National Geographic gone mad?

mabman · Aug 12, 2008

Not my personal style, but similar frame counts have been done by others completely unrelated to NatGeo with reasonable-to-great success - see Winogrand, Garry.

Personally, I don't have a big issue with NatGeo photogs shooting that way - if someone dropped me in Outer Mongolia with the sole intention of documenting the local culture/geography, I would shoot as much as possible, too - it's not like I can re-shoot a scene a month later when I'm back in North America.

Larry Bullis · Aug 12, 2008

I think most people assume that a magazine photographer's main job is to "take pictures". It's not. It is to produce a story. That is a fairly complex conceptual exercise that involves stuff that people who've not done it would have a lot of trouble understanding, including knowing the editorial policies, the readership, etc.

Also, I suspect that amateur photographers (of which I am now one, by choice, having for many years been a magazine photographer) generally don't realize that for a professional, photography is a job. A Jay-Oh-Bee. Job. So, expecting a busy professional to have the same interests, and similar philosophical attitudes toward photography that the amateur has is really unrealistic. To expect a professional to want to talk about photography is unrealistic. If I do photography day in, day out, I probably am going to find some other way to have fun.

One more: Virtually all magazines are fantasy stimulators, and NG is not an exception. The idea is that YOU could be there; YOU could be living in that house; YOU could be preparing or enjoying that entré or dessert. With NG, there is an additional fantasy for the amateur photographer: YOU could have taken that picture.

The story is all important; the picture, while important, must support that story in as strong a way as possible. Most stories are driven by the pictures; the story depends upon the pictures, both specific pictures and the range of them. Each picture serves a particular function; does it lead, does it illustrate, does it introduce a new topic? Does it draw the reader into the story? How that very strong picture is obtained is practically irrelevant, as long as it is there. The picture serves SO MANY essential functions in relation not just to the story, but to the magazine as a whole publication and for the person reading. It doesn't have to be a great photograph. If it is, so much the better, but that's extra. NG has done very well on that score over many decades.

If pictures are required to conform to an ideology, it is highly unlikely that there is even going to be a magazine.

David Brown · Aug 12, 2008

bowzart said:
... expecting a busy professional to have the same interests, and similar philosophical attitudes toward photography that the amateur has is really unrealistic.

Or, the same working methods, productivity, etc.

bnstein · Aug 12, 2008

mabman said:
Not my personal style, but similar frame counts have been done by others completely unrelated to NatGeo with reasonable-to-great success - see Winogrand, Garry.

Indeed: "Garry Winogrand died of cancer at age 56 in 1984 and left over 2,500 rolls of undeveloped film, 6,500 rolls of processed film, 3,000 rolls of contact sheets that evidently hadn't been looked at--a total of 12,000 rolls, or 432,000 photos Winogrand took but never saw. " http://www.photogs.com/bwworld/winogrand.html.

Clearly he must be a bad photographer because he took so many shots ;-)

the video on http://2point8.whileseated.org/2007/03/23/garry-winogrand-with-bill-moyers/
makes for interesting watching

mike-o · Aug 18, 2008

Alex Hawley said:
For many years now, NG has cared more about their agenda (generally of the "activist" bent) than they have cared about objective reporting. I think this is showing through even with the photographers that work for them. Once in a while, they do run an objective article that is excellent. Once in a while they do have an excellent photography article. But most of the time, agenda is most valued.

Coincidentally, my September issue of NG arrived in the mail today. I leafed through the magazine carefully, but found no evidence of an "activist agenda," unless conservation and preservation of the earth be considered activist.

Colin Corneau · Aug 18, 2008

Keep in mind many of the images created by National Geographic photographers end up used for purposes beyond just an immediate story in an issue -- there's stock sales, there's file usage down the road, there's online and book publishing, and more.

Cripes, let them shoot 50K frames or whatever -- anything to keep film manufacturers busy and putting out product for the rest of us, too!

DanielOB · Aug 18, 2008

bnstain
Indeed: "Garry Winogrand died of cancer at age 56 in 1984 and left over 2,500 rolls of undeveloped film, 6,500 rolls of processed film, 3,000 rolls of contact sheets that evidently hadn't been looked at--a total of 12,000 rolls, or 432,000 photos Winogrand took but never saw. "

FIRST OF ALL garry was GOOD photographer. So many shoots does nothing with it. He might be liked just to shoot and just to shoot, so he did with his own films. But it does not means he did it to make a good shot so repeat and repeat.
I have films not developed for 6 months, and it because there is nothing interested on it to me. I shot it joke sake, just to hear my shuter.
When Garry wanted the shot he made it with one-two clicks and that set.
---------------
But what NG guys do is very differnt story. They did not make photography, they made movie literaly. Just wrong tool and lack of confidence.

Daniel OB
www.Leica-R.com

Alex Hawley · Aug 18, 2008

mike-o said:
Coincidentally, my September issue of NG arrived in the mail today. I leafed through the magazine carefully, but found no evidence of an "activist agenda," unless conservation and preservation of the earth be considered activist.

Uhhh, perhaps you demonstrated the point with the comment. I don't care. I dropped my NG subscription several years ago. Got more than tired of the rants and of the junk science that was/is being propagated.

Robert Budding · Aug 18, 2008

Perfect! You're guaranteed to capture the 'decisive moment' if you capture every moment!

haris · Aug 23, 2008

Colin Corneau said:
Cripes, let them shoot 50K frames or whatever -- anything to keep film manufacturers busy and putting out product for the rest of us, too!

If they shoot film, that is...

23mjm · Aug 23, 2008

Hello all

Before we all pass judgment, have an opinion, or weigh in on NG photo techniques we should watch this. http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/david_griffin_on_how_photography_connects.html

It is an interview with NG senior photo editor---it was very enlightening and inspiring to me. Well worth the 15 min it take to watch.

Athiril · Feb 27, 2010

Mustafa Umut Sarac said:
Honestly talking , technical quality , colors , compositions are not the same as 15 years ago. Its possible to find corner aberrations at the pictures , or flat death colors , cyan cast , thats all I hated to see
everywhere especially at a magazine which made me an archeologist.
I think ink quality , paper quality , editor quality , film quality - fuji - went down. Where is famous tiffdruck rotogravure printing ?
To take 500 photographs in few hours You have to use fast working autofocus zoom cameras and this is not Leitz and Zeiss way but cheap japanese brands.
I saw at apug , very big percent of the photographers dont know the reason of using leitz lenses , they are matching them with sigma , nikon etc.
This is comparing a SR 71 to toyota , there is this difference.
One time , I bought a NG magazine and saw a photographer was using cheap sigma !
I think photograph magazines killed the photography , nobody knows what is the quailty as cinema died , music died and classical music , painting , opera died.
Polaroid died , kodak dying , .... thats too sad.
I am switching to science and I will take remote sensing photographs with false colors. This is new art , mixing scientific findings in to art. I m not talking about space hats of 1960s women This lack of creativity damaged everything.

Sigma are cutting ledge leaders in lens innovations, they make some of the world's best lenses. 300-800 5.6, they invented whole lens categories.

Sorry for the bump, but I just happened to come across this in google and impulsively replied..

nolanr66 · Feb 27, 2010

When I pick up a National Geographic magazine I get great articles, wonderful photography and a bargain price. The NG photographer may have taken thousands of pictures but he/she also had to pack, travel, unpack and possibly could have been arrested, harassed, became ill, assaulted, robbed and who knows what else. I have the upmost respect for the NG photographer. I believe that each of them is using gear and technique that is necessary to get the job done. The proof is in the magazine.

removed account4 · Feb 28, 2010

in the " film days " they shot a huge amount as well, it is not just because it is a digital camera.

Ektagraphic · Feb 28, 2010

I wish all of those were on film

Mike1234 · Feb 28, 2010

It's not at all uncommon for a magazine's method of photography to be take a gazillion shots and search for the tastiest acorns hidden in the vast forest. It's easy to get a nice image just clicking away with a trash:keep ratio of 1000:1. Even I can do that.

Athiril · Feb 28, 2010

This reminds me I have a National Geographic endorsed camera, this thing is the secret to Nat Geo's modern photography.

How Nat Geo takes great images in the digital era:

Colin Corneau · Feb 28, 2010

What an amazingly ignorant and disrespectful thing to say.

If it's a joke, it's not a very good one.

Mike1234 · Feb 28, 2010

^^^ It's better to be irreverent than irrelevant.

SilverGlow · Apr 5, 2010

Mike1234 is right, as usual! lol

Ektagraphic · Apr 5, 2010

Love that $4 Nat Geo camera! I want one!!!

Prest_400 · Apr 5, 2010

Photo Engineer said:
In addition, back in the "old days" of Kodachrome, we at Kodak used to make whole master rolls of Kodachrome available to NG! In fact, just at the Cape, I used to have a refrigerated freight car of Kodak materials delivered to the back of the Technical Labs for our photo people there.

So, with big photo products, that figure is completely normal to me and I didn't blink!

PE

A master roll... That was about 30.000 35mm rolls?
Did NatGeo switch to E6 (velvia) when it was first available? That would be removing a strong suppost for Kodachrome, then; And for film, now.

National Geographic gone mad?

haris

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency