Photographer Quotes: Photojournalists

Photographer’s Quotes: Photojournalists

I have interviewed quite a few photographers over the years. Here are some of my favorite quotes from those interviews, here focusing on photojournalists.

Walter Iooss (http://walteriooss.com/) covered the 1984 Olympics held in Los Angeles. He also did much of the photography of the athletes prior to the games on assignment for Fuji Photofilm and Sports Illustrated. This was a dream assignment for a sports photographer, and Ioos handled it with a style that changed the way sports photography was done forever after. His method of work changed after the initial phase because of the changed nature of the Games in the aftermath of the Munich massacre.

“Because of the enormity of the event and its political nature, movement will be quite restricted. Security will be very tight and the restrictions on movement should make photographing the games a difficult job. I’ve always prided myself on moving around, on not duplicating everyone else’s shot. While the Los Angeles committee is doing its best, it’s going to be hard for photographers not to be caught up in the ‘one big cable release’ syndrome.”

John Isaac

John Isaac (http://www.johnisaac.com/) served as the photo editor and assignment photographer for the United Nations for many years. His work combines a compassionate eye with the discipline of a documentary photographer.

“There are two keys to assignment photography—know about the background of what you are shooting, and expect the worst. I strongly believe that pictures should not degrade anyone. The big question is: how much should a photographer intrude on privacy—where do you draw the line? I believe in trying to convey a message, to show a part of someone’s life.”

Neil Leifer

Neil Leifer (http://www.neilleifer.com/) was a staff photographer for Time magazine and later specialized in work for Sports Illustrated. His has dozens of covers and has hundreds of published images to his credit.

“You remember the pictures you liked and say, ‘How did I do that?’ And when you encounter the same situation something clicks. You take your time when you shoot and you edit and you begin to know what you like.

“I’m just curious about things. And I try to let my camera bring me in to see what things are about. I’m not suggesting that the work is easy. It’s not. The pictures don’t just happen—I’m not that good. I put a great deal of effort into them and enjoy the challenge.

“My philosophy has always been that the magazine pays my salary and they’re going to get their money’s worth.

“This job has so many things to do that have nothing to do with photography. There are the obvious things—like plane and hotel reservations—but there’s also a lot to do with just setting things up. People would be amazed if they knew what went into setting them up. But people do cooperate.

“I never fooled myself into thinking they were saying yes to Neil Leifer. They were saying yes to Sports Illustrated and Time magazine.

“ I’m always thinking about the picture I’m going to shoot for the magazine. I’m not overly impressed by the celebrities. The idea is to get the picture. There is a point when you turn out the lights and put on the projector, and the picture is there or it isn’t.

“When I look back at my experiences I know that photography has brought me to meet all these people and see all these events and has given me experiences that no money can buy.”

Digital Imaging Advances

Digital photography is advancing on many fronts these days, with each advance making some “old” tech obsolete and fostering new ease of creating very high quality images and prints. The progress in image data backup and storage, Raw file conversion and flexibility and long-lasting inkjet print output has been and continues to be impressive.

One of the challenges of being a digital photographer is image file management. It’s not only being able to track and find the images made, but being assured that those files will be around when sought later that has had photographers concerned. A digital image is a virtual thing, a collection of information that without computer, software and monitor is invisible and ephemeral. Recognizing the potential for losing images without a backup plan, digital photographers are at least becoming aware that they should not just back up images on their hard drive, but should make copies on whatever medium is available. In addition, as digital cameras routinely deliver at a minimum 1GB loads during download, and now up to 16 or 32GB, so the need for even greater memory capacity has become obvious.

Having just converted and tossed away a couple hundred dollars worth of 100MB Zip drives to DVD backup, I can attest to the fact that photographers today have to be kept aware of the shifts in mediums and backup technology. Indeed, those 100MB Zips seemed massive a few years back, but now even tiny flash memory on key chains offer substantially more storage. And what about backup on CD’s? Today they also seem quite slim on capacity, and DVD’s are an obvious move. But trumping even the 6+ GB DVD’s these days is the external hard drive, which in many manifestations is being sold at what seems like bargain-basement prices for massive amounts of storage capacity.

Indeed, photographers can get almost 1 TB storage for under $400, with a backup regiment that is as easy as drag and drop. No waiting for the CD or DVD to burn, or concern about disk warping or unreadability. And those backups can do double duty as system backups as well. And this new way of backing up has brought increased attention to the digital photography realm from companies like Western Digital (www.wdc.com). Many companies offer portable backup systems as well, wallet-size drives that are sure to become part of every digital photographer’s travel kit. Now, all one or all of them has to do is create a patch from their portable drives directly to digital cameras, especially DSLRs, so that photographers need not carry both backup and laptop on the road.

The other part of image management is software, and that’s where Raw file format comes into play. There’s little doubt that Raw yields the best image quality, and the most flexibility in image enhancement. Yet, some photographers are still more than a bit stymied by this format, and it seems shrouded in a veil of mystery for many. Why, they ask, do they have to convert Raw, and how do they go from Raw to a format like JPEG for emails or TIFF or .psd (Photoshop format) without a lot of gymnastics?

When Raw first came on the scene it was quite confusing, and for many remains so because of its proprietary nature, with each maker, and indeed often with each model from each maker, offering formats that are unreadable by generic software.

True, users can download updates of the Adobe Camera Raw (www.adobe.com/downloads/updates), or use Raw converters like those from Phase One (www.phaseone.com) and similar companies, but to some this is just too much trouble, and too confusing. And that’s a shame, because Raw is the future of digital photography, at least for those wanting the best quality from their digital cameras.

While a number of Raw converter software programs are currently vying for attention, two I have worked with recently make Raw just as easy to work with as any JPEG. Apple’s Aperture (www.apple.com/aperture), for Mac only now and in the future, and Adobe Lightroom, treat and read Raw files with ease and make image enhancement all part of an easy workflow that just might clear up any difficulty photographers have with Raw today. In my experience, Raw makes digital make sense, and makes the experience with digital both rewarding and delightful.

Nothing completes the circle of snapping the shutter like making a print. The recent PMA (Photo Marketing Association, an industry group www.pmai.org) report on printing shows that the kiosk and lab printing of digital images is still growing, and that many consumers have finally caught up with the strides the industry has made in quality and availability of the digital printing infrastructure. Equally important is the improvements in desktop printers for those photographers who enjoy making their prints in their home or studios. And one of the differentiating factors is the growing recognition of the archival quality of pigment inks and printers that deliver same.

While the knowledge of dye vs. pigment ink longevity has yet to permeate the consciousness of the majority of digital photographers, there is a growing number who understand the difference and apply it to their own work. Indeed, there are times when the cost of dye or thermal printers and the end use of the prints will determine that choice. Increasingly, however, “fine art” photographers and avid amateurs are choosing pigment ink printers for the work they want to sell, or simply want to last for many more years than the dye-ink print counterparts.

All these changes bode well for the future of photography and for its continued growth. It seems that as issues arise the industry responds with new and improved products, better solutions and innovations that answer the needs of the end users. While issues of too-rapid obsolescence, constant upgrades and unit incompatibility still dog digital photography—issues that come, I suppose, with being engaged in the computerized world—I see a constant change for the better, with image quality always on the rise. It’s ironic that film will be going away just as it seemed to reach its highest quality, at least in my working and testing experience with the new Kodak Ektar 100 color negative film. While digital still has “issues”, the pace of change is such that what we use and work with today will seem quite obsolete in a few short years. That’s both encouraging and frustrating as we all do our best to keep pace.

Exposure: Film and Digital

Exposure is the change caused by light when it strikes a photosensitive material. It has two factors—time (or duration of exposure) and intensity (the volume of light striking that material.) In both film and digital systems the time of exposure is indicated by the shutter speed, the amount of time that the gate through which light travels after it leaves the lens remains open. The volume of the light that gets through in that time period depends on the size of the diameter of the opening in the lens, known as the aperture number or f-stop. Exposure is like turning on a faucet and letting water flow through a pipe. If we leave the tap open for a longer period of time more water will flow through. If we enlarge the pipe more water can run through in that same period of time.

Exposure is calibrated with a system of stops, or the modern equivalent, EV (exposure value). If the total amount of light doubles or halves there is a change of one stop, or one exposure value. A 1 stop or 1 EV change can be made by halving or doubling the exposure time (shutter speed, for example changing from 1/15 to 1/30 second, or from 1/30 to 1/15 second). It can also be changed by opening or closing the lens diameter by one f-stop (for example, by going from f/11 to f/8 or from f/8 to f/11).

This system allows us to expose with the same amount of light and alter image effects by balancing the changes we make in aperture and shutter speed. If we use a faster shutter speed we can freeze motion; if we use a narrower lens opening we can increase depth of field. As long as we maintain a balance between the two (change the shutter speed in proportion to how we change the aperture—one going up one stop and the other down one stop) we maintain the same overall exposure. This setup is called “equivalent exposure” and is the basis for many creative techniques used in photography.

This exposure system holds true for both film and digital photographic systems, as do the image effects they create. As mentioned, the physics of photography do not change because we have gone from a film to a digital medium.

Digital SLR Photography

Your decision to work with a digital SLR (DSLR) might just change the way you make, process, store and print your images. True, both film and digital photography capture light and require processing steps to see that recording as an image. But digital imaging differs in that it begins as an electronic signal generated by light and ends up as binary code that describes color, brightness and tonality. It is in how you deal with those codes to create an image that makes digital so different.

At first, DSLR cameras can seem familiar. Placed side by side, film and digital cameras often resemble one another; in fact, most DSLRs are built inside the frame of a 35mm SLR body. There are also similar buttons, dials and controls. Terms such as shutter speed, aperture, autofocusing and exposure are all quite familiar to the film photographer. But it is in the behavior of the digital sensor where the two mediums diverge. This is especially true in the image record--the digital image file. It is so unlike the film record that it’s easy to become confused by familiar terms that mask the need for very different operating procedures.


Digital images require considerably more “housekeeping” than film. Both types of image record must be stored properly, be kept safe from damaging influences and must be archived in a way that makes them readily accessible. But you can hold a piece of film up to the light to see the image. Not so with the digital image file. It is “virtual” (mathematical, really) and requires a good deal of computation to be read. It cannot be seen without the aid of a computing device. It requires the intercession of yet more machines and mediums to be maintained, and is always tied to the “grid”—sometimes called the “digital imaging infrastructure.”

This grid is dynamic and can change over time. It can render some cameras and devices obsolete in short order. It can drop image-recording mediums entirely. This pace of change means that there has to be a fairly strong awareness of changes in the computer and imaging industry at large and how some modes of recording and reading systems will change. As you get more involved you’ll see that copying, backup and why an awareness of how recording and playback systems and formats may change over time is important.

The housekeeping extends to archiving, storage and, ultimately, to you taking in hand the actual processing of the image itself. This does not mean you have to do the math or complex programming—the camera’s on-board image processor or your computer handles that. But to get that image onto a print, or corrected or refined to meet your standards, often means your intercession will be necessary. It is this hands-on demand that can make digital so different for many photographers. Granted, this is where your creative process as a photographer comes into play, and where the real potential of this medium resides. But digital is anything but a “you push the button and we do the rest” process.

This is not meant as a cautionary tale to scare you off the digital path. It is presented in the hope that this will become an eyes wide-open endeavor for you.