Don McCullin: Nobody wants the pictures I used to take.

[warden]

No. I think if you pay attention to other things McCullin has said, he mean no one wants photos like the ones he used to take. His photos were up close, immersive, completely focused on the actual violence of the situation. He didn't stand a mile away with a 500mm lens.

A lot of the photos published that you see of the war in Ukraine look like a movie set. Photos from after - it's safe. Here's a clump from the immediate search results for "bombed ukraine"

View attachment 349353

I don't mean there is no value in contemporary photography of these things. I think the type of photojournalism Don McCullin did and was permitted to do - the access he had - is just no longer permitted.

There’s only one Don McCullen, but there are others putting themselves in harm’s way with their cameras, of course. This is from today’s edition of the NYT.

Load. Fire. Get to Cover.

It was just a single moment in a war that at times feels endless, but an image of Ukrainian soldiers firing upon an unseen enemy captures the dangers of the front line.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Two23]

“Photojournalism is dead. We’ve become obsessed with glamour and gloss: footballers, narcissism and gossip. Nobody wants the pictures I used to take.”

Don McCullin: ‘Photographing landscapes takes my mind off all I’ve seen. It’s healing’

The photojournalist, 87, tells Michael Segalov about his tough upbringing in Finsbury Park, early success, the pleasure of reading books in old age and the death of photojournalism

www.theguardian.com

One of my favorite photographers. My first photo books was his "Hearts of Darkness."


Kent in SD

 

[Sirius Glass]

And because no one wants to see those on their Instagram or Twitter feed - where people now consume "journalism" - no one wants to pay someone who makes them.
It is all part of the whole.

It is hard to make a living with a camera because there are just too many GWCs around.

 

[Mike Crawford]

Now tell us about those refreshments

I expect it was a glass or two of hopefully good stuff but might have to check with the Archbishop of Canterbury!!

 

[CMoore]

Did the general public actually pay for HIS photos, or were they usually part of a large publication magazine or newspaper that people bought regardless.?

 

[Don_ih]

Did the general public actually pay for HIS photos, or were they usually part of a large publication magazine or newspaper that people bought regardless.?

The general public pays for photos by buying magazines (or, now, by visiting websites). That's how photojournalists make money.
Good photos sold magazines. I think it's less so with websites.
McCullin probably isn't looking very hard.

 

[Saganich]

There is also the problem that crisis and conflict have become much more multiple, overlapping, and interconnected. A singular person trying to cover such a world of events seems impossible these days. Also, the density of conflict and crises tends to diminish our reaction or memory of those that have recently fell below the fold. In other words the time it takes for a crisis to fall below the fold can easily be measured in hours.

 

[MattKing]

Seems pretty easy to snipe from an armchair in Ontario.

Just a caution:
Please don't bring the Alberta vs. Ontario conflict to Photrio!
Civility! Civility!

 

[GregY]

Just a caution:
Please don't bring the Alberta vs. Ontario conflict to Photrio!
Civility! Civility!

Edit.... It's easy to snipe from the comfort of an armchair....

 

[MattKing]

Edit.... It's easy to snipe from the comfort of an armchair....

And are you sitting in one right now???
I thought "sniping" was what one did to win internet auctions.

 

[GregY]

And are you sitting in one right now???
I thought "sniping" was what one did to win internet auctions.

Acutually I'm not..... but you know i was implying this definition. "make a sly or petty verbal attack."

 

[MattKing]

Acutually I'm not..... but you know i was implying this definition. "make a sly or petty verbal attack."

And that will get your comment deleted by a moderator.
Civility please.

 

[GregY]

And that will get your comment deleted by a moderator.
Civility please.

MK, How is it uncivil to point out that the honourable member from the east has made a rather acerbic (not referring to acid stop bath ) comment?

 

[MattKing]

Referring to something said as "acerbic" - sharp and forthright - is on the edge. Petty and personal is problematic. It is a matter of degree and of personalization.
By comparison, if you had said something indicating that it is "easy" for anyone - not necessarily the poster you are replying to - to be critical from the comfort of one's armchair, it would be much more civil.
Now let us please return to the subject of the thread.

 

[GregY]

There are still photographers working in war zones. Any documentation of those violent situations is important work. And to suggest that that kind of photography is no longer being done is a serious disservice to those who risk their lives to bring the wider world documentary evidence. We no longer have the front covers of Time & Life magazines, but the reality is that online news is the current means to reach people. As far as front line photos of the actual fighting, that is only one aspect of the war situation. Photographs and stories of the places and people affected by conflict is part of the deeper story and involves more humans than a single photo of hand to hand combat. Here's a good piece of journalism that considers that aspect. https://time.com/6257802/ukraine-war-photos-anniversary/

 

[logan2z]

There are still photographers working in war zones. Any documentation of those violent situations is important work. And to suggest that that kind of photography is no longer being done is a serious disservice to those who risk their lives to bring the wider world documentary evidence. We no longer have the front covers of Time & Life magazines, but the reality is that online news is the current means to reach people. As far as front line photos of the actual fighting, that is only one aspect of the war situation. Photographs and stories of the places and people affected by conflict is part of the deeper story and involves more humans than a single photo of hand to hand combat. Here's a good piece of journalism that considers that aspect. https://time.com/6257802/ukraine-war-photos-anniversary/

You might like to check out the work of Lynsey Addario, a pulitzer prize winning photojournalist who has done work for the NYT, Time, National Geographic and other publications.

Lynsey Addario

Lynsey Addario is an American photojournalist, who has been covering conflict and humanitarian crises around the Middle East and Africa on assignment for The New York Times, National Geographic Magazine, and Time Magazine for almost two decades.

www.lynseyaddario.com

 

[GregY]

You might like to check out the work of Lynsey Addario, a pulitzer prize winning photojournalist who has done work for the NYT, Time, National Geographic and other publications.

Lynsey Addario

Lynsey Addario is an American photojournalist, who has been covering conflict and humanitarian crises around the Middle East and Africa on assignment for The New York Times, National Geographic Magazine, and Time Magazine for almost two decades.

www.lynseyaddario.com

Thank you logan2z

 

[Louis Nargi]

To bad he thinks that way

 

[GregY]

To bad he thinks that way

Agreed....

 

[CMoore]

The general public pays for photos by buying magazines (or, now, by visiting websites). That's how photojournalists make money.
Good photos sold magazines. I think it's less so with websites.
McCullin probably isn't looking very hard.

Isn't that what i said.?

 

[Don_ih]

to suggest that that kind of photography is no longer being done is a serious disservice

Then go and reread what I said. I said that McCullin may think that.
Want an ascerbic comment? Pay attention to what people actually say.

To summarize, because it's a long trip back for you, I said McCullin probably isn't looking in the right places to see his style of photography, but that he may be responding to fact that most of the prominently-placed photos of the war look like movie stills, or it may have to do with the fact that it's probably a lot less likely a photojournalist will be able to hang out with a group of soldiers in a war zone, now, do to increased administrative paranoia about what the world gets to see.

 

[Arthurwg]

The heroic period in photography is dead.

 

[GregY]

The heroic period in photography is dead.

Arthur, what are you considering 'heroic'...is it the act of war photography or something else?

 

[warden]

There was a well written analysis of the evolution of war photography in today’s NYT if you happen to have that subscription. Sontag and Capa make appearances.

When Everyone Becomes a War Photographer

The images streaming onto our phones from Israel and Gaza, many coming from those fighting or caught up in the war, don’t just document the story — they shape it.

www.nytimes.com

When Everyone Becomes a War Photographer​

“Instead of supplementing and contextualizing information from the front, as traditional war photography once did, these digital pictures act as information themselves. They participate in a new marketplace of images, where professional news gatherers compete with governments, nonstate actors, terrified bystanders and just plain cranks, and where pictures get compressed, sutured, redeployed and redefined as they travel along wireless networks.”

 

[Arthurwg]

You really can't compare the amateur photos referenced here with the work of Don McCullin, James Nachtwey or Phillip Jones Griffiths, to name some of my favorites. Yes they are documents of a sort, but they lack the profound meaning delivered by the pros.