Kertesz and Cartier-Bresson versus Smith and Salgado

Approach To Photojournalism: Smith And Salgado

For Smith and Salgado, the decisive moment works differently in that it is not destroyed by their intervention. To them, it can be shaped and influenced, even enhanced by the photographer and editing in post. The photographer acts more like an artist in their view and through their manipulations the stories told by photos can be made more clear and compelling. The decisive moment can be illuminated even further. In Smith's Case, the primary tool used to manipulate photographs in post-production was light. By focusing light on the subjects and further focusing that light in post- production he could direct the eyes of the viewer to specific aspects of the subjects in a specific order, and in doing so, enhance and clarify the story of the decisive moment that he was telling. Smith didn't just use post-production to tell stories though, he would also stage photos (see Walk to Paradise Garden, in which he had the children walk by the camera multiple times until the shot turned out right.) This approach of direct intervention with the subject allowed for far deeper access to it, but also shaped it in accordance with their vision of it. 

Left: For this photograph I was inspired by the many portraits of working men taken by Salgado. I wanted to convey the struggle and somber tone that he was so incredible at getting across, but I fear that all I managed to convey was an intense focus. 

Right: In this photograph I wanted to try to employ some of Smith's dramatic lighting techniques. I turned off all the lights in the house, posed the subject, and used a flashlight and some cardboard to ensure that the light would be focused almost entirely on the subject's face, as was common in so much of Smith's work. I think that I managed to infuse some of that drama into the portrait.

Who Has The Better Journalistic Approach?

To me, the highest goal of photojournalism is, well: shooting the truth. I think that the goal of capturing the truth stands above all others. If your goal as a journalist is to tell stories, those stories must be true. If it is to portray a subject or event, it must be captured as accurately and true to the way it existed as possible. If your goal is to educate the public, you must inform them of the way things really are, not the way you think will be most compelling or sensational. It is for this reason that I think that when it comes to photojournalism, the Kertesz and Cartier-Bresson approach of capturing the decisive moment with as little interaction with the subject as possible is the superior methodology. While both Smith and Salgado as well as Kertesz and Cartier-Bresson are similar in that they are all aimed aimed at capturing the decisive moment, and interact through the lens with the subject in some capacity, I believe that Smith and Salgado both overstep in that interaction. This is because through their interactions with their subjects they alter the reality of the decisive moment they are trying to capture, and in doing so, compromise its truth.

By posing their subjects, interacting with them in such an extensive capacity, and altering their photos in post production Smith and Salgado remove those subjects from their natural states and turn them into performers of a sort for the camera. This takes the candid nature out of their photojournalism and makes them far more like artists telling a story, and for that purpose, their methodology of interaction is excellent, it allows them to craft incredibly compelling images with equally compelling stories. What is good for photojournalism about their approach is the amount of access to the subjects that it provides, this allows for them to gather more information about them and perhaps  even portray them in a way they wish to be seen that is in line with the self they chose to show the photographer. However it does not allow the photographer to get an accurate snapshot of the life they would be living and the event they are a part of without the photographer's influence. For the purposes of photojournalism to capture the truth as it exists without bias or influence, it is paramount that that influence is not there. It is because of this that I believe it to be the inferior method.

For Kertesz and Cartier-Bresson capturing the decisive moment, untainted, is paramount. To capture things as they truly are, and not as they want them to be or appear is the goal, and I believe that this goal aligns directly with that of the photojournalist: capturing the truth and reporting on it without bias. By remaining removed from the subject, it becomes much more difficult for the photographer to impart their biases onto the subject. By leaving the photos as they are and not altering them in post production, Kertesz and Cartier-Bresson maintain the integrity of the subject and ensure that the public sees things as they are, they get the story as it really is, not through the lens of the photographer's vision and inherent biases, but their camera. It is for this reason that I believe that the methodology of Kertesz and Cartier-Bresson is superior for photojournalism.

Left: My attempt at recreating Kertesz's Bowl With Sugar Cubes. His use of grey tones, shadow, and contrast are far more compelling than mine, and his work just the same. I used ice cubes instead of sugar cubes, but I feel they have a similar effect. 

Right: For this photo I was inspired by Cartier-Bresson's picture of a man in a park in Marseille, France, who he said suddenly turned to look at him. I think the umbrella casts an interesting shadow, and the subject looks into the camera with a similar intensity.

Bibliography