Daniel Miller's Shameless Self-Promotion

The price of news

Television news execs were shocked to find out how much it's going to cost them to work the Scott Peterson murder trial in California. According to a story on cnn.com (which I'm sure was in no way CNN's public way of whining about the issue **end sarcasm**) San Mateo County is charging $51,000 for each precious spot next to the courthouse to be used as a backdrop for a talking head... I mean reporter. They are also charging $7,500/month for parking spaces for satellite trucks and $200/month for regular journalist parking spots.

If you've had enough sense to not really care much about this "sensational" story, let me fill you in on all the pertinent details: Peterson is accused of killing his pregnant wife whom he said was missing. Sensational, huh?

Not really.

What makes this story so compelling to the tabloids and most major media outlets? Why were the lives of this pregnant woman and baby more important to tabloid-style news than any other? Because it was a real-life movie of the week complete with beautiful stars. You know this would have been a non-starter if they had 3 teeth between them or were from a trailer park or ghetto.

I cheer the actions of San Mateo County and hope others follow suit, no pun intended. Television media has brought this upon itself with conduct like the OJ trial, JonBenet Ramsay, Michael Jackson, Susan Smith, Baby Jessica... I could go on ad nauseum. If the major news sources insist on infotainment feeding frenzies and sensationalizing stories to generate ratings and profits, then I don't have a problem with all parties getting their fair share. This is especially warranted when municipalities have to spend extra public money to deal with the sudden onslaught of tv armies. If you've never seen a network encampment, it really is impressive to see how many people it takes to man a stationary camera and fluff the ego of an on-air "personality."

There are less expensive alternatives, especially for situations like this with very little going on visually. They could pool video or keep the talking heads... I mean reporters, in the studio. Anybody heard of a green screen? God forbid networks should consider using their affiliates. Maybe this will cause some of the network bean-counters to rethink some coverage policies. Maybe it will cause some news managers to question why bean-counters are making coverage policy in the first place. Riiiiiight.

Integrity, Reality, Truth

I was talking to a friend online the other day and he said something that disturbs me. He was looking at a picture on my blog and he asked if I had removed the background. "No, of course not" I replied. It doesn't sound like much but the more I thought about it the more I came to realize how often people question the reality of images now. (and maybe the integrity of the photographer)

Let me give a little background. W. Eugene Smith was a storied photojournalist who worked for Magnum, Ziff-Davis and even dictated his own terms when he was a staffer at Life Magazine. He has been called "arguably the greatest photojournalist who ever lived." Many of the most recognizable iconic images, such as 'Steelworker With Goggles,' the portrait of Albert Schweitzer and 'Tomoko Uemura in Her Bath,' are his. That's why it was such a surprise to find out how much image manipulation he performed in the darkroom. For example, the silhouette of the saw and the hand reaching for it in the Schweitzer photo were added after the fact. They do not exist on the original negative. And that's only one example of many famous iconic images that were modified by Smith during the printing process. He has changed the direction people were looking, eliminated backgrounds and even added fiery reflections to goggles. I won't even detail the amount of lightening and darkening (called dodging and burning) he did to selected areas of prints, which is and has always been standard practice in photography. Despite public knowledge of all that, W. Eugene Smith is still a revered legend.

Fast-forward to 2003.

• Photojournalist Patrick Schneider of the Charlotte Observer had a trio of awards rescinded and was suspended without pay for three days because he "altered the content of a photograph" according to the North Carolina Press Photographers Association President Chuck Liddy.
• Brian Walski, a staff photographer covering the war in Iraq for the Los Angeles Times, was fired for creating and submitting a photo that was a composite of two consecutive images.

The ability and opportunity to manipulate, edit or fabricate parts of photographs has always been present. Widespread public knowledge of it has not. Today it seems like everyone and their grandmother knows what Photoshop is.

A lot of professional photojournalists are afraid that incidents like the couple from 2003 will erode the public trust in the accuracy of news images. In reality there's no need to worry about that. The seed of doubt already exists in the mind of the public and conduct like that of Schneider's merely confirms it. The damage is already done. I suppose the only real question left is whether the public really cares. Is it possible that major image manipulation has become so common that people don't view it as deception?

Necessity To Nostalgia

Will film ever die? Would I mourn the loss?

No and it probably won't ever be truly dead. People still make daguerreotypes, use vacuum tubes in electronics and listen to cassette tapes despite "more advanced" alternatives being available. It will pass from the standard it is now to a historical curiosity at an ever increasing pace only hanging on in the places digital imaging hasn't yet been able to claim. I have yet to see a digital image with the beauty and color saturation of chromes (slides) or the amazing detail of large formats like 4"x5". There are still jobs where film is definitely the best choice.

Since I don't believe it will die, mourning seems a bit silly. Will I miss using film? Absolutely and not a chance.

I will miss the smell of a freshly opened film canister, the mechanical whine of a high speed motor drive, the mystery and anticipation that builds just before you hold your negatives up to the light to see what you've captured. I'll miss the innate coolness of contact sheets, the little arrows and numbers between the sprocket holes, the magic of watching your image appear on a blank piece of photo paper in a tray of chemicals.

I won't miss having to change rolls after 36 exposures, needing to keep three different speeds of film in my bag at all times, wasting the rest of a roll if you needed to change film speed, having to wait while color film is processed, the smell and the stains from the processing chemicals, the bulk of storing negatives and prints. Also on the list: waiting for your eyes to adjust after emerging from the darkroom (aka mole squint), wasting 5 sheets of paper adjusting by trial and error to get one decent print, accidentally rolling the leader back into the cartridge and not remembering later if it was exposed.

Digital photography has so many practical advantages for me that it has completely replaced film. I literally haven't shot a roll of film for 3-4 years. The quality of images produced by my current digital gear is more than good enough for most anything I need to do but I still can't convince myself to get rid of my Canon EOS-3 film body. I guess I'll dust it off when I get nostalgic.

What do you think? What will and won't *you* miss about film cameras?

Jazz Brunch

I went to get some pictures of a gospel brunch at a new jazz club downtown and I came back with much better pictures than I expected.

Photos by DANIEL MILLER
Charles Blanchard plays his alto saxophone during a gospel brunch at Manhattan's Sunday afternoon.

Reverend Edward "Skip" Turner plays trumpet on When The Saints Go Marching In. Turner is one member of the jazz group Amazing Grace which was performing at a gospel brunch Sunday afternoon.

Reading Tub

I was taking pictures inside a classroom Friday. The way I prefer to work is to be unobtrusive and let things happen somewhat normally, then document what I see. The teacher in the particular room graciously set three kids in an old tub they used as furniture during reading hour. After circling I found I was much more interested in the way the light from the window played across one child's face.

Photo by DANIEL MILLER
Justice McKinney reads a book while sitting in a cast iron tub in the library corner of Mrs. DeCola's first grade class at the Englewood Peace Academy in Toledo, Ohio, Friday Jan. 23, 2004.

Harbinger

Is this the beginning of the end for film in photography? CBS is reporting that Kodak, the company historically most associated with photos, plans to completely stop selling user-loadable film cameras in the US and western Europe. (As an upside, this also means they will stop selling those damned APS cameras. That system was deeply flawed from the beginning.)
Obviously, this isn't the first sign but it's definitely a significant move for the industry. It's not surprising to see Kodak making this move earliest. For starters, it was a pioneer in digital slr cameras selling models when $10,000 was considered cheap for a digital body. The company's execs haven't been blind to the coming trend. Kodak's film camera quality and selection had gradually died on the vine so it represents no great loss.
Will film ever die? Would I mourn the loss? Well, those are topics for another post.

28000

President Bush came to town today and AP had me at the airport covering his landing and departure. Aside from the usual waves to the crowd (read: media), I was mainly there in case something dramatic happened. Other than that I was testing the old saying, "What doesn't kill me will only give me frostbite." We stood outside in 5 degree temperatures with a strong wind for 45 minutes. Gloves don't do much for aching fingertips at that point but it was worth it to see Air Force One in person.

Photos by DANIEL MILLER
Air Force One turns sharply while taxiing in at Toledo Express Airport.

A member of Air Force One's aircrew stands in the cold wind on the tarmac at Toledo Express Airport in Toledo, Ohio Wednesday, Jan. 21, 2004. The President was in Toledo to speak at Owens Community College.

President George W. Bush waves before entering his limousine after Air Force One landed in Toledo, Ohio Wednesday, Jan. 21, 2004.

Two wheels and flies

Photos by DANIEL MILLER
Greg Brooks swings his legs off his motorcycle during one of his jumps during the Extreme Jump Off Contest at Toledo Arenacross. Brooks won the competition, beating four other performers.

Brent Miller, a contestant in the Extreme Jump Off Contest at Toledo Arenacross, leans forward during one of his jumps. Miller finished second in the competition.

Environmental Portrait

I made an appointment to shoot an environmental portrait of the new director at the local art museum and was only given 30 minutes due to his tight schedule. It was basically shoot and run. The light in the other two spots was terrible but due to their proximity to paintings, flash was prohibited. Luckily, the third location had both a lack of paintings and a very convenient wall to my left for bounce flash.

Photo by DANIEL MILLER
Don Bacigalupi, the new director of the Toledo Museum of Art, stands in the Cloister at the museum. Bacigalupi comes to Toledo from his director position at the SanDiego Museum of Art.

New Year '04

I was invited to a New Year's Eve party at Nathan and LeAnna Smack's house so I took the camera along to get blackmai... uhh, record cherished memories.

Photos by DANIEL MILLER
Nathan holds a couple champagne corks from the night's refreshments.

Nathan, at left, LeAnna and LeAnna's brother offer a toast at midnight.

The funny thing is that I would have given Nathan more beads for *not* showing me his hoo-hahs.

Rachael makes a funny face for the camera. (Either that or my camera was as drunk as I was)