“Having a story to tell and willingness to tell it, is nothing – a total zero… ability to do it is much more important and valuable…”
this is just a part of a very provocative, and soon to be very controversial comment, by one of our readers , Anthony RZ , under our most recent multimedia essay by Kerry Payne…so provocative, that i felt it should be right out here for general discussion…why? because it is one of the most important discussions in photography today in my view…..this topic has been discussed a bit before here on Burn and on my previous Road Trips blog, but i do not think it can ever be thought about enough…..please read the entire comment by Anthony…it will definitely make you jump one way or the other….
the discussion here should not be to single out Kerry who obviously has a heartfelt story to tell and who will most likely be moved to tears by the comment of Anthony….any form of diplomacy/sensitivity was clearly not his intent…however, he was honestly direct…..i do not want to fuel that fire for its own sake, yet at the same time with passions now raw among us and surely on full alert, this seems like a good time for more of a general discussion about content and form …about stories to tell….about the ability to tell them….about storytelling and storytellers….and clearly about the medium itself…and even about the purity of still photography and it’s morphing into multimedia….
obviously we all want a great story, brilliantly told…but, the question here put forth by Anthony is of priorities….
so, what do you think?
what is most important for you as a viewer: the story or the ability to tell it ?
My cousin died by suicide at the age of 35. We were the same age. We were very close, like brothers. I have always wondered over the years what I could have done. This helps. Thanks Kerry.
Both the story and the ability to tell are a must in order to transcend.
Kerry’s story is one full of emotion and pain. Touches our sensitivity very deeply, as it speaks about death of the loved ones. It’s a difficult subject to document, and I think that being a part of it, as Kerry is, might be a problem for her, as a photographic essay requires not only a good story but the ability to make aesthetic decisions that are easier to make when you are emotionally detached of the subject.
I value her work from other perspective, from the courage of taking the decision to do it, for the effort and emotional commitment that must have been making all those interviews and taking all those pictures.
An example of good, striking story which is (in my point of view) brilliantly presented and that connects you with strong emotions is this one, about Narcolepsy: http://jmcolberg.com/weblog/2010/07/uwe_h_martin/.
In any case, I think Anthony RZ has a point, but I would never justify his manners…
Ariel.
The ability to tell the story has to come first, although the story is important. But we all know from reading great literature that even the simplest story can be lifted up from the mundane by a great storyteller. As photographers, we have to find a way to tell the story, whatever the story.
The reality is, though, that we can never fully develop our storytelling skills unless we find stories that have personal meaning. I’d be interested to hear from David if he can think of his top 20 personal projects over the years, and how many of those were stories that had no personal meaning for him — I’m guessing none. Our passion for the story is what propels us forward and upward, and what forces us to improve our ability to tell that story.
what comes out at the end, is the key.
I do understand Anthony’s comment in the way that if you take weak photographs and mix some sound, voice to it, it still is a weak result. However, people may say they like it because they are distracted from the photographs by the sound.
If there are strong photographs, telling a story of its own, the sound etc is not necessary BUT this then can give the essay a even stronger thing.
However, if the pictures speak for themselfs, one could keep them separate from the sound. The viewer can use their own speed in looking at the pictures.
Looking at a multimedia environment like burn, why not experimenting and see the outcome? Finally, it is a matter of the chosen medium. Here I appreciate the way Anton takes with his Yakuza project – presenting the work in different forms.
Basis for all are the story told by the pictures. So the ability to tell the story is as important as the story itself.
Anthony obviously contributed something that provokes us into discussing something important, and that is helpful. I hope we get a link from him of a photographic essay(s), with sound (and without sound), that he thinks really works. If you look at literature, there are just so many ways to tell a story, from David Alan Harvey’s favorite Latin American writers, to Raymond Carver’s America, to Kafka’s stories, to Nigerian Amos Tutola’s unconventional and ungrammatical novella written by a real amateur. Can’t there be many kinds of photography that are all equally provocative, and great? Can’t an untrained amateur tell a good story with bad shot photos? This is theoretical: badly shot photos that are brilliantly put together because of the strong sense of narrative of the amateur that moves his/her audience? Not possible? I don’t want to start a debate on a particular photographer, but I have read reactions to Nan Goldin’s photos, from those who find them weak on ability, while others find her personal narrative very compelling. On a bigger scale, isn’t this also a debate between ability and story?
“Having a story to tell and willingness to tell it, is nothing – a total zero… ability to do it is much more important and valuable…”
Absolutely, and I can understand Anthony RZs point of view the storyteller MUST be able to use his or her chosen medium to communicate the desired message. I personally am excited by what is termed multimedia although it’s not really something new; we have had collage, joiners, hand coloured photos etc. but the genres are specialised, niche. Will multimedia in the form of mixed DSLR video and still photography become niche? Probably too early to tell. With the new hardware that we as storytellers have at our fingertips (internet, iPad etc.) there has never been a better time to tell a story. There is going to be a flood of DSLR videos (already is) and much of it is going to leave something to be desired but we also must remember that these people are learning their craft: we are all, hopefully, still learning our craft.
Have you ever watched one of those TV shows that show todays stars in the early days of their career? They were learning their craft. Now they can move us to laughter or tears and it’s all because they had the opportunity to learn and grow and we should allow today’s photographers the same opportunity.
Besides, we don’t want to limit ourselves or box ourselves in here. The special, incredible, unique aspect of photography is that it can stop a moment in time and allow us to see and examine that moment – a moment that is unique and will never come again – and from this perspective Anthony is correct, but some people, will be able to make what we call multimedia sing.
Mike.
I think Anthony’s point that still photography is about the moment is a good one. It’s just that what we’re referring to as multimedia is not still photography and it’s not necessarily relevant to judge it as such. Multimedia is moving images. They are moving at 29.97 or some such frames per second in a timeline whether they appear to be moving or not. And this is nothing new. Moving images, or “movies” for short, have been around for a long time. As has adding motion to still images, which is now pretty much universally known as the “Ken Burns effect.” And when you add audio to still (looking) and moving images and put it into a journalistic framework, it’s known as a broadcast news story. None of this is the least bit new. What’s new is our ability to create these multimedia stories on a reasonable budget of both time and money.
So the challenge, imo, is to tell a story with moving images and audio in such a way that emphasizes what is great about still photography and subtly enhances it with the advantages of audio and motion. I haven’t seen very many of what I consider good examples. Hopefully, this dialogue will produce a lot of links to good ones. So far though, this one by Franco Pagetti of VII strikes me as a very good way to go. The story is sophisticated, the still images support the (nominal) story while telling important, sophisticated stories on their own, and the audio and video enhance, but do not overwhelm the stills.
The story or the ability to tell it? Nice koan. Kinda like the tree/forest thing.
Is there really something like a ‘bad’ story? A story not worth to be told?
For the photographer I think the ‘why’ is the most important thing, the motivation, what keeps you going on. For the viewer the ‘why’ is less important, the ‘how’ becomes more important, vital, to keep looking til the end.
Having the ability to tell a story is nothing, a total zero, without a compelling story to tell.
There is truth in both statements, no? What is one without the other? Perhaps I am missing the point and need more coffee but it seems silly to try to subordinate one to the other, to set up a hierarchy of what is more important, what is “better,” when both are important. However, I do think having a good story to tell, either your own or others, or just a solid concept, is more difficult than would seem on the face of it and at the same time, all concept does little for me, as does all ability with no strong thread. But then, no story CAN be good if it is just a feeling, or a color, or …? … ??? … On the road, need more coffee, confused … signing out.
… Ah, just thought, no one has brought up Soth’s latest work in this discussion …:))
Where is the F#$@ing coffee? Sorry about that. Out.
AKAKY???
I will be back…
YOUNG TOM..
do not be confused…and, yes, get more coffee…as i said in my statement there SHOULD NOT be a hierarchy…we all want a great story , brilliantly told…yet, with all of Hollywood’s billions and talent, and all the publishers out there, and all the talented writers and photographers, how often do we get that story that somehow has both? it most obviously is hard to come by otherwise we would surely see more of it…so, i do think it fair, since perfection is oftentimes elusive, to prioritize…and it is also THE discussion going on in our business right now…the importance of storytellers is in danger if you read most of the media press on themselves…my cry for authorship could go by the way to hear some tell it…anyway, you know my view…the storyteller most important….a good teller can have you in the palm of his/her hand with just the telling….a great story poorly told falls flatter than not so great story eloquently presented…however, sure does not hurt to have some grist for the mill…
cheers, david
yeap…the chicken or the egg…???
I will go with the chicken…
cause the chicken has the ability to make the egg…
…the egg is just the story
therefore…I will go with ~~~the ability to tell the story~~~
ohhh,well…where is the coffee???:)))
It has to be the story first. Any monkey can take a good picture. Very few people have something worth saying. There must also be something said for having a go. I’m playing with audio slide shows and most of them are shit but how else are you suppose to learn?
I think the exact opposite of this at the same time as writing this.
Between two nightshifts, maybe I need a coffee too, but I thought it was obvious that one needs a great story AND the ability to tell it to really shine, to emerge…
Pretty much the same with comments / communication: it’s not only about WHAT you say, it is also about HOW you say it…
This is a quality piece of Multimedia
http://www.vimeo.com/4997847
Multimedia intrigues me and I found Kerry’s piece very good. It was a very moving piece that told a story that touched my heart and made me aware of my hard heartedness at my friend’s statement. That is what art is all about. When we get so entrenched in the need for everyone that does art to be the best in the field we miss out on the opportunity to learn what a piece is teaching us, and hearing the artist’s message. Plus, it is impossible to grow in a field unless the work is displayed to be viewed, dissected, embraced or spit out by the viewers.
Having done a very personal essay myself I know just how hard it is to convey “your” story in an essay; there will always be those that see it and go “HUH?”
Regarding the nature of photography vs multimedia, the use of photoshop to enhance vs the true capture, or as some like to view it keeping it pure: it is all emerging and the best will last and the ones that are not will fall by the wayside as happens in art throughout the centuries. The nature of humanity is to find a new, better, more exciting way to produce/view our art and there are many out there waiting to sell us just the right camera, video system, software to make that happen. My cousin who is an artist told me the other day, “The greatest compliment that can be paid to your art is when someone loves it enough to pay you their hard earned money for it.”
I won’t forget Kerry’s piece and most importantly I won’t forget the lesson she shed on my own personal life on this subject. That is what emerging is all about. I bet the next multimedia piece Kerry does will blow even NZ’s socks off; because she will have learned so much just from having the balls to put it out there. We can’t see the full nature of our work until it is seen through the eyes of the viewer.
no clue watsoeva ……….thinkin … thinkin ………. b bck in some time ……….
Unfortunately, I find the Tuvalu piece more exemplary of what can go wrong with multimedia. First, it’s pretty much a typical piece of broadcast journalism with mostly still images replacing video. But even if we accept that as a desirable form, I found many of the transitions to be irritating. The blinking, particularly the blinking between differently sized copies of the same image, hurts my eyes. In my own work, I’m finding I spend much more time and effort on those kinds of timing and transition issues than I do on putting together the story. It’s great that multimedia software gives us such control over presentation, but with that positive power comes great opportunity to do it badly as well, and in an infinite number of ways. It’s not like throwing a slideshow together and setting the length to five seconds and the transition to cross-dissolve. You gotta have pace.
“You gotta have pace.”
Nonononono.. you gott have CONTENT. If you have that then whatever..
Uff, ok, outta here, I’m a dinosaur looking at prints and books.. ;)
Harry wrote,
“This is a quality piece of Multimedia
http://www.vimeo.com/4997847”
The story is something that is of interest to me and the images were also to my personal
sensibilities but the the way they worked together, somehow, didn’t compel me to watch it to its
conclusion. As soon as the second round ‘typing’ text effect came up I left
That, perhaps, superficial way of viewing content is probably one of the problems that multimedia
and, I guess, storytelling in general faces now.
We’re bombarded with choice and if the hook isn’t set, quickly, them viewers leave.
Thank you for this thread David. And thank you to Kerry for telling a story that has the potential to heal a great deal of pain and suffering and potentially save lives. I know of very few things that are as ‘important and valuable’.
If we take some time to think about Anthony RZs comment, we can see that it basically denies the rights of people to tell their stories and, renders their suffering or experience (the story) to ‘a total zero’. This seems to me a way of thinking that could permit great injustice to continue in this world.
So Edgar Degas decided that being a painter and sculptor was not enough for him, he wanted to be a poet as well. So he tried to write a sonnet and quickly became frustrated at the slow pace of it. He complained to his friend, Stephane Mallarme, that he did not know why writing this sonnet should be so difficult; he had, after all, lots of ideas. Mallarme nodded and pointed out to his friend that having ideas was all well and good, but sonnets are not made from ideas, they are made from words. Having a story to tell is one thing; all combat veterans have a deeply interesting story to tell, but there are only a few Erich Maria Remarques or James Jones or Norman Mailers to tell them.
The ability to tell is a total zero without a story but a story cannot be heard without the ability to tell.
I like a lot of what Ed Kashi (www.edkashi.com ) has done in some of his multimedia pieces.
The “Sandwich Generation” ( http://www.mediastorm.com/publication/the-sandwich-generation ) worked well for me-good story,easy pace to the telling of the story, and not all ‘tricked out’ with effects.
Another one of his pieces, Iraqi Kurdistan Flipbook, from a couple of years ago really divided
opinion on a host of forums after release.
I, personally, disliked it for a long time feeling that his individual stills were much more
powerful and effective in telling the story but after hearing him defend the chosen visual style
I came to appreciate it. In essence, he said that he felt that the newer generation of visual
consumers ( not photographers or photog-groupies) neeeded to be entertained as part of the
process to engage them in a story that they might not otherwise consider.
I have heard a lot of stories by people unable to tell them. They were moving nonetheless…
“Having a story to tell and willingness to tell it, is nothing – a total zero”… without people ready to listen…
“You gotta have pace.” No kiddin’…!
Getting away for a minute from the slogan “what is most important for you as a viewer: the story or the ability to tell it ?” (which I think is a fairly absurd dichotomy, really) but trying to get to the heart of what this dialogue seems (?) to be really about, which I think is the relative importance of technical mastery and subtlety in mixing still images with motion and sound in multimedia presentations… (or am I wrong again?)…
In some ways audio slide shows are an already well-established form for story telling… (I’ve been doing slide shows with music and spoken commentary for some years now… aside from that, the genre I ‘m most familiar with are the audio slide shows that have appeared online on the New York Times over the last 5 or 6 years)… what seems to be new are three elements: 1. Because modern DSLRs allow motion photography, the temptation is strong to use it; 2. Because of advances in equipment and software, one person can now (theoretically) do (and is expected to do!) what used to require a whole crew of sound recorders, engineers, film editors, scriptwriters, etc., and 3. (As a corollary to 2), because of the Web and broadband, almost anybody can throw it up somewhere online, to be noticed or not. Now, ordinarily I’m not a reductionist, but I think because this topic is so huge, it makes sense to break it down into manageable segments just to think about it intelligently.
No doubt these three new elements change a lot of the landscape, even if they do not quite ‘change everything.’ It is very early days for this kind of multi-media storytelling. I’m sympathetic to the view ROBBY expressed that there are many ways to tell stories, and we should celebrate variety and experimentation and not look too soon for codification…
That said, the reality is that multimedia as a VIEWING EXPERIENCE is closer to cinema and TV news broadcasting than it is to traditional still photography, whether in gallery, book, or magazine context… and in considering the viewer (yes, the original question was, “which is more important to the viewer?”) we have to remember a more-than-hundred-year-legacy of evolved audience perceptions and tastes regarding motion pictures. And the quality and consistency of the visual images are only one element of that experience. Remember, most movies start with a script and words, not with visual images. Aside from the spoken word, sound in itself is almost as important, and certainly as complicated, an element. Musical sound tracks make that even more complex. And yes, pacing… (Oh, the stories I could tell about cultural and generational differences in pacing…!).
In my own feeble and primitive efforts, I often feel there is considerable hubris in believing that any one person (particularly me!) can master enough of this to actually produce something that anyone (other than a close relative or another photographer) would want to experience, when the average run-of-the-mill feature film has a roll of technical credits that takes five minutes to scroll across the screen.
On the other hand, since this seems to be where we are, let’s see what we can come up with… I suspect that length, pacing, number of images, types of sound, etc. will evolve as audience tastes and experience evolve, there won’t be any one formula that will work… nor should there be. The nature of the story, and the nature of the storyteller (and the new nature of the potential audience) should, hopefully, create whole new possibilities and suggest new directions. Back in the 1950s and early 60s, because of commercial radio and jukeboxes, it became ‘the law’ for pop songs to run for no more than 3 and half minutes… let’s hope the equivalent doesn’t become true for multimedia pieces.
In case the kernel message above is too subtle… what I’m trying to say is, our ideas of what works and what doesn’t will change as we try more, see more, experiment and fail, and occasionally get lucky. But try to keep in perspective just how daunting and ambitious a transition this represents for someone coming from a still photography background…
yup … prefer the ability than the story ………. would rather be known as a good wedding photographer than a lame conceptual one …………. the reason why i love russel peters …. the guy says the dumbest stuff ever but cracks me up in 30 secs …….the situation aint matter but the photograph does ……. Picasso was a kool painter …. paining isnt kool coz Picasso did it ……..
mtomalty, “he said that he felt that the newer generation of visual
consumers ( not photographers or photog-groupies) neeeded to be entertained as part of the
process to engage them in a story that they might not otherwise consider.”
this is a very good point; we here should remember that much work is meant to communicate with the general public rather that other photographers. I do wonder, however, if Ed has evidence to back up his statement that the newer generation “need” to be entertained etc. or if this is just a perception – rather like “the new generation only have a short attention span” and because of this perception we have to endure TV programs which cut to the next scene every one or two seconds and drive me crazy! I so hope he (Ed) is wrong.
DAHs interest, like many (i hope I’m not putting words in your mouth here David) is in no small measure due to photographers having to find a new business plan after the collapse of the traditional publishing model that used to hire photogs to produce work for newspapers and magazines. I think the new model will have to be that the photographer produces the completed work and then attempts to sell it. Obviously, if the works includes video the photog has a broader range of opportunities to sell. It doesn’t have to be multimedia: it can be stills in a magazine, video on TV and multimedia on the web. The thinking seems to be that the if you are multi-skilled you will be more able to survive the transition from the old publishing model.
Of course it’s not as easy as that. Still and video require a different mindset and you might miss a great still photo because you are thinking video and vice versa. The June issue of the relaunched and excellent British Journal of Photography was devoted to DSLR video and multimedia and I’d urge you to check out the magazines website. Incidentally, the magazine has gone monthly as it’s old business model of bringing news weekly was outdated. by the time the news was in print, we had all seen it via the internet.
Mike.
i´d say..
“Having a story to tell and willingness to tell it is nothing WITHOUT the ability to do it¨
the sentence can exist better without the negative.
to say that having a story and having motivation is a total zero – outshone by ability is wrong..
A.RZ is presenting a black and white, either / or.
all three.. an idea, motivation and the ability to show it.. stand shoulder to shoulder.
arguing which is the greater of ingredients is like asking if the pancake, lemon juice or sugar made my dinner more tasty..
as one dear friend of mine would have said, the statement is ¨splitting the hairs on a gnats arse¨.
development of photography and moving forward is certainly worth discussing.. and as with my pancake earlier tonight, the inclusion of all ingredients will push things forward better than homespun arrogance parading as wisdom.
reading back up the comments now and see people hitting the mark very well..
For me, in all art the first thing I look for or try to get a sense of is honesty. It doesn’t matter if the presentation has mistakes, in fact I find “mistakes” to make art a little more honest. Kerry’s story is extremely personal and honest, these are raw emotions, and you can’t deny that you don’t feel something looking through her images. If you don’t feel anything looking at an image of a mother crying for her lost son, you are obviously jaded, bitter, and disconnected from what makes this world such a fantastic place.
With that said, I don’t think it really matters if you have a great “ability” to tell a story. All of us are born with the ability to tell a story, we do it everyday. While some of us progress at “editing” our stories, to be a good story teller is to be, in my eyes, a good liar. There isn’t anything wrong with that, but people like me can always point it out when we look at art. We see that a person is over exaggerating particular points they are trying to make to give their work more impact. Beating you over the head with a message and insisting upon its own importance.
The story is always there in front of you, picking a story that you identify with is of pinnacle importance. Either you are passionate to tell the story, or you have a personal identification with the people or subject matter you are covering. The story is the most important thing, if we all waited for the “ability” to tell a story, I would not have seen so much amazing work in my lifetime. Yea its not perfect, yea the artist may have some “growing” to do, but you can’t fake honesty. It shines through in your work, and those that are attuned to it, see it right away.
yes very interesting question david…
the ability to tell the story correctly in relation to the “product” you want to put out there (slideshow, multimedia, print, magazine, book,…) is absolutely crucial. Which story you want to tell is in my eyes totally irrelevant. How you tell it, related to the medium, is the key.
A mismatch between “way of telling” and “medium” indeed will always stand out… all the pieces must find and also be of highest quality… and many forget that after “taking the picture” there is still a whole other mountain to climb which involves just as much energy and creativity and work…
Compare it with a feature film: a great director and a perfect DOP will be nothing without a genius screenplay/scenario… and vice versa…
great discussion…
.. to keep banging rocks with sticks or begin to try them on stretched pig skins ..
¨For me, in all art the first thing I look for or try to get a sense of is honesty.¨
said james rhodes
Harry. “Any monkey can take a good picture”…what utter horseshit. In fact very very few people can take a good picture. That statement is itself a big part of the problem ,as many many people believe they can, and do. And the ability to make a good picture(and know one) stands head and shoulders above everything else.
Without that ability you are always leaning on other elements to prop you up.
remember ‘you cannot polish a turd’.(not sure what the american translation is, but you get my drift).
I do not pretend to be a wordsmith, so I stay away from using words to paint with.
I do not pretend to be a musician, so I stay away from using song.
I AM a photographer; so I tell my little stories with a picture; and the stories ARE the pictures. And they are complete within themselves.
And yes…i do believe that EVERYONE has a story worth telling…but the ability,or the knowledge of which medium tells it best? …probly not in most cases.
go lots to say on this one (no shit ;)), but no time…about to take Dima to see a film (that’s another story)…will try to write something tonight…
b
actually,
¨“Having a story to tell, willingness to tell it and the ability to do it are all important and valuable…”
now..
where is my cup of tea?
I’m with John Gladdy on this.
HARRY…
i cannot tell if you are joking tongue in cheek or serious with your comment and your example..if you are serious, then i could not disagree with you more….do you not see the multi media pieces on Media Storm , VII and Magnum in Motion?…..hmmmmm, curious…any monkey can take a good picture? maybe that is true…strange that very few humans can….
cheers, david
HARRY…
i had not read the John Gladdy comment when i wrote mine to you..funny
John any one can take a good picture.(my 5 year old daughter does this every other month or so). To consistently take great pictures on demand is one of the highest forms of craft (art).
David, oh yes joking.
SIDNEY…
not quite the discussion i was trying to set up…multimedia was only a part of it….but in that sense i think you have a handle on it….however, the dichotomy which you think is absurd is at the very core of our disagreements about what photography IS or ISN’T for the last three years…i will never get you to look at a picture as something beyond a representation of an object or place or person….nor of a photographer whose voice just might change the very perceptual nature of the subject represented…
cheers, david
mtomalty, thank you so much for posting the link to Ed Kashi and Julie Winokur’s “The Sandwich Generation.” I cannot imagine a more effective example of blending audio, motion and still photos to tell a story, an important although everyday kind of story. Of course, the fact that it was co-created by a professional filmmaker and photographer who were telling their own story places it head and shoulders over the multimedia work of those of us who are just learning to add audio and video to our work as still photographers.
I personally believe that multimedia is here to stay and that photojournalists, especially those we would characterize as emerging, would do well to develop the techniques needed to add audio and video to their more traditional expertise with still photography. In recent years Detroit’s local newspaper, the Detroit Free Press, has made a name for itself because of its talented videographers and their work.
As a still photographer myself, I thought I would be getting into multimedia. That is until I discovered through trial and mostly error how physically demanding it is to accomplish. For a gal whose hands have trouble even holding my camera and successfully clicking the shutter release button every time I want, dealing with the special needs of video is a bit over the top. But that’s OK, I’m loving the quality of images I get with my new Canon 7D and wouldn’t trade it for anything.
Regarding the story and how it is told, technique — be it still photos or multimedia — is merely a tool: the story is the thing. But that story must be told in a way that respects its integrity, pushes it beyond the commonplace, and engages the viewer on a gut level. And that takes a photographer who is one with the story he/she is telling. Even if the photographer chooses to present the story from a detached point of view, she/he must be engaged with it on a deep level. Superficiality is not the same as conscious detachment. You’ve got to be willing to dig in and get your feet wet, muddy actually. You’ve got to be changed more than your viewers.
For me, that’s why Kerry Payne’s essay works. She’s at the heart of it and it shows. This is her story and it is not easy to tell. That’s its power. As she pursues this work — as I hope she will — it will grow and deepen because she will grow and deepen into it. And technically it will mature as her photographic skills mature. This story must be told and Kerry is the one to tell it. And she will.
Patricia
P.S. Anthony R.Z. may have had an important point to make but I found his way of expressing himself to be insensitive and unnecessarily harsh. How we express ourselves here on Burn is every bit as important as how we tell a story with our camera.
John you sort of have the (or at least my) problem down. I can sort tell a story with photos. Now I’m trying to add sound which I have no idea about. A lot of the multi media I’ve been seeing looks like people like me having ago with something new. It’s not great, but in a few years time it might be. I should really find a sound man and a film guy to do it right but the last thing in the world I want to be is a director producer.
I think if the story is good the people (the public not professionals) will let other things slides.
MIKE R…
i was not really thinking in terms of a new business plan for the future, although i suppose by now it is pretty obvious that many will indeed have to make this adjustment…most of the changes actually give us opportunities way beyond anything in the old model which was truly restrictive in terms of storytelling…only a very small part of the experience could be told because of space limitations…what i am talking about is the “way” a story is told in terms of visual acuity , not so much in tech expertise…it will be interesting to see which model works out in the long run…will the picture viewing public want to buy the “story” told by almost anyone because the content is just so damned important or will the quality and finesse of the teller be so compelling that the viewer/public will buy the “style” instead of the “road map” …my gut tells me style will win out, it always has, but there may be a long long road and a lot of bad examples of storytelling before the dust settles and the new young masters are able to rise from the abyss…
cheers, david
Hmmm.. I was in the wrong room..
panos skoulidas
July 20, 2010 at 4:38 pm
All stories are cool if presented the “right” way…
Harry. yes of course I see your point now. the pictures my parents took of me and my brothers when we were young make me smile, and remember..and also feel sad. And so are good. The pictures that children make in innocence and joy, also are good. The magic there is in our connection to the subject, and the memory vault it unlocks….Making a universal key with your picture,for everyones vault, now…thats a rare thing indeed.
Patricia. We are not all given to spiritual dispositions, nor are we all gifted at diplomacy, and I, for one find blunt honesty far more palatable than sugared platitudes.