Reasons to be Cheerful Part Three

... continued from part two.

"We don't know who discovered the water, but we know it wasn't the fish." Marshall McLuhan.

(iii) The Visionaries
(iv) and the Fish.

If you're over 26 then you're not a fish.

I doubt many people under 26 (the Google Generation) would be here anyway and so I can them all Fish without fear of reprisal. They're the people younger than the internet and as such they're digital natives. Speaking at NYU last week, I asked again "How many people here use social media to research and develop their practice?", and as usual, my vernacular was impregnable.

Not because they didn't understand the terms, but as usual they just didn't regard their current social media habits as being the methodology by which they'd define the sustainable photographic practices of the 21st century.

It was like me telling them that they all had accents. Accents that only I could hear.


Which is kind of the point. It was too normal to point out, and for them too blindingly obvious to be an issue. This is a very circuitous way of saying that, the problem is all mine, and ours (that is, if you're not an aquatic). I can teach them craft but they're fettered by my ineffectual application of their digital reality, a traditional application just doesn't account for the huge shift in attitudes to terms like: 'access', 'value', 'free' and 'ownership'.

It's us that have to learn how their perception of the digital landscape will redefine ours.

This particular bunch of students were very lucky to have the last sort of person that I met as their Professor.

There are the those people that see this moment in history to be one of unparalleled opportunity. A real chance for Photographers to take control of their medium and their practice. The chance to define a future where they can realise the full material benefit (both economic and otherwise) by leveraging the forces of this post Digital-Renaissance ('access', 'value', 'free' and 'ownership').



They see how (in very practical terms) this can define 21st Century Journalism as a force to empower their subjects to effect positive and lasting change.

These people are the Visionaries.

And right now, they're all out fishing.

Behind the scenes

I had to put together some examples of my work for a talk that I'm doing, so rather than a bunch of disparate stuff I thought I'd make a little film of one shoot where you see the images being made and then how they get used. This is a portrait session with the band Kasabian.






(Note to self - I have to gather much more information on shoots and work with assistants/collaborators that can shoot video and record sound, whilst changing a Hasselblad backs like the wind itself.)

Do I have to go to college to be a Photographer?

No. Obviously not - I think it's a deliberately stupid question and one that I hate being asked with a passion.

Second only to "What camera should I buy for my vacation?"


I'm not saying that one shouldn't pay for a degree. On a good course (the right course for you) there can be some clear and perceivable benefits to making the substantial financial investment. But a person can certainly put themselves into all of the situations in which they'd benefit from the positive aspects of a bricks and mortar education, without actually packing a bag.

I went to college because I thought it was my only way into the industry. I knew no one that made photographs for a living. Neither of my parents had gone to college, my Mother worked as a receptionist and my Father was a salesman. It was 1991 and my network of friends, family and colleagues didn't reach geographically or otherwise very far from our garden gate.

This was not the right reason to go to college.

Anyone reading this article and considering going to college today can't claim to have the same story.

Why?

Because you just met me for one. So unless you're my Mum (hello Mum) then you've probably already broken some ground in extending your network of contacts and reference points.

So where next?

Well, start by continuing to think in this fashion. For instance, there are actually very few people that work in the Photo industry that make photographs for a living. The job is just one aspect of an industry that runs the whole gamut, from framing prints, curating exhibitions, styling clothes/food/rooms, to location scouting, researching, production, representation, photo direction and art buying, right up to commissioning Picture Editor of the New York Times.
How do you find out about these opportunities? Well the job centre/employment office is rubbish for all of this stuff and frankly most Photography courses don't deal with it either. The ones that do deal with it tend to focus so much on the "How" that it tends to be to the detriment of the more important "Why?". You end up knowing how to do work a bunch of different cameras but no idea what to point them at.

(But)...a lot of photographers think that if they buy a better camera they'll be able to take better photographs. A better camera won't do a thing for you if you don't have anything in your head or in your heart. - Arnold Newman - "American Photo" - March/April 2000, page: 17

One way is to carry a notebook (old skool I believe) or a phone that's up to the task and every time you see a picture that you like (no matter how bizarre the situation or outlet) to jot it down (I guess we could call this Augmenting our reality ^_^). Then in the splendid comfort of your own virtually snug, home-computing environment, work out who the hell made it? How? And for whom?

Here are some nuggets that might help you begin this process of reverse engineering:

Lets say it's a picture in a magazine. The name of the photographer should be with the picture somewhere, certainly in the case of an editorial story (as opposed to an advertisement), perhaps underneath, at the foot of the page or in the gutter (where the staples are).



This being the case then the picture was either;

• a) commissioned by the publication
• b) given by the subject
• c) sold by a photographer/their agency, or
• d) placed by an advertiser.

a) The Art Director or Creative Director are usually top of the pile at a magazine and top of the masthead (a column of contributors usually early on in the magazine) they're great to meet if you get chance but they will seldom micro manage the photo-commissioning, it's usually the Photo Editor that does this.
Photo Editors come in a variety of flavours, some publications have rafts of them, others get by with just one. Either way, this is the person that would commission you and it's the person you have to show your work to.

b) Publications will often not have enough of a budget to commission new photography. They will choose instead to buy/use stock photography, re-use -pictures from previously commissioned shoots that they've retained the rights to use or use press and publicity images.
Press and Publicity images are owned by the subject or their representatives and used to promote themselves or what they do.
Either the subject themselves,their publicity person or agent will commission you to make these pictures. And as they have a natural shelf life, this can become a source of regular income, as any Photographer doing mode l head-shots will tell you (or not).

c) Generating your own work is an essential part of what we do as creatives. If you want to be known as anything more than, a technician called in to facilitate somebody else's vision, then you have to demonstrate this with your own work. Entire business models are evolving that rely less and less on commissioned editorial work and instead seek to realise the benefits from self generated projects. Look at Magnum for instance and how their industry can no longer compete with the citizen eye-witness on their mobile phone. Instead their direction is more in large Art projects that are made after the initial news event and monetized through exhibitions and book deals. When you generate your own work then you can sell or license it.

d) Advertisers remain a large and profitable market for a lot of photographers. There are a number of ways that a client may wish to use or commission photography to sell and promote their product or services. These are usually fed through a creative/advertising agency and more specifically through the Art Buyer.
It is this person's job to h ave a comprehensive knowledge of the industry, so that when a designer (who normally hails from planet Zorg) comes to her desk and says that they need a, young/old/foreign/quaint/sexy/religious/colourful/retro/black and white (that thinks in colour) photographer to sell their new Haemorrhoid treatment - he or she will be able to pull together a bunch of absolu tely relevant photographers.

If you're stuck with a spare Christmas card approaching the festive period, then send it to an Art Buyer.

Five questions to ask before you go to University ;

1. Who wrote the course and when?
2. What is the course Ethos and how is that embedded? (sum up the course in a sentence)
3. Who is delivering the course?
4. What work do they do? (you must at least respect aspects of their practice to be fair to them and you)
5. Who are the alumni and what do they think? (also and essentially how long ago did they graduate, was it the same course and was it delivered by the same people?)

ps. When you found the name of the Photographer, did you Google them, go to their website, go through their client/publications list and make notes of them all ? If they were represented by an agent did you go through their site and see who else they represent ? If it was an advert did you find out who art directed it and then worked out what other clients they have/campaigns they work on ?..... I do.

Why I use Twitter to teach.

The rest of the sentence should read "amongst other things" but it wasn't as pithy.

If someone asks me; what are the defining moments within Photography over the last hundred years then I feel confident giving them a list of things to think about.

It's easy.

Even though my intimate relationship with the subject has only spanned the last twenty of those years, I've done very little else. As such, my collateral knowledge (although not without holes) is substantial enough for me to provide reference points, overviews and directions for further research.

If someone asks me what themes dominate Photographic practice over the last ten years, then I'm confident enough to refer to both my own experiences and those of my close professional colleagues over that time. I'm able to draw on the knowledge invested in my bookshelves, where along with the books, videos and DVDs are plenty of articles and magazines that I've also read and kept along the way.

When someone wants more than this, then things change fundamentally.

It seems to me that acknowledging this fact is a defining characteristic of the people that will continue to drive and be relevant in debates that concern the biggest cultural shifts in Western society since the Renaissance and Reformation.

I can't help but think that to describe the current condition of the photographic/media industry as being "in flux" sort of plays it a bit short, so to speak.

Similarly discussions about whether or not wet darkroom techniques should form the cornerstone of a good and relevant photographic education, are the sorts of questions that I expect to see on a list with item number three being; Is the Internet just a phase? - discuss.

If someone asks me; what are the current thoughts and debates driving the photographic/media industry, this year/month/week and furthermore how do I listen to and follow the drivers of these debates ? Then I'd be lying to say that I knew.

It's hard.

Yes it's pretty much all that I think about. Yes, I am constantly and actively researching and trying to understand not only what the answers to those questions are but also, I'm trying desperately to understand the damn questions themselves.

What is a Photographer ?
What is their role, right now and what will it be in the future ?
What constitutes a sustainable practice for them now and looking forward?

And .. ... then I wonder if anyone else is asking these questions ?
.... and then I wonder if there's a community of people out there that might be sourcing and sharing material to try to comprehend this moment ?

When I find information relevant to these topics I post links to the websites, pod casts, web logs, news feeds, photo galleries, articles, practitioners etc and share them with people that form the community of learners, of which I am one.

This negates the sometimes hermetic environs of academia. Twitter and other methods of social media can constitute a more dynamic and outward facing type of research, especially to the student whose hitherto notion of it was cut'n paste Wikipedia.

Likewise as part of a structure of dynamic learning methods, it also serves to embed the framework of sustainable practices that are relevant wherever the medium takes us in the future. Right now Twitter enables me to follow the thoughts, processes and debates that other media practitioners are engaging in and from this come to a more thorough and global understanding of the commonalities. ... And there is also a keystroke combination that allows you to Tweet forward into the future... .....

As I write this, a tweet from TrendTracker has fed into my Tweetdeck stream it reads :
"Twitter changes everything http://j.mp/61pTE RT @jeanlucr @ggrosseck #socialmedia"

It probably does a better job than I just did of explaining why I Tweet.

That's annoying.



Some great starting points for the virgin Twitterer (via Mashable via Twitter) :

1. Twitter tutorials.
2. Why are some posts prefixed with #Hashtags?
3. What is ReTweeting RT and how do I do it ?
4. Five great Twitter research tools.
5. Seven ways to approach Twitter.
6. Five ways to get your questions answered on Twitter.
7. 18 Professors to follow on Twitter (19 if you include me obviously)
8. The Journalist’s Guide to Twitter.