I have a naive question. I've seen the "movies" of course, but never been in war experience. I'm curious what the logistics of a war photographer like that you can get multiple POV's of the same event taken seconds (and mere inches) apart? Do the photographers generally travel in groups? Do they rely on local vans/busses to drive them around?
Good question. Yes, photographers often travel together in war zones - for safety and logistical reasons. Those small, and sometimes big, differences in how photos are “seen” by multiple photographers has always interested me. Thanks for your comment.
Thank you for posting this reflection. I've rarely read such a close, and meaningful reading on composition and color as it relates to war and suffering. It stopped me in my tracks today, and I'm grateful for that.
This is such an insightful post on the importance of composition and color. Some good thoughts on what to include in the frame or leave out, depending on your story you want to tell.
I believe the composition -- and that often just means a step to the left or right -- does more than color or lack thereof. In the photograph of the boy mourning his sister, the b&w photo impacts me more because I can see more of her face and more of his emotion. In the photo of the Bosnian soldier, the color image is the one that is more striking to me, because of its borders and its angles. In Brauchli's photo from the Chechan war, the garage door certainly does help compose the image in the color version, yet the angle in the b&w version shows the unnatural angle of the left leg better. The two photos together make me wonder if the woman who is alive would have noticed the woman who is dead had there not been a pod of photographers standing there snapping pictures.
The crops also matter. If the first picture were wider and included a big yellow billboard, that would change the impact of that yellow curtain. The crop on that NYTimes opinion piece is unforgivable though: imagine cropping the first image down to just a child's hand on a piece of drape.
Another great post. As an editor - do you find the "language" of photography changing? When we started in this business, shooting black-and-white was not a creative choice, but a practical one for getting news images out faster (color separations took longer to transmit over the AP wires, and the film stocks were much less forgiving for exposure in marginal light). So, now with iPhone and photoshop "filters" an almost limitless ability to enhance and maniplulate color is not only a creative bonanza, but it maybe has also led to an immense expansion of the general public's photographic literacy. TLDR: my question: Is a the use of, and editing for, color any different today than it was 20 years ago?
Thanks for the thoughtful comment, good stuff. I’m curious about the question of literacy, especially when it comes to color. When a reader sees a “Ukraine Gray” color photo in The New York Times - do they notice the difference?
Patrick, your Substack is my absolute favourite. Thank you, thank you for your work. This post is as beautiful as it is heart wrenching. I find your analysis through image making fascinating, perhaps as a visual thinker you are breaking down an intuitive process for me. Thank you!
In the example of the opening photograph I agree that the yellow settings against the monochrome background pulls the viewer in, and adds a power to the photograph. I have always been of the mindset that color should be used when 'the colors' help to tell the story. In most instances however - especially in the examples that you showed, the black & white takes the viewer's eye to the heart of the story that the image is telling. It strips away any distractions created by color.
Take, for example, the images of the woman over he dead husband. In the color version I am questioning the material that contains the body because of its color. That draws my eye away from the woman's face - also that the woman's face is in shadow and the material is brighter. But in the B&W version the detail of the wrapping is excluded and, if fact, becomes even more haunting in its blackness.
The same thing (for me) happens in the image of the dead woman and the blue door. The boldness (and inclusion) of the blue door tells me that there is a significance to the door - that it is part of the story. My eye also wanders to the colors of the fence (blue) - all the while keeping my eye from focusing on the two important elements of the image: the dead woman and the woman rounding the fence and seeing it.
I have a naive question. I've seen the "movies" of course, but never been in war experience. I'm curious what the logistics of a war photographer like that you can get multiple POV's of the same event taken seconds (and mere inches) apart? Do the photographers generally travel in groups? Do they rely on local vans/busses to drive them around?
Good question. Yes, photographers often travel together in war zones - for safety and logistical reasons. Those small, and sometimes big, differences in how photos are “seen” by multiple photographers has always interested me. Thanks for your comment.
Thank you for posting this reflection. I've rarely read such a close, and meaningful reading on composition and color as it relates to war and suffering. It stopped me in my tracks today, and I'm grateful for that.
This is such an insightful post on the importance of composition and color. Some good thoughts on what to include in the frame or leave out, depending on your story you want to tell.
I believe the composition -- and that often just means a step to the left or right -- does more than color or lack thereof. In the photograph of the boy mourning his sister, the b&w photo impacts me more because I can see more of her face and more of his emotion. In the photo of the Bosnian soldier, the color image is the one that is more striking to me, because of its borders and its angles. In Brauchli's photo from the Chechan war, the garage door certainly does help compose the image in the color version, yet the angle in the b&w version shows the unnatural angle of the left leg better. The two photos together make me wonder if the woman who is alive would have noticed the woman who is dead had there not been a pod of photographers standing there snapping pictures.
The crops also matter. If the first picture were wider and included a big yellow billboard, that would change the impact of that yellow curtain. The crop on that NYTimes opinion piece is unforgivable though: imagine cropping the first image down to just a child's hand on a piece of drape.
Thanks for your comment, love to hear other’s thoughts on these photos...great point about the Grozny photo.
Another great post. As an editor - do you find the "language" of photography changing? When we started in this business, shooting black-and-white was not a creative choice, but a practical one for getting news images out faster (color separations took longer to transmit over the AP wires, and the film stocks were much less forgiving for exposure in marginal light). So, now with iPhone and photoshop "filters" an almost limitless ability to enhance and maniplulate color is not only a creative bonanza, but it maybe has also led to an immense expansion of the general public's photographic literacy. TLDR: my question: Is a the use of, and editing for, color any different today than it was 20 years ago?
Thanks for the thoughtful comment, good stuff. I’m curious about the question of literacy, especially when it comes to color. When a reader sees a “Ukraine Gray” color photo in The New York Times - do they notice the difference?
Patrick, your Substack is my absolute favourite. Thank you, thank you for your work. This post is as beautiful as it is heart wrenching. I find your analysis through image making fascinating, perhaps as a visual thinker you are breaking down an intuitive process for me. Thank you!
Thank you so much 🙏🏻
In the example of the opening photograph I agree that the yellow settings against the monochrome background pulls the viewer in, and adds a power to the photograph. I have always been of the mindset that color should be used when 'the colors' help to tell the story. In most instances however - especially in the examples that you showed, the black & white takes the viewer's eye to the heart of the story that the image is telling. It strips away any distractions created by color.
Take, for example, the images of the woman over he dead husband. In the color version I am questioning the material that contains the body because of its color. That draws my eye away from the woman's face - also that the woman's face is in shadow and the material is brighter. But in the B&W version the detail of the wrapping is excluded and, if fact, becomes even more haunting in its blackness.
The same thing (for me) happens in the image of the dead woman and the blue door. The boldness (and inclusion) of the blue door tells me that there is a significance to the door - that it is part of the story. My eye also wanders to the colors of the fence (blue) - all the while keeping my eye from focusing on the two important elements of the image: the dead woman and the woman rounding the fence and seeing it.