deliberate

(c) Christopher Anderson / Magnum.

There is a really interesting discussion brewing in the comments section of the Magnum blog regarding a post about the Feb. 8 photos of the week. Magnum photographer Christopher Anderson took this photo of Mitt while he was campaigning in Michigan in January.

During this election, I've seen some slick looking images of the candidates -- really sophisticated lighting, really quirky characters, bold blues and striking reds -- all these elements that I thought made successful photos. This has none of that. It almost seems like an accident.

I was pretty confused when I saw this image because of the haphazard quality I initially perceived. It also reminded me of this also well-received and similarly harshly lit image of Obama by Redux photographer Stephen Ferry. Is this some new kind of style?

If I ever came back from an event with anything like this, I would think that I fucked up my assignment and throw it out. But then in the comments, Anderson explains the deliberate nature of his photograph --

"...I guess I just wanted it to feel like what I was seeing there. These events are rather ridiculous. they are staged and repetitive. While it may not look like it in these pictures, I do in fact know how to balance my flash and expose. It was a conscious decision to flash with this technique. It is as if throwing too much light on it might somehow expose these campaign photo ops for what the really are. The designers of these events want us to make a pretty picture. but a pretty picture to me felt like something that would be false to this event. I almost thought of the flash as being like an xray that would reveal what I really see at an event like this."

This kind of thought process is really admirable in my opinion. When I'm shooting, I try and stay weary of giving media wranglers what they want. I seldom shoot high-profile events here in Lima, but even on this level of news, we still encounter PR folks doing their job, overly manicured business men, people that smile too hard and shady local politicians.

As a photographer, I often feel like I fall short of communicating and developing my voice in an innovative and creative fashion because of the nature of some of the editors in newspapers that sometimes encourage conventional images -- bring back the "safe shot." Sometimes I get so caught up in bringing back that safe shot, make sure you are covering your butt to avoid getting a finger wagged at you, that I don't stop to make honest observations for myself.

This photograph, while initially not visually appealing to me, did make me stop and think. The ability for the photographer to refine his message like this makes me want to push myself beyond the mediocrity of more traditional photographic images.

Of course, it is a matter beyond being cool or edgy or unconventional. It is a matter of using my tools -- my gear -- to reflect my perceptions.

Read the thread. It is worthwhile.

found via dennis dunleavy