), an international association of …well.. photojournalists turned wedding photographers. And it’s not just America, like other photo trade organization, it’s actually worldwide ( remember, photography knows no boundary ?).

Did I hear someone called the death of Photojournalism? Not so fast. I see a strong pulse  here.

It’s a peaceful organization : No endless whining, no boring tirades by old timers regretting the good old days, not talk of microstock or any kind of stock at all, no Getty images ( well, not yet), no pictures of dying Africans in B/W, no medium format photography of greenish empty parking lots ( in China, preferably), no Social Media gurus ( no Gurus at all, actually).

Just great photography…enjoy. ( click on the image above to see more).

Posted in newspaper, commercial stock, Social Media, photojournalism, slideshow, getty, news, Microstock | Print | No Comments »

August 4, 2010 by pmelcher.

From a Photo Editor job posting at Time, inc, the world’s biggest publisher of magazine in the world:

-Excellent editorial judgment and eye, must generate story ideas and identify topics to cover, must react to news.
-Edit and build various online photo galleries, notably never-seen LIFE archival content and LIFE.coms weekly feature: The Weeks Best Photos
-Oversee and perform the digital restoration of LIFE archival photos (basic retouching and color correction)
-Experience negotiating and managing usage rights and rates for digital, mobile and video content
-Assign, produce and direct original photo essays
-Liaise with Editorial, Legal, Sales and PR Teams in the execution of featured content packages
-Manage freelance staff
-Strong eye for young talent
- Must be creative in terms of doing more with less for less and must be ready and willing to do so

Revealing, isn’t it ? Especially the last phrase, which could be rewritten like this : Must be capable of getting the best images for peanuts and not complain about it. Ever.

This is symptomatic of the photo world today : Publishing companies profiting from the recession to squeeze top talent into a dilapidated photo department and forcing them to put pressure on photographers.

When will we see photo editors salaries only constituted of the money they save ?

Here is you budget. Whatever you do not use for photo purchase, you can keep for yourself.

Thus putting photo editor in direct survival competition with photographers.

As long as the publishing companies keep on treating photography as a necessary evil that needs to be crushed into “misc.” category along with other parasite expenses, nothing will change.

And, as long as there is photographers or photo agencies willing to accept this pathetic treatment , nothing will change.

O yes, if you wondered why we all had to sacrifice ourselves: 

Time Inc. Operating Profit Jumps 50%, Ad Revenue Climbs 4%

Posted in celebrity, license, magazine, Good Enough, Corpocrates, newspaper, SIPA, news, editorial, photojournalism, TIME, getty | Print | No Comments »

July 19, 2010 by pmelcher.

Man I love what this guy has to say :

Posted in license, multimedia, Search, TIME, celebrity, magazine, E Reader, commercial stock, technology, web 2.0, prosumer, news, corbis, getty, editorial, transaction, flickr, photojournalism, finance, Microstock | Print | 3 Comments »