vrijdag, maart 21, 2003
Peter Howe has been a war photographer in Northern Ireland and El Salvador and later was the picture editor for The New York Times Magazine and director of photography for Life magazine. He knows many of the photographers on assignment in the Middle East and is aware of the challenges they face in the days ahead.
"The kind of embedding that's going on this time (where reporters and photographers live with and follow a military unit) hasn't really been tried since World War II," Howe said. "I think the military is hoping for a good compromise between the over-control of the first Gulf War and what -- from the military point of view -- was the over-freedom of the Vietnam War." Howe said he thought the Pentagon decided to allow reporters and photographers more access to combat units in part because "they didn't get a lot of good press from the first Gulf War. They want the public to understand what they're doing, and they want public opinion on their side."
Advancements in technology since the Persian Gulf War of 1991 mean that "photographs can be transmitted in a matter of minutes," Howe said. "If you have a digital camera and a laptop and a (satellite phone), you're set." The widespread use of digital cameras is an advantage but is not without its problems, said Howe, author of "Shooting Under Fire: The World of the War Photographer". "The problem with digital cameras is, I think, they will radically reduce the amount of images available," Howe said. "If these field commanders are allowed to censor images before they're transmitted, and they don't like a particular image, they can just say, 'Delete it.' It's a lot easier to delete an image off a digital camera than it is to snip a frame out of a roll of film."
Deleting an image from a digital camera and losing it to history sounds analogous to the way e-mail has replaced letter-writing as a form of communication, much to the regret of future historians. "Yes, except e-mails can turn out to be more permanent than we thought," Howe said. "You can recover a (deleted) e-mail from the hard drive of a computer, but you can't really recover a deleted image from the memory chip of a digital camera."
War photography works on two levels, Howe said, "as news for today and as history for tomorrow. For example, there's a photograph in my book of a charred Iraqi soldier from the last (gulf) war. That photo was taken off the (Associated Press) wire because it was considered too graphic. Twelve years later, that photo is a part of history."
Every war presents different challenges for photographers. In the Middle East, those challenges can be as everyday and important as keeping dust and sand particles out of cameras and lenses and as life-and-death as having a protective suit in case of chemical or gas attack. Howe said he recently had lunch with two photographers now on assignment in the Persian Gulf, and much of the discussion concerned what type of chemical protection suit worked best.
In every war, some journalists and photographers are eager to distance themselves from the pack and make an impact, either by getting a scoop or capturing an image no one else has. Howe said one of the myths of war photography is that photographers work as individuals. In fact, they often work in groups, and it is not unusual for photographers from competing news organizations to work side by side.
"It's always possible to get something different, but I think the difference this time will definitely be experience," Howe said. "I know several photographers who are embedded in different units who have more combat experience than the troops they're with -- not only the troops, but in some cases, the generals and commanders of those units. Some of them are very experienced in combat. I talked to Jim Nachtwey, one of the photographers in the book, after he'd gone through the boot camp (for journalists) and asked him how it was. He said it was pretty basic; they told them things like 'don't get between a soldier and whatever it is he's firing at.' "
Bron: The Oregonian.
"The kind of embedding that's going on this time (where reporters and photographers live with and follow a military unit) hasn't really been tried since World War II," Howe said. "I think the military is hoping for a good compromise between the over-control of the first Gulf War and what -- from the military point of view -- was the over-freedom of the Vietnam War." Howe said he thought the Pentagon decided to allow reporters and photographers more access to combat units in part because "they didn't get a lot of good press from the first Gulf War. They want the public to understand what they're doing, and they want public opinion on their side."
Advancements in technology since the Persian Gulf War of 1991 mean that "photographs can be transmitted in a matter of minutes," Howe said. "If you have a digital camera and a laptop and a (satellite phone), you're set." The widespread use of digital cameras is an advantage but is not without its problems, said Howe, author of "Shooting Under Fire: The World of the War Photographer". "The problem with digital cameras is, I think, they will radically reduce the amount of images available," Howe said. "If these field commanders are allowed to censor images before they're transmitted, and they don't like a particular image, they can just say, 'Delete it.' It's a lot easier to delete an image off a digital camera than it is to snip a frame out of a roll of film."
Deleting an image from a digital camera and losing it to history sounds analogous to the way e-mail has replaced letter-writing as a form of communication, much to the regret of future historians. "Yes, except e-mails can turn out to be more permanent than we thought," Howe said. "You can recover a (deleted) e-mail from the hard drive of a computer, but you can't really recover a deleted image from the memory chip of a digital camera."
War photography works on two levels, Howe said, "as news for today and as history for tomorrow. For example, there's a photograph in my book of a charred Iraqi soldier from the last (gulf) war. That photo was taken off the (Associated Press) wire because it was considered too graphic. Twelve years later, that photo is a part of history."
Every war presents different challenges for photographers. In the Middle East, those challenges can be as everyday and important as keeping dust and sand particles out of cameras and lenses and as life-and-death as having a protective suit in case of chemical or gas attack. Howe said he recently had lunch with two photographers now on assignment in the Persian Gulf, and much of the discussion concerned what type of chemical protection suit worked best.
In every war, some journalists and photographers are eager to distance themselves from the pack and make an impact, either by getting a scoop or capturing an image no one else has. Howe said one of the myths of war photography is that photographers work as individuals. In fact, they often work in groups, and it is not unusual for photographers from competing news organizations to work side by side.
"It's always possible to get something different, but I think the difference this time will definitely be experience," Howe said. "I know several photographers who are embedded in different units who have more combat experience than the troops they're with -- not only the troops, but in some cases, the generals and commanders of those units. Some of them are very experienced in combat. I talked to Jim Nachtwey, one of the photographers in the book, after he'd gone through the boot camp (for journalists) and asked him how it was. He said it was pretty basic; they told them things like 'don't get between a soldier and whatever it is he's firing at.' "
Bron: The Oregonian.
# posted by Jan-Edward : 11:33
|
|