For decades journalists have depended on photographs to tell stories but this article describes the many ways that the field of visual storytelling has changed.
A major theme throughout the article is accessibility to equipment and more technology that anyone can use.
I like that the article emphasizes how even with more technology, there is still “no app” for capturing beautiful moments.
It used to be rolls of film with limited exposures and lengthy processing but now it’s hundreds of images at our fingertips.
Is the more the merrier, though? Have we been desensitized or is it just easier to connect to images?
Mentioned in the article, “A Grunt’s Life” by Damon Winter is a photo story he created by taking photos through the hipstamatic app.
To me, the images here are visually interesting and undoubtedly more impressive than most on my instagram feed, I found myself questioning whether these moments really would have “disappeared” with the introduction of a DSLR camera. What do you think the advantages or disadvantages of these are aesthetically? Do you agree that these moments may have been impossible to capture without the discretion of a cell phone?
This also made me think about the format of viewing, instead of taking images that would just stand up well printed in newspapers, we see thumbnails and small squares, slideshows and videos. We probably wouldn’t be engaged in our webpages and screens if all we had were lines of text without images or design. It used to be one picture or maybe a few photos to go with an article. The journalist had one frame to encompass an entire story. Do you feel that makes the image more powerful? How do multiple images or a video change the way we interpret that representation?