In their article "Digital Still Photography," Quinn and Filak argue that still photography is more powerful than video, because rather than displaying images for a passive audience, still photos allow the viewer to chose how to long to look and where. This concept was fascinating to me, and I immediately flashed back to the 2012 Summer Olympics in London when McKayla Maroney executed a perfect routine on the vault. There were pictures and videos all over the internet documenting her vault.
While some might argue that the still photography is more powerful at depicting the intensity of a moment, I think that they are powerful in different ways. With a video, you can see the full effect from beginning to end. As an example, I've attached a video clip of Maroney's vault routine.
It is undeniable that watching the whole performance from start to finish is unlike anything else. Her execution is perfect, and her ability is amazing. However, there is a different kind of power to a still photo--no more powerful, no less powerful. It is simply achieves a different purpose. A still frame captures the intensity of a single moment in time.
The other thing I found interesting about Quinn and Filaks's article was the idea that even photojournalists need to be held to ethical standards. Photojournalists, just like regular journalists, they are capable of skewing the truth, and so skewing public opinion. Quinn and Filaks urge that photojournalists must use their photographs to "tell a story that reflects what actually happened." While photographers don't need to use a method of verification, they do need to ensure that there is minimal interference with the integrity of a photograph, event, or article.
No comments:
Post a Comment