Photojournalism: Then and Now

So I’ve been posting a lot about iconic, historic photojournalists, and one modern photojournalist that may be the last of his kind. Or will he be? The history of photography and photojournalism is filled with very expensive means of capturing photos–making it originally difficult and costly to be a photographer. However, nowadays, everyone has a camera. Everyone has the ability to take a shot of anything happening around them either from their point and shoot, DSLR, or smart phone. What does that mean to the serious photojournalist?

I’ve been really stuck on this issue lately. What does that mean to me? The ever-more-competitive and exceptionally skillful field of professional photojournalism is becoming more and more difficult to become a part of. Luckily, along with the many challenges entering the modern photojournalistic world presents, comes many, many opportunities.

I posted about the NPPA earlier today, and have become quite smitten with what they offer. Their website, programs, and resources strike me as incredibly uplifting and inspiring.

What do you think about the NPPA? Or the field of “professional” photojournalism? Is it dying? Is it changing?


2 thoughts on “Photojournalism: Then and Now

  1. I think the NPPA is a valuable and helpful resource for current and aspiring photojournalists, like yourself. I don’t beleive the field of “professional” photojournalism is dying out but I do think that it’s changing. While it’s true that anyone can snap a photo at anytime with their camera or their phone, it doesn’t mean the photo is any good. It could be blurry, out of focus, and filled with bad lighting. Professional photographers know how to set up the camera and take their time making sure they get the perfect shot. They don’t take a picture just to have proof that they were there, they take pictures to capture a moment in time and to tell a story. Editing and retouching tools like Photoshop have changed the field of photojournalism because anyone can edit their photos to make them look nothing like the original. I personally view this as ethically and artistically immorally because knowing how to take visually appealing and moving photographs is an art form and shouldn’t be recreated with the help of a computer.

  2. “They don’t take a picture just to have proof that they were there, they take pictures to capture a moment in time and to tell a story.”

    That is a very good point, I believe that, too. the professional photojournalist’s goal is to capture a high-quality image that will tell a story to an audience beyond those who witnessed it. They have a higher purpose than those who take the photos to ‘prove they were there’.

    I also will soon research and post about the ethical issues of modern photojournalism–having to do with photoshopping, copyright, etc.. Thank you for your input!


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s