ArticlesVideo Capture'No Future in Photojournalism' Interview: Dan ...

'No Future in Photojournalism' Interview: Dan Chung

By Barney Britton | Published Feb 10, 2012 | Video Capture

Tagged with: camera photojournalism video

Dan Chung is an award-winning photojournalist who made his name
shooting for The Guardian newspaper in the UK. In recent years he has
shifted his focus away from still imaging and towards video.

Dan, you made your name as a stills photographer but you’re mainly shooting video now, what changed?

'Photojournalism as a profession has taken a bit of a nosedive in recent years. Although I’ve been fortunate enough to be in continuous employment, I’m not immune to the longer-term trend, which is pretty desperate if you’re talking about make a living. I took a strategic decision to get more into video and it’s been reasonably successful.'

Aftermath - The Japanese Tsunami from Dan Chung on Vimeo.

What sort of work are you doing now?

'Initially I was shooting a lot of web video for The Guardian which I still do, but now I’m shooting more and more for TV, news, plus the odd advert here and there. I took the decision to stay basically within documentary and news shooting rather than go off and try and be a Hollywood filmmaker just yet!'

'I don’t really see a future in photojournalism, if I’m completely honest, as a way to earn a living. But also there are a lot of creative opportunities with moving images that you couldn’t possibly dream of doing with stills. I’m surprised though that relatively few other photographers have made that conversion.'

Why do you think that is?

'I divide my time between the UK and China and it seems to me that photojournalists in the UK have been really slow to adopt video whereas China and in fact Asia in general there’s a much higher take-up and the same is true of the US.'

'A lot of it has to do with what editors are asking photographers to do and my impression is that editors are basically asking for video more in the US and Asia than they are in the UK. I’ve been running DSLR video workshops in the UK now for a year and they’re always packed out, so there’s obviously an appetite there, but it’s early days.'

North Korea's Military parade in Slow Motion from Dan Chung on Vimeo.

Was moving to video a hard choice for you?

'It wasn’t really a choice at all. The way I look at it is convert or die. It’s a very steep learning curve but once you get into it, it’s like anything - you get into your stride and away you go. I’m constantly amazed by the fact that amateurs seem to do a much better job of adapting to new ways of working than professionals.'

'If you look at Vimeo.com there’s a lot of really good stuff on there, shot by amateurs. A lot of them have come from a stills photography background, and might have never shot a movie before, haven’t been to film school, and don’t know one end of a video camera from the other, but that doesn’t stop them from going out and shooting great-looking videos.'

What does the future hold?

'The arrival of DSLR video has been a great creative revolution and in the long run I think the beneficiaries are actually amateurs. Maybe they don’t know it yet, and maybe not all of them realise the potential of video. Things like Nikon’s Motion Snapshot mode on the V1 and J1 might seem kind of wacky right now, but maybe in a few years time functions like that will be perfectly normal.'

'I’m very upbeat about DSLR video actually, and I think it’s here to stay. The functionality is getting better and better, and it’s giving lots of people an opportunity to start doing some really creative multimedia shooting, mixing stills and video and everything else.'

Mongolian Racer from Dan Chung on Vimeo.

'We're looking at the tip of the iceberg really. Broadcast professionals have already figured out what to do with this technology and are using it, and are investing in a new generation of more expensive, pro-oriented cameras. For the rest of us, the increase in quality in DSLR video from a new generation of cameras like the Nikon D4 and the Canon EOS 1-DX means is that you don’t need to go out and spend tens of thousands of dollars in order to compete.'

'Increasingly, as an enthusiast or semi-pro videographer, the quality of DSLR video is getting so good that it really doesn’t matter what you shoot on. The technology isn’t the barrier any more, the barrier is imagination.'

About Dan Chung

Award-winning photojournalist and videomaker Dan Chung made his name working as a staff photographer at both The Guardian and Reuters news agency, and has since pioneered the use of DSLRs in filmmaking, particularly in news coverage.

Iraqi families leave Basra via a bridge manned by British soldiers, in March 2003. This photo earned Dan the Photographer Of The Year Award at The Picture Editor Awards 2004. (Dan Chung, Pool Photo)

Dan's many accolades include the Picture Editors' Guild Photographer of the Year 2004, the Nikon Press Photographer of the Year awards in 2002 and he also won the Digital film category in the 2011 Press Photographer's Year.

Dan now lives and works in China, but travels the world on assignment. He also runs the industry blog www.dslrnewsshooter.com

LIKE 11

Flag as inappropriate

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions held by dpreview.com or any affiliated companies.

Print view

Comments

Total comments: 278

Just a thought- would dpreview also be migrating to integrate more video information on their site? It would certainly attract more traffic, fill up the rather sparse video forum, and provide an excellent go-to site for videography that dpreview already is for photography

I.e. articles, perhaps more thoroughness on video in camera reviews (although to be honest I've never thoroughly read the video sections of the reviews until recently, so I don't have a good idea of how thorough it already is)...but I wouldn't necessarily miss an absence of camcorder reviews...I think I'm going to stick with hybrid cams.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

As video becomes more central to the feature set of digital 'stills' cameras we have to find ways to properly address it, just as we would any other feature. It's one of our major challenges for 2012!

0 upvotes

Barney, could you possibly consider a camcorder section or a separate website? I don't know anything like dpreview for camcorders, and this is frustrating...

Or you think that there's no place for dedicated camcorders anymore, and they should be replaced with video-capable still cameras?

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

We're a photography website, so although I can't say exactly how we'll evolve as regards video, in the short term *on the reviews side* we'll cover it as a feature of stills cameras, primarily.

2 upvotes

It's always stills vs. video - Why??? They are different mediums and each has it's own pros & cons. It's sad that no one wants to pay for stills, but I have so many stills burned in my mind, and very few memorable videos. One can't stand back and take the time to appreciate a video - it's just too fleeting. Then again, a poor digicam shot of Rodney King being beaten wouldn't be the same as the VHS video, either. Some day the pendulum may swing back the other direction from video to stills...

1 upvote

I think the point of a video DSLR is that you can now capture both stills and video. So I don't think it's a case of "stills vs video". I think it's now a case of "stills AND video". The DSLR has become a multi-media device. After all, Nikon even called their D4 a "multi-media DSLR".

0 upvotes

For me, I'll never convert to just video. It's more fun and financially helpful if you do both. Here in my country, I work as a photojournalist in a national newspaper. And now, our chief photographer from our main bureau adviced me to make videos in the field during assignments since my DSLR can capture video. Now, i take both stills and videos at the same time and adds up in my income.
If you're willing to work hard, don't give up stills and do them both. =)

3 upvotes

Stills are still the backbone of journalism. But photojournalism as a profession is shrinking for a reason Chung doesn't touch on (I saw this in the my last couple of years before I retired): news outlets are accepting more and more images from citizen journalists as digital technology has advanced.

Unlike a reporter, who can put a story together though online research, phone interviews, etc., the PJ must obviously be there, to get the shot. With the ubiquitousness of digital cameras, cell phone cameras, etc., - there are millions of high-quality digital eyes present on every scene, and the internet makes transmission of those impressions quick and easy.

Some venues like sports, concerts, editorial concepts, etc., that require a high level of expertise, or press conferences and venues that require credentials, or familiarity with journalistic protocol, are still shot by pros. But it's a shrinking field, as the democratization of high-quality image production grows ubiquitous.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

7 upvotes

And so it will be with video. In fact it is all ready happening.

0 upvotes

What are you views on Chinese government censorship? How long will you live in China if the communist elite views something you've done as anti-CCP?

0 upvotes

video is dynamic... and thus, that fluidity the only thing left indicating in the 'as captured' world what we see is real... but when it comes to stills, it could be anything, none of us know what happens between its capture and its sharing, much more easily manipulated to whatever those controlling the image want to convey or influence, and there would never be any helpful indicators what we see is real.
of course, once folks, pros, do fancy behind-the-scenes 'post-shooting' work... even video becomes just as suspect as their stills counterparts... manipulated to the point of artistic fiction... divorced from reality 'as captured', none will be the wiser.

both media are important, be it stills or motion, each have their weaknesses and strengths. each, their own appeal.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

Hey Dan,

Can I have your camera? Sounds like you won't be needing it.

Just because nobody is willing to pay for the work, does not mean its unimportant from a historical, artistic, creative, .... perspective. Video is video and stills are stills.

Also, when I see a political rally and hundreds of people hold up their iPhone to get grainy, blurry, horrible video / pictures of a historic event I am reminded that someone with a REAL camera, and the skill to use it, is still needed.

But seriously.... any time you don;t need that camera, just keep me in mind. I call dibs!

-- Bob

1 upvote

"Just because nobody is willing to pay for the work"

That's his point. Not that photography isn't important anymore, but that video is increasing in demand from companies and publishers, photos less so, ergo he has to adapt to video if he wants to make a living.

His point is that it's hard to make a living on a photo-based job, and the trend will continue that way.

0 upvotes

I agree about the iPhone thing. People using those things & calling it "photography" and "the tool doesn't matter" & "you're just limited in your backwards thinking scoffing at phones as cameras"--oh give me a break. For everyday snapshots, sure, but as an artistic tool for the serious? I don't care how many awards they win, phones aren't "real" cameras for artistic pursuits of excellence. That's the domain of SLRs or, at least, mirrorless Sony NEX models etc.

0 upvotes

Nonsense, larry, Picasso and Rembrandt, DaVinci and Klee made great art with pencils and crayons! They are all just tools.

0 upvotes

See again, "just tools." I don't agree with that at all. There is a reason people get excited when models like the D800 come out, just as they did with the D7000 and D300 and even the D2x (a model that seems obsolete now). And it isn't just because of a "gearhead" mentality, although that certainly does play a part. It's because those tools take photos no iPhone can, no matter who's using it.

Yes the skill of the shooter is the most important thing, but if you are a serious shooter you use a tool fitting the occasion. The only time I use a camera phone is if, say, my pipe leaks & I want a photo to show the guy at the hardware store what it looks like to get the right part. But photography? Oh please. To use an iPhone for real photography is an insult to the art in my opinion.

0 upvotes

Everybody wants a blurb in the form of moving pictures. No wait, not everyone does. ;-)

Motion picture and still picture are very different from each other. A still picture has to capture something of significance or of interest in the form of a slice of time. Many people prefer moving pictures because those don't tax their brain as much as looking at a photograph and trying to make sense out of it. Looking at a photograph is an active process. Watching moving pictures is exposure to a constant stream, which is for the most part a rather passive process.

Comment edited 53 seconds after posting

1 upvote

I think that's a bit too simplistic. There are many motion pictures that make people think about the images and what they imply as there many photos which are very straight forward.

The basics are the same: lighting, composition and focus. But I do think motion pictures are more forgiving, generally speaking. Time is more on your side. A photo is just a (very) brief moment. It's either good or bad. Missed or nailed. Simply put, a very bad recorded shot of a very important event will still be used or published, but a very bad picture mostly ends in the garbage bin. On the other hand, a motion pictures project tends to give more editing work afterwards.

I could be wrong of course.

0 upvotes

There's a whole new additional dimension that is added to video that will need a few ounces more of a photographer's creativity:

audio (music and sound content)

motion editing (film editing)

etc.

It is like being a conductor to an orchestra (or an ensemble) when it used to be just playing the oboe by yourself...

Not all photographers can leap easily into this new realm.

Happy are those that can.

3 upvotes

Yes, unfortunately video journalism won't be a career job either, once everyone has access to good quality video.

2 upvotes

Still images are nowhere near dead yet in photo journalism. That has been my career for the past 20 years. Shooting stills will always be my choice, I will not become a videographer, no way, no how. There's no soul in video. I will quit the day my editor tells me to split time between stills and video.

1 upvote

"No soul in video"?
The lead video about the tsunami is all soul, all soul.
Thanks Dan. Moving, wonderful stuff.

1 upvote

Interesting article. And yet I didn't bother to click on any of the videos - after all, who cares? It's just video; there's millions of videos on the net. The last photo in the article, however, tells a whole story.....

7 upvotes

Perhaps you should take a look. The videos are quite good, especially the first one.

1 upvote

'just video'? - watch the Tsunami one...

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 28 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

Out of all potential reasons, your reason is the number of videos out on the net? For every video on the net, there's probably 100 photos.

3 upvotes

+1 @ecm

0 upvotes

I dunno about that. Personally, I have little patience for video. How often do you sit and watch an entire video clip? I'd rather have a single strong image sum up a story.

4 upvotes

When it's on TV in a news report?

2 upvotes

Photos do work better for news, IMO. But in the end video has so much more potential, but it requires an audience willing to take the time to watch.

Honestly, I think it's a problem with people these days. They want to read everything in snippets. Reading a full length article or book, or watching even a clip that's more than 10 minutes long is too much for a potentially very educational, first hand experience that could not otherwise be had.

Sure, some people truly don't have time. But a lot of people do, but are too lazy to take the time. They would rather go through 50 facebook statuses, tweets, short youtube clips, etc. than read through one potentially perspective altering video that's often shorter than those shorter things combined.

Again, not the case with everyone...but I feel like people are always in a hurry...even when they have down time.

1 upvote

Well very soon now you'll be able to just clip whatever still photos you want from your 4K+ video to use for your still needs. Or you could go have the reporting team take a few still shots while they're out there anyway.

And at some point, consumers will be doing the same thing- shooting everything in video and then clipping the stills they like. Those rapid fire Casio point and shoots from a few years ago already had this capability.

0 upvotes

Still images will always be the backbone of photojouirnalism.

What is not commented upon in this article is that timing, location, and luck goes a long way toward capturing/making an image useful for photojournalism.

Today, the timimg and luck portion must now be shared with a huge number of passerbys that have cameras on their phones or in their pockets.

This is the main reason why 'making a living in photojournalism' has become very difficult. Not the fact that video has come of age.

The photographer in this article is supplementing his still work with video, video is not supplanting still photography in photojournalism.

To all those thinking or pursuing a carreer in photojournalism, don't let this article discourage you. Learn your skill, learn your Timing, and you can create enough Luck for yourself that you can succeed.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

The point being made here is that in the interviewee's opinion, as someone who has been there, and done that, photojournalism is an increasingly shaky way of making a living. And that has serious implications.

Yes, there are amazing photojournalists out there, producing amazing images but if they increasingly can't support themselves doing what they love, what does that mean for the future? That's the one variable that you can't control as a photographer, no matter how good you are - how to put food on the table.

2 upvotes

As a photojournlist i expressed my opinion and I stand by it.
Timing, Luck, and Location are prme ingredients for a good photojouranlistic capture.

The article should have been titled 'Supplementing my income as a photojournalist'/ It would have been more instructive.

I said nothing about 'amazing photojournalists'.

Almost every photojournalist that I am aware of earns money shooting other types of photography in addition to photojournalism.
This is nothing new.
My first thought when reading your article was bringing to mind the person who said that the patent office ( in the US ) should be closed because 'everything has been invented already' (paraphrase).
This article all but buries the still photojournalist, in my opnion.

Video requires technology to view as well as the viewer's time.

Stills may require technology to view (LCD, etc.) but do not take any of the viewr's time to view compared to watching a video.

Stills will always be needed and so will photojournalists.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting

1 upvote

North Korean sure loves Nikon.

On another note, video has always been better for propaganda since 1934 with Leni Riefenstahl. Didn't we also request Mr. Butler to have video preview (ahem propaganda) of new cameras?

1 upvote

The problem isn't that photojournalism is dead, it's that the news itself that is fundamentally flawed. No one bothers to ask the hard questions or do the legwork to tell the real story.

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting

4 upvotes

Simple fact that about 70% of my fulltime staff photographer friends at various newspapers around the country pretty much says it all about the future of photojournalism, at least as a career.

Mind you people won't stop taking pictures, nor will the demand for stills ever totally go away, but rather, there just isn't going to be any money in it.

I only get about $8 after wire service cut for images used on sites like Sports Illustrated, ESPN etc, its just such a saturated market and everyone has hundreds of frames per game to upload that its simple supply and demand. Ironic though when you see the prices of the latest D4, D1X, 400mm 2.8 lens etc used to produce the images.

Sad and simple truth is that its going to be very, very difficult for most people to expect to be able to earn a good living in the next 5-10 years.

2 upvotes

I love that DPR has expanded beyond the days of "just" digital camera reviews. Excellent piece. Look forward to reading articles like this.

5 upvotes

This is why high quality EVF's will eventually migrate to high end DSLRs, replacing the optical viewfinder and reflex mirror: because professional photographers will need and want to be able to use the viewfinder to shoot both photos *and* video. The days of having to use the rear LCD, or some external LCD, to shoot video are numbered. Eventually, a "photojournalist", or any other user of a DSLR, will be able to put his eye to the viewfinder, and do it all-- shoot a photo or shoot a video clip-- because the viewfinder will be an electronic one, not an optical one.

4 upvotes

Gee, no matter what the subject, it's hard to find a thread on DPR these days where someone doesn't pipe up, like a broken record, about EVFs being the future. Give it a break - we've heard it all so many times before.

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

The future will be dual. OEVF. Allready seen in some compacts. You will be able to switch between screen and optical and even mesh them together. Just a matter of time until somebody works that out.

0 upvotes

It's kind of sad. I guess video is the superior medium and technology was really the only limiting factor for a wide range of people to really start adopting it.

Kind of disappointed...not only is photography dying out, but it means more competition over YouTube, college, workshops, internships for video, when it has been somewhat easier to find your niche....but then again it means more resources, more education, more awareness, and possibly more audiences.

As a high school senior, I hope no matter what major I end up picking, that photography/video can remain a big part of my life. There's just something about those mediums that can translate into powerful messages that couldn't be communicated otherwise.

0 upvotes

Don't be too disheartened. I think this can be of encouragement for you, in that it will test out your mettle and desire to create quality work that will stand out.

0 upvotes

He probably has some right in his visions regarding what the media wants and which media. When photography came about, paintings were doomed. That proved not the case. Video and stills will live side by side, but at the moment, and that is what it’s all about, is earning a living for the ones in the journalistic business. And it is video. Albeit, a still has more impact than a video which hurries by and is seldom being watched again. At least, that’s my opinion.

0 upvotes

Hopefully still photos will have as many erroneous obituaries as the novel.

2 upvotes

And shooting video isn't photojournalism?

1 upvote

What does he shoot with?

0 upvotes

I'm actually preparing another article, with contributions from Dan (and other photographer), which will touch on his equipment choices.

5 upvotes

Photographer and Videographer...its hard to do both.

0 upvotes

http://vimeo.com/danchung

Canon C300 and Sony F3 and Canon DSLRs.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I totally agree with the premise that photojournalism is in trouble. My main source of income is from public school teaching, but I have been a freelance photographer and sports columnist for a small weekly for over 25 years.

I'd say the heydays were in the 2002-2005 range, when digital cameras were good enough to forget about film... so the volume of usable shots went up and the appetite (budget) was still there for printing multiple shots of an event.

Since then, with the shift away from print and onto internet news (and commerce), newspaper budgets have really been squeezed. Free advertising sites, such as Kijiji and Craigslist have undoubtedly hammered ad income too.

There is still a place for print news, but I wouldn't encourage anyone to pursue a career in print media. It's a tough go.

1 upvote

It is not hard to do both although it takes skill to do both. My brother is one of the top architectural photographers in the world and like in PJ he is increasing asked to shoot video along with or instead of stills. Normally he shoots 4x5 LF but acquired a 5D system with TS lenses for more portable on site work and preparation. But once he upgraded to the 5DII he started getting more requests for video,especially for online use.
That is just the way it is. His artistic work is stills but his job requires video more and more.

0 upvotes

I really admire this person. He was always working and wise in all areas.

0 upvotes

Total comments: 278