Skip to content

A Light At The End Of The Tunnel

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.

Comments 17

  1. doug wrote:

    the feel good post of the day, I think I’ll go buy a new lens.

    [Reply]

    Posted 15 Aug 2008 at 12:20 pm
  2. stikman wrote:

    I was bummed I missed out on the hetherington sale…wanted one of those

    [Reply]

    Posted 15 Aug 2008 at 12:28 pm
  3. Ian Barkley wrote:

    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.

    [Reply]

    Posted 15 Aug 2008 at 1:08 pm
  4. J Sandfier wrote:

    20×200 Brilliant! Thanks for turning me on…

    Interesting comments on the WSJ post…

    thanks!

    [Reply]

    Posted 15 Aug 2008 at 1:40 pm
  5. maja wrote:

    i dont think there is a light in the end of the tunel in this bussiness..

    [Reply]

    Posted 15 Aug 2008 at 3:06 pm
  6. Jacob wrote:

    Rob, curious what your comment on #6 is:

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

    [Reply]

    Posted 15 Aug 2008 at 5:14 pm
  7. A Photo Editor wrote:
    - 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.

    [Reply]

    Posted 15 Aug 2008 at 5:46 pm
  8. Davin Ellicson wrote:

    Also look at the edit on Magnum of this. Dworzak does seem find pretty women. . .

    [Reply]

    Posted 16 Aug 2008 at 1:05 am
  9. Davin Ellicson wrote:

    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.

    [Reply]

    Posted 16 Aug 2008 at 11:38 am
  10. christopher wrote:

    incredible. .. the AFP photograph in the basement of a destroyed hospital in Tskhinvali. winner.

    http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2008/08/war_in_south_ossetia.html

    [Reply]

    Posted 16 Aug 2008 at 11:45 am
  11. jimmyD wrote:

    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.

    [Reply]

    Posted 16 Aug 2008 at 5:06 pm
  12. Vittore Fotografo wrote:

    I found the 10 Misconceptions really great.
    Thanks, I find your blog really a useful sort of information.

    [Reply]

    Posted 17 Aug 2008 at 5:06 am
  13. Davin Ellicson wrote:

    @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?

    [Reply]

    Posted 17 Aug 2008 at 5:28 am
  14. jimmyd wrote:

    Davin @13– Yeah. I guess that’s pretty much what I’m saying.

    [Reply]

    Posted 17 Aug 2008 at 1:26 pm
  15. Rosh wrote:

    What a great postive post in a world of negative photography news!

    The idea of the big picture was dying in my mind. You’ve given me hope.

    Rosh
    http://www.newmediaphotographer.com

    [Reply]

    Posted 17 Aug 2008 at 7:09 pm
  16. nina wrote:

    ahhh…what a wonderful post. THANK YOU!

    [Reply]

    Posted 17 Aug 2008 at 10:08 pm
  17. jamie kripke wrote:

    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.

    [Reply]

    Posted 20 Aug 2008 at 4:57 pm

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *