October 21, 2011 by pmelcher.

Drop everything you are doing, you are taking a spaceship. Not the kind that goes up for a few minutes and brings you back down. No, you are talking the Major Tom kind, destination Mars.
You have not much time to pack and the agency, in its infinite kindness, let’s you take one photograph. Only one. Choose carefully because it could be the only one you stare at for a very long time. You might even need it to explain earth to some wandering martian.
Think you know which one to take ? OK. Now look at what 100 photographers from around the world ( mostly photojournalists) have chosen.

The result is quite telling. A majority seem to take family pictures, like a trucker going on the road. Otherwise pick from their own portfolio, probably satisfied with their own work, and finally the last group will take classics, Eugene  Smith being the top pick.
O ya, there are two that picked an image of the earth. A souvenir !
What is interesting here is how the mind works. Choices here are mostly emotional, thus the family pictures. Emotional too is the choice of their seemingly favorite pictures taken from their own work. Probably because it brings them back to a place and time of reassurance. But others have chosen highly disturbing images ( mummified faces kissing). Will they really want to stare at it for 100 years of solitude ?

Posted in magazine, Social Media, web 2.0, photojournalism, slideshow, editorial | Print | No Comments »

June 22, 2011 by pmelcher.

A new camera is about to change how we think about photography. Or is it ? This camera, called Lytro, records the light field instead of a beam of light. Let me try to explain:

Our current camera record light in one point regardless of its distance and crashes all the information in one location. The Lytro, however, records light from all direction and can take into consideration how far the light is based on its intensity. It than records and store this information so it can be retrieve at will later on.

The result. A camera that does not need to focus. By capturing all the information of a visual scene at once, including the distances, it creates a file that contains all the focus points. Thus leaving the focus decision to the viewers. Example ( click on the image) :

The result is an interactive image demanding viewer participation. No longer does the photographer control the narrative of his image, it becomes the prerogative of the consumer.

The good news is that there is no need for focusing anymore. Everything in the image is in focus when needed. Thus no waiting for cameras to find the focus point. The second advantage is since the sensor is so much more sensitive, images in very low light are not so difficult to capture anymore.

However, because there is always a However in new technology, this puts the burden of point of view on the viewer. Well, it’s not really a burden. The photographer no longer controls where he wants the viewers eyes to concentrate on. Since photography or at least great photography is all about point of view, this could not be such a welcomed tool.

It also kills depth of field . Well, it redefines how we experience depth of field. From a fix position, we can now navigate through it, revealing what used to be blurry elements. Again, we are messing with point of view and subjective perspective. A photographer uses fixed depth of field to convey a message. By allowing it to change, the message is partly, or greatly lost.

Finally, this technology is only available online. Obviously, it cannot be printed. It is not explained how an image taken by one of these cameras would look in a book, or a magazine . The assumption would be that one would need to select a point of focus and fix it in order to use the image for print, thus loosing all the novelty aspect.

“Proof is in the pudding”, as said the queen of spade, so there is no telling what the result would be until one of these cameras are put in the hands of very creative people. It will be interesting to see the results when the camera becomes available but we do not see this going much further then other trendy technologies like tilt-shift photography or lens Babies.

You can read some more and reserve your camera here

Posted in focus, technology, multimedia, filter, lensbabies, slideshow | Print | No Comments »

April 27, 2011 by pmelcher.

You say photojournalism is dead. You say , where are all the good stories gone. You say, it used to be that we could see great photo essays in the pages of our magazine. You say a lot of things. But what do you do ?

Well, here is a suggestion : go to kickstater.com or emphas.is and indulge yourself in becoming a donor in photography.  Jump in with your two feet into the now and present and put your money where you mouth is. Support, sponsor, donate and get involved. Got your tax refund check ? take a small portion of it and spend it in high high luxury by helping out a photographer that has all the right tools but is just missing a few dollars.

There is no scam here, not wasted energy, to false promises. Be your own photo editor and pick the stories you like and make them come to life. You have no idea how good it feels. Do it for yourself, for the next generation that will see and enjoy them, do it in memory of those who died to keep this trade alive. Do it because you can and you should. Do it to make the naysayers shut up and the temple merchants disappear.

Do it because you want to see more . Don’t wait for stories to come to you. Make them happen. Be an instrument of change. You have absolutely nothing to loose. Do it often, even if its a few bucks here and there.

If you are not sure, here is a suggestion:

You already know you will not regret it.

Posted in multimedia, technology, Social Media, web 2.0, photojournalism, transaction, finance, slideshow, editorial | Print | No Comments »

April 25, 2011 by pmelcher.

Photography has always been about Time. and Space.  When one presses on that button, both are frozen, captured and can thus be delivered elsewhere in Time and Space. That was then.

The makers of the GigaPan, a machine that takes multiple images of a scene with various focal lengths in order to reconstitute it into a massive file have now launched the Time Machine GigaPan.

The GigaPan is well known for allowing viewers to zoom in and out of a photograph without losing any definition, as well as scrolling left and right, giving users more control on how they view a photograph. Now, with the addition of time lapse, one can also travel through time.

The advantage ? A scene is no longer static and one can zoom in ( or out) at specific moments . More user control.

Is this the future of photography ? While the concept is very appealing, giving still images more depth than they could ever dream of ( yes, Stills can dream too) , the file size is already a huge drawback. Furthermore, not all subjects can be time lapsed ( and unlike the current trend, nor should they), nor that all subjects are good candidates for zoom in scrolling.

However, some can be and actually gain depth from this new technology. This is where GigaPan would love for you to help. Join in there project and discover, with them, what would work with this. Come on, when was the last time someone asked you to participate in the future ?

Posted in magazine, technology, multimedia, Search, slideshow, news | Print | No Comments »

April 19, 2011 by pmelcher.

Always a late entry in the continuous flow of photographic awards, the Pultizer is still a very a very, very honorable one to receive. Mainly because it is one of the oldest ( the oldest ?), but also because it is so tied with sister, the written press. This year’s crop has made no discovery of young talented 20 year old who grabbed his camera and got the scoop of the year. None of that.  Rather, the jury went for established professionals with years of industry background and strong financial backing. Is that wrong ? Not at all. photography should not be about who you are, how you did it, but  about what you show: the photograph.

This year’s winners also show that while newspapers might be a dying breed, newspaper photogrpahers are certainly not. They still photograph world events with the same passion and commitment as ever.

That is exactly what the venerable Pulitzer showed this year . One little thing, however : Can someone redesign the site so it does look and feel it was made in the 70’s ? especially, can we make a little effort to display the photographic winners a tad better ?

See winners here :  Breaking News : Pulitzer 

Posted in magazine, technology, newspaper, photojournalism, editorial, slideshow, news | Print | No Comments »

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 6, 2011 by pmelcher.

One of the interesting aspects of the launch of The Daily this week, for those of us who are in the business of licensing images, is how to price those images.

Traditionally, an image license takes in consideration the circulation of the publication. And with  print, it is no problem. A publisher will decide how many copies to print and hope that they will all sale. Thus, the circulation is clear, cut, precise.

With an Ipad only publication, well, at first, there is no circulation. The publisher releases an issue and waits to see how many people will download it. Thus, the real circulation numbers are only known after the issue has been replaced by the new one.

So how do you price that ? Well, the best you can do is price the license based on known numbers. Those would be the ones of yesterday’s issue and hope they will be close enough.

But what if it’s a new circulation and it has no previous numbers? Do you use zero as the circulation number ? probably not.

It used to be that the publisher took all the weight of the publication cost.  By deciding how many copies to print, they would, in effect, also decide the cost of an image. Now, it is up to the licensor to partly take over that responsibility. They have to try and figure out the licensing value of their images based on an educated guess. There is a good chance they will always be too low.

In a perfect world, the image license fee should be decided at the end of the day ( for a newspaper, like The Daily) based on how many downloads. It would be possible if the publisher would share these numbers with you. While they are more than willing to do so  with advertisers, they will not with image suppliers.

An ” intelligent image” could report back to you and automatically bill your clients based on downloads, at the end of the day. It would be fair, especially if your image( s) where instrumental in provoking a spike. Otherwise,  you are left to play a guessing game with a blindfold.

Slightly related :

Like everyone else, I have been following the events in Egypt. It is hard to say, and maybe see, the image or images that will remain as icons of this movement. However, they are plenty going around. However, one unnerving  item is Time Magazine. On their website ( and maybe in print), they have there sideshow by Dominic Nahr from Magnum. While the image are good, there are two main aspects that are wrong:

- One : they call it “Time Exclusive photos: The Clashes in Cairo.” . This make it sound like they are the only ones to have covered this event. Which clearly they are not.What is exclusive is that you will only see Dominic Nahr’s coverage of the clashes on Time.com.

Not sure if anyone cares.

- Two: The whole page has to refresh every time you switch to the next photograph. You would think that for a publication own by Time Warner, we could expect a better site design than one done by a 11 year old in 1994. Come on people, it’s 2011!!

Posted in magazine, license, Canada, technology, E Reader, multimedia, newspaper, finance, slideshow, photojournalism, TIME, editorial | Print | 1 Comment »

February 3, 2011 by pmelcher.

Sometimes, away from the screams of the mainstream media’s ADD ( Attention Deficit Disorder) , you fall on some incredibly powerful story. This is one of them.

Beautifully photographed and edited by photographer Piotr Malecki.  ‘Nough said.  Take a look :

Posted in magazine, multimedia, photojournalism, slideshow, editorial | Print | No Comments »

December 20, 2010 by pmelcher.

With more than 10 % of every internet visit going to Facebook and 25 % of pageviews in the USA, Facebook has, in 2010, shown to be a more powerful player than Google.

Sure, you can spend your days optimizing your website for Google search results until you are blue in the face, or until Google tweaks it algorithm yet again and you have to start all over again. Sure you can read or hire search gurus for hundreds, if not thousands of dollars to show you the “hidden” tricks for SEO. Thing is, since they show everyone else, including your competition, it is not so secret anymore. It’s like everybody trying to climb the same ladder, at the same time, to be the first on top. For what ? Lots of clicks ? does that bring business?

It’s not because you throw you kite in a lot of wind that it will fly.

Problem with Google is that it’s google. It’s a search engine, not a reference tool.

In other other hand, you have millions of people connected via Twitter / Facebook / Linkedin , sharing what they like, and dislike, on a huge scales. Friends, colleagues, family telling each other : “look at this/that” ( sharing links is the number one activity on social media, by far). Why can’t your website become one of these links, with the added features of a friend reference ?

While your competition is still trying to climb the SEO ladder only to fall off a few weeks later, why don’t you explore the Social media jungle.

No, not by opening a Tweeter account and talking what you are eating. Besides your mom, no one cares. Neither by opening a Facebook page about your photography. The only friends you will get is those who already know you, or just want/have to be polite.  These are just time waster for both you and whoever has decided to follow/friend you.

Rather, become the fuel of Social Media. Become those links that everyone shares. Become what other people want to talk about. Make your site Social Media Optimized ( SMO).

Just think about it. After links, or very close, the most shared item on social media is : Photography .

Don’t you have both ?

Here you have the ability to get yourself a rather free market research along  with free ( and powerful)  referrals.

Sure, we could go here about what steps to take to make a site SMO. But this is not our purpose here, nor do we claim to be a guru of anything, beside common sense. Furthermore, since it is constantly evolving, there is no such things as rules. The same way you research your next photo shoot, research what could work. For you.

And you know what ? The more SMO your site is, the more SEO it will be.

Posted in technology, Social Media, multimedia, pictogram, web 2.0, slideshow | Print | 2 Comments »

December 10, 2010 by pmelcher.

The two sides of Getty Images :

Getty images : “we will drown you with our images”

Getty Images : Cool Year in review

Posted in multimedia, celebrity, photojournalism, slideshow, editorial, getty | Print | No Comments »