David Campbell on what matters in storytelling.

Robert Capa said: “If your pictures aren’t good enough you aren’t close enough.” Todd Papageorge said: “If your pictures aren’t good enough you aren’t reading enough.” Professor David Campbell delivered a talk on ‘Narrative, Power and Responsibility’, within photography and storytelling.

Beginning with exploring the notion of narrative, David mentioned the significance of the relationship between the event and its story. As Allen Feldman states “The event is not what happens. The event is that which can be narrated.” An event – and crucially any implication it may have – is determined by the means of which it has been narrated/recollected/viewed etc. A story is always constructed not found. And the idea of an overall or ‘full’ narrative is a fallacy – this is simply their nature, and one that must be acknowledged by photographic and storyteller practitioners. David therefore urges that the onus be on a consideration of context, of how an individual story will fit into the wider issue, and the importance of research, before producing or telling such a story.

“To me, the work that is most powerful, the work that sustains itself over time, is the work that understands its own context; not only its own context of production, distribution and publication, but the context of the issues that it’s trying to portray visually.”

David went on to highlight the popularity of narrative: the idea that it offers a sense of purpose and meaning, something that is more comprehensive and less ‘messy’ than the experiences of everyday life. Context takes the form of a setting for a statement, idea or event – and can be considered as the wider issue which already holds people’s attention. This coupled with the natural attraction to narrative, explains the interest, demand for, and therefore success of, stories which can be accessed and understood.  

David raised a crucial point about the relationship between individuals and the context: the issue is not an entity to witness, but you can witness the issue in individuals who embody it – and this he states, is one of the most fundamental things to consider when putting a narrative together.

To finish, David brought forward the questions of power and responsibility that an image/story-maker holds, and to what purpose they might direct themselves when they have the potential to effect change. David soon illuminated the fact that it is rare for an image to seriously effect change to the extent that the image-maker may have desired. To counter this, he suggested a greater effort be put to the thought and research of a story, with particular attention to context and narrative.

“…that outcome will be maximised, the prospects for change will be greater, if those ideas of narrative and context are better understood. Because the more that you can relate work to particular contexts – both what’s involved in the issue, and also the channels through which it gets distributed – then potentially the greater impact it can have.”


A full recording of the talk, and the questions that followed, can be found at #phonar.

Pete Brook on the Haiti Prison story.

Pete Brook of Prison Photography delivered a guest lecture for the #phonar module, where he talked about the media coverage of the upheaval to the Haiti prison system following the earthquake there in January. The podcast lecture, with links, can be found here.

We have been given the opportunity to question and respond to Pete, and so follows my thoughts on the lecture, in particular to the concluding points from 20:30.

Hi Pete,

My first question is: why do you think the prison system is likely improved since the earthquake? Because of the 'publicity' it has received, and hence the raised awareness of its major flaws?

My suggested explanation as to why the Pakistani floods and other natural disasters have not been covered as intently, is simply because of the drama of it. The continuous, and continuously reported, sufferings of international people, has reached such a regular frequency, that it is more likely to be greeted with boredom and disinterest than shock or sympathy by a western audience. Unless of course it has some original (and potentially cinematic quality) drama. For example (and here's your Hollywood tagline): an earthquake leads to a prison break of ruthless criminal overlords, unleashed on a peaceful and vulnerable community which had previously been rescued from their corruptive grasp! We all like a bit of drama.

I agree with your point that the caption is as important as the photograph it accompanies. But surely the problems of 'cross-reporting' and of no firm narrative/consensus with the Haiti case study, highlight the problem of deciding when a caption is 'correct'.

Thank you for an excellent and informative lecture, I look forward to hearing more of your thoughts.

*Update: Pete has been very generous with his time and not only responded in detail to my questions and thoughts, but also recorded his response which you can find below. Many thanks Pete, I look forward to communicating with you again in the future.

These are pictures I did not take.

Following on from last week's task, I was inspired by Michael David Murphy's 'Unphotographable' website, to write my own 'unphotographs'. This notion excites me, and is something that I part stumbled on a little while ago. Frustrated by photographs that were often a let down to what my eye experienced (this is as likely a fault of my technical ability) I started to take satisfaction in simply looking and remembering, of taking photographs without a camera. I would still use my eye, and then my memory to fix the image in my mind. It may not be as accurate nor as defined as a camera's depiction, but it is equally if not more loaded with my emotion, with my artistic bias, with the subjectivity of my memory - which in a way makes the image more my creation. I may not be able to show it visually, but I can still share it descriptively. At the time I could only label this little revelation with the very lame title of 'Lookography'. To have discovered Murphy's site, and his solid execution of this idea is very encouraging. So now I'd like to share two of my own 'unphotographs' which I've had stored for a while.


This is a photograph I did not take of a young, probably second or third generation, British-Indian woman, standing in front of her colourful, well-stacked perfume stall, in the brightly lit glass entrance-way of a shopping centre. She stands with a confident pose, weight on one leg, and stylishly dressed in red and black, whilst her eyes move from one passer-by to the next as she seeks out her next potential customer. The bright sunlight shatters through the glass, reflects off the white-tilled floor, and surrounds her dark hair, skin, and clothes, with a pearlescent mist.


This is a photograph I did not take, at the evening of a Folk Festival, looking in through a caravan doorway at a man and his three year old daughter facing each other, lit by a single dim light in the low ceiling. The man, tall, with his hands on hips, looks down at his daughter, frowning slightly, and thoughtfully, having just asked her what she wants for her dinner. She looks back up at him, with an expression which perfectly describes her innocence and uncertainty, whilst trying to think of an answer.          

Research Beginnings

A few notes from the reading of the past week.

From Camera Lucida:

• In chapter 4, Barthes talks of three practices (or emotions, or intentions) of making a photograph: to do, to undergo, to look; the Operator, the Subject, and the Spectator – the same three I had established previously.
• In chapter 5, he talks of being photographed: "I instantaneously make another body for myself, I transform myself in advance into an image." He goes on to talk about his (the subject's) concern to appear revered: "If only I could "come out" on paper as on a classical canvas, endowed with a noble expression – thoughtful, intelligent, etc.!"
• He goes on to mention the uneasiness of seeing oneself on paper, different from a mirror, and also says: "For the photograph is the advent of myself as other: a cunning dissociation of consciousness from identity." 

The points made here regarding photography and portraiture are pertinent to this investigation, and with plenty of room for discussion. I need to return to them later when I can conjoin them or counter them with research more specifically on self-portraiture. 

From Portraiture

• 'the oscillation between art object and human subject, represented so personally, is what gives portraits their extraordinary grasp on our imagination' - portraits are intriguing because of the resemblance, the notion that it is them.  
• A portrait is a portrait because of the artist's intention to allude to the subject by representation (portray them) foremost over the viewer's recognition of the subject.

Again these are not points specific to my research, but I feel it is very worthwhile to circle the subject widely, whilst slowly moving in, so that any opinions I have on the core topic, are well informed ones.

I found a couple of other books which would also help me in this respect. Train Your Gaze by Roswell Angier, and Self-portraiture in the Age of Photography edited by Erika Billeter. As well as helping with the method above, I think these 'simpler' reads will give me a more comfortable starting point to the topic, and hence more confidence when tackling the in-depth literature.

From Train Your Gaze

• 'Portrait photography is about (or records) the exchange between photographer and subject' - A solid and simple way of summing it up, which of course leads me to question the nature of that exchange, or of that record, when the subject and photographer are the same.
• Bayard's early photograph 'Self-portrait as a drowned man' was noted as one of the first portraits to deal with strong personal emotion, rather than informative representation. 

From my personal reflection

• The idea that the triangle relationship is not flattened, that the photographer and subject, although the same person are taking different roles (intentions?).
• I grasped on to the idea of performance. The inherent difference between portrait and self-portrait, being that the subject knows the image is being made, in what context it is being made, how it will be presented, how they look, how they will appear. And so through knowing, they will behave, perform. 

Following this reading/thought will be the second tutorial with Ed Dimsdale, and an attempt to determine a hypothesis. 

Working with Photography in Context

This is the major research project for the final year of my photography degree. Regular and in depth research will take place from this time forward, and this project will culminate in a presentation, as part of a larger symposium, in March. 

When trying to answer the difficult question of what to research, I decided to pursue the ideas and theory that had most enthused me from the course so far. This came from the 'Picturing the Body' module from the 2nd year, when I conducted work on photographing the human body with a macro lens and in an intentionally ‘unflattering’ – and potentially regarded as ‘gross’ – style, see Body (own). I found that I needed to use my own body as the subject for fears of exploiting or mocking another person’s. This unease was explained in a following lecture - 'The Politics of Ageing' (see my thoughts on the subject there). The main points are:

• the notion of a three way relationship in a portrait photograph, between photographer, subject and viewer, 
• the responsibility therefore placed on the photographer, as they hold the power over how the subject is presented, and hence judged by the viewer. (the source of my unease)
• how this relationship changes when subject and photographer are the same - a self-portrait.

I resolved my dilemma by using myself as the model. I then became quite interested in the self-portrait, the consequences of it on the viewer, altering the relationship through a photograph. In a subsequent post I attempted to examine what was going on in this situation:

It comes back to this idea of a photographer holding power over their subject, and power over the judgement the viewer makes of the subject. But when the photographer is also the subject, it's like that judgement has already been made, or the option for the viewer to judge has been removed. The photographer presents herself, judges herself, and the viewer can only ponder on that, on why.

These queries into judgement, and the control of that judgement, through a self-portrait, are what I will carry forward as a starting point to this research.

Penultimate Peer Session

As the assignment deadline is drawing near, we began this session with a group review and discussion of everyone's ideas and latest work, towards the aim of helping each other along with our final pieces. I hope the session was beneficial, I for one was very encouraged to hear some excellent and inspiring ideas followed up by thoughtful questions and suggestions. The important thing now is that we really make a good effort at realising these ideas - don't be timid - if you've got something that you're passionate about then go for it. I'm keen that next week we will all have more images to show (even if they are just preliminary or research) so that we can get a stronger sense of where everyone is headed.

Following the review, I invited fellow second year student Joanna Ornowska to come and talk to us about some of her work. After the assignment to 'document a meeting' was set, Joanna's photography (in particular her Park Portraits series) came to mind. We asked about and discussed with Joanna her methods of approaching and directing strangers, her considerations of light and composition, and the technical challenges she dealt with. All of which was very insightful, and I hope useful to the group.

Her photography of strangers she meets is continuing - at the moment it's couples walking on Welsh mountains - and there is also her more personal and intimate project Awake, looking at her family life during and after her illness with hepatitis C and skin cancer. Joanna shows a great level of dedication to her projects, which is reflected in the quality of her pieces. Each time I see her work I am inspired to better my own.

For the remainder of the afternoon we had a flashgun workshop with Kevin, which I will endeavour to sum up here:

• The power of the flashguns can be stepped up or down by 3 stops (above or below the ambient exposure) so they can be used as a subtle fill light, your main light , or for an over-exposed effect. 
• The lights can be used on-board and off-board - mounted to light stands or tripods, using super clamps, magic arms, or just the foot, or you could even get an assistant to hold it. 
• They can be altered to send light in different manners - direct, bounced, diffused, or coloured using gels. 
• There are different ways of firing them remotely: using a radio trigger; using the 'SU 4' setting (similar to the 'cell' function on the studio heads); or using the flashguns' in built radio signals - which means setting one flash as the 'master' and the other(s) as 'remote' (remember that the master can be the camera's own flash). 
• Different models and brands will vary in settings and terminology, just to keep it confusing for us.
• You'll need to provide your own batteries (usually AA) and ideally they should be above 2000mAh (milli-amps). 

All of this might sound a bit techno mumbo jumbo, but as with any new equipment the best option would be to take it out and have a play. The crucial thing to remember is that these are just lights, apply the same principles as you would with studio lighting and don't over-complicate things. Again the Strobist blog is a useful resource, try the 102 lighting archive. And Kevin also mentioned the website of Ken Rockwell, who seems to know his camera equipment through and through and provides a review for just about anything.

Welcome to 'Working with Light'

To all 'Working with Light' students: this blog will now host weekly posts covering what we go over in our support groups, whether that be technical issues, post-lecture discussion, feedback on peer's work, links to inspiration and so on. This is a space for you all to contribute to, so please get happy commenting with your work/ideas/research etc.. Please note these support groups will take place on Mondays from 10am in the outer darkroom.

Thursday 22nd April

Jonathan Shaw introduced the module, we questioned 'what is light?' (and will continue to do so throughout the term). We started by watching a film by Mike Figgis: Timecode. I enjoyed the film largely for its original format and delivery, more than its plot or message. At first frustrated by its awkwardness, but then soon (as we discussed afterwards) adapting to it by allowing the changing audio to manipulate our selected viewing. I found myself evolving with this process - listening to the conversation of one character(s) and looking to the silent actions of another, to keep track of them all. I also thought that this could be a film to be re-visited - with more to be discovered when the viewer doesn't need to follow the plot and so can look for the finer actions/behaviours of the characters. A point to remember with our photography - can we produce something original which will hold a viewers attention, perhaps even encourage them to revisit it and/or discover more? We all know how easy it is to blitz round a gallery, skimming over others' work.

We were given the article Why Street Photography is Facing a Moment of Truth by Sean O'Hagan. Looking to the quotes of the article, there are some quite useful insights into photographer's attitudes when approaching 'street photography' -

"It's essentially a way of working wherein you have to be utterly open to what happens on the street. So, no props, no models, no setting up of shots, and you always use available light. Then, it's down to a mixture of happenstance, luck and skill." - Matt Stuart

"I'm not really drawn to a lot of the ideas around street photography, the notion of waiting around for something to happen, an accident or a man walking by an odd sign or things like that. What I do is always carried by the subject. In this instance, I was totally reacting to a place that I had stumbled on, and the place completely moulded and shaped the work. I was reacting, really, rather than going out looking." - Stephen Gill

The article also pointed out something of a gap between street photography and its place in the art world, because it is too grounded or authentic in some way. Hopefully we can bridge this gap with our pinhole work. Which leads to the task for next week - to photograph the 'street' using our pinhole cameras, and taking into consideration the points discussed in this article. When we say 'street' what we're really talking about is the public place. I started to question what defines that place - somewhere everyone and anyone has the right to be, and hence where you can expect to meet anyone - an absence of privacy. How does a camera (as an objective viewing tool) fit into such a place? Or how does a photographer (as a subjective 'eye') enter into and engage with it?

I'd mention to students that with this task it's important not to get hung up on the technical restrictions of pinhole, but rather to enjoy them. If all you've got is a bloomin' cake tin then how are you going to get something from it? This task is not looking for perfectly focussed, lit, exposed, framed images, instead it's looking to break the mould, and (pardon the cliché) get you to think outside the box. I think this is what the module is really about, pushing the boundaries, challenging the thinking we take for granted when photographing. And as wise Wonathan put it - "if you're not enjoying it, stop it and try something else."


For those who haven't seen it, here is my post and video of the Camera Obscura I made. Recommend that everyone has a go at this - very simple, very cheap, very interesting, and educational towards pinhole cameras.

See you all on Monday - peer review and guidance for 'street' task, post-lecture discussion, pinhole camera surgery. No hangovers allowed.

Thoughts on Ross Rawlings' Photography

Currently studying a masters in photography at Falmouth University, and a recent graduate of Coventry, Ross Rawlings has been a keen participant of the 'Picturing the Body' free online course. His work can be seen here.

I followed Ross's work online as he went through the 'picbod' course and tackled each of the weeks briefs. There was some positive and engaged discussion on his week two work, which inspired me to write this comment piece, however I've waited till now to write it, because I wanted to see where Ross would take the work (also gives me more material to discuss). So for week one he started with some clearly considered environmental portraiture, demonstrating confidence with his process of engaging people for the camera. It was encouraging to read about.

For week two Ross made use of his method of coupling to the purpose of "creating a narrative, and an image that leaves a lot of questions unanswered." The work was responded to well and lots of talk was taken up around this idea of narrative. Personally I think narrative is not quite the right term, I think of it rather as 'suggesting'. A connection is suggested across the two images, the light leads me to think it is something ethereal or dreamlike. The narrative is to come later, with a greater number of images, when more can be inferred from the work. That is my take on it anyway, it's a term which is banded around quite a lot in photography and open to varied interpretations/uses.

There is no doubting that Ross's technical ability is flawless. He has developed and identified his own style of light – the best word I can think to describe it is 'pearlesence'. And I find his posed photography, where he locates, controls and utlises this light, to be most striking. There is a distinct emotive feel which runs through this work, I struggle to pin it down, but (as others have identified) I can relate it to Rinko Kawuchi's photography. I had a go at arranging some of my favourites. 

In the week two comments Ross mentioned an open narrative and leaving interpetation to the viewer, he then expressed a desire to present a clearer narrative. Seeing as he has now achieved a succession of strong work which is identifiable to his name, I wonder if this can be done. If he can bring together a body of work with meaning behind it, open-ended or resolved.

All images ©Ross Rawlings 2010, taken from http://rossrawlings.wordpress.com/ 

The Politics of Ageing, and Where the Power Lies...

Rather appropriately – considering the recent work on my father, and moreover my concerns about it – we had a lecture, followed by discussion, on 'The Politics of Ageing'

The real 'meat' of the lecture came out though when we got on to looking at power relationships in photography. It was said that all photographs have embedded within them a triangle relationship between photographer, subject, and viewer. When the subject becomes a person, the relationship is naturally of greater significance and holds greater impact. The power almost inevitably lies with the photographer, they choose the moment, they edit the world, they edit their exposures, they decide on how the subject is presented to the viewer, they have say over the meaning of a photograph. Think of Joel Sternfeld's work 'Landscape in Memoriam' where the additional text describing the crimes committed at the scenes, alters the viewers opinions and how they regard those pictures dramatically – replacing a calm non-committed stance with shock and pity.

We then thought about when this three-way relationship becomes two – when the photographer is also the subject, and how the power shifts, or seems to. The photographer casts a critical eye over themselves, and this can then come back at the viewer, potentially challenging them. Think of John Coplans, Sam Taylor-Wood, Jo Spence, Cindy Sherman. It seems the photographer holds sway over both themselves and the viewer, 'controlling' the image, and its presence.

We then thought about photographers who could be regarded as exploiting their subjects, exploiting their  power as the photographer. Martin Parr, Diane Arbus, Jock Sturges, Sally Mann. Often their subjects are not aware of the context in which these photographs will be viewed – their use (intended or otherwise) for ridicule, mockery, disgust, gratification. And so we questioned, with lots of debate, whether a photographer should be 'allowed' to publish such work.

All of this discussion was very relevant to the anxieties I have on my own work. I remember at the time agreeing that as a serious practitioner our work deserves to be free, to be spread, to be viewed. Information, pixels, want to be free, should be free, should be shared. And then I looked again over the photos I'd taken of my father's body – and had doubts. I think if a practitioner is confident with their work, then yes, they should push it out there regardless of concerns as to what others might think. But if they are uncomfortable with it themselves, and don't wish it to be widely viewed, then there's a reason for that, and it shouldn't be ignored.    

He who bears the camera bears the power... and the responsibility.

A Discussion

An update on my 'lecture' on Fashion Mgazine by Alec Soth. The presentation went down well with the group (I think), it certainly evoked a lot of discussion, of which I will try to sum up here.

The main point, or rather question, that we kept coming back to was: 'Is this fashion photography?' Fashion photography is primarily there to sell, it is an industry tool. But then it is entitled to an artistic appreciation, although personally I would question the depth of the creativity. And then there is the rather vaguely categorised 'high fashion'. And now we're entering into a much larger debate, of which I am barely informed.

But to bring it back to 'Fashion Magazine' - Soth's sensitive pictures of Minnesota teenagers, are not as candid as they first appear. It would seem they have been dressed/styled in designer outfits, the photographs then carefully arranged, and then perhaps even poses asked for. So would a viewer, from this style of image, be spurred into purchasing the product. Well potentially yes, they might be. They would not at all be familiar with this mode of advertising, but may be encouraged by its originality. So this means that the categorisation of 'Fashion Magazine' lies entirely with the viewer - is that right? I suppose its all subjective anyway and we'll only end up in circles arguing the definition of 'fashion'. A good debate then I'd say.

It felt like we ended up with two options in our attempt to 'classify' this work. Fashion, against social documentary - or rather a comment on fashion - both we're equally defensible. We are aware of Soth's dry and ironic humour (watch this video now), but I really didn't feel that there was any cynicism with 'Fashion Magazine'.

Soth seems to be party to our inconclusive debate when attempting to define this work:

"...I love the idea of borderlines - of walking a tightrope. This is the best place to make pictures. I would never claim that this magazine is documentary photography. But I'm not really sure this is fashion photography either."

And this brings me back to my thoughts on Soth not pushing boundaries, but redrawing them. Through the group's discussion, it seemed to me like we found this borderline that he speaks of, some of us found ourselves strongly on one side of it, some close to it, and some pondering it laterally - "I'd hardly even call it photography, more that he is a conceptual fine artist."

And so, wondering what project we could set ourselves, this discussion topic led us nicely to a theme of 'genre challenging'. The idea being that, in a similar way that Soth has challenged our concept of 'fashion photography', we should ponder the same, whether it be through producing our own images, research, or even just comment.

What is exciting is the potential for this genre theme to continue, with varied project/discussions into the many different, and difficulty definable fields of photography. I look forward to the results, see you in a month.