Summary Of Access And Consent In Public Photography

Gatekeepers such as publishers and the government play a role in photo manipulation. As Newton (Newton J, 2001, pg. 74) suggests that "those who tend the gates of reportage tend power". These people are the ones who decide what the public ‘needs to know', what is ‘appropriate', what is ‘news' and also what the public needs to ‘see'. Gatekeepers as such must answer questions like: "Will publishing a picture of the body of a drowning victim prevent others from drowning at the same spot, or will it only exploit a tragic situation to sell newspapers?" (Newton J, 2001)

For this essay the works of Robert Draper, author of “Why Photos Matter,” and Fred Ritchen, author of “Photography Changes the Way News is Reported,” will be analyzed. Though both deal with the topic of photography, their take on the matter is very different. While Ritchen is a photographer who writes on “what professional photographers will be doing in the future,” Draper is a writer for the National Geographic writing on how the photographers of the magazine share “a hunger for the unknown.” Both writers, however, write on the topic of photographers having a deeper understanding of their subjects, Ritchen due to research and practice, and Draper because the photographers “sit [with] their subjects, just listening to them.” In both essays the need for a deeper understanding of the

While Postman points out the literal meaning of photography is “writing with light”; the two are from completely different universes when it comes to public discourse (p. 71). Unlike typography, photography cannot offer assertions, make propositions and offers no commentary. As long as it is not an altered photograph, it has no choice but to be true (p. 73). Thus, the photograph is only able to capture a moment in time and does not have the ability to comment on that moment. Our author contends, where language presents the world as an idea, the photographs only option is to show the world as an object (p. 72). Whereas in language, the correct context requires consideration of what is said before and after, in photography there is no before and after, only the snapshot of time. Therefore, by its very nature photography is context-free (p. 73). As photography immersed itself in the American culture author, Daniel Boorstin called this “the graphic revolution.” Postman is unequivocal on the point that the traditional forms of information, news, and even reality itself received an impairment by this new focus on images. For examples, he cites billboards, posters and advertisements. He points to magazines Life, Look and several newspapers. The picture was the focal point, and the writing was forced to take a less dominate roll and sometimes done away with altogether (p.

Although cameras are machines used to capture a moment, Ondaatje argues that they do not accurately portray a person’s essence and their true self. To know someone’s genuine character, one must interact with them, rather than only viewing them through “ground glass or tripod” or the stories told through another person’s perspective. “Ground glass” represents camera’s lenses, a filter altering reality to fit the desired perception of a moment. Cameras are machines that influence someone’s perspective, rather than providing the true nature. Readers typically view Western society as an unknown wild land with no laws, but is it really so? Ondaatje’s use of cameras as a machine questions this notion and shows that cameras and images are only a biased representation of someone and how they want to be perceived.

This essay will focus on appropriation of name or likeness for commercial purposes. First, it will define the right of privacy, and right of publicity. Next, the evaluation and discussion of four cases in which appropriation of name or likeness for commercial gain was assessed in courtrooms. Then after, thoughts on current developments in this area of law will be discussed, as well as suggestions for current working journalists. Finally, closing and concluding statements will be addressed.

Teju Cole, in his essay “Against Neutrality,” dissected the tones behind photography- which he believes are thought of as unbiased towards the subject. The power of words and of photos is crucial to Cole’s essay. He states that images can “make a grim situation palatable” because of the photographer’s craftiness in selection (Cole 1). To anyone who isn’t an experienced photographer these tricks can be hard to see but Cole provides further insight from the historian, John Edwin Mason. Expectantly, Mason sheds light behind the misconception on photography, how the “manipulation in photography isn’t really about Photoshop or darkroom tricks”, but the style, angle and other aspects of taking photos (Cole 1).

Quinn expresses a fundamental concern with the validity and objectivity of journalism with the coming of the digital age, and the increasing role that digital/information technology plays in media that reports or represents reality. Quinn begins his 2004 paper with the mention of the transition of non-digital/traditional photography into mainly digital photography with respect to journalism. More than just the changing of the photographic platform and format, Quinn notes the role that computer software that specializes in photographic manipulation in journalism. Early on, he contends, "Technical advancement has helped photojournalism be more effective in may ways, but has also created ethical challenges in making deception expeditious and less transparent." (Quinn, 2004, 1) The article explores this ethical quandary. Digital technology, photographic software, and digital manipulation are tightly integrated into modern photojournalism, among many other industries and fields. Quinn challenges readers to consider and explore the ethics of photographic manipulation and the implications upon perception. He presents the digital manipulation as having a positive and use; furthermore, that at this point in history and in the profession of photojournalism, it is unavoidable. Quinn clearly additionally presents the issue as loaded with negative ethical implications and

Photographs are re-collections of the past. This essay is about photography, memory, and history and addresses the relationship between photographic images and the need to remember; it is based on the notion that seeing is a prelude to historical knowledge and that understanding the past relies on the ability to imagine. At the same time, the role of thought and imagination in the production of society--as reflected in the earlier work of Louis Althusser (1970), Maurice Godelier (1984) and perhaps more significantly, Cornelis Castoriadis (1975), suggests yet another role for photography in the construction of a social and cultural reality. Photographs in capitalist societies contribute to the production of information and participate in the surveillance of the environment where their subjective and objective qualities are applied to the private uses of photographic images in the perpetuation of memory.

Sekula describes the archival paradigm through the work of Alphonse Bertillon and Francis Galton, who developed the tools and techniques that allowed the growth of the generalized practice of the bureaucratic handling of visual documents. Bertillon and Galton’s work represented two attempts to regulate social deviance by means of photography.

Entry 11: The American star system and paparazzi was the focus of this lecture and topic of this entry in the journal. The development of cameras led to the progression of the idea of paparazzi. In 1959 the United States was introduced to the portable zoom lens, this was a drastic advancement in technology and opened the door for curious fans to discover more of the personal lives of celebrities. In a sense, they outsmarted the persona that was portrayed publically and strived to learn the truth of the stars that they had come to adore. They wanted to know whether or not the lives of these stars were as desirable as it was portrayed to the public. The portable lens that was introduced in the late 50s was that of the Zoomar. This was the first mass produced lens and in essence developed the film industry into what it is now. The camera allowed filmmakers more flexibility in their desired shot and they could now move around and achieve many different angles that were impossible to accomplish before. With the camera’s advantages, came many downsides when put in the hands of the wrong people.

Photography gave a face to the people that were often over looked; women, slaves, and non western now were being portrayed in greater numbers than before. Even as the portrayal of these people grew, the depiction of these groups were manipulated by the photographers in order to convey and fulfill the desired perceptions of the western society. These groups of people became a commodity in western society due to the the efforts by photographers to shape the portrayal of the photo’s subject(s), but these efforts were overridden by the agency that the subjects utilized, either by reshaping or refusing to fit the stereotypes placed upon them.

As I shuffle with the crowd through the doorway and into the first floor exhibition space of the Vancouver Art Gallery, I notice a sign, sandwiched in between the ubiquitous Instagram camera and the hashtag “#couplandvan”, that ardently refutes one of the most basic conventions of viewing work in such a space: “Photography encouraged.” It appears, however, that most of the guests fail to notice this; rather, upon seeing the oceans of products, slogans, and logos lined row by row, they hold up their phones to their faces to take a photograph or three, demonstrating

The autors concludes that the photographer who work in coler have an sdvantage over those who work in black-and-white. The authors uses the examples of the portrait srodios and the types of film as an evidence. However, the authors makes several major assumptions that need to address before the magazine readers could accept or reject this

The show is an American hidden camera/practical joke reality T.V. series produced and written by Allen Funt. Here, the concept of exhibitionism mentioned above aptly applies to this series. This is because the show, Candid Camera, conclusively acquaints spectators with the exhibition of domestic video recordings in a mass media TV context. Thus, by portraying exclusive representations on public screens, Allen Hunt succeeds in making the audience feel comfortable while simultaneously familiarizing them with representations of acts performed by those individuals who remained unaware that he/she was being filmed. Here, the show inevitably empowers the notion of exhibitionism. For instance, the program uses concealing cameras to shoot regular people facing uncomfortable situations, this sometimes includes the use of trick props. Here, the consciousness of long-time spectators or voyeurs is inevitably affected. This is because, hypothetically speaking, as long-time audiences watch the show’s pranks, they could grow to believe that a similarly awkward or discomforting situation could befall them. Here, the voyeurs role and that of the exhibitioner has inevitably reversed. For example, audiences with such a frame of thought become increasingly mindful of their behaviors in social surroundings. Here, the individual self takes charge as the performer when one believes that he/she is under the scrutiny of others. Thus, these people that perform with their “audience” in mind are consequently conscious that another person may be monitoring the compatibility prevalent within their actions, behaviors and their individuality. Such conscious performances are not a staging done solely by the individual. Rather, it is an interplay connecting the self or person, the environment, and the audience, created to provide others with impressions of oneself. Thus, the instances mentioned above consequently prompts individuals to react

It is a well-known fact that the media has a strong hold over the society, and in this information age, it plays a more prominent role than ever before. The recent film, Spotlight shows the manner in which a group of investigative journalists in the Boston Globe made is known to the world that sexual exploitation and abuse was thriving in Churches across the globe. The movie itself further propelled the awareness about this issue. On the other hand, earthquakes and genocides seem to go unnoticed on the mere mention of Kim Kardashian having a child. Clearly, the media is powerful, but people seek excitement from it as much or perhaps even more than they seek information and awareness. Unfortunately, it often seems that the media panders to the need for excitement, but such news can be easily acquired and sold. In other words, the kind of news that instigates public interest makes money is the mantra of the media today, and the quality of the news is compromised in this bargain. Even more concerning is the lack of responsibility exhibited by the new media. This paper attempts to show that the new media seems highly inclined to develop an exploitative relationship with the society, wherein the profits generated undermine the significance of the society’s well being.