1. Instagram, professional photojournalism for dummies…(?)

    I’m all for phone photography - the power to easily create sometimes striking images from a mobile device. The ability of virtually anyone with a phone to document and share their lives is truly remarkable. ..But I am over the unnecessary use of Instagram in professional journalism. I’m over it.

    I have no argument with the merits of using Instagram for personal use, for artwork, or even for hire when top users have been contracted to use their profiles to promote brands. What I dislike is the use in professional settings. In the context of professional journalism, does anyone think these cropped filtered photos will stand the test of time? (Do they even stand up now?)

    On Monday Time Magazine’s director of photography, Kira Pollack, sent out 5 photographers to cover Hurricane Sandy with Instagram. One image was even selected for one of the three covers this week. (more Instagram photos featured in Time’s Lightbox)

    photo by: Benjamin Lowy (sourced from PetaPixel article)

    "The information is there. It’s accurate information journalistically," she emphasizes. "The decision to cover it on Instagram wasn’t an aesthetic decision. It was about having a direct feed, about getting these pictures quickly by five photographers in three different regions." (Kira Pollack in Foliomag.com article)

    ”It’s wasn’t like, ‘Oh, this is a trend, let’s assign this on Instagram.’ It was about how quickly can we get pictures to our readers.” (Kira Pollack in Forbes article)

    Not buying it Kira….

    I agree 100% it wasn’t a question of aesthetics. An image of equal or greater aesthetic (with proper resolution) could have been created by a professional camera. It’s not “accurate information” ! filtered images break the moral code of photojournalism. I don’t buy the time excuse either, images were sorted then edited (and must have been approved!!) before they were uploaded. Lets be honest you DID do it because of the trend…because you can gain great amounts of shares and followers on social media. Its a business and larger audiences lead to a healthier bottom line..let’s call it what it is.

    Not to mention the articles you are quoted in talking about why Instagram is the right tool for the job. Again promoting trend over the importance of the actual topic….a devastating hurricane.

    I’m putting it out to my followers. What is your take on this? Should a news outlet be covering a natural disaster with Instagram?  Leave a comment or email davidtribbyphotography@gmail.com to speak in detail.

    …Is there any place in professional journalism for Instagram?

  1. aaromain likes this
  2. salvadorsanvicente likes this
  3. onlyonphotography reblogged this from davidtribby and added:
    No they shouldn’t. Not until phone cameras can get the same resolution as a good quality dSLR, WITHOUT filtering the...
  4. ampatspell likes this
  5. brianmaryansky likes this
  6. ramblingsonnothing likes this
  7. tonyframpton said: What I hate about Instagram is that you can choose your filter effect before OR after you take the shot. For my crappy cell photos, I prefer Hipstamatic because you have to choose your film, lens, flash before you press the shutter. Feels more genuine.
  8. antuanbatuhan likes this
  9. shuttertroy likes this
  10. thelocalbloggery likes this
  11. tenfingers1touch answered: In time it will sort itself out people tend to jump on new technology and play with it and then drop it for something else things as they are
  12. lines-in-pleasant-places likes this
  13. leafybug likes this
  14. why-ya-buggin reblogged this from davidtribby
  15. aprillia88 reblogged this from davidtribby
  16. aprillia88 likes this
  17. exmango likes this
  18. themisadventuresof1toomany answered: Photography has always been amplified by post-production work. Instagram is simply post-prod work simplified and convenient.
  19. theonewhowaited likes this
  20. gregador answered: I agree David. This is all about the social media buzz.
  21. electricwondermachine answered: A sad case of misuse of trend. The discussion ends for me with your point: “…filtered images break the moral code of photojournalism.”
  22. samshawphotographic answered: Instagram is the worst thing to happen to photography since the diana mini
  23. emmmmly answered: If it wasn’t about “the trend” she would send them out with their smartphones & have them email unedited images back quickly!
  24. amberredfield said: I feel there is a limit to when Instagram can be used in professional fields such as this. The only plus would be the feed to get it out quickly, but it does take time to “edit” them, and you definitely don’t get the same raw feel as from DSLRs.
  25. virgu answered: honestly, I think instagram is a hype, I think media is using them because is popular and easy to share, they’ll regret for not use a camera.
  26. amberredfield likes this
  27. jasonennis answered: David,
  28. carpathyah answered: I don’t think so in my opinion, when used with filters. I mean, we can tweet pictures. Instagram is just silly and for recreational use.
  29. constantaddict answered: No. No place for it all. Instagram=An app for teenage girls to post pictures of themselves & kittens. In all seriousness, Use a real camera.
  30. virgu likes this
  31. up-and-cunning answered: In a journalistic setting, I think that having as realistic quality as possible is key. Instagram takes away from the truth of the photo.
  32. sedentaryskylines answered: I agree with you completely! Instagram is a great thing to use for personal functions, but for a strict professional setting no.
  33. cobbafett likes this
  34. maudeloves answered: nope. i can understand cell phone footage/photos if it’s so sudden etc, but instagramming a photo takes as much time as pulling out your cam.
  35. davidtribby posted this