In all honesty, I think I was a tad complacent throughout the process of completing my One Day International (ODI) photo story and my Temba Nature Reserve sound slide. I was ignorant to ethical considerations; they were merely an afterthought to me, that I now see as genuine questions that need raising. I also encountered plenty of difficulties; some of these difficulties were in hindsight unsurprising, and some were just plain frustrating. Believe it or not, it was the photo story that caused me the most problems, which I certainly wasn’t expecting, considering it was a days worth of photography. The following passage will touch on the ethical questions I established, and I will also give insight into the difficulties and how I overcame them.
Contrary to the ODI photo story, the sound slide at Temba turned out to be, in my opinion, quite a success. Obviously it helped that I was comfortable with producing audio material, but what also helped significantly, and perhaps put me at a slight advantage, was having already established relationships with the people that worked there from my audio project there last term. Accoridng to Tamar Garb (2006:14) photographing people for Pieter Hugo, “involves elaborate negotiation, contract and collaboration”. I firmly believe in this style as a successful approach to photography, because I don’t believe you can fully invest yourself in the subject or situation if you aren’t familiar with, or haven’t established a relationship with your subject. I think this is apparent in my audio, because I’ve gained the trust of Peter Repinz, the voice of my sound slide, and as a result I managed to cover areas of the reserve that the ordinary tourist or safari-goer wouldn’t have been able to. This in turn, made my pictures that much more interesting, because not only did he take me on a free game drive, he also gave up his time to show me his tame animals, such as `Whiskey’ the Zebra, which was more than I could have hoped for. In order to gain his trust and time, it was just a matter of spending a lot of time there, which proved my investment in the project, and showing a genuine interest in what he had to say and show me, because then at least he didn’t feel like he was wasting his time. In the end, I had a sound slide that covered the most significant aspects of the reserve.
The ODI photo story on the other hand, did not allow me this time. I had one day to do it, so I had to do well or otherwise, to put it bluntly, I was screwed. I had difficulties before I even got into the stadium. After roughly 20 minutes of waiting at the ticket desk, and talking to about seven different officials, I eventually got my long lens through the gates. Interestingly, with every official I spoke to, I said the same thing- “how is a long lens going to affect the game or anyone around me? I understand a flash will, but not this!” I got the same puzzled response “I’m not actually sure, it’s just the rules.” I may have unknowingly just set a significant precedent for future sports photographers! But it is indeed true when Grazia Neri (2006) says “only the great names are able to command respect.” To everyone around me in the stadium, I’m just that annoying guy with the big camera. From struggling to get in, to the tisk tisks of the people sitting behind me whilst I get up close to the cricketers on the boundary rope, I’m just a plain nuisance. In the end I settled for a balance between being the nuisance, and giving people around me some respect. If I wanted the photo, I would take it, but I wouldn’t stay in the same place for too long. The downside of that was coming back to the computer at home to find that some photos were out of focus or there was an agonisingly annoying distraction in the photo, such as someone’s hat creeping in the corner, without many alternatives to choose from.
In reflecting further on my photo story, I can’t help but be concerned that it lacks in a personal feel. By this I mean the viewer can’t really get to know anyone that’s in the story, or feel at all like they are there, immersed in the story. Whilst I believe the majority of the photos to be good sporting photos, on a personal, story like level, it is lacking. On the whole, this is down to not getting close enough to the subjects. For instance, my photo showing kids lining up for autographs allows the viewer to understand the situation, but the emotions aren’t entirely captured. It would have been nice to get a close up of an excited child, anxiously awaiting the autograph. But I just didn’t get close enough. Although I wasn’t thinking about it at the time, this issue did eventually lead me to what I consider to be quite an important ethical question. How close up to an individual can I get in order to take a photo, without consent? I discovered the following ethic on a photographic ethics website- “Respect the privacy of children and those who do not wish their images to be subject to E- commerce, and immediately remove such images upon request of the customer.” (Wanamaker, 2011). If I wanted, I could have gone up to someone, taken their photo without knowing their name, and put the photo in my story. But too what extent is that even okay?
This leads me to another ethical question. One that I actually take quite seriously because I see it in sports news every day. Bias. To what extent would I have presented Australia’s victory had they won? It became an ideal situation that South Africa won, because I wanted them to be the winning team in my photo story, but as a professional photographer should I feel that that is an ideal situation? According to Susan Sontag (1997:30), “photographs themselves have become so widespread, and their subject matter so all encompassing that it has changed both what we think is worth seeing and, in terms of ethics, what we think we have a right to see.” I would subconsciously feel the value of my photo story lesson had Australia won, because if I were to submit my photo story through to Grocotts for instance, they’re not going to want a story showing how Australia reached their victory. What they would rather want in that situation is the expression on the Proteas’ faces after their defeat, and the disappointed crowd reactions. In my photo story I have pictures of Jacques Kallis and Graeme Smith reaching their half centuries. Would I include these pictures in there had they lost? Probably not. But instead of showing pictures of Australia batsmen reaching their fifties, I would show crowd expressions when Kallis and Smith go out. So does this become bias, or is this simply meeting the demands of the mass media?
My last point on the photo story is one that concerns me quite a lot because it could ultimately affect me the most. As a sports fanatic, and quite a close follower of cricket in particular, I know the game quite well, and hence I feel I know a good moment in the game when I see one. But do others, especially those who don’t know the game that well, see things the same way? According to Neri (2006), each of us react to a picture on the basis of our own sensitivity, culture, intelligence, mood and passion. I have one picture for instance that I wanted to include in my photo story, just because I felt it captured such a great moment in the game. It’s of South African cricketer Morne Morkel, walking in as a ball is bowled, with nothing but him and the packed crowd in the distance. To anyone who doesn’t know the game, it’s just a cricketer standing in the field, but to me it’s quite an intense capturing of concentration and intenseness. Thompson (1990, 25) adds to this point when he says that the process of appropriation is a critical process in which individuals attempt to understand, and make sense of the messages they receive, to relate to them and share with others. In this sense, it’s perhaps not an appropriate picture to include, and as a result I’ve made it a standalone.
In building on this point, Roy Quan (1979:4) says, “photographs are not simple reflections of reality. They are interpretations of experience and must be read as such.” This established an interesting debate for me, because in opposition to this point, Sontag (1977:30) argues that “photographs are not interpretations like writing and handmade images. Photographs seem to be pieces of reality that one can own.” I am strongly in favour of Quan, because as I’ve said, the image becomes far more open ended if the viewer isn’t familiar with the situation, which is something I took careful note of when choosing my photo story pictures. The same applies to my sound slide. I present photos of animals that appear to be tame and inquisitive, which perhaps suggests they are happy and comfortable in their environment. These photos alone can be interpreted like this. That’s why a crucial aspect of my sound slide was the alien vegetation, which limits the areas where the animals can graze, and often results in injury and discomfort if they attempt to eat or step on the vegetation. With this aspect in mind, the happy and comfortable appearance of the animals can suddenly be interpreted as vulnerable and frustrated, which is the change that I hoped to create.
So in reflection, it was the photo story that brought about certain problems and frustrations. It’s a shame that I could only do this course for a term, as I haven’t had the chance to rectify the problems, and practice the lessons I’ve learned in the process. But one thing is for certain; one can’t just take a picture or create a story without taking into consideration the impact that it might have on your audience, whether it is on an ethical level, or an interpretive level. So I feel now that I’m at the stage where I can think on these levels when practicing photography.
Works Cited
Garb, T. 2006. Fictures and Fictions: South African Photography in the Present Tense.
Neri, G. 2006. Ethics and Photography. The Digital Journalist. Retrieved 2 Novemeber, 2011, from http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0101/neri.htm
Quan, R. 1979. Photography and the Creation of Meaning. In Art Education. National Art Education Association.
Sontag, S. 1997. On Photography. USA: Picador.
Thompson, J. 1990. The Concept and Theory of Ideology. In Ideology and Modern Culture. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Wanamaker Photography. 2011. Our Strictest Code of Ethics. Retrieved 2 November, 2011, from http://www.wanamakersports.com/about-us/our-strictest-code-of-ethics/
