A Light At The End Of The Tunnel

- - The Future

Two recent developments have me excited about the future for photographers:

1. Magnum photographer Thomas Dworzak is in Georgia for The Wall Street Journal and they’ve got a nice online slideshow to go with it (here) but then they take it a step further and have a BIG picture page with a comment area (here). Spread the word. It can only get better.

2. Andrew Hetherington sells out of a series of 220 prints in 9 minutes. All because he’s a brilliant photographer and…he has an audience (read about it here).

It can only get better as more an more newspapers and eventually magazines adopt the big picture strategy and need professionals to go out and deliver powerful content. And, photographers with an audience can count on publishers seeking them out to tap into that audience and their additional channel of distribution.

Also, check out the 10 Misconceptions about photography. I’m feeling pretty good about what lies ahead.

There Are 17 Comments On This Article.

  1. I am a fan of Hetherington myself, primarily because I have gotten to know him through reading his blog, but like Terry Richardson, his appeal seems mostly limited to photo editors, photographers and those in the arts community. I think if I hung a Hetherington Print in my home or at my office, I would get a lot of confused looks from the average neighbor. But congrats are definitely in order to anyone who can sell out prints that quickly.

  2. Rob, curious what your comment on #6 is:

    ‘Misconception No6: A photo editor knows a lot about photography.’

  3. - Misconception No6: A photo editor knows a lot about photography. A photo editor only knows a lot about the photography used in their publication. He or she works, breath and sleeps in a very confined universe. Their ability to make one publication look great almost never translate in making any and all publications look great. That is why very successful photo editors never leave the publication they work for. They grow into them.

    Sure, I think there’s some truth to that. You need passion for the subject matter and you need to understand the nuances of the genre you’re covering. I think that hiring great photographers, making strong edits of their work and most importantly standing up for photography at the publication can take you a long, long way but ultimately you’ve got to pair the right photographer and subject and that takes a deep understanding of the subject and the history of photography that’s come before yours.

  4. Daryl Lang from PDN posted on: http://www.pdnpulse.com/ after seeing this APE post. Also, interesting to read on the WSJ Big Picture page under Dworzak’s pictures how people think the WSJ was kind of lame to steal the idea from Boston.com and call it by the same name.

  5. Re the images used as examples for this thread, there is momentous photography and then there’s photography of momentous events. Sometimes, the two are confused with each other. Sometimes not.

    When a shooter is on an accepted “Who’s Who” list of shooters, there’s a greater chance the two are confused. But not always.

    My apologies if this sounds jaded and cynical. What do I know? I just shoot pretty women.

  6. @JimmyD You are saying that sometimes it is easy to think a photograph is great just because the situation and subject matter are so dramatic when in reality the image, photographically speaking, is average, right?

  7. Misconception #3: Video will replace stills.

    How about a full frame sensor that captures RAW files at 30 FPS?

    http://www.red.com/cameras

    As for who will take time to sit down and look through all those frames to find one? No one will, that’s what software is for, and it’s not that far away either.