What catches your eye?

Those who like the limelight often seek to be the “center of attention.” The idea is that, by being front and center you are more likely to get noticed and focused on. Yet, when it comes to photography, this is not always the case. Kress and Van Leeuwen highlight this idea in their article.

Growing up, you always think that by putting something in the center it is more likely to get noticed. This idea is logical, as our eyes are often focused straight ahead. Yet, when we look at photographs, our eyes are attracted to other areas of the photo as well. This is not to say that putting the focus on the center of the photo is bad, but some of the best photos put their focus elsewhere in the frame.

Why is this the case? I think that, when we look at photography, we are examining the entire photo. Thus, we are attracted to focal points in every part of the frame, as well as in the foreground and background. Placement is probably the easiest way to create interesting focal points, but there are also other ways.

What are some other ways to create more interesting focal points in our photography?

Pictures v. Words, A Power Struggle

It’s amazing how I can a picture one way, but you could see it completely differently. Yet, as the article states, that is exactly what pictures do. Pictures allow for perspective. That is not to say that words do not, but pictures are far more up to interpretation. Certainly words can be open ended as well, but pictures open our imagination to possibility.

As the article states, various factors can influence the way we see a picture, and I would agree. Where are you seeing the picture? Is it in somebody’s home? Why do you think they have it there? Is it in their living room or their bedroom? Is it in an art gallery? What city is the gallery in? Where was the photo taken? In that city? What section of the gallery is it in? What is happening in this picture? Is anybody in the picture? Are they happy? Angry? Are they Americans? Can you tell?

All of these questions are relevant to our understanding of photography. With words you can ask questions as well, but the list is likely far shorter. Thus, pictures are powerful too, but in a very different way. They open our minds to debate and every person in the world could see the image differently. In all likelihood, this phenomenon would not occur at a Barack Obama speech.

There’s an old saying, “a picture can say 1,000 words,” and it is true. A picture can be as powerful, meaningful and provocative as a long speech, without saying any words at all. A speech can last an hour, yet our perception of an image can be just as powerful and formulated in just a second. Thus, the power of pictures cannot be underrated.

Do you think pictures can be as powerful as words?

Achieving Immortality

It’s a Tiger Woods fist pump after sinking the final putt in a Masters victory. It’s David Tyree pinning the ball to his helmet as he is getting hit to propel the New York Giants to a Super Bowl victory. It’s a tender confetti filled moment between Drew Brees and his son. It’s Kirk Gibson hobbling around the bases.

Photography plays a huge role in sport. It captures athletes at their highest highs and lowest lows. It has the power to influence the legacy of any moment, significant or insignificant as it may be.

I believe that photography in sport has two significant roles. The most obvious role is that of preserving great moments. There is no denying the passion and raw emotion encapsulated in a Tiger Woods fist pump. Yet, it also makes moments that may not seem so great at the time, legendary. Many realized that the Tyree catch was spectacular, yet few realized that it would become immortal. Photography allowed that.

 The other important aspect is the aesthetic side. People enjoy seeing athletes in a different light. We see them making big plays, or taking big hits, but what is their life like off of the field? The picture of Drew Brees holding up his son at the Super Bowl exemplifies this. The picture juxtaposes two things that Brees is most proud of; the pride from leading a team to his sports greatest feat, and his son who would be the pride and joy of any mans life.

Of course, there are more provocative photos as well. Photos of protest, politics and fighting amongst athletes have become immortalized as well. Generally, though, I feel that the positive pictures stand out more in our minds.

Why do you think athletes have been given such a bully pulpit to be so influential?

The Power of Instagram

 Trends in social media are constantly changing. Currently, the big social media trend is instagram. Instagram is a picture app that applies filters to pictures (or not, #nofilter), and posts them into a easy to view thread on their app. Additionally, instagram makes it so that their biggest presence is on smartphones, not traditional outlets such as computers.

The article for today talked about the power of pictures. Pictures can influence our opinions and ideologies, as well as tell stories. Instagram has played off of these ideas.

They say that a picture is worth 1,000 words, and instagram proves that this is the case. Some people have even decided that they would rather only have an instagram instead of other social media sites or would rather have instagram be their primary social medium. That is to say that people would rather look at a stream of photos to see what is going on in the world and in their friends lives, than look at a stream of words with some photos mixed in.

The concept of the filters also plays up the power of instagram. People are attracted to instagram because they can take possibly bland pictures and spice them up with the instagram filters. The average photographer instantly becomes Ansel Adams. Not everyone can be a master of speech. But with instagram anyone that can find a beautiful tree can be a master of photography. 

Finally, looking at photos is easy. It accesses the blank canvas of a persons mind and allows them to create their own picture. Words are what they are, but pictures allow the viewer to create their own caption.

Will instagram take over the social media game? Have they mastered the concept of the human brain being more attracted to photos than words?

Blogging BBQ

Branding is a pivotal aspect of any business. As the article tells us, blogging has revolutionized the way that people view businesses. Blogging is now a powerful marketing tool.

This summer, I helped the BBQ company that I worked for investigate ways to better their blog presence. Although they had previously used a blog for marketing purposes, their blog presence could be a lot stronger. The company has thrived off of being a family business, and of course for also having the best BBQ in Boston. In 2012, they decided to jump into the food truck game as well.

As we worked on a plan it was clear that a blog would be a great outlet to further promote the idea that the company is still a family owned business with family values. Because food trucks are also so hot right now, we decided that it would be interesting to tell the stories of the guys that work on our food truck. Each of us (yes, including me) had our own interesting BBQ background that would make for a riveting series. In addition we could add pictures of the food, video of the preparation and other multimedia aspects that would really make the blog pop.

Though I have left for the summer, the company is still working on their blog development. Like the article said, however, we all felt that the blog could really help further our brand as a company that welcomes its customers as members of the family. For blue-collar companies, blogging can be a trendy way to show that, behind the scenes, some things never change.

How important are blogs in establishing a “buddy-buddy” relationship with your customer base as a company?

From Inside the Walls of Syria

Citizen journalists in Syria are forced to sneak stories out

As each of the articles discuss certain aspects that pertain to citizen journalism, I feel there is no better case study than the current situation in Syria.

Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons is the hottest topic on Capital Hill right now. But focus on that word “alleged” for a second. Part of the current debate, albeit a small part, is focused on whether there is enough evidence of such actions. Such a question seems preposterous in today’s day and age. No evidence of chemical weapons being used in the streets? Surely there must have been a reporter on the scene?

The fact of the matter is that reporters from outside of Syria have no way of accessing the country right now. But instead of letting the world’s biggest news story go untouched, media outlets are relying on the few people that can tell the story of what is going on: The people inside of Syria.

Citizen reporters inside of Syria have singlehandedly told the biggest current event in the World. Likewise, the rest of the World has relied on the reports of these common men and women from within Syria. I believe that there is no better example of the profound impact of citizen journalism on the journalism industry than Syria.

Should we, however, take their stories to be true? Would it be outlandish to suggest that perhaps these reporters are embellishing the truth to bring help to Syria? While I personally do not think that such is the case, the idea is not totally out there. Regardless, without the reports of these citizens the World would be left clueless to the nightmare that is hiding behind the borders, thus making it a risk well worth taking.

Is Syria the greatest example of citizen journalism ever? Should the accuracy of the information provided by the citizen journalists be trusted? Does it matter? 

An article on citizen journalism in Syria 

LinkedIn or LinkedOut?

 I found both of today’s readings to be highly intriguing, but one section particularly caught my attention.

I find the idea of different degrees of connection to be very interesting. One social community that is not shy about their employment of this idea is LinkedIn. When you search for somebody on LinkedIn, the site shows up to three levels of connection. Those that you have officially connected to are a first-degree connection. Those who are a connection of your connection are a second-degree connection, and a connection of a connection is a third degree connection. 

On multiple levels I think that this is a smart technique. On a personal level, I know that I think a lot more about whom I accept into my network. When I know that they can see that I am connected to some well-connected individuals, I have to ask myself if I would be comfortable connecting these two people. For example if A and C are both first-degree connections of mine (I am B in this scenario), would I as B be comfortable connecting A and C? Unfortunately for all of my acquaintances, the answer is not always yes. 

 

Some may argue that Facebook is the same way. Facebook does connect people through the idea of “mutual friends.” However, I would argue that this is a far tamer strategy. While somebody may friend me as a friend of a friend on Facebook, Facebook is a far more social site with more social intentions. Regardless, LinkedIn has caused me to reassess my criteria for Facebook requests as well.

Assuming such exclusivity is being taken to account, LinkedIn is an extremely powerful tool. Assuming that every person also keeps a tight network, we are a far more professionally connected society. And further considering the competitiveness of the job market today, that cannot be a bad thing.

So I pose the question: have professional networks such as LinkedIn caused a greater feeling of connection selectiveness amongst the general population?