Pupil Barrister

Month: May 2009 (Page 3 of 3)

Moving Photography?

Jason Kottke thinks that the stills video camera will become obsolete in a few years time:

As resolution rises & prices fall on video cameras and hard drive space, memory, and video editing capabilities increase on PCs, I suspect that in 5-10 years, photography will largely involve pointing video cameras at things and finding the best images in the editing phase. Professional photographers already take hundreds or thousands of shots during the course of a shoot like this, so it’s not such a huge shift for them.

I think he underestimates the convenience that the traditional method provides.  Editing even a few moments of video is a lengthy process, and selecting a precise frame or three from a length of footage will be too time consuming for the average punter.  Granted, professional photographers do fire off dozens of snaps in quick succession, to increase their chances of capturing ‘the moment’.  But the ratio of wheat to chaf in this process must surely never approach that generated by 25 f.p.s. video (or film).  I don’t doubt that at the very high-end, photographers will continue to use this technique, but the act of editing, of post-production, will keep the time premium high, and restrain its use to a limited number of professionals.  Without devoting the time to inspect every single frame, how can you be sure the quality of the image would be any better than normal?  It is certainly not an appropriate technique for photojournalists on a deadline, or the amateur snapper with other things to do.

The clamour for the photo (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)

The clamour for the photo (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)

Governments losing the media war?

I’ve been at the Frontline Club to listen to a World Press Freedom Day Debate: Are Governments at War Winning the Battle of Controlling the International Media?
Tim Unwin has done a good job of accurately reporting the proceedings. I think the debate will be online too.
My feeling is that the truth of the motion depends on what we include as “international media”. If we are talking just about established, authoratitive news outlets, then maybe the “ayes” have it. However, if we include bloggers and citizen journalists in the definition, then maybe the “noes” are closer to the truth.
There is also the distinction between “combat operations”, when real time reporting seems to go in favour of governments at war, and after the event reporting, when more facts and viewpoints emerge. The established news organisations have the edge in the heat of battle, and alternative, dissenting voices emerge only over time.
At the end, Joe Cullen from the Tavistock Institute urged caution regarding social networking and web 2.0 technologies. They are not changing the political landscape, he says, and most people’s experience of these new sources of information is filtered through the mainstream media, and whatever narrative it is currently perpetuating.
The question is, as always, in what direction are we travelling? I remain optimistic that as more people adopt new methods of communication and news sources, the credibility gap will close and the spectrum of opinion, and information available, will increase.

Newer posts »

© 2026 Robert Sharp

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑