Photographer honoured by US military

http://www.stalbertgaz​ette.com …grapher-earns-rare-honour

And here are the pictures:
http://www.afghanistan​throughmylens.com …Through_My_Lens​/Home.html

Thanks for posting this! It's nice to see photos of a major world event through the eyes (or lens) of just a regular person instead of the media, which tends to skew some of the story.

Well, he is a photographer/filmmaker​. I'm not saying that to detract from his award or challenge his contributions... just saying he's not just a "regular person." Thanks to all those people who don't just settle on being "regular" and put themselves in harm's way in order to pursue what they are passionate about.

For him to hang out and become part of a team for seven months in that kind of place says alot about the man.. I would shake his hand and buy him a beer any day. And IMHO, I also feel that he's far from being a "regular person".

Don't forget the active-duty shooters...

http://framework.latim​es.com …tographer-of-the-year/#/0

Sorry, I guess "regular" wasn't the proper word to use. My point is, he is a non-media photographer that isn't skewing the story-he is photographing it how it is.

helloyo53 wrote in post #16144746
My point is, he is a non-media photographer that isn't skewing the story-he is photographing it how it is.

I don't mean to pick you apart, but I know at least one news photojournalist on the forum here that does a remarkable job portraying some of the most important events of our lives today.

On the forum, we've touched on topics like photojournalist integrity and, as a result, I feel that photojournalists - more so that your "regular" photographer - are obligated to portray things as they are. As I understand it, the photojournalistic circle frowns upon manipulation of photos during postprocessing aside from basic exposure tweaks and cropping. There is absolutely no cloning or masking or touchups being done to their images... unlike what many of us "regular" photographers do.

In my opinion, it's the written media that can churn a story - but the photograph, in and of itself, is a depiction that tells its own story without words. EVERY photographer attempts to tell a story - but I think it's the commercial photographers, portrait photographers, or even wedding photographers who try to "skew" the story in a way most favorable to their client.

Nathan wrote in post #16145885
but the photograph, in and of itself, is a depiction that tells its own story without words. EVERY photographer attempts to tell a story - but I think it's the commercial photographers, portrait photographers, or even wedding photographers who try to "skew" the story in a way most favorable to their client.

The story a photograph tells is no more true than the story a writer can tell you. What is and isn't shown can change the story dramatically.

Best example was photos from the early stage of the US invasion of Iraq, went something like having one photo showing a group of soldiers having just come out of their transport and hit the dirt in a row. A dramatic photo showing gallant young men putting their lives on the line...

Another photo, shot from a different angle so as to include some of the soldiers and the photographer revealed half a dozen or so photographers out ahead of the soldiers, and made the scene look far less daring and impressive.

You don't have to change a thing in the image to tell complete lies with a photo.

Luckless wrote in post #16145917
The story a photograph tells is no more true than the story a writer can tell you. What is and isn't shown can change the story dramatically.

Valid point. I can agree with that. So, as it turns out, everyone has an angle. A photograph is but a small piece from a larger tapestry of truth. No matter how it's cut, it's still only a a piece of the truth.

Then it goes, perhaps, that a photo is not worth a thousand words. Or... if it is worth a thousand words, it takes a million more to tell the story.

helloyo53 wrote in post #16144746
Sorry, I guess "regular" wasn't the proper word to use. My point is, he is a non-media photographer that isn't skewing the story-he is photographing it how it is.

Well, I somewhat take offense to this, as a "member of the media." Photojournalists are not sent to a scene of a crime, a world event, a disaster with the intentions of "skewing" something. That's not how we are trained, and that's not in our code of ethics. Take a look at this, the generally accepted ethics we follow, https://nppa.org/code_​of_ethics.

We do not approach things and say "Hey, I'll make sure to make this person look worse than this person." A true image maker/photojournalist is going to shoot the scene as he or she sees it, as it is given to us, and not with the intention to skew it one way or another. What can get skewed is how it is used afterwards. Take some text and throw it on the image, that can completely change it. Add it to an article with some info, and the picture can have no relationship to the story, but the text will make it seem so. Your understanding of a "media-photographer" needs to be changed. Video is a whole different animal, but for the true, still photojournalists, no one is going into it with the idea to skew the story, and you should be careful about the judgements you make.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #16144338
Don't forget the active-duty shooters...

http://framework.latim​es.com …tographer-of-the-year/#/0

Thanks for sharing, a lot of powerful images here.

Sorry, I have never been that good at getting my point across clearly. I wasn't trying to offend or put down media photographers. Maybe this is why people don't let me talk in public.

I don't know how to explain what I am thinking, so I'm not going to say anything else as to prevent myself from digging myself in a deeper hole.

Regardless, the images shown on the site are very good images that show very well the life in Afghanistan.