Click thumbnail to link to the article (Cornell Capa/Magnum)

So what exactly is the boundary when it comes to over-editing, over-Photoshopping work? At what point does it destroy the integrity of ones work, misrepresent the true reality, and make for none other than just a pretty picture? The most compelling photographs are usually those that are plain, simple, speak truth and give no reason for doubt at all when a viewer looks at the image. I try to learn as little as possible about Photoshop or Lightroom (or whatever editing tool one uses) because I just don’t see the need for doing a few million retouches to make a photograph perfect– no one ever said it should be perfect, not least whatever has been captured. At most I’ll add in contrast, color corrections, change to black and white, and some serious dirt cleaning (I should really just clean my camera lenses, mirrors, sensors and all). More and more though, I see a lot of very, and I mean very, colorful pictures, digitally manipulated, to look surreal beyond belief.

So it was, with an article that was published on March 30 about a photographer having been disqualified from a Danish photo competition for having over edited his work. Klavs Bo Christensen was asked to send in his RAW files to be compared with those he submitted to the jury as they started to review the competitors’ work. The difference was pretty astonishing, as I’m sure it would be to any photographer/photojournalist intent on respecting his own work and the subject itself. The submitted photos were vibrant, alive, and crawling with color– but his RAW image files were quite the opposite. It’s as though the images were given a whole different life– the drab, unsightly scene from a Haitian slum became the aesthetically ugly. The article can be found here for further reading.  

Another example was this year’s World Press Photo Awards– a coveted annual prize in photojournalism that recognizes the best of the best. In the sports category, however, second place was a real disappointment to me personally. A Russian photographer by the name of Alexander Taran nabbed this prestigious prize, and though I congratulate him for having won second place, I have to wonder what the judges were thinking and when the rulebook got tossed out the window. Although the rules do allow for dodging and burning, the end result of the photos he submitted seems to have gone a little overboard. What Taran did was essentially vignette all of his photographs, and not even in a very classy or pretty way– I was shocked to see that it made it so far. Such editing produces more of an effect than anything else, and it’s a little saddening to see that photos, and photography styles are becoming gimmicks and losing originality– that is, content, composition, and a moment for what it is. Click the thumbnail below for a closer look. 

I also noticed, after having not visited the Wall Street Journal website for some time, that more slideshows with some really astounding photographs are accompanying their usually text-reliant stories… it can’t really be so bleak for the photo industry, can it now?

7am outside my window on a freezing march morning.

9am, sleepies on the subway… one day this ‘pop’ will have sound and movement and a backlight.

In my ‘good old’ days back in Hong Kong before I graduated from high school (circa 2005), the cell phones we had were generally all tri-band/3G and we had a ‘computer mall’ where we could actually find all things computer/techie/geeky all in one place, where you could even trade in your old Macbook for a discounted new one. (Point: Asia is very much on top of its technology… phones, wireless internet, latest gadgets, etc– they’re amazing and every bit efficient at keeping up and updating their societies with it, I don’t think anyone else quite tops that). More to the point, and what’s most impressive were the insides of the MTR stations (MTR = mass transit railway system, i.e. the subway), which featured long screens inside the tunnels, yes inside, and one particular advertisement they showed while the train was about to enter another station was for Cathay Pacific airlines– the plane flew with you on the screen as the train was going along and it felt unreal, mesmerizing. Then came screens that flashed out ads right across from the train platform, where bored commuters watched an endless cycle moving pictures. It was like being in a public movie watching all the ads before the feature, like mindless mind-feed for the not so hungry, but still, it was advertisement, good money, good marketing.

THEN… when I moved outside of the main city of Hong Kong, on another railway system, I discovered the joys of watching the news (and more advertisements) on mini screens located above the handle bars inside the train– screens were, and are everywhere there. The news segments even catered to that particular transportation system, running only several minutes (commuters are only on trains for so long) before moving on to other programming, then the loop starts all over again. In London recently, I screamed a silent joy on my way out to Heathrow when the BBC World News popped up on the screen to regale my pre-flight loneliness with the day’s bad, then worse, news– and I can be pretty certain that service has been in stock for a while by now.

Blinking, flashing, information all over– my question is, why after over five years of screen life all over Hong Kong, of amazing techniques of public advertising (and most likely Japan and other Asian capitals) has the US barely even caught up with these basic technologies yet? When I really think of home in Hong Kong, that’s more the more likely futuristic movie I have in mind.

So the article is already a little bit out of date, but there is something to be said for the appeal magazines have, for somehow it’s an art form that can’t quite be found looking at a screen, and somehow provoked much more curiosity than a newspaper. 

In fact… journalists and citizen journalists converge here and upload, from news to sports, to celebs, it scales a number of categories, and no it’s not a stock agency, a collective, nor a wire service but it sure is starting to feel like one… the bonus includes links to deals on photo equipment, picking up the latest in clearance items for the foto-fanatic.

Nicole Tung

Prof. Penenberg – Cutting Edge

Profile Draft 3 – 02/19/09

A Storm to Stay

     When it comes to talking about the state of the journalism industry today, Brian Storm has an upbeat confidence about it that most editors or journalists do not. “Print is not dead,” he says, and this is coming from a man who is the founder and president of MediaStorm, an online multimedia publisher. One might ask here, why he would be advocating print while working in the very thing that seems to be killing it off. “It’s only a matter of how the medium is used,” says Storm. In other words, perishable stories in the daily papers are better off moving online, where it will share space with the growing number of multimedia pieces—the so-called next generation of media—which is already here now, and here to stay.

     Storm, 39, is a former photographer-turned-multimedia producer who is somewhat of a pioneer in the latest of what technology has to offer for journalism. What he has done with MediaStorm has most certainly demonstrated how we now have the power to change the public’s engagement with the stories in the news (it’s only a matter of time before everyone catches up).

     Now into its fifth year, MediaStorm has become an award-winning platform for multimedia, renowned for its focus on the storytelling. It’s the kind of publication many photographers strive to have their name in, especially those who have spent years documenting an issue. Other than the time put in to the work, the story itself, Storm says, must compel and reach out to speak to an audience on a human level, by making connections, while teaching, and inspiring people into action. On another level, MediaStorm is also “A blitzkrieg. It’s about trying to get a project out in every single vertical you can: print, web, broadcast, mobile phone, everywhere you can touch to distribute.”

     The genesis behind MediaStorm came about in 1994, when Storm was a graduate student at the University of Missouri. He worked on CD-ROM projects with the same idea that is now behind MediaStorm, only it was limited by the technology of the time. Storm’s aim was, and is, to produce long form, in-depth projects “built around the power of still photography, given additional context of the audio narrative.”

     After receiving his master’s in 1995, Storm went to work for the next seven years at MSNBC news, before moving to New York and joining Corbis (a photo agency owned by Bill Gates) as its Vice President. In both companies, he made sea changes to the multimedia and photo departments, breathing in new life to the world of photojournalism, creating partnerships and building better relationships between photographers and agencies, even sprucing up Corbis’ reputation that had then been in decline. All the while, Storm knew he wanted to bring MediaStorm back, and his chance came when Corbis fired him in 2004.

     With the technology available, and the viral nature of the Internet already in place, Storm revived his old project and became a publisher of multimedia. Storm seems to prefer the word ‘storytelling’ rather than multimedia, however. “Honestly, the word ‘multimedia’—I don’t know what that means anymore. It’s lost its value because everyone uses it for different reasons now.” While multimedia has become the jargon for encompassing visuals (video, photography) with audio, for Storm it means more than just the technical aspects of the medium. Where some are more conscious of the economics of producing such work, Storm is focused on the actual quality of content.

     More than being the messenger of information though, Storm believes his role, as with that of photographers and journalists, is to make people actually do something. “I want people to care, I want people to be upset, I want people to say to themselves: ‘really? 800,000 people died in the 100 days of Rwanda? We let that happen?’ and being able to ask the same about Darfur now.” The idea behind MediaStorm is also to encourage audiences to be active in thinking about the choices they make as consumers. For example, on the page showcasing ‘Rape of a Nation’ about the war in the Democratic Republic of Congo by photographer Marcus Bleasdale, the text below the multimedia piece says: “When buying gold or diamonds, ask the retailer if they know where they’re coming from. In this way, we as consumers can maintain pressure on an industry that is sometimes not as diligent as it can be.” Beyond telling a story, it is about social awareness, responsibility, and accountability, and it forces a different reaction from the audience than otherwise.

     One of the most striking examples of ‘feedback’ that Storm received came from a jewelry storeowner in Oakland, California. After seeing the piece on the Congo, and being so moved and shocked by it, she called up Storm to tell him that she was inspired to show other jewelry storeowners the story—by posting it on Facebook. “We connected the story to the exact person who is financing the war over there, and they’re making their own connection in their own heads,” Storm says. Rather than being passive about it, she became the advocate for the story, and more importantly, Storm adds, “I’m positive that the story created important change on the planet because people became aware of it.”

     Having such a platform has also led MediaStorm to collaborate with numerous other organizations including NGOs and clients such as National Geographic, working with photographers to publish pieces on issues ranging from war, social ills, to climate change. But where exactly does it get all the funding to work on these projects? Well, it’s simple: no money is even spent on publishing these stories through MediaStorm. When the Council On Foreign Relations (where Storm also serves on the Advisory Board) turned to Storm for some advice on a marketing strategy, with the already known name of MediaStorm in mind, his response was to “build a kick-ass project. “Create the absolute best story on the Congo [for example], and the people who care about the Congo will market it for you.” For Storm, it’s the product that counts most, and all else follows thereafter.