I'm really wondering who will gravitate toward the Light L16 in terms of specific careers or styles of photography and I ran across this very interesting article about photojournalism and the thought crossed my mind… “just how will the photojournalist who's interested in capturing a ‘real' scene without modification deal with the Light L16's ability to re-focus or change the depth of field?”
What advice do you have for photojournalists trying to grow their careers?
It’s the same advice I’d give myself: you’ve got to pursue personal projects. You’ve got to find issues or stories or themes that really grab you – that you really care about – because that’s when you’ll always do your best work. You don’t have to go to Afghanistan … There’s this great photographer, Paul Strand. I always loved this quote where he said something like, ‘I could spend the rest of my life photographing my back yard and never run out of subject matter.’ I know that’s very romantic, but I do like that ethos … It sometimes makes more sense to find something near you, so you can focus your resources, energy and reporting time on the subject – as opposed to battling ISIS or getting access to the military.
Of course, that's just a small snippet of the article, and it is an interesting read, but what's going to happen with photojournalists and the Light L16?
I mean, there's always been an expectation that a photo shot in a ‘photo-journalistic' way would be completely un-edited (except for maybe things like exposure updates etc)… so does the Light L16 change any of that?
Of course, there was always some choice by the photographer about camera body and lens (and of course f-stop impacted depth of field), but will there be any backlash if the photojournalist goes in after the fact and changes the depth of field for example?
The future the Light L16 is bringing could boggle the mind if you think about it too much HA!