has it struck anyone

[emraphoto]

that for the past 5 years the drums have been beating a 'death of the still image' chorus and SHEBANG! the still image becomes critical! to understanding the events unfolding around us!

i mean it's the work out of Lybia and Japan that has just made me go wow! this still image thing isn't over. shaky, pixelated phone video of a cloud of smoke ad nauseam or intimate, beautiful, thoughtful images from people on the ground, in their homes, some grieving? i know what has captured my attention.

the work in Libya from the likes of Saiman, Addario, Hicks, Moore, Ed Ou. these people have nerves of steel man. and they are so close. i read that the photo of the crashing jet (Patrick Baz) was shot from about 6 blocks! incredible!

seriously, we are surrounded by incredible (still image) work that is giving us unparalleled access to almost every angle by some serious talent and i salute them!

 

[back alley]

the still image has been the victim of loud death knolls since the death of life and look magazine...i think we're safe for awhile yet.

 

[emraphoto]

not only safe but being treated to some seriously good work!!

 

[oftheherd]

the still image has been the victim of loud death knolls since the death of life and look magazine...i think we're safe for awhile yet.

Yeah, I hadn't heard any extra drums in the last five years, but then I have hearing loss from 4 years in Vietnam, so I may have missed it. 🙄

But I accept the point that still images are still powerful.

 

[Colin Corneau]

The most viewed feature of almost every news outlet website is the still photo galleries...it's been that way for years, consistently.

 

[semordnilap]

I think stills and video serve different purposes, and one will not replace the other. Drama and storytelling have coexisted with crafts and painting from time immemorial, as there is always a place for art/information that comes with its own timeline versus that which can be perceived on the timeline of the viewer.

Stills make different demands on the viewer than video because they can be viewed and absorbed at whatever pace and in whatever amount one wishes. For this alone they will always be valuable. Stills also offer a different level of abstraction than video, and can thus add to our perceptions in different ways.

No matter how much media changes, how much new technology changes the way we absorb news, combining writing with interactive illustration and video, among other things, stills will remain an invaluable part the equation.

 

[emraphoto]

I think stills and video serve different purposes, and one will not replace the other. Drama and storytelling have coexisted with crafts and painting from time immemorial, as there is always a place for art/information that comes with its own timeline versus that which can be perceived on the timeline of the viewer.

Stills make different demands on the viewer than video because they can be viewed and absorbed at whatever pace and in whatever amount one wishes. For this alone they will always be valuable. Stills also offer a different level of abstraction than video, and can thus add to our perceptions in different ways.

No matter how much media changes, how much new technology changes the way we absorb news, combining writing with interactive illustration and video, among other things, stills will remain an invaluable part the equation.

applause! needed filler