London - Covent Garden

From Chinese shop workers to doormen to waiters to day-trippers to artists to a strange dancing woman to colourful transvestites on a birthday bash there to see 'Pruscilla - Queen of the Desert' - One thing that is for sure is that when it comes to street photography Covent Garden offers plenty of subject matter to keep your photographers' eye working.

The hustle and bustle of a big city especially in an area such as Covent Garden offers much for the photographer, even in the current climate where photographers are treated, at times, with suspicion, if you use the right approach you can still work freely and hopefully get some good shots.

The beauty of working in an area of a big and bustling city like this is, for me, the sense of freedom that comes with it. You can be anonoymous and you almost feel that you can do anything you want and nobody will give you another thought - within reason. It is a very liberating feeling.


My approach in this kind of environment is to be very upfront when I photograph and to try and act naturally, with confidence and present the appearance of being someone who is exactly where they are supposed to be! If you act suspiciously or without confidence then people will pick up on this, act naturally and you won't draw unwanted attention.


Sometimes I take candids, sometimes, in fact often, the person will know they are being photographed, my initial approach is to allow them to see the camera, I lift it up making sure they will see it, more often than not I will have, hopefully, a friendly smile (rather than a manic grin) on my face and will quickly move into taking pictures. Occasionally a comment to relax the subject, depending on what I think might suit each particular situation and when I have finished I may, not always, offer my hand for a quick handshake, thanking them quickly and then moving on.



This approach worked fine yesterday in Covent Garden, it's an approach that has worked in other places that I have photographed but don't think that it will always work, always be prepared to change your approach to suit the situation.

A lot of it is trial and error, trying to find the 'flow' or the 'feel' of a place and fitting into that flow. In a way it's easy in this kind of environment because there are many street entertainers, loads of tourists, many of whom are taking photos, and various weird and wonderful characters so one more random photographer taking pictures kind of gets lost in all the confusion.


Everyone has a story or something to say and more often than not if you treat people with respect and a little humility then you can get your pictures and they sometimes even thank you for your time afterwards, even though you have used them to get your pictures. Thats one of the great things about photography, especially this kind of photography, you get to see other people, get to chat to them briefly and see a part of life that maybe you would never come across during your normal day to day life.

So go into it with confidence, keep a few witty comebacks or oneliners for the smart arse with his mates, don't sneak around when your moving to take a picture of someone, realise when the point is reached when someone really doesn't want their pictures taken and move on - would that particular photo actually be that good? Keep your kit light and simple, no place for heavy bags here (All these pictures are NikonD3 with 50mm prime), have your technical skills nailed so your not messing about and have a good time and enjoy it, you can get some nice pictures and if your a slightly shy photographer then this is something you should absolutely do - your confidence will soar and as a result all your photography will benefit.

Concert shooting

I was out shooting a music concert the other evening near Twickenham that featured a couple of new bands and a performance by Jools Holland. I've not covered a lot of live music but the event was definitely a photographic challenge.

Fortunately and something that is not common, especially at larger gigs, was that I had pretty much unrestricted access and movement in the pit in front of the stage was easy enough with only around six other photographers in there, so not too crowded and the first three songs rule didn't apply.

The trickiest part was to get the exposure nailed - Ambient dropping as night fell, white, blue, orange, red, green spotlights everywhere, smoke machine chugging away, lots of unpredictable movement...you get the idea. Tricky but good to get in there and get some shots nailed.

Kit wise I was using a D3 with an 85mm 1.4 and my D2x was on a wide lens, just for the record, the D3 was shooting at 3200 ISO at f2 and gave me a shutter of an 8000th and as far as image noise is concerned the pictures were awesome, visible yes, but nowhere near as bad as the D2x for low light, high ISO noise.

So if you get the opportunity to shoot some live music then get on it and push yourself and your photography.

You decide...

Is showing images of dead or dying soldiers in areas of conflict like Afghanistan right or wrong?

JULIE JACOBSON is a writer and photographer with the news agency Associated Press, she was embedded with US troops from Golf Company, 2nd Battalion, 3rd Marines and took the images and wrote the journal linked below.

Recently there has been discussion about whether it was the right decision to take, transmit and subsequently release the image of the mortally injured Lance Corporal Joshua Bernard following a hit from an RPG during a patrol. From this, questions about the right and wrong, questions on the morality and responsibility of photographers', journalists and news organisations are raised.

Take a look at the links below and the extract from Julie's journal and see what do you think?


Audio Slideshow.....

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_international/afghan_marine/

Statement from the Associated Press on their reasons for the release of the image...

http://www.ap.org/pages/about/pressreleases/pr_090409a.html



The following is an extract from the online journal of JULIE JACOBSON written whilst embedded with the US troops...

Wednesday Aug. 19, 2009

The last few slow days have allowed me to reflect some on the events of Friday, the 14th. I did not ever formally meet Bernard. There are some 50 men in a platoon, and every day we were going out with different squads, so I have not really gotten to know the guys too well. ...

I shot images that day well aware that those images could very possibly never see the light of day. In fact I was sure of it. But I still found myself recording them. To ignore a moment like that simply because of a phrase in section 8, paragraph 1 of some 10-page form would have been wrong. I was recording his impending death, just as I had recorded his life moments before walking the point in the bazaar. Death is a part of life and most certainly a part of war. Isn't that why we're here? To document for now and for history the events of this war? We'd shot everything else thus far and even after, from feature images of a Marine talking on a SAT phone to his girlfriend, all the way to happy meetings between Marines and civilians. So shooting the image was not a question.

To publish or not is the question. The image is not the most technically sound, but his face is visible as are his wounds. Many factors come into play. There's the form we signed agreeing to how and what we would cover while embedded. It says we can photograph casualties from a respectable distance and in such a way that the person is not identifiable. Then you think about the relatives and friends of Bernard. Would you, as a parent, want that image posted for all the world to see? Or even would you want to see how your son died? You'd probably want to remember him another way. Although, it was interesting to watch the Marines from his squad flip through the images from that day on my computer (they asked to see them). They did stop when they came to that moment. But none of them complained or grew angry about it. They understood that it was what it was. They understand, despite that he was their friend, it was the reality of things.

Then there's the journalism side of things, which is what I am and why I'm here. We are allowed to report the name of the casualty as soon as next of kin has been notified. It is necessary and good to recognize those who die in times of war. But to me, a name on a piece of paper barely touches personalizing casualties. An image brings it home so much closer. An image personalizes that death and makes people see what it really means to have young men die in combat. It may be shocking to see, and while I'm not trying to force anything down anyone's throat, I think it is necessary for people to see the good, the bad and the ugly in order to reflect upon ourselves as human beings. It is necessary to be bothered from time to time. It is too easy to sit at Starbuck's far away across the sea and read about the casualty and then move on without much of another thought about it. It's not as easy to see an image of that casualty and NOT think about it. I never expect to change the world or stop war with one picture, but only hope that I make some people THINK beyond their comfort zones and hope that a few of them will be moved into some kind of action, be it joining a protest, or sending that care package they've put off for weeks, or writing that letter they keep meaning to write, or donating money to some worthy NGO, or just remembering to say I love you to someone at home. Something. I believe that is why I decided to send the photo in to the NY desk despite what the media rules of engagement said, to start some conversation about it and hope that it will move out there. It bothered me too much not to have at least some discussion about it. And with great respect and understanding to all the opposing arguments to publication, I feel that as journalists it is our social responsibility to record AND publish such images. We have no restrictions to shoot or publish casualties from opposition forces, or even civilian casualties. Are those people less human than American or other NATO soldiers?

I believe that it was the right decision to make the image available. I find the final paragraph in her journal above echoes many of my thoughts on this.

What would you have done?

AP website link...

http://www.ap.org/

I'm a photographer, not a terrorist

As professional photographers we should all be aware of and continue to support this....

I'm a photographer, not a terrorist

http://photographernotaterrorist.org/

From their website...

Photography is under attack. Across the country it that seems anyone with a camera is being targeted as a potential terrorist, whether amateur or professional, whether landscape, architectural or street photographer.

Not only is it corrosive of press freedom but creation of the collective visual history of our country is extinguished by anti-terrorist legislation designed to protect the heritage it prevents us recording.

This campaign is for everyone who values visual imagery, not just photographers.

We must work together now to stop this before photography becomes a part of history rather than a way of recording it.

Spread the word....