There are lots of very obvious reasons for using photographs in your pages or articles. On a basic level, they add variation to an otherwise monochrome page and break up the copy into more conveniant chunks. After all, who wants to read a huge chunk of words of block copy? But, of course, pictures are far more compelling than that. We are a visual species. Nearly every memory we have is held as an image in our brains and images have been our primary method of communication for thousands of years. By comparison, writing has been a mere blip.
An image can be so much more than words. The colors can effect our emotions, the content can make us chuckle or gasp, the context can persuade us to trust or disbelieve. Words and pictures use different mental processes - letters must be mentally reconstructed into words which then have to be interpreted before they can be understood, whereas pictures are hot-wired straight into our minds.
In fact really great pictures seem to defy words altogether. Our response to them is emotional - almost visceral - rather than objective. Little wonder then, that images are used all around the world to instantly portray those feelings and emotions that a thousand words could not easily describe. How many words would you need to reproduce the image of the soldiers raising the stars and stripes at Iwo Jima, Spencer Rowell's classic image of a bare chested man cradling a vulnerable newborn in his arms, or that anonymous man, with his shopping bags in hand, standing in the way of the Chinese tanks close to Tiananmen Square? And how poor would that description be, compared to just showing the picture?
Images that are made for publication often fall into three categories. The first, and most obvious is that of identyifier. They are there basically to show that something, or someone actually exists. In newspapers they appear as small headshots, or product shots. They usually get scant attention from either the editor or the reader and have often been shot to a set template - blue or green background - and showing a grin something between a conspiritorial smile and look of terror. This is because PR professionals usually just want to send out a single photo designed - they imagine - to be used in all eventualities. If you just mail out out one picture, then it can't be too happy, or sad, or indeed anything, just in case. This seems to me to be missing opportunities. If you have commissioned a photographer, he will have a selection of pictures for you to select from. Why not pick a few and send them all out? Picture editors like a choice and aren't likely to use them incorrectly. The same argument applies to product shots. There may well be a best angle, but give a selection so that they can change the images around occasionally or crop them to different shapes.
Shooting these headshots against a plain backdrop also misses an opportunity. Whilst picture editors will stay away from portraits with obvious logos in the background, or a letter sticking out of your head, there is no reason why you can't be photographed in an appropriate place. If you make widgets, why not be photographed in the workshop?, However, general office shots aren't successful because one office looks just like another - it does nothing to explain what you do or who you are. Standing in an office infront of a logo or banner is unconvincing. Good pictures do actually effect where the piece will appear. Remember an ordinary article with good photos will normally get a better show than a mediocre piece with ordinary images.
The second kind of picture is the eyecatcher or dramatic moment. Present in every newspaper and magazine, these pictures enable you, the viewer, to witness a precise event. It is a moment in time which, ironically, if you had been there you might well have missed. As if to emphasize this, the subjects are usually in off the ground or in mid motion and there is often eye contact with the the viewer which only enhances the feeling of connectedness and immediacy. These pictures are designed to draw you in and engage with you. In other words, these eye catching pictures are used by publications to pull you in, past the headlines and the stand-first, to the content.
In terms of corporate images, the eyecatchers will always have currency. Movement is always going to attract attention, but unusual context will also catch the eye. Whether it is a bike in mid air or a suited gent in high heels on a railway track, you can't help but notice it. The abnormal in every day life contains an air of uncertainty that we can't resist. However, remember that the image should reflect your company values and that what might seem funny to an inside professional, might mean nothing to your prospects. Always think about how the picture is constructed: follow natural perspective by putting the subject in the middle of the image, surrounded by the supporting elements. Remember that eye contact is attractive and make the picture engaging by either having the subject coming towards the camera, or shoot over a shoulder, to pull the viewer into the image.
The third kind of photograph which we are all so used to seeing is the feature picture. The feature picture is different from the portrait because it aims to place the article or subject in a certain surrounding or context and it is not like the eyecatcher because there is no doubt that the photographer (and possibly the subject) have worked to create the context. These pictures don't pretend to be a moment in time, they want to tell their story in a single shot.
In that sense they are reminiscent of some of the portraits by the great masters. When a man was painted for posterity, he wanted to leave the viewer with a lasting impression. It wasn't a quick snap - it would take weeks to complete and hang in pride of place in his house. It wasn't just an image, it was confirmation of his status. Each element had been thought out and gave a clear message to the initiated. The content will depend upon who has the final say. If the subject is powerful enough to set the terms, it will usually reveal how they regard themselves and their achievements. If the commissioning editor holds sway, then it will tend to fit the story which is written around it.
However the feature picture doesn't have to have an ego at the centre. The essential element of a feature picture is that it has been manufactured. The photographer has changed the context or parameters so that he can better tell the story. He has taken the components he thinks are important and arranged them so that the viewer will be led through the photograph in a specific way so that the story is uncovered in a specific way. In making these decisions, he has also thought about format, style, lighting and colour saturation as well as content. And so as a consequence, feature pictures tend to be more artistic in nature and stand up to scrutiny better. Because so much consideration has been put into them, good feature images can be studied just like the Old Masters.
An image can be so much more than words. The colors can effect our emotions, the content can make us chuckle or gasp, the context can persuade us to trust or disbelieve. Words and pictures use different mental processes - letters must be mentally reconstructed into words which then have to be interpreted before they can be understood, whereas pictures are hot-wired straight into our minds.
In fact really great pictures seem to defy words altogether. Our response to them is emotional - almost visceral - rather than objective. Little wonder then, that images are used all around the world to instantly portray those feelings and emotions that a thousand words could not easily describe. How many words would you need to reproduce the image of the soldiers raising the stars and stripes at Iwo Jima, Spencer Rowell's classic image of a bare chested man cradling a vulnerable newborn in his arms, or that anonymous man, with his shopping bags in hand, standing in the way of the Chinese tanks close to Tiananmen Square? And how poor would that description be, compared to just showing the picture?
Images that are made for publication often fall into three categories. The first, and most obvious is that of identyifier. They are there basically to show that something, or someone actually exists. In newspapers they appear as small headshots, or product shots. They usually get scant attention from either the editor or the reader and have often been shot to a set template - blue or green background - and showing a grin something between a conspiritorial smile and look of terror. This is because PR professionals usually just want to send out a single photo designed - they imagine - to be used in all eventualities. If you just mail out out one picture, then it can't be too happy, or sad, or indeed anything, just in case. This seems to me to be missing opportunities. If you have commissioned a photographer, he will have a selection of pictures for you to select from. Why not pick a few and send them all out? Picture editors like a choice and aren't likely to use them incorrectly. The same argument applies to product shots. There may well be a best angle, but give a selection so that they can change the images around occasionally or crop them to different shapes.
Shooting these headshots against a plain backdrop also misses an opportunity. Whilst picture editors will stay away from portraits with obvious logos in the background, or a letter sticking out of your head, there is no reason why you can't be photographed in an appropriate place. If you make widgets, why not be photographed in the workshop?, However, general office shots aren't successful because one office looks just like another - it does nothing to explain what you do or who you are. Standing in an office infront of a logo or banner is unconvincing. Good pictures do actually effect where the piece will appear. Remember an ordinary article with good photos will normally get a better show than a mediocre piece with ordinary images.
The second kind of picture is the eyecatcher or dramatic moment. Present in every newspaper and magazine, these pictures enable you, the viewer, to witness a precise event. It is a moment in time which, ironically, if you had been there you might well have missed. As if to emphasize this, the subjects are usually in off the ground or in mid motion and there is often eye contact with the the viewer which only enhances the feeling of connectedness and immediacy. These pictures are designed to draw you in and engage with you. In other words, these eye catching pictures are used by publications to pull you in, past the headlines and the stand-first, to the content.
In terms of corporate images, the eyecatchers will always have currency. Movement is always going to attract attention, but unusual context will also catch the eye. Whether it is a bike in mid air or a suited gent in high heels on a railway track, you can't help but notice it. The abnormal in every day life contains an air of uncertainty that we can't resist. However, remember that the image should reflect your company values and that what might seem funny to an inside professional, might mean nothing to your prospects. Always think about how the picture is constructed: follow natural perspective by putting the subject in the middle of the image, surrounded by the supporting elements. Remember that eye contact is attractive and make the picture engaging by either having the subject coming towards the camera, or shoot over a shoulder, to pull the viewer into the image.
The third kind of photograph which we are all so used to seeing is the feature picture. The feature picture is different from the portrait because it aims to place the article or subject in a certain surrounding or context and it is not like the eyecatcher because there is no doubt that the photographer (and possibly the subject) have worked to create the context. These pictures don't pretend to be a moment in time, they want to tell their story in a single shot.
In that sense they are reminiscent of some of the portraits by the great masters. When a man was painted for posterity, he wanted to leave the viewer with a lasting impression. It wasn't a quick snap - it would take weeks to complete and hang in pride of place in his house. It wasn't just an image, it was confirmation of his status. Each element had been thought out and gave a clear message to the initiated. The content will depend upon who has the final say. If the subject is powerful enough to set the terms, it will usually reveal how they regard themselves and their achievements. If the commissioning editor holds sway, then it will tend to fit the story which is written around it.
However the feature picture doesn't have to have an ego at the centre. The essential element of a feature picture is that it has been manufactured. The photographer has changed the context or parameters so that he can better tell the story. He has taken the components he thinks are important and arranged them so that the viewer will be led through the photograph in a specific way so that the story is uncovered in a specific way. In making these decisions, he has also thought about format, style, lighting and colour saturation as well as content. And so as a consequence, feature pictures tend to be more artistic in nature and stand up to scrutiny better. Because so much consideration has been put into them, good feature images can be studied just like the Old Masters.
About the Author:
Jim McGrath has worked in the media industry formore than two decades. He has a specific interest in digital imagery and good cameras. Learn more about the best digital SLRs at his camerawize website.
No comments:
Post a Comment