Haiti Earthquake Aftermath Montage from Khalid Mohtaseb on Vimeo.
When two international TV networks asked me to go to Haiti to shoot ENG footage I was very uncertain about what to expect. Like many others I was getting my information on what was happening on the ground from the news and occasionally by word of mouth. Almost everyone who knew of my trip tried to talk me out of it, which in itself was very frustrating. The networks wanted us there as soon as possible and there was no time for preproduction or coordination.
Almost all the images and videos coming out of Haiti had become all too familiar and I knew that was not how I wanted to capture a story of this significance. The idea that life goes on even in the most horrific state of despair was fascinating to me and getting that concept across was my main goal in shooting this montage. I wanted to focus on the Haitian people and the lives that had been affected by this devastating earthquake as well as showcase how modern technology can revolutionize journalism and the way news coverage is shot.
Our team of four, which also included two correspondents and a second shooter, traveled from New York City to Santa Domingo and with great uncertainty, took a bus across the border to Haiti. Our 15-hour trip ended when we were dropped off at the heavily guarded US embassy in the Haitian capital. From there we found our way to the United Nations base, where we pitched a tent and settled in along with the many other journalists based there. For the next week that tent would be our home.
Posing with aid workers - the team all ready to shoot the news with the Panasonic HPX-500
The 5DmkII rig ready to roll with Kessler Pocket Dolly
Production
All the ENG footage was shot with a Panasonic HPX-500. The second shooter was my good friend Raymond Bishir, who is a photographer and wanted to shoot his personal work as well. Every day we not only had to shoot, edit, and transmit two three-minute reports but to make enough time to shoot our personal stuff. We established a workflow in which we would alternate between news shooting and personal shooting. We were fortunate enough that the two journalists we were working with (Susan Modaress and Hassan Abu Zaytoon) were very supportive and patient with us.
Working in an earthquake zone is physically and emotionally overwhelming. Aside from the documentary I shot in Egypt and Lebanon this was my first time shooting with a journalistic mindset. Having to document a natural disaster of this magnitude was very difficult to grasp. One of the main factors that we were all concerned about the logistical challenges such as housing, food, water, transportation, and safety; however I tried not think about the obstacles as they tend to be distracting. That being said, we packed very lightly. Each of us only brought a limited amount of personal belongings and the bare essential tools to get the job done.
Tools I used for the montage.
-Tenba shootout rolling backpack
-Canon 5D mark2
-Kessler Pocket Dolly
-Miller solo ENG legs w/ the Arrow 25 head, a few lenses
-Canon 16-35, 24-70, 70-200 2.8 L series),
-Marshall 7inch HDMI monitor
-5 Canon BPE-6 camera batteries.
-Apple Macbook pro
Shooting personal work at the airfield with 5DmkII on Pocket Dolly and Miller tripod
It’s crucial to keep a low profile when shooting in disaster zones so I chose not to bring a mattebox, follow focus, filters, and barely ever shot with the monitor. The pocket dolly was almost always part of the setup as it takes seconds to build and works flawlessly. I strongly believe that a dolly shot is far more powerful than a static shot so I tried using it any chance I could. I chose to shoot everything between a 100-320 ISO and nothing faster than a 5.6 f-stop. I tried to keep my shutter speed around 1/60 of a second to get it closest to a film shutter degree. I cranked up the shutter speed for all the water distribution shots to crystallize the water.
Shooting in the strong sun was challenging
One of my biggest challenges when it came to shooting was the contrast between the darker skin complexions and direct sunlight. I worked around it by finding a midpoint between the two and exposing for it. Turning down the on-camera contrast also helped significantly with the latitude. I knew I wouldn’t achieve the look I wanted in camera so I shot everything with a standard pictures style and tweaked the look in post.
Post Production
I’ve been listening to Eric Wollo ’s music for quite some time now and I knew that “Sounds of the Seen Part 1” was the track I wanted to use. I edited everything in the native H.264 codec and exported as Apple ProRes 422 after I was done editing. The montage was edited in a couple of days using Final Cut Pro and most of the time was spent grading.
A still from a clip graded in Photoshop for reference
My first step in grading is almost always retouching a screenshot from the clip in Photoshop. I then use the Photoshopped still as a reference for my color grading. I started the grade in FCP using the three-way color corrector to shift the mids and shadows to a warmer color tone. From here on out I live in Magic Bullet Looks to fine-tune the exposure and colors. I rarely ever use the looks presets as they are overused and can get more precise results by building my own.
Using Magic Bullet Looks to fine tune exposure and colors
Some of the most useful tools in Magic Bullet are the spot exposure, grad exposure, vignette, contrast and curves. I faced major latitude issues due to the dark skin completions and the skin tones were almost always too bright or too dark. The spot exposure really helped in solving this issue.
The grad exposure is an essential tool to draw attention to your subjects. I used it to bring the exposure of the foreground or background up or down a few stops.
I’ve also been spending a lot of time recently trying to learn Apple Color, as its tweaking tools are far more precise than Final Cut Pro or Magic Bullet.
The before and after results of grading
Khalid was born in Doha Qatar in December 1985. He spent his childhood traveling from one country to another, until his father was relocated to Wayne New Jersey in 1993. Inspired by music, math, and independent film khalid discovered his passion for filmmaking at an early age. In 2004 he attended the New York Film Academy and later won best screen play at the 2005 New York International Film Festival for his short feature “Optimistic”. After graduating he started working on commercials, music videos, and corporate events in hope to finance his personal projects.
His website is here
57 responses to "Into the Haiti earthquake zone – Khalid Mohtaseb covers the aftermath on 5DmkII"
AndresAguilo Says:
March 26th, 2010 at 1:01 am
I don’t want to get into a moral debate but for me Khalid video of Haiti was completely irresponsible, there is a time for everything, a travelling is more than just a camera movement and in an aftermath is disrespectful for the people, why not take advantage and make a post apocalyptic fictional drama, as godard said every shot is a moral question. What really get to me is the fact that this Internet community sees this and just thinks it’s a great video and congratulate the film maker. I just feel sorry for this immature act of being amaze by the “exotic”.
Christian Tillmanns Says:
March 26th, 2010 at 1:32 am
@ Andres Agilo
I disagree.
Behind ALL images – and there is no exeption -, there is technique and equipment and it is absolutely legitimate to discuss that techniques as it enables journalists to tell a story visually. I think nobody here forgets what the images are about.
This is about visual communication. It is about being touched by images. And it is about how to tell a story by images.
Wether it is shaky ENG style or composed imagery. There is a technique behind. To call a specific technique irresponsible needs explanation and can’t be based on a simple camera movement.
Have a look at the images of Sebastiao Salgado. In your terms he must be the most irresponsible by creating utterly touching but beautyful imagery.
kind regards,
christian
Mark Says:
March 26th, 2010 at 10:55 am
Leave the crappy slider at home next time. Seriously people are really over using those things at the moment and it really doesn’t work here.
As for the footage shown it doesn’t really tell me anything about what happened or how people are coming to terms with it. Its just another bunch of pretty pretty shots put together which to be honest given the situation i think is a pretty piss poor attempt at journalism. If you want to focus on the people then show us interviews and have real interaction with the people. Not this over color corrected sliding rubbish.
Technical deficiencies i can forgive if there’s compelling subject matter and strong story telling, but show casing technical knowledge and equipment while fundamentally failing to deal with the subject and story really is pretty poor.
Khalid Mohtaseb Says:
March 26th, 2010 at 4:18 pm
Thanks for clearing things up Christian.
Andres, in what way was this video “irresponsible”? If you were on the ground you would understand that the Haitian people wanted their story told without bias, regardless of the format or the aesthetic. This video demonstrates that the story of the Haitian people can be told without undermining their privacy, dignity and integrity. These images would not have been possible if I did not establish a sense of trust with the people of Haiti.
Whether you like my take on what I saw or not, as James Nachtwey once said “We must look at it. We’re required to look at it. We’re required to do what we can about it. If we don’t, who will?”
I think you have to remember that filmmaking is an ongoing education, and to undermine the intelligence of the internet community is in my opinion disrespectful. Through these online forums and blogs we either learn from each other’s knowledge or each other’s mistakes. And it is imperative for us share our experiences with one another.
I also fail to understand how you might think that Haiti is exotic in any way. That to me is extremely disrespectful associating Haiti, the aftermath of a devastating earthquake and its people in their time of despair as “exotic”.
Mark leave your ignorance at home next time. I sensed your anger from the second I started reading your comment. If you want to give constructive criticism then you’re more than welcome to share with us, however referring to the Pocket Dolly as “crappy” my work as “rubbish” and using terms like “piss poor” is completely disrespectful and unprofessional. What exactly is your definition of journalism anyway?
I guarantee if my video was displayed as still images rather than “over color corrected sliding rubbish” you would classify it as journalism. Your opinion is that of a child and an amateur.
Dan Chung Says:
March 26th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
Yes friends, whatever you think about this subject can we please keep the conversation civil and constructive. I think we all know where we are coming from, there in no need to resort to insults.
Mark Says:
March 26th, 2010 at 7:19 pm
If you want to label my criticisms as childish or amateur then thats fine. But i hope next time you’re out filming a deeply saddening event like this you do try to engage with the people more and rely less on gimmicks. I love when i see well made, insightful content that informs, challenges and above all inspires. I may sound harsh but i just don’t see that here.
I still stand by my earlier comments, you may think they’re disrespectful and unprofessional, i just think they’re honest and passionate in an industry that seems increasingly happy to keep its head down and not really question what is being put out there. Its that, that makes me angry.
AndresAguilo Says:
March 27th, 2010 at 4:13 am
Khalid, as you said it I also think its important for the people in Internet to share their knowledge and to learn from mistakes. Lets start with the word “irresponsible” perhaps a harsh word but in my opinion I think that mixing the journalistic environment with the fictional tool has its limits. This line may be a little bit blurry, but Haiti is way across the line in my book. Both documentary and fictional sides are known for being manipulated by the director, but journalism should be another thing. The extensive manipulation of the image and sound evokes me to the fictional side of things, and puts me further away from this being something real.
I see in your portrait (I don’t know what else to call it), in terms of images:
The scenery, people walking, faces, naked people taking a shower, an outdoor hospital, nato forces and a gun.
Why did you choose to show this elements with a short travelling? For me the form should de back up with the content. I don’t see any reason to use the travelling. It tells me the idea the you used it just because you had it around and that may be irresponsible or naive.
The naked people washing, here, I just don’t understand the point. Why so many shots and why so much time devoted to this? Why did you include in the final edit the 1:20 shot? There is no need to show naked people taking a shower might as well show us how they desperatlly eat. That is an exotic view of things from your part. Comming from Latin America, I have seen to many exotic portraits of the people. And here it’s clear that you put on the tele objective and just hit record.
The outdoor hospital, again why the use of travelling to show a injured man? is the image not strong enough for you?
The faces, here I have to congratulate you, those looks share with the camera more than every video made from Haiti, its a shame you didn’t make a video only of those looks. I see a connection there, that trust in the camera is very hard to find.
JD Says:
March 27th, 2010 at 7:17 am
honestly, isn’t it about time people stopped showing us what this camera is capable of?
Stop with all these demonstrations of tricks, gimmicks, software and hardware and just show us some actual stories, but some meat with the sauce.
@Khalid Mohtaseb
“I wanted to capture a story of this significance.”
I’m sorry, but I see no story in this at all!
If you remove the existing context (ie all the previous news footage and exposure to the actual story), your piece tells us nothing.
context is king… and this is where the piece fails. even if these images were still’s they wouldn’t tell us the who, what, when, where, how and why.
All we see is what is there and are left with questions and no answers.
It’s simply not a rounded piece at all and I honestly don’t understand what the point in it is?
Tim Says:
March 27th, 2010 at 7:40 am
This is a great website. Due to it’s subject matter, it must attract readership from all levels of the profession making it a great forum to learn, share material and offer opinions. In other words, it’s not just Vimeo or Youtube. Okay- lesson 1.
To tell a story with moving images, one must learn the “film language.” This is made up of grammar and vocabulary and together they make syntax or a sentence that can be understood. We then edit the sentences together to tell our story.
So, any camera move whether it be a zoom, pan, tilt etc usually works best if it is hidden by subject movement. Generally camera moves should start on something interesting and end on something more interesting. In other words for a camera move to make sense, it should have a reason. The reason is usually strongly connected to the subject which helps tell a story. This applies to all areas of the project whether it be the music or the effects or lighting. It’s all part of the film language. Each part has a reason and should support the project as a whole.
With this in mind, we should always view our work critically so we never stop learning. When one is more fluent with our film language then one can produce a film that can be more easily understood. The rest is just taste.
Tim Says:
March 27th, 2010 at 7:59 am
Oh, one more thing. Lesson 2 -
The Canon’s hot shoe is designed to support about 400 grams which is equal to the weight of it’s designed accessory. A Marshall monitor and Anton Bauer battery is asking for trouble. Even Phil Bloom could learn from this.
The sooner they shove this sensor into a proper video camera the better.
Mick Jones Says:
March 27th, 2010 at 4:12 pm
I thought the piece was thought provoking and emotionally engaging. I also think Khalid’s artistry in his camera work is quite masterful. However, I will agree with the comments about the dolly slider. I have one of these too and I try to use it sparingly if I design the shot for it. For me the static shots in this piece work better at conveying emotion and I felt that the sliding shots took me out of my thought process a little. I have only seen two of khalid’s pieces and I find them both truly inspiring works of art. I look forward to seeing more.
Ron Dawson Says:
March 27th, 2010 at 8:21 pm
Wow. I think some of you are wound up way too tight. Calling this piece “rubbish” just b/c he’s using dolly shots. Complaining that you’re sick and tired of people talking about what this camera can do. Frustruted that he color graded. Eesh.
As an artist, we all want our work to be portrayed in the best possible light. Color grading, using dolly shots, etc, help achieve that.
FWIW, I think the only reason this is an issue is b/c Khalid went into detail describing the production process. Can you honestly say you’d have all these same issues if you just stumbled upon this video on Vimeo, YouTube, wherever, with no description. It’s beautifully shot and the faces DO tell the story of what’s happening in Haiti.
I admit that I’m no journalist. So, maybe there are some rules of journalism you all know about that prohibits the use of set up shots, or whatever. But I DO know a thing or two about documentary filmmaking, which, if done honest, is got to be considered a form of journalism. I see this as a beautifully told, artfully shot documentary that does the people of Haiti justice b/c Khalid went to the trouble to make it look good. It’s more subconscious, but you’re more drawn into any film if visually it’s aesthecially pleasing to the eye. Richer colors grab you more than pale ones. Dolly shots are more compelling than static shots.
@JD – I think you mean “content’ is king. And this content in the conTEXT of what we know does tell a story. It emotionally conveys the plight and desperation of these people. I don’t think, as edited, it’s meant to be a stand alone, all-emcompassing documentary.
Speaking of documentaries, how would this crowd feel about award-winning documentarian Errol Morris’ work?
Great job Khalid. The only critique I may offer is that it would have been nice to hear some nat sound, or a poignant voice over. To the extent, I think some of the other critiques have somewhat of a point about flushing out the story more. But I think what you’ve done is beautiful and honoring of what’s happened in Haiti.
Carl Olson Says:
March 27th, 2010 at 9:03 pm
Khalid, what a beautiful, intensely moving film. I waited for a considerable time before watching this. I didn’t know if I could handle it emotionally. Two of my children were near the epicenter of the earthquake in Chile. Of course that event does not begin to compare in magnitude and loss in Haiti. Still, for a few very agonizing hours my wife and I had no idea of the fate of our children. It’s a very raw, visceral emotion. Sadly, even in that event, not every parent got good news as we did.
Your effective use of tools led to a film with emotional impact. Sadly, the world is full of negative people. Frankly, if these naysayers who have posted here think they can do better, then they should go to Haiti show how to do it. But, no, they won’t. They are too afraid to do the art you have done.
Chuck Fadely Says:
March 27th, 2010 at 10:04 pm
Not all stories have to follow the norms of A-roll/B-roll with talking heads and coiffed anchors.
This story tells another side of the earthquake: emotion. Emotion in the form of the viewer’s reaction to the events there. While other network crews were focusing on dead bodies and giving the world the impression that looters were overrunning Port Au Prince, this video gives the reality of the situation.
It’s an iconic image of a particular point in time. Years from now, when someone wants to see what the earthquake was like, this will still be a powerful image while Anderson Cooper will look silly. Unlike most footage coming out of there when this was shot, Khalid respects the people there, and does not exploit them.
Good job. But yeah, the slider was a little over done…
Jas Says:
March 27th, 2010 at 11:43 pm
Guys Guys cmon. this is ridiculous. Perhaps post some links to the material YOU have shot thats has more MEAT and less sauce??
Links people?… no? didint think so. So lets just can it. If you can say something constructive then just move on.
A and for christ sake does it need to get so petty as giving ‘Lessons’ about hot shoe weight limits. sad.
jas
Susan Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 12:56 am
Khalid Mohtaseb has taken conventional journalism and documentIon to a new level and I think this has touched a raw nerve with some of us who are afraid we will have to raise our game. Is this perhaps the future of journalism?
We have gotten used to having stories narrated to us and conclusions reached for us by news networks who more often than enough have a preset agenda, we know that and we have learned to accept it.
However, Mohtaseb’s piece is significant in that he shared with us what he saw with all honesty, leaving us to draw our own conclusions.
I don’t understand why some of us are looking for a story? Is the story not right in front of us?
(Perhaps what struck me as very shocking was comment #7 who writes: “The naked people washing, here, I just don’t understand the point. Why so many shots and why so much time devoted to this?”
It appears that even when the story has been explained to us time and time again we chose not to listen, unless you have been living on Mars for the past few months you would know the important role water played in the lives of the Haitian people post earthquake, it was one of the most pressing and challenging issues for the population, government and aid organizations.
As a journalist who has been covering disaster zones for the past decade and a half I know first had how difficult it is to go out and bring the story home, let alone create moving images like these in the aftermath of one of the biggest disasters of our time.
Congratulations Khalid Mohataseb to your courage and determination. My hat goes off to…….
Susan Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 12:58 am
Mark Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 3:17 am
Wow, i’m really glad i’m not as easily pleased as some of you.
@Chuck – i agree not all films have to be the talking head, news anchor type thing, even with news video. In fact one of the most creative and moving pieces i’ve seen by primarily a photographer is ‘Roadworks’ by Antonin Kratochvil.
http://www.antoninkratochvil.com/#/Multimedia/Roadworks/1
Now don’t get me wrong i was very disturbed by some of the news coverage. The constant referral to a tinderbox waiting to burst into violence. The referral of desperate and starving people as looters was way out of line. As i said what some of the mainstream media puts out there really angers me. There’s certainly space and i would hope demand for something more poignant and subtle. But to say this video gives the reality of the situation is absurd. It shows barely anything of of it. As James said there is no context. Was looting that wide spread? I’ve heard from people there that it wasn’t, but the cameras gravitated to it. Was the situation really about to explode into violence as was suggested or was it more isolated? This really doesn’t answer those questions or give me any reality of the situation at all.
I had family and friends caught up in the Chile earthquake and it took up to a week to get word that people were ok. That was gut wrenching enough. But the scale of the Haiti earthquake is on such a level i just can’t even comprehend. Going on for a quarter of a million people dead. You can’t imagine that, or i can’t. I strongly believe the only way you can even begin to relate to that is to bring it down to a few small individual stories.
@ Ron and Susan – this isn’t about making pure art (though of course there is an art to good film making) its a news video site and that means you have at some responsibility into what you produce and how its perceived. If neither of you are remotely perturbed by the fact that someone has gone to a major disaster zone and made it look like a stylised pop video without any journalistic gravitas then there’s something really wrong. I’ve covered natural disaster too, nothing on this scale, but seriously the people there deserve better than that.
@Ron – i don’t care that the description of the production process is included, i was more than interested to read how Danfung Dennis filmed Afghanistan. Its how the subject has been covered that i have a problem with. So yes i would and do have the same issue if i found it on vimeo (where it also is by the way). It may be thats it not meant to be a fully formed piece which then means its an opportunity lost. But the reliance on stylised camerawork and post are still valid criticisms.
@Susan – i always want people to make me raise my game, even if i can’t compete then it doesn’t matter because of course i want to see great content produced. But if there’s any new level here then its definitely in the wrong direction. If this is the future of journalism, i.e not engaging with the subject, not giving any information about whats happening, not using subtle yet compelling visuals and letting the story speak for itself then we’re all in big big trouble.
I think its important to remember as visual journalists the tools we have are composition, use of light, story telling ability and compelling subject matter, using those simple things will get you a lot further than dressing things up with the latest gizmo. Its a real testament that this film failed to tell any kind of meaningful story despite having such desperately moving subject matter.
@Carl
“Frankly, if these naysayers who have posted here think they can do better, then they should go to Haiti show how to do it. But, no, they won’t. They are too afraid to do the art you have done.”
What the hell are you on about? The last thing Haiti needed immediately after the earthquake was yet another photographer running round using up vital resources. But really you shouldn’t start making assumptions like that. I’m a trained journalist so when i see something i’m uncomfortable with then i’m going to question it. As i said earlier i knew people caught up in the Chilean earthquake and very nearly went there to cover it, unfortunately being a freelance i didn’t have the up front funds to finance the trip. But friends that i trained with went to both Haiti and Chile and in the latter helped to make contact with people i was worried about for me.
@Jas – Talking of links how come exactly your name isn’t written in blue with a line underneath it?
JD Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 4:04 am
@Ron Dawson:
“And this content in the conTEXT of what we know”
That’s my whole point!!! It presumes people already know the story… it doesn’t put anything into context, it just does nothing but attempt to show it in a stylised way.
and look at the material. apart from the fallen buildings etc. how much of that what is shown is different from before? how can I tell as a viewer? the piece doesn’t tell me anything like that.
and in that sense I’d possibly think the piece is simple exploitation… an attempt to build portfolio material or something.
“ooh look I went to haiti and look how pretty my content was”
how is it different from all those photojournalists etc. running to these disaster zones for the credibility… hardly any of them coming back with an actual story?
It just stinks of disaster zone tourism.
I say that because I seriously can’t think of another reason for it to exist.
Seriously where is the market for it and I mean other than video gear junkies.
JD Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 4:05 am
oh and @jas: I put my face and my work to my comments… maybe you should do the same if you don’t want to be seen as a troll?
oh and if you looked hard enough you’d find my work.
Jas Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 4:18 am
Im not criticizing anyones work here. keep it nice or move on.
Mark Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 4:44 am
Jas i’ve always been of the mind that criticising people’s work is the best way for everyone to learn and improve. I realise some of my remarks have been quite aggressive but thats because i’ve felt so strongly about how the subject matter has been handled.
I’ve been commenting here (including critiquing) fairly regularly since the site started. I’ve said before i’d be more than happy to put my video work up here if i felt i had something strong enough to really get behind. But most of the things i’ve done so far (which you can find easily enough) i fully admit have been me learning the technical side of video. Of course that doesn’t preclude me having an opinion on others work as a consumer of content.
I am currently editing a 30 minute film on people with learning disabilities which i think is probably strong enough but the client is an educational establishment and getting permission to use footage outside of their needs isn’t possible at present.
Henry Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 6:50 am
A lot of good points are being made here. I just want to add that I liked the video, but I thought the overuse of the ‘slider’ was a little too much for my taste. The static shots would have worked better on many shots.
I just felt the ‘content’ didn’t need all that movement to be compelling, it is compelling on its own.
Aurélien Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 8:31 am
Why showing people like that ? Filming like a music video with a useless color grading (okay, I hate color grading and useless effects…) to make it more laborious… Why using such an easy way to provoke anything but pity and embarrassment : Just look at the work of Sophie Ristelhueber about war…
DSLR cinema, like each great technologic revolutions, definitely is making its after-effects : a general vulgarity without nuance…Like Phillip bloom’s craps, (I know everyone is gaga about him)… If vulgarity can be very well done… I think we need much more exigent work : Okay, you were in Haiti, you were in the place to be to make something great, not DSLR pornography : I’m hard and pretentious (and English is not my mother tongue) but I’m really sad seeing such good talented people like you wasting their time with mindless work. You, they, we, deserves better. Stop filming without thinking
Tom Lowe Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 9:39 am
Change makes people uncomfortable. But change is coming. These types of artistically done news pieces are going to catch on, bigtime. My only beef with this type of filming is that you cannot control the light and are forced to shoot in very harsh light sometimes. Haha. So obviously I am arguing for even MORE cinematic quality.
People have razor-thin attention spans these days. Slick, short, artistic news pieces in stunning high-def will become very popular. Watch and see. As long as the content is true and worthy, then I see it as a good thing. Rock on, Khalid.
Wayne D. Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 11:22 am
Khalid, keep doing what you’re doing. Innovative trail-blazers like yourself have always encountered opposition at first. I welcome more heart-wrenching cinematic news footage like this.
Pat Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 11:36 am
Here is a link to another Haiti story shot on the 7d. This one is by Travis Fox and NPR’s Adam Davison. It tells the story of the businesses that are sprouting up in the tent cities. Really nice storytelling.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/haiti/view/economy_tent_city.html
Jas Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 1:04 pm
Mark, totally understand your comment and your work speaks for itself. And understand constructive criticism. I guess i just objected to the tone of some of the comments in here and constructive isnt the word for most of it.
Christian Tillmanns Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 3:01 pm
@ all those who are so easily spitting out hard words
I have a little suggestion:
Why don’t all the people that are so easy with spitting out the sometimes very hard criticism get on their cameras and edit a newspiece that does justice to their own critiques.
(You do not need to be on Haiti to find a subject.)
Then please submit those masterpieces for disussion… and we all will see what you guys are up to…
joe Gerhardt Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 4:10 pm
Wow, what a bunch of pathetic disgusting complaining people on this blog. Losers with nothing to do but try to hurt strangers they’ve never met. Strangers that are actually out there working hard to learn and expand their craft. Mark, you are everything about humanity I hate, all rolled up in a body.
Ron Dawson Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 5:13 pm
It seems like the biggest criticism here was that it was too “cinematic” and not “journalistic.” Perhaps for a site such as this that’s a valid criticism. But I can only speak for myself when I say I was genuinely moved by the piece. I could see it used in conjunction with a religious organization or non-profit looking to recruit volunteers to go help. To me, empirically it’s an emotional piece. Clearly others here were not moved by it and were put off. Maybe b/c there was an expectation on their part as to what it SHOULD have been.
@JD – regarding the context issue. The name of the piece tells us what it is. I can’t think of any distribution venue for this film where it won’t be known that it’s a story of the Haitian earthquake disaster. Who in the world that has access to a high speed internet connection doesn’t know about what’s happened in Haiti? Again, maybe we’re looking at it from two different perspectives as to it’s purpose.
To your point as to whether it’s exploitation I cannot answer. Only Khalid knows his true heart when he went down there. I know I’ve made documentary pieces that were full of emotion that included heartfelt and painful stories. When I made those films, I wanted them to look and sound as good as they possibly could b/c the subjects in my film deserved that treatment. Seems rather silly to go down to such a place, shoot it, then keep the footage looking bad just because you don’t want to be accused of making it stylized. Would this be a “better” piece if the footage was 60i, flat colors, shaky camera work, and a producer and a mic giving us a play by play?
I understand that it’s a photojournalist’s creed not to doctor photos or video. Just to tell the story as it happened. Perhaps that’s what people here are reacting to. But, I guess I don’t see a piece like this meant to be a photojournlistic one. It’s one filmmaker’s take on what’s happened down there. It has moved a number of people. If it didn’t move you, that’s fine.
This is my first time ever reading or commenting on this blog. What was off-putting to me was the kind of criticisms given. Much of it is not constructive. Calling it “rubbish” “piss poor journalism” “crappy slider.” All personal shots that seem unprofessional. Is there no other way you could communicate your obviously strong feelings w/o such rhetoric.
Khalid is only 25 freaking years old. Instead of crushing his spirit by calling his heart-felt, hard work “rubbish” because you disagree with his approach, take this opportunity to be a leader and a mentor. Share with him in a truly constructive, compassionate way WHY you feel it didn’t deliver on the goods. You may have very good points that if provided in a truly constructive way, could help shape this young filmmaker as a true journalist.
All artists are sensitive about their work. Even when criticism is truly constructive it can be hard to take. When it’s given in the form of biting language like this, it’s not only mean-spirited, it’s unproductive.
I don’t know if this is how most of the community interaction on this site is, but it’s definitely not the greatest first impression.
Ron Dawson Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 5:20 pm
This is taken from the About page of this blog:
“dslrnewsshooter.com is dedicated to the use of the latest HD-dSLRs like the Canon Eos5DmkII, 7D and Nikon D300s for news, documentary and factual shooting. Run by working news shooter Dan Chung it should be a place for professionals, educators, students and industry figures to discuss the practice and the art of cinematic in documenting the real world.”
Seems to me this piece fits perfectly with this blog’s own site description. It’s for documentary and factual shooting. It’s for discussing the use of HD DSLRs. And it’s for discussing the “art of cinema in documenting the real world.” By my account Khalid did all those things.
vladbox Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 7:07 pm
Honestly, pretty pictures, but Journalism is NOT. There is no focus on the problem at hand and it gives us no analysis to eventual solutions. If you had visited Haiti before the earthquake you could have been able to get most of the same devastation, for Haiti is the poorest country in this hemisphere. I have to agree with some of the first comments. If you are trying to show us your expertise as a shooter, no doubt, it may be there, but if you were to show the devastation and OFFER some compelling reasons to help and even your POV as a documentarist, you failed.
Also misleading header to a story that is far from what it seems to be.
Dan Chung Says:
March 28th, 2010 at 7:40 pm
There is also an interesting debate along similar lines about the stylised photojournalism going on here http://www.PDNPulse.com/2010/03/stylized-photojournalism-where-to-draw-the-line.html#comments Worth checking out.
Mark Lomas Says:
March 29th, 2010 at 2:45 am
@Christian – i’ve already answered that in my last comment. Though i was talking about some new projects last night.
@ Joe – Are you serious? You’ve made some assumptions about my personality and decided i’m the worst thing in all humanity from a few comments on the internet? That does make you sound a little ridiculous.
@Ron – i really don’t get your argument that i would think it better if it were shot 60i, flat etc etc etc. I’ve shot on Z1′s and similar and found them awful. These new cameras are great in what they let you do and i’m all for people experimenting and doing great work on them.
But as ever with new equipment and the opportunity to do something different (i.e photographers being able to do video with equipment they already have) people are losing sight of what really makes good work. Throwing gimmicks at something doesn’t make it good. I wouldn’t go round shooting all my stills with a fisheye lens so why would i go round shooting all my video with something so visually distinctive as a slider?
There are some ok shots in Khalid’s video but the overall stylised look really really detracts from it. It goes with comments i’ve made elsewhere on this blog that we’ve now seen what the camera can do so lets get over that and stop with the pretty b-roll footage. Lets see some actual content.
And that’s my main criticism, the lack of content. It just wasn’t fully formed. Maybe it wasn’t meant to be but its still a criticism that it was an opportunity lost to show what the major networks weren’t. Clearly we seem to have different frames of reference but it just didn’t move me at all. Which given the scale of the tragedy says a lot really. Its not like i’m some cold hearted person either (contrary to what some may think)!
I agree i could see some of the footage used by an aid agency or such. But then i really dislike how those videos are produced too.
As for how i’ve put across my arguments, well i think you’ll agree after my first post, where to be quite honest i was outraged that someone had shot a disaster with a pop video aesthetic, i’ve explained my concerns clearly and honestly and i’ve continued to discuss those thoughts.
Sure the first comment was cutting but i don’t think there’s necessarily anything wrong with that. Its an honest depiction of the reaction i had to it and that can be a lesson in its self.
It is easy to forget when out filming, photographing or locked away editing that you’re in a bubble of your own ideas and thoughts and that you have responsibilities in what you produce and how you portray your subject. Given the scale and nature of the subject matter i think this falls far short in giving justice to the story.
What i honestly get from it is that its all about Khalid, his technical ability and the equipment he has. Now I don’t think for a second that was his actual motivation and i’m sure he intended to produce something moving and thought provoking. But hopefully next time he’ll at least take on board some of the criticisms here (even if he doesn’t agree with them) and produces something with more depth and lets the story tell itself.
PS – another lesson to learn is you need a thick skin, really a few comments from someone on the internet shouldn’t mean that much to anyone (they certainly don’t make me the devil…Joe!). They’re only opinions, we all have them.
@ Dan – saw those the other day. I don’t mind some of the compositions but again whats with the fake borders? Can people not just work with the equipment they have without unnecessarily having to jazz it up? Just let the camera be invisible and let the content do the talking, sure make the most of what you’ve got but subtlety and honesty are your friends!
jameswatt3d Says:
March 29th, 2010 at 7:00 am
Different styles are a matter of personal preference but there is enough room for many styles of footage. There will always be the debate on how much post should be applied to more documentary footage and when to dolly and pan, and in the end it comes down to the person that makes the work.
I see this video as almost a series of moving photos. A still camera could have produced a very similar essay, although the movement certainly adds to it. It certainly looks like Khalid has come from a photography background to produce this work.
On first view, I thought that this video was very beautiful but lacking in content, mainly because we are used to seeing more storytelling in a video. After you look at it as a moving photo essay, it suddenly makes more sense.
I think that experimentation is key in this area of multimedia and only through trying new things will we move forward. If you don’t like this, no problem, but we need experimentation to progress in the medium.
Tim Says:
March 29th, 2010 at 1:22 pm
I’d suggest everyone take at least a quick look at Khalid’s website. He really is a talented music video maker.
It’s true, he is young. He is obviously very intelligent and motivated. Therefore one would hope he’ll be smart enough to learn from his mistakes. If he does, then he could very well be a name to watch. Also, he’s getting out there and having a go. All of this is admirable.
However, he states, “this was my first time shooting with a journalistic mindset” This simply begs the question……was this Khalid’s first ENG shoot?
I would strongly suggest that unless Khalid’s up for another roasting the next time he puts up a “montage” aimed at “showcasing how modern technology can revolutionize journalism and the way news coverage is shot” he should enrol himself in a good journalism college then put in some time on the road, this time with a microphone but minus the pocket dolly and music.
Keep in mind that ever since VJ’s came along with miniDV cameras about 15 years ago, there have been very few, albeit extremely talented journalists who have ever consistently made films that could ever be described as “trail blazing” or “ground breaking.”
Martyn Bull Says:
March 29th, 2010 at 4:06 pm
Technical discussions aside, this is a good piece of observational documentary that indicates Haiti getting on with moving forward after the earthquake. The narrative demonstrates an everyday calm amongst the ruins together with the fun, mischief, petty niggles that make up everyday life. Khalid has traveled to Haiti and recorded what he has found and that is sufficient to tell the tale of Khalid’s impressions. I’m rather glad there is only music. What would we expect folks to say? Does news always require a directed story? Perhaps the value of pieces like this is to trigger discussion where standard format pieces only sustain indifference?
taylorgary Says:
March 31st, 2010 at 9:09 am
i suppose magic bullet and glide tracks have become artistic filters, as they did for all those amazing photographers working in side photoshop.
This over produced colour grading reminds me strongly of Rarindra Prakarsa’s work. He got awards for ‘creating’ brilliant documentary images. So I find ‘pure honesty’ a little hard to believe, particularly when you quote from the likes of James Nachtwey.
Admittedly I think everyone in here would say some of the shots are very beautiful, and well crafted. However when you say “I wanted to focus on the Haitian people and the lives that had been affected by this devastating earthquake”
It’s understandable that various people get angry when you also said “showcase how modern technology can revolutionize journalism and the way news coverage is shot.” Because the showcasing the modern technology completely took over the show, and what you failed to do was ‘focus’ on the people! Even more so, because you seem to do all these nice shots for showreel purposes. Which I know at some stage everyone needs! Why not impress right? However I think this is a big problem with people trying to get into journalism in general..Simply taking a picture of someone, isn’t a story. Particularly not an emotional one.
In the commerical world I don’t think you can survive without having images to this standard. You would simply fail otherwise, but also doesn’t then suggest we who want content, want bland, lifeless and dull images. I’m sure everyone here would complain even more, but I we both. Apart from the likes of Danfung Dennis on here, very few are doing that.
So what I think upsets fellow doc/journo photographers and videographers the most, is seeing praise in work that could be done very easily. I can back that up by saying look at vimeo and you’ll see all the copycat F-academy productions on there. Even on this site, which is sort of confusing I suppose. Dan being a news photographer, It doesn’t feel like content matters, only the quality of image/footage.
It’s like having all those pop songs on the radio which all sound the same, but every so often one song is slightly better than the rest. Which I think in this case, you’ve put out that slightly better pop song! It looks and sounds exactly like philip bloom etc yet it’s done slightly better!
It’s a very fine balance of getting images that speak volume but at the same time, images/sound that really gives something back to the viewer, that they’ll remember for years to come.
Just as little exercise I’d like someone to watch these videos one after the other and say they didn’t get a little bored, and explain they felt informed, educated and entertained. I have a feeling they’d be a little bit bored. Mostly 3-5mins long so try and watch a collection for 30mins like a normal tv documentary would be! It should be a wonderful experience, since it’ll be a mixed bag of subject matter! I couldn’t do it, I really tried and it felt like torture!
taylorgary Says:
April 1st, 2010 at 5:53 am
is there a link to the ENG work that was produced for the two international TV networks? “Every day we not only had to shoot, edit, and transmit two three-minute report”..
We need to see those really, because if it’s not anything like this footage, then it’s kind of hypocritical to say this is a new level. Surely it needs to be uploaded to news networks website, or broadcast at the very least!! I really don’t know what some of you watch or how you come to the conclusion that this is a new’ level though. If you compare it to CNN or the BBC I can understand the comparison, but someone like myself doesn’t source news/documentary from those networks. Their great for highlights and constant updates. For interesting and thought provoking journalism they’d certainly be bottom on my list.
I wonder if most of you actually go beyond the Philip bloom films and beyond zacuto promos! Just amazing how well those guys market themselves. It’s impossible to avoid them now! It really is dribble! Even carl olson’s comment, it’s very lavish. I’d soon be very touched by his comment if surprise surprise!!! if he wasn’t buddies with philip bloom, steve weiss (zacuto) — Just makes me think he’s deliberately talking utter rubbish. “I waited for a considerable time before watching this. I didn’t know if I could handle it emotionally.” Talk about switching on the amateur dramatics. If you’re kids were there, or you knew people that lived near it, you wouldn’t hesitate for a second to look at whats going on! And a camera operator going into a situation like that, isn’t a solution to a problem, regardless of what artistic twist you spin on it!
It was quite fun at the beginning that we were all in it together. All of us trying to use the dslr for news, as it was it’s intended purpose, and finding out what equipment was best. Now the novelty of the camera is wearing off on a lot of us, what we’re doing with the footage is vastly important. Music and Footage just doesn’t cut it for me – Didn’t we quickly learn that lesson in slideshow presentations for still images? That’s why we introduced interviews and sound bites over the top of them. Then connection speeds increased we knew video could be a better tool for the job!
Are we really that uninterested in want message we’re putting out there now? All we’ve achieved since the beginning, is that we can produce ‘still like quality’ on video, but with less meaning and effort to convey the story. Most of all we now have glide-tracks to replace ken burns’
Maybe there should be more lens coffee cup give aways to provoke another 300+ comments and responses! Seems like that’s what most of you want! ***bangs head on wall
taylorgary Says:
April 1st, 2010 at 6:21 am
The BIGGEST NOTE I find extremely interesting – 2 ‘International TV networks’ asked him to go to Haiti to shoot ENG footage. His previous DOC/ENG experience was a ‘montage’ in Egypt and Lebanon, again with completely no story/content apart from well crafted shots and splashed with mb colours in post..
Forgive me for thinking “WHAT A LOAD OF B******” – I just find it too hard to believe. I don’t know a single person that would be given that privilege. What did they say exactly “It’s ok, here you go, I know your 25 years old, and just out of ‘film school’ and I know you have no real experience in journalism, even at a local level…but here we’re sending you to Haiti! But by not one! but 2, not national…but ‘international’ news networks to one of the most important news stories that’s happened this year!?
“first time shooting with a journalistic mindset”
Seriously?
Khalid Mohtaseb Says:
April 2nd, 2010 at 9:55 pm
@taylorgary You’ve officially crossed the line my friend!!! One thing is posting your thoughtless comments but accusing someone you dont even know of lying is out of line. The fact that you think I lied about what I went out there to do is simply disrespectful and insulting. Are my behind the scenes photos and referencing the names of the journalists and photographer I was working with not enough evidence for you. The answer is right in front of your eyes, so try thinking before you say something.
“Forgive me for thinking “WHAT A LOAD OF B******” – I just find it too hard to believe. I don’t know a single person that would be given that privilege. What did they say exactly “It’s ok, here you go, I know your 25 years old, and just out of ‘film school’ and I know you have no real experience in journalism, even at a local level…but here we’re sending you to Haiti! But by not one! but 2, not national…but ‘international’ news networks to one of the most important news stories that’s happened this year!?”
I find this to be rather humorous because the answer is “YES” to all of the above. Maybe if you change your attitude you would quickly learn that its not just about how old you are or how much experience you have in the business. Those are just a few cards in the game… And for your information I was a shooter at the United Nations base in NYC for about a year and a half at the age of 21.
I think its pathetic that you have taken time out of your life to actually write the ridiculous things you have written. Not only did you accuse me of lying but you also disrespected and talked trash about two of the biggest names in independent filmmaking. (Phillip bloom, and steve weiss from Zacuto) Who are you anyway? At least @Mark Lomas was brave enough to back his words up by his name and work. Show us all who you are and where your talent is and maybe ill take you seriously.
Cliff Etzel Says:
April 3rd, 2010 at 9:13 am
Khalid – it’s been my experience that the moment someone has to go off on another to defend a position – either themselves or someone else, that person isn’t as secure as they portray themselves to be for said position.
Having said that, as a visual content creator for over 30 years now, myself transitioning from stills to video 3 years ago, and mentored by the likes of Michael Rosenblum and David Dunkley-Gyimah, I’ll chime in on this discussion as I think it bears witness to the fiasco that is broadcast news networks.
Since you want examples, my humble content is located on my website at http://www.bluprojekt.com. In addition, I attended the 1992 Eddie Adams Workshop and am a regional award winning photojournalist for years 1992-94
First off, your piece is not journalism. It’s a simple fact. Whether you agree with me or not is irrelevant. There are set guidelines & practices for journalistic content – either written or visual. They are the measuring stick that defines the term. You didn’t adhere to them. Don’t believe me? Take a look at the works of people like Chad Steven’s “Leveling Appalachia – The Legacy of Mountaintop Removal Mining”. That is proper documentary journalism at it’s finest – and it won NPPA Best of for 2010 in the documentary category.
@taylorgary, although a little harsh, did nail you on many points that you can either get upset about or look at and ask yourself “Is there any truth to what he has said”. As someone who has lurked on this thread since Friday, I have stood back and read each comment and measured them against the known principles of journalistic integrity. You deviated from them and used your cinematic vision and passed it off as journalism. That’s a major party foul. And I believe he has a personal opinion that does seem to line up with his stating Bloom wannabe’s and Zacuto. I myself have grown tired of all the marketing. I personally tend to see this as another form of spin doctoring ad wizards playing upon peoples insecurities. But that’s my personal opinion.
Are you a good filmmaker? It appears to be so. But for this piece, you didn’t do your due diligence journalistically.
I’m going to quote what I posted on Ron Dawson’s blog about this hotly debated topic (full thread found at http://bit.ly/djJrTm):
“The video provides nothing except visual content acquired using a DSLR, a slider and music. There’s no real journalistic substance to the piece. Instead all it provides is a jumbled set of clips pieced together with music – there’s no beginning, middle and ending arc to this piece. There is no continuity that I can see from beginning to end.
As pro shooters, we know that video is 60-70% audio and as such, Khalid dropped the ball on this piece – this isn’t good story telling IMO and any doc shooter worth their salt would more than likely agree with my assessment.
Had Khalid utilized voice narratives from those very subjects he shot video of – actually spending time with them instead of shooting from a distance as a voyeur, and utilizing those voices as a part of the overall experience of this video piece, you and I would be in agreement and it would have been much stronger in it’s overall concept. It then could be called a documentary.
As a solovj, it was his responsibility to bring the “full meal deal” so to speak to the table for this piece. He didn’t accomplish that.
To call this a documentary as it stands in execution as of today – I beg to differ.”
When I worked as a newspaper still photojournalist back from the mid 80′s to mid 90′s, you had to abide by certain ethical standards of journalism. Today it seems those standards are being thrown out the window in favor of “Personal Vision” by the digital generation. If you have to heavily color grade to suit your “personal vision”, you’ve already violated that code of ethics that are in place as a measuring stick for journalistic integrity.
Cinematic filmmaking is not bound by journalistic standards and it’s accepted as such – as long as you disclose that up front. To pass off cinematic film making as journalism is – TBH – a lack of integrity on ANY shooters part.
I myself make no claims of being a film maker – I’ve attempted a cinematic style with some personal projects and I learned some things from those attempts. I know where I stand in visual content creation – I’m a story teller and solovj and so I stay within my skill set and push what I know as much as possible within the realm of solo video journalism and the guidelines and practices that are established.
Pet Peeve here – If you have to open your piece with bragging rights having said you shot with a DSLR, a pocket slider and heavily graded with Magic Bullet, um, I personally have issue with that as a solovj. That I feel is where @taylorgary and I both agree.
American University’s Backpack Journalism Project (http://bit.ly/9A6XXX) is already setting the standard for what it means to combine a shooters vision within the guidelines of video journalism.
Regarding your finished piece as it stands currently – as a personal cinematic vision that could be used for fundraising for an NGO or non-profit’s fund raising, you’ve done a good job.
In closing, you appear to be defending your ego and your work as if it is a living entity. I encourage you to revisit your position and realize it’s just a piece of video. Learn from this experience in what mistakes you made and try not to repeat them.
Regards,
Cliff Etzel
Solo Video Journalist
http://www.solovj.com
taylorgary Says:
April 4th, 2010 at 6:45 am
Well if you want to add a .com to the end of my name, then go ahead. However I don’t see why you need to be up to a certain standard to have a valued opinion about something. Do you have to be a politician, to come to the conclusion that voting for George Bush was a bad idea? Do you need to be a musician to come to the opinion that “The Fast Food Song” by the Fast Food Rockers, was ridiculously bad? Do you need to be a film maker in order to go to the cinema and comment on it? Do we need to have been in a warzone to understand that saving private ryan was pretty damn realistic? 99% of the audience won’t know a glide-track to a tripod pan, so it doesn’t matter what professional experience someone might have! I really don’t see that as a reasonable response. You more than anyone coming from a great school like NYC that when you notice the cuts, when your attention is diverted away from the subject matter, it looses it’s feeling. “Admittedly I think everyone in here would say some of the shots are very beautiful, and well crafted.” I will still hold that opinion!
I also didn’t comment to start measuring penis sizes either. You spat out the dummy with Mark about the dolly, carry on doing it, I really don’t care. You seem to noodle pick the positives as ‘yeah and I know I’m great’ and get angry like a vicious dog at the negatives. I apologise if you can’t take an honest and negative opinion from someone, but it’s not like I smoke up a cigar and say “look at me I’m the greatest! Even though I was a finalist in the nikon discovery awards in 2008, and at 16 I won best young film maker from the bfi – Doesn’t make me want to go and ‘brush my shoulders off’ – I can take back my ‘trash talk’ about philip bloom, he’s worked hard for those cigar smoking moments I’m sure. not for someone like steve weiss. Yeah, great that he’s out there making a good living for himself, and creating some over priced gimmick products for the naive ‘indie makers’. As well as producing some ok pro products! I loose respect for a company that acts the way they do in their promos, light-hearted as it maybe and I loose respect when the company does this.. http://www.zacuto.com/girls-of-zacuto
Striker
Target Shooter
Fast Draw
Single Action
Cross Fire
Double Barrel
Point ‘n’ Shoot
WTF is that about!? I thought the U-Boat Commander was a joke!
I know age isn’t everything, and I’d be lying if I wasn’t jealous at out very well established contact network. Particularly at 21 being a shooter for the UN. The ‘WHAT A LOAD OF B***** was at the ‘system’ to which allowed such an inexperienced ENG operator as yourself. Yes you can take great pictures, but it takes more than that. As the ones you shot, edited, and transmitted in two three-minute reports. Again I’d really like to see those.
It’s the fundamental lack of experience that caused everyone to not like this piece in first place. Which is not a direct and personal remark at you as a person. I would love to try and have a go at editing something together with all your footage, interviews with the people and all the sound bites you got out there. Would be a great opportunity for me to understand more about it.
Dan Chung Says:
April 4th, 2010 at 9:10 am
I’m sorry but I really need to either get everyone to calm down or I’ll be forced to shut down what was initially a very stimulating conversation. This whole subject is clearly divisive and at this point it is pretty clear to me that everyone’s positions are clear so let’s please try to be constructive from here on in. There will be more on this subject very soon so maybe we can continue by discussing the new material instead of dragging over old arguments.
taylorgary Says:
April 4th, 2010 at 9:52 am
Please remove all my comments..I just don’t want to be part of this anymore!
Cliff Etzel Says:
April 4th, 2010 at 11:29 am
Dan – my lengthy response is still being held in moderation – please remove it as I don’t want to contribute to the flame fest that has ensued.
Dan Chung Says:
April 4th, 2010 at 11:27 pm
Gary, this is a public forum and I’m not going to remove any comments unless you can give me a better reason than ‘I don’t want to be a part of this’. Do you still stand by your comments? is there a valid reason for their removal? As with most blogs there needs to be good reason before you alter the public record.
Dan Chung Says:
April 4th, 2010 at 11:39 pm
Cliff, actually you post should have been approved earlier. As I explained to Gary I see no reason to withhold its publication so it has been approved. My line would be that once submitted it should be in the public domain – I hope you would agree this is standard journalistic practice. I totally understand and respect if you no longer wish to be a part of this conversation, that is your prerogative. On a positive note – whilst I don’t necessarily agree with you I do find your post informative and well argued. Dan
Mark Says:
April 5th, 2010 at 3:46 am
Thats the first time i’ve heard that interview. Its interesting to listen to (even if it is somewhat Khalid friendly…was Jeremy Paxman not available?) though i am puzzled by some of the things that were being said and can’t help but feel that some points haven’t been grasped.
First off whats with all the age talk? Really it has nothing to do with that, certainly for me it never even crossed my mind. I know some of the people who commented here are roughly the same age as Khalid so lets not hide behind that one. I’m 35 for the record but only did my nctj fairly recently. I’m not some grizzled stuck in the past hack so lets stay away from the the lazy assumptions shall we.
Another thing that i don’t think seems to have come across is this idea that all we want is the typical piece to camera/bbc news type package. That’s why i linked to Antonin Kratochvil’s ‘Roadworks.’ That in itself is a very stylised and alternate take on an event but for me has so much more power to it. Another example would be ‘Foreclosures’ a still multimedia package from Bruce Gilden. Again very different to your usual news package but i think its certainly journalism (even if Gilden is more known for his street work) and makes me really care about the subject matter in a way Khalid’s piece just didn’t.
http://inmotion.magnumphotos.com/essay/foreclosures
In fact i was going to comment on the post after this about the BBC in Burma that it is just a typical news item. Well done, but nothing that really moved me, its a baseline standard news package.
I still honestly feel this was an opportunity missed to tell something that the news networks weren’t showing and i still don’t get that its moving or telling much of a story.
I’m also not sure on the ‘if it were stills it would be journalism’ idea. I know what you’re getting at but they just have different limitations and so think you judge them by different criteria. As Cliff said there’s no beginning, middle and end in Khalid’s film, but thats not something you can really get with a single still image. Even if you had a slideshow then i’d refer you back to Gildens ‘Forelosures’ as something more fully formed and which tells a story so would probably have the same criticisms.
But in any case i’d still think the processing was overdone and too stylised (I guess there’s yet another discussion to be had about what colour correction means!).
@Khalid: just to clarify something i hadn’t seen your other work when i described it as having a pop video aesthetic. Its honestly what i got from it first time round.
@Dan – personally i agree with you about not deleting posts. I was one of a number of people who criticised Will Sterns (a former assistant of Nachtwey’s) for posting a single (and very stylised) image of someone who had been killed in Haiti to a social networking website in amongst lots of pictures of celebrities and fashion models. It was quite frustrating to have him edit out any kind of meaningful debate about the subject.