Mountain Workshops

I felt really inspired by this project. I had never seen audio and photography used together. I think it lets you focus on the important aspects of a story, pulling the meaning out of a story more efficiently than other mediums do. You can see the tears in someones eyes and the creases in their favorite photos and these images have a chance to dwell in your mind, allowing you to create deeper associations between your own personal experiences and the experiences of the people in the story. The audio increases the impact of the story because it ties the photos together to emphasize the meaning and storyline. The audio added emotion and realism. This happened especially for me when I heard the old man (top left corner) talk about his wife being killed and his voice cracked like he was going to cry. It seems the more senses you target when conveying a story the deeper it resonates in the reader.
I particularly liked how these people were not famous, rich or particularly exceptional people, they just told simple stories that many of us can relate too. Often stories seem so exceptional and dramatic that people skim over them, not able to absorb their consequences because they cannot relate to them. It's refreshing to hear a simple story, profiling the little things in life we often take for granted.
I think this technique of using audio and photography together is more artistic than other mediums because the journalists have more choice in what images and soundbites they use and where.

Lawrenceburg

- Justin Ray

I continued to peruse the multimedia work done on Lawrenceburg, Kentucky that we began in class on Tuesday morning. When used in this context, I think that the still photography coupled with audio does a great job at zeroing in on several intricacies that video might leave behind. Simple facial expressions seem so much more magnified and important in telling the story at hand, adding context and additional life to everyday situations. This feels unethical to say, but I think sometimes subjects simply aren't interesting enough to warrant being captured by video, and what needs to be said can be delivered better via the still shot / audio method.

One instance when this seems to fit is the piece about the war veteran (top right corner). Capturing his voice adds depth and an authentic sense to the story that the spoken word may not convey as well, but his age and manner of speaking don't necessarily permit him to articulate his thoughts and story in a manner most adaptable to video. His story seems to resonate more with shots like the yellowed wartime photo with the broken frame, or the shot with the younger man in uniform in one corner and the man today visible in the background. Anyway, this probably wasn't the most exciting post, but I thought those elements really brought the story to life.

If Only

If only I had read David Snider's article before our assignment. I have recently formed a new found respect for this aspect of journalism. Photography has the unrivaled ability to show an exact moment just as it happened.
The LaBelle peice showed how much goes into photo journalism, something that seems to be forgotten. Our assignment taught me that taking pictures is easy, butn telling a story with them can be quite difficult.
from Nathan Skid

The hunt for good photographs,--or good technology?

I agree with everyone else-this week's reading was interesting and informative. It was clear and concise, the photos were interesting and I found the suggestions on how to find a good feature photograph really helpful and applicable to all types of journalism. Yet I was also troubled by the reading.

Many of Labelle's references (especially in the section on preparedness) to film and ways of shooting were out of date since the onset of digital photography. While I believe that great photographers have the ability to see and capture moments in a way that I can only aspire to mimic, Labelle's advice to "bend your knees or change angles" when striving to keep a photo clean and uncluttered made me wonder why he didn't just mention the cropping tool in photoshop.

Last week's little experiment with the camera definitely enlightened me as to how difficult photojournalism can be, and I now realize that I personally am not and probably never will be visually artistic enough to win any photo competitions. Good photography is an art form and in my opinion requires some natural talent. But there are more ways to enhance and correct photos now than ever before. We can crop a photo, blur a background and grayscale an image with a mouse click or a quick keystroke. When reading this assignment, I found myself wondering if high-tech digital cameras and powerful cropping and editing computer programs like Photoshop have made photography too easy. Do we really have to be that good at "seeing" and focusing on a subject to produce a nice photo, or can we just create one after cropping the image, lightening or darkening the photo, blurring the background, etc...

If I sound controversial, it's because I'd like to hear other opinions on this. What do you all think? With all the recent advancements in photojournalism, can anyone who understands the technology be a good photographer?

Week 2 - Photography Blog

I really enjoyed our readings for this week. Like a couple of other students, I wish I would have read them before taking my own pictures. Perhaps I would have ended up with greater depth of emotion in my shots. I’m not a Photojournalism major, and I’m far from being technologically savvy, but I hope that the practical skills will be naturally developed out of practice, and with a lot more reading, of course.

I thought that David Snider’s portfolio was phenomenal. I’ve always loved photography and been a little in awe of it. There’s something almost magical about capturing imperfect subjects caught in a perfect moment on film. Perhaps my art background will come in handy when shooting such scenes. Now that I feel a little more knowledgeable, I can’t wait to go shoot some more pictures and see what I come up with.

Photography

I think the main point I got out of the reading and David Snider's photographs was how much humanity and relationships are at the root of all good photography. It's about emotions and portraying the truth of a situation. It's about catching the moment when inner beauty is expressed outwardly.

The photos I liked best out of David Snider's collection were the photos stirred emotions in me. For example the photo of the two children laughing and running I could relate to, and it brought back memories of me when I was that age. Then on the opposite end of the spectrum I really liked the photo of the woman with the beads in her hand because it was almost shocking how weathered her hands were. Her hands and the beads told so much about her life, a life that we could not imagine. It made me curious to know more about the woman, the photo opens our eyes to see what life is like for someone from a different world.

It seems that the best photos were distinguished by one or two critical details, like shadows, a paradox, somebodies facial expression. The chapter on how to hunt for a good photo was interesting to read because it talked about how much patience and preparation goes into finding a photo with those couple of details that make it different. Whether they showed a different perspective of a common image or you catch a paradox in the photo you wouldn't typically see it's all in your timing and determination to find it. I really liked Snider's photo of a couple in France walking down a street with an arrow above their heads going in the opposite direciton. This paradox creates interest for the reader.

Photojournalism- Week 2

I have to admit that I am terribly intimidated by photojournalism. The concept of telling a complete story in one image seems like a daunting task, considering how verbose I usually am. However, The Great Photo Hunt seemed to put a lot of things into perspective for me. I feel that you can instinctual tell what is a good photo, when comparing final products. For me, at least, the difference between a snapshot taken at a party and a genuinely interesting photograph that tells more than what the subjects were wearing is obvious (this is an extreme example). It's the act of composition and recognizing the potential of moments that poses the greatest challenge.

I can ask questions, I can write a story... but telling it with pictures seems illusive. It seems like it's all about catching That One Moment that says everything a reader needs to know, with one glance at the photo (as opposed to taking the five minutes to read a standard news story). Wow. No wonder I'm intimidated. But I suppose that comes with practice and more knowledge of the process of photojournalism, of which I admit I am woefully ignorant.

Photography: The Great Picture Hunt

I am truly amazed by photography. I find a book of pictures or a site such as Snider's to be an abundance of talent in which one person can relay so much emotion and communicate such a story that I want to find something similar every time I walk down the street. I took a photography class in high school and have always loved sitting down with "The Year in Pictures" types of books, but have never considered myself a "photographer." I think these two readings made me want to improve and learn more.
Snider's photos were beautiful. There are a few of children that stressed the importance of emotion, and the faces on those kids said so much. The article talks about catching action, reaction and interaction, and I think these are my favorite things to see with people or animals. The Bubble Blower picture had so much b & w contrast practically split down the middle. All of the shapes, lines and shadows were perfect and added a lot to some of the pictures even if the subject was something completely different. I think I might try to clutter too much into my pictures opposed to trying to stay simple. Also, Snider is a great example of "show me a fresh angle of something old." Not every picture has to have an new subject, just a new way to view it. Some of the most local, regular stories can become the best pieces of work.
I agree with Chroes when he said as much as these tips are important, true and helpful, it really will take experience. The art is not as easy as pressing a button and capturing and image. The article talked about enterprising and how "finding something interesting, well-composed, timely and maybe even meaningful--on deadline" can be exciting and nerve wrecking. A photographer can walk in and have the best addition to the paper/magazine or walk in a be a huge disappointment. Characteristics such as trying to blend, being curious and being over-prepared (some of those things I would never consider!) caught my attention but I loved this: "good photojournalists are not in love with photography, they are in love with people and with life."

Photo readings- Blog #2

Looking through David Snider's portfolio, I remember why I enjoy photography so much. While I do not consider myself very skilled at the art, I do appreciate it for its ability to truly encapsulate a moment, a feeling, an expression that people ordinarily may not notice. Photography is reality. Articles can tell great stories through carefully chosen words, but it is the accompanying picture that often brings the text to life.
Snider's pictures embody many of the qualities that the "The Great Picture Hunt" article said are essential for good photos. There's emotion, there's originality. In many he was able to capture an angle or composition that takes a simple topic and makes it more interesting, and in some ways more important.
"The Great Picture Hunt" article raises some good points on ways to seek out good stories and improve one's ability to take good photographs. I really admire people who possess this talent. And while I don't consider myself a photographer, I hope I can adopt these suggestions and in turn see my own attempts at photography turn into work I can be proud to turn in and display.

A Helpful Summation

With minimal experience doing any kind of photojournalism, I found LaBelle's summary of the hunt for great feature photography to be very helpful. Upon analysis, these elements all make perfect, simplistic sense - so much so that I am kicking myself for not fusing these elements into my initial picture assignment. Because essentially all my journalistic experience comes from the written word, I've often overlooked the intricacies of photography. This may seem somewhat elementary and corny, but I am beginning to develop a much stronger appreciation for what goes into a great photo.

The most lasting and prevailing images will always be ones that either show or evoke great emotion. Probably my favorite passage from the reading was LaBelle's description of what constitutes a moment. "Moments make statements - they say something about the human condition. They don't require poetic words to describe to the reader what is happening, only identification of the subject and the circumstances." I completely agree with this sentiment. Though the writer in me wants to defend my favorite craft, frothy metaphors are no match for a flawless snapshot.

Week One

After reading Mush of Medocrity I see a number of disadvantages I had not previously thought about. I had not really thought about how one person trying to accomplish a print story, photographs and a video package might have to decrease the quality of these to accomplish there tasks in a deadline. It makes sense that three people could do that better than one.

However, I also believe that if a person is trained well enough in convergence journalism they can be a valuable asset to a media company. Just like the example in Backpack Journalism of the guy who had to do the story by himself due to only one visa being issued, this shows how valuable somebody with various areas of knowledge can be. I believe that the kind of training we are getting now will not lead us to be any less competent than our collegues who specialise in one area of journalism.

In 10 years when convergence journalism is going to be more popular, questions of quality may also be answered with the development of technology. I am sure that in 10 years time the technology available will make a convergence journalists job easier and of a higher standard.

So to sum up, I believe that if the opportunity for a media company is there to send five people for a story, if they have the money and staffing available for that, then this is the best option. However, when this is not possible and often when international stories break this is not, a convergence journalist is going to be a valuable tool.

Stevens v. Stone

Both articles raise some interesting questions. Some of them are questions I asked before decided to pursue this sequence. Are convergence reporters really the future of journalism? Can convergence reporters produce quality journalism in light of their increased responsibilites? Will there still be a place for specialization? What I found particularly intersting is that while Stevens and Stone may appear to be on opposite sides of the fence, both agree that convergence journalism is going to be around for awhile. The examples given (i.e. Pariah Nation, The Herald Sun's piece on Nicaragua, etc.) prove that multimedia reporting can be incredibly compelling. Yet with the exception of 9/11, these examples were stories that took weeks to produce. It seems that the real issue here is whether or not spot and daily news can be effectively covered by a convergence journalist. I think that this is possible, especially if you consider using a convergence duo or team. If you assigned more than one person to a story, it would be easier to balance the different tasks each story required.

In regard to the whole "mush of mediocrity," theory, I think that there should and will be a degree of specialization in any good convegence reporter. While convergence journalists have a broad knowledge of how to use several media, most would ideally have one to two areas of expertise. Much in the way that people who are multi-lingual have one to two dominant languages, the convergence journlaist would have a preferred medium that could be enhance using multimedia skills. For example, a reporter for a newspaper who takes some photos for a story enhances that story by giving it a visual aspect. That photo would add to the story even though the reporter may not be a trained photojournalist. Does that make sense?

Ultimately, I think I agree with Eddie that convergence journalists are journalists above all else. The most important part is the story! Convergence journalists will still be collecting information and preparing the story using the tried and true methods of the past. The difference is that the convergence journalist can package the story themselves, and as the technology becomes better and even more user-friendly, the end result will be better.

Advantages of Convergence

Jane Stevens presents a thought provoking piece on the blending of the different aspects of journalism. Her ideas concerning the advantages created by the internet offer many different avenues the institution of journalism would benefit from following.
I agree with Stevens in the interent has the ability to bring context and continuity to a story in a way that neither newspapers nor television are able to fully capture. After reading this article I feel that I have gained a more precise understanding of the role the convergence journalist will play as societies dependence on the internet increases. I have great confidence in the ablility of journalism to captivate the full potential of the internet, bringing many mediumd into one interacive forum. From Nathan Skid.

Backpack Journalism

- from Ashley Ward

I believe Martha Stone’s description of multimedia journalism as a “mush of mediocrity” addresses the primary fear of many journalists. No one wants the quality of journalism to suffer, but I think people have to accept the idea that journalism’s form must change in order to stay relevant. While developing this new form of converged media, mistakes are going to be made. However, as an investment in the future of journalism, news corporations must be willing to work through these missteps and pour resources into more advanced training for the journalists currently staffing their newsrooms.
I don’t believe the ultimate success of converged media rests with current journalists, however. The largest contributors will be students entering the field from journalism programs which emphasize telling stories across different platforms. As these students advance in their careers, they will be more comfortable working in an environment that combines different forms of journalism in order to tell the story most effectively. Although most of these journalists will still specialize, they will have a broader knowledge of different technologies, and therefore will be more inclined to tell a story using a variety of mediums, engaging a more diverse group of consumers.

Backpack Journalism and "Mush of Mediocrity"

After reading Jane Steven's article on backpack journalism, it was so exciting to think that we can help head up the generation of the journalists who shall soon "rule." The following "Mush of Mediocrity" was a little disheartening, but if you think about it, it cannot be entirely accurate for those with the drive to do the job of a journalist and present truthful information in the most accurate and useful way possible.
Stevens stressed the idea that the world of media cannot just hit a switch titled "convergence" for everything to adjust--it will take money, organization and people who care. I consider those learning the trades of convergence journalism to be enthusiastic about their job and therefore want to cover it in the best way possible and will therefore want to be familiar with all of the options (be it through video, audio or print). As the journalist for the Discovery Channel said when she traveled the world as a backpack journalist for stories, it was the one time she felt she "wasn't cheating anybody" because she could give her audience a true picture/sound of her experiences. With the web, audiences now expect there to be more visuals along side the print and links that take them to the type of stories they are interested in. It is exciting to think of all the different ways to tell a story, and we can now set up links so that maybe the audiences can understand news in our world a little bit better.
It is my hope that editors/media organizations will not just hire those with multimedia skills just because sending one person out is cheaper than a team (a mix-up of loyalties). I always thought of teams of multimedia journalists working together to create a well-rounded package. I think I am kind of confused on differences between multimedia and convergence...
No matter what, journalism is moving forward. We still need those with specialized training, and convergence can use them to work together with others to produce the best package for a story/event.

Day One blog - Backpack Journalism

From: Justin Ray

I share some concerns with the second article, specifically that most backpack journalists are utilitarian at all forms of media, but masters at none. Since my mind works almost entirely in sports metaphors, I'll use a small handful here. As a kid, no little leaguer aspires to be Jose Vizcaino or the fifth-starter / long relief man at the back of a big league pitching staff. Rather, the youngster envisions himself as Manny Ramirez cheesing for an Upper Deck baseball card shoot, or as Dontrelle Willis II in training. In a parallel to this, with two whole days of Convergence under my figurative belt, it is not my desire to be the Jose Oquendo of multimedia, but a news gathering dynamo with an arsenal of mediums at my skilled disposal. I hardly call my aspirations as an attempt to dive into a "mush of mediocrity."

The necessity for multi-tasking journalists goes hand in hand with the way people acquire news now and will in the future, and old-fashioned industry types will realize that in time. But, I agree that even the most talented and focused individual can suffer slip-ups when holding so many responsibilities at once.

Thoughts on "Backpack" journalism (Week One)

--from Lindsay Wilkes-Edrington

Martha Stone argues that the problem is few journalists are capable of multimedia journalism and those who are will likely produce mediocre work. While there may be some truth to her point, I feel it is unfair to dismiss convergence journalists and their ability to tell stories. I think the growing interest in convergence is evidence more people are recognizing the importance of thinking outside the box.
It’s rather unfair to criticize “backpack” journalism, or convergence journalism in general, when the traditional mediums aren’t on solid grounds these days. If anything, convergence journalists are essential. They are the innovators who are looking for ways to make the public interested in journalism.
With programs like the one at MU, I think the label “mediocre” will be unfitting and unfair to convergence journalists in the future. While we are learning a variety of skills, that’s not the priority. Regardless of sequence, the main lesson in our journalism education is learning what makes a good story. We may all become a “jack of all trades,” but I refuse to believe we will be “masters of none.” Our top priority will always be to produce good journalism.

Week One

I read the article "The Backpack Journalist is a 'Mush of Mediocracy'" with more than a grain of salt. It sounded to me like the author was more concerned with the number of journalism jobs avaliable than with the quality of journalism being produced. I would argue that most of the current backpack journalists lack formal training in the field of convergence or multi-platform as a speciality, and what training we are now recieving will better prepare us to relay information in this manner.

I guess I didn't really imagine using all the different media types to tell every single story. I see myself coming out of this sequence with the ability to use all sorts of different things, but also posessing the discretion to choose one or two that are best suited to the story. Or working with specialists in each media to put together a multi-platform story. I suppose that because convergence journalism is still rather new, we'll get a bit of say in what it will be or look like in the future.