Felix Features dispatches

Revoke Jens Stoltenberg "Nice Guy" award

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Tue, 26 Jul 2016 08:10:00 +0000

Turkish authorites continue their attacks on journalists (and others) as they abandon democratic practices.

Meanwhile the Sec Gen of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg, have only issued some meek statements about the situation. Stoltenberg was awarded the "Nice Guy" award by Norwegian Pressphotographers Club PK (Pressefotografenes Klubb) for " his leadership" following the 2011 terror attacks in Norway. I thought the award inappropriate at the time (media should be critical of power, not suck up to it). Now I think it should be revoked.

Following the purge in Turkey EU Commission President, Jean-Claude Juncker, made made it clear "Turkey is in no position to become a European Union member any time soon". Sadly no such clear language from Stoltenberg about any consequences from NATO, despite the alliance "principles" (freedom, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law) being ignored in Turkey. This was true before the recent coup attempt, now it should be too obvious to ignore.

Norwegian Pressphotographers Club can send a message: we see how Stoltenberg is failing his leadership, unable or unwilling to stand up for democracy in Turkey, and allowing persecution of journalists to continue.

Revoke the award.

This blog post was in response to a Facebook post by Selahattin Sevi :

Aschehoug på røvertokt

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Fri, 20 May 2016 11:40:00 +0000

Min ni år gamle datter synes det er litt dumt når jeg sier hun ikke uten videre kan bruke Ariana Grandes musikk når hun lager en animasjonsfilm og legger den ut på nettet.

Jeg blir litt matt når jeg møter samme pedagogiske utfordring hos tre forlagsredaktører.

Det er ganske vesentlig for en fotograf å få bildene sine publisert. Men det er også viktig å få betalt. Til å hjelpe oss har vi opphavsrett, copyright på nynorsk. Kort fortalt står det rett og slett i den store røde boka, Norges lover (1), at fotografen har "enerett" på bildene sine, at ingen skal bruke de uten avtale. Dessuten må de som bruker bildene betale et honorar.

Egentlig er det ganske enkelt: vil du bruke noens bilder må du sjekke om du får lov, og du må spørre hva det koster.

Ingen lover er komplett uten forbehold, unntak og litt forvirring. Det kan man jo prøve å utnytte hvis man ikke vil spørre og ikke vil betale. F.eks er det noen som tenker at hvis du tar en hel side fra en avis, ofte kalt faksimile, med bilder og tekst, så er det fritt frem. Det er det ikke.

Heldigvis er det noen som har gått opp den løypa for oss. I 1992 gikk tidligere fotosjef i Dagbladet Odd H. Anthonsen og og journalist Kjersti Skotheim til søksmål mot Se og Hør etter at ukebladet hadde brukt en såkallt "faksimile". Der fikk de slått fast at man har krav på vederlag (selv i de spesielle tilfellene hvor man ikke trenger å spørre om lov først). Takk til Odd og Kjersti som sørget for at det ble noen færre uklarheter.

Jeg skal ikke gå i detalj på det juridiske, jeg linker under for de som er interessert i å lese mer. Og kan anbefale min advokat om noen trenger ytterligere bistand.

At en niåring ikke forstår hvorfor det å klippe og lime noe er å stjele er ikke så rart, men det hadde vært fint om profesjonelle aktører tok seg bryet med å sette seg inn i hvordan dette fungerer. Som de tre redaktørene i Aschehoug som alle bestemt avviste mitt beskjedne honorarkrav da jeg oppdaget at de hadde brukt seks av mine bilder i en bok (det viser seg etterhvert at det er syv bilder).

Det er ikke uvanlig at fotografer som får bildene sine stjålet krever dobbelt honorar. Desverre er ikke dette USA (hvor man kan få inntill $150.000 i "damages"), men rettspraksis tilsier i alle fall at det er rimelig å kreve tapt fortjeneste, (altså vanlig salgspris) og gjerne 50% ekstra. Men jeg er en rimelig og løsningsorientert fyr så jeg sendte en faktura på 1200,- pr bilde, som er vanlig arkivpris for bruk i en bok. Uten noen grådige påslag. Men å være litt rimelig og løsningsorientert får man visst ikke noe igjen for.

Jeg synes det hadde vært redelig av Aschehoug å betale den regningen. Enda bedre: tenk om de hadde sagt "beklager"... Så hadde vi vært ferdige. Alle kan gjøre feil.

Men nei. Isteden har de valgt noen klassiske grep de fleste frilansere har møtt: ignorering, trenering, og skjemmer seg ut med fantasifulle tolkninger av loven. Tre redaktører kaster bort sin egen tid. Bruker penger på sin egen advokat. Kastet bort min tid og mine penger (advokat). Og etterhvert, når de har snakket med sin egen advokat kommer et tilbud om "forlik" som tilfeldigvis er det samme jeg ba om i første omgang. Bare med et tillegg: taushetsplikt. Aschehoug vil jo ikke de andre fotografene og journalistene skal finne ut at de også kan sende regning. Så mens de påfører meg tap vil de samtidig at jeg være med å hjelpe dem så så de ikke må betale mer til andre de har tatt stoff fra.

Men når det står så dårlig til med kunnskapen i forlagsbransjen synes jeg det er på plass med litt voksenopplæring. Så derfor håper jeg alle de andre journalistene og fotografene som har fått stoffet sitt på trykk i denne boka sender en regning til forlaget også (liste under).

Det er ganske mange av dere, kjære kollegaer, som har bilder og tekst i boka XTRM. Så læringsutbytte for Aschehoug kan bli anstendig.

Er det uvitenhet om opphavsrett eller et sprukket moralsk kompass som gjør at man lager en bok og fyller side etter side med komplette artikler, uten å spørre de som har laget stoffet? Og så nekter å gjøre opp for seg når en er tatt med hånda i kakeboksen?

Referanser:

(1) åndsverklovens § 43 a

(2) http://folk.uio.no/olavt/Dommer/RG/RG-1997-390.htm

(3) http://www.nored.no/Juss/Opphavsrett/Kunstverk-og-foto

(4) http://hannemyr.com/faq/legal_dm06.shtml

Her er en liste med fotografer og journalister som har byline i en eller annen faksimile, og som jeg vil hevde har rett på vederlag for sitt bidrag til boka:

s 61. Dagbladet

Jaques Hvistendal

Geir Arne Bore

s64-65 Osloavisen

Svein Oppheim

tekst: Inger Lise Finstad

s 98 Klassekampen

ukjent

s104 Klassekampen

ukjent

s111 VG

Geir Olsen

s113-114 VG

Tor Inge Jakobsen (kilde)

tekst: Espen Olsen

s132 Arbeiderbladet

Terje Akerhaug

Stig B Hansen

tekst: Geir Arne Amlien

s147 VG

foto:ukjent

tekst: Erik H Sønstelie

s156 VG

foto: Tor Kristiansen

tekst: Kristine Brunmark

s161

foto: Christian Fougner

tekst Lars H Jacobsen

s174-175 Dagbladet

foto: Fredrik Naumann

Odd R . Andersen

tekst Arve Bartnes , Sven G Gjeruldsen

s 176 Dagbladet

foto Fredrik Naumann

s 213 Arbeiderbladet

foto: Terje Akerhaug

tekst Birger Baug

s 216 Klassekampen

foto: Victor Dimola

tekst: Anna Heen

s 223 Arbeiderbladet

foto:ukjent

tekst: Ole Martin Larsen

s 224 Dagbladet

foto: Norfoto

tekst:Geir Selvik

Aril J. Waagbø

s226 Dagbladet

foto: Scanfoto

tekst: Geir Selvik

s 226 Arbeiderbladet

foto: Stein Marienborg

s 232 Dagbladet

foto: Geir Bølstad

teksts: Vigdis Alver

Geir Selvik

s 239 Arbeiderbladet

foto: Mimsy Møller

tekst: Tor Sandberg

Birger Baug

s 254 Arbeiderbladet

foto Terje Akerhaug

s256 Dagbladet

foto Anders Aabel

Photojournalism Comeback

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 08:16:00 +0000

Scandinavian publishing houses join forces to increase their journalistic credibility, beef up their photo departments, respect copyright and offer fair rates to freelancers.

- We've come to realize that falling circulation has been linked the quality of our newspapers. We need to increase the quality of our product, and the best way to do this is to re-establish photojournalism as one of our pillars, says Schibsted COB Ole Jacob Sunde. The media group plans to hire upwards of 100 photojournalists, and have a special section for long term features.

CEO of Egmont, Steffen Kragh, continues: - We have concluded it is unethical for men in suits to cash in and set new profit records every year, while at the same time firing the hard working people that laid the foundation for our success.

Ole Jacob Sunde also laid out plans for strengthening copyrights for freelancers:
- It has dawned upon us that we would not be able to function without the contributions from independent photographers. And they - and their pictures - deserve to be treated not only in accordance with the law, but also with respect for the intent of copyright: to allow creators to control and benefit from their work. In such a way that they can keep creating great work.

The two men agrees fair prices and an end to theft is an important step in ensuring a viable and ethical business model.

- For us to reap the rewards, while photographers struggle to make ends meet simply isn't right. It has kept me awake at night! says Steffen Kragh.

It is expected the new initiative to boost photojournalism and photography in general will be launched when pigs fly.

Drone Pilot

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Thu, 17 Apr 2014 09:41:00 +0000

I am a drone pilot. No, I don’t sit in a bunker in Nevada. I am a photographer and fly my camera in the air to capture things from a slightly different angle. It is good fun, but also quite a challenge.

Amongst the general public, the word “drone” inevitably conjures images of spying and killing. So some photographers prefer to use the acronyms UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle), UAS (Unmanned Aerial System) or RPAS (Remotely Piloted Aerial System) to distance themselves from the sinister, military versions. Personally I don’t mind if you call them drones, in my case what we’re talking about are remotely controlled helicopters with four or six rotors (they come bigger too). And in terms of photography it is an amazing tool, with potential for imagery that was impossible or prohibitively expensive to shoot in the past. Leaps in technology, just within the last two years, has made aerial photography accessible for independent photographers too. I use my drones for both stills photography and video, but to my mind the flying camera lends itself particularly well to moving images. The recent flooding in England provided many good examples of drone-journalism both for TV and newspapers.

That said, flying a drone and getting good shots takes more than the $1000 entry level “quadcopter” used by many. As many find out the hard way, it takes quite a bit of practice to fly in a way that gives good pictures. And you soon realize why you could easily spend (if you had it) $20,000 on a system that performs as well as you expect from your regular camera gear. There are quite a few technical challenges to overcome to get steady shots. And then there is safety. Sadly these things fall out of the sky from time to time, and you want to make sure you fly in a manner that reduces risk to those on the ground to a minimum. Not only is there obvious danger in getting hit with something that may weigh a few kilos, but also the propellers spin at lethal speeds (mine hover at approx 4350 rpms). Think of it as a flying lawn mower with six blades, you really don’t want to be responsible for that ending up on someone’s head!

Last, but not least there is the LAW. This varies greatly from country to country, but in many countries you can fly quite freely, below 400 feet and away from people and airports, as a hobbyist. However, if you wish do do this as part of your work you must be certified with the Civil Aviation Authorities. As I found out, it can be quite a lengthy process, but there really isn’t an alternative if you are serious about this. Some will try to “fly under the radar” using these without the authorities’ knowledge. That is fine until you have an accident and are facing a manslaughter charge or a lawsuit… And having a
drone in your luggage at a Syrian checkpoint may not be very wise either. So keep that in mind. In the US, pending new legislation, the FAA have tried to ban all commercial use of drones, grounding all photojournalists and filmmakers. However, they lost the first round in the courts so we'll see how that all plays out.

Aerial showreel from Fredrik Naumann on Vimeo.

About the photographer:

Fredrik Naumann is a Norwegian photojournalist with a classic newspaper background. He’s been a member of Panos Pictures since 2005. Having photographed on land and under water for many years, aerial
photography seemed like the next natural step. Fredrik wrecked a number of toy helicopters on the way, and still struggles with volts vs. amps. He became CAA certified RPAS operator last year, as one of the first photojournalists in Norway.

Fartsblind fotojournalistikk

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:51:00 +0000

De negative reaksjonene etter "Sørlandsgate", der et bilde med Photoshop-overdose ble premiert, var helt på sin plass. Pressefotografenes Klubbs formann gikk ut og kallte bildet "juks", og reaksjonene fra kollegaene var ganske samstemt: dette er for drøyt. Og nå er Agderposten dømt i PFU. Da burde jo alt være greit, og vi kan sette en strek. Eller?

Nei, desverre er det ikke så enkelt. For dette handler ikke bare én, villfaren, enslig fotograf. Sørlandsgate var bare så elendig håndverk at det var umulig å overse. Jukset i norske redaksjoner og blant norske fotojournalister gjøres stort sett mye mer elegant og diskrét. Og slipper dermed som regel unna det kritiske blikket bildene i media fortjener.

Den fotojournalistiske etikken forvitrer. Det skjer på mange plan, fra styrerommene i mediene, via redaktører og reportasjeleder og ned (ja, ned) til den enkelte fotograf. En kontinuerlig nedbygging av fotoavdelingene de siste årene har gitt mindre og fragmenterte fotojournalistmiljøer. Enkelte fotoavdelinger er blitt helt borte, erstattet av leserbilder, skrivende journalisters mobilknipserier, og 99 cents arkivbilder. Stillfotografer må lære seg video og lyd (egentlig noe vi burde kunne forlengst), og gjøre dobbelt så mye på halvparten så lang tid.

Det holder ikke vente på øyeblikket, nå må du skape det! En fotograf blir ikke populær på jobben om han/hun venter i timesvis på det rette lyset, og at noen sovner på en buss i fart.
Dette er 2013! De av oss som helst vil vente til øyeblikket kommer naturlig og ekte passer ikke inn, det er egentling ikke tid og penger til oss.

Det er bekymringsfullt at én fotograf er blitt Photoshop-fartsblind, men det store bildet er at vi har vært på vei hit en stund. Lenge før mange fotografer ble hypnotisert av Instagram-filtre, og de tilsynelatende uendelige frie tøylene man fikk om bare bildene var fotografert med en iPhone.

Og midt i forvitringen har Pressefotografenes Klubb sittet ganske så stille de siste årene. De har svart på spørsmål når det har kommet noen. Men forøvrig en meget diskré fagorganisasjon. Foreningen kunne vært et samlingspunkt og debattarena i hverdagen, en kunnskaps- og inspirasjonskilde. PK kunne (og burde!) ha stått på barrikadene for fotojournalistikken og fotografene, men har valgt å overlate den delen til foto-impotente NJ. Det er reneste harakiri. Senest i denne saken, hvor NJ's PFU representant er sitert på at reglene som skal verne om fotografiets troverdighet "er dumme", og at "litt skrøning" er helt OK. Dette er altså det nærmeste PK kommer å være representert i PFU: av en som synes debatten vi fotografer har fremmet har vært "pinlig".

Isteden har altså PK krympet til en festivalarrangør, der kritiske innspill ikke har vært spesielt velkomne. Festivaler er fint, men ett slikt arrangement i året fikser ikke denne biffen. Nå har PK fått en ny ledelse, og de har tatt noen grep som lover godt. Men om vi ser litt tilbake i tid, så er det kanskje ikke så rart at en Sørlandsfotograf føler seg litt forvirret og urettferdig behandlet: PK har blant annet premiert Forsvarets faste PR-fotograf i Årets Bilde. Ganske tungt etterbehandlede bilde har sluppet igjennom uten at noen har ropt om å få se orginalfilene. Og hvilke koblinger de ulike fotografene har til ulike organisasjoner (NGO'er) snakker vi ikke så høyt om, så lenge det blir gode bilder (og penger spart i redaksjonene).

Inntil nylig premierte PK "snille gutter og piker", som blant annet inkluderte et antall politikere. Pressefolk som gir premier til politikere, det gjorde en gjestende utenlandsk fotograf sjokkert. Det burde sjokkert flere her hjemme! Ikke minst når utviklingen er at det offentlige Norge lukker dørene for pressen, og bildene som publiseres kommer fra et Flickr-album fylt opp av PR-medarbeidere på innsiden av boblen. Jeg har selv blitt utkonkurrert av fotograferende byråkrater og deres gratisbilder, selv i en stor avis der fotografene deres åpenbart (etter engasjementet i Sørlandsgate å dømme) er veldig opptatt av "troverdighet".

I USA har dette nå boblet til overflaten, og man er lei av hvordan det Hvite Hus kontrollerer alle bildene av presidenten. Her ga vi premie til Jens Stoltenberg.

Her hjemme er redaksjonene nemlig takknemlige for alt stoff så leng det er gratis. Det inkluderer ikke bare "hjertegode saker" om barn i nød (som jeg kan sympatisere med), men direkte reklame. Som denne bilkampanjen, der reklamebyrået kan slå seg på brystet og si at de har fått omtale i over 50 lokalaviser (Er det forresten rart man sliter med å få inn annonsekroner, når man gir gratis reklame i avisa?)

Nylig tipset jeg en av Norges største redaksjoner om en sak. Interessen var lunken. Helt til jeg ga utfyllende informasjon: de kunne få filmen jeg hadde laget, gratis. Den var nemlig reklame for et forlag. Da slo de til! Noen av opptakene gikk på TV også, da riktignok som et underholdningssegment. Lokalaviser og radio var også på plass for det som for meg var et ganske åpenbart "reklamejippo". Da synes jeg ikke det er rart om en Sørlandsfotograf smaker på ordet "hyklere" i denne debatten.

Nå sitter selvsagt jeg også i glasshus og kaster stein. Jeg fotograferer nemlig både for media, organisasjoner og tilogmed for staten i blant. Og jeg gjør også feil. Men: jeg liker å tro at jeg stort sett klarer å skille både kunder og sjangere fra hverandre. Men, det finnes åpenbart både fotografer, redaktører og andre som sliter med å gjøre det. Selv etter klare signaler fra kollegaer.

Jeg tror det beste for den norske fotojournalistikken er om hver enkelt fotograf kan være våken nok til å tenke igjennom hvilken sjanger man egentlig fotograferer til enhver tid, og løse hvert oppdrag ærlig deretter.Og er ikke bildene fra virkeligheten så spennende som man hadde tenkt, så er det likevel virkeligheten. Og det er den fotojournalistikken skal formidle. Og som skrivende journalister kan vi fotograferende tolke og formidle den personlig. Men nei, det er ikke OK å "skrøne" med reportasjebilder.

See this film

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Wed, 25 Sep 2013 07:08:00 +0000

Recently I got the opportunity to see the film " A Thousand Times Good Night" (before you can even see the trailer!). It is the latest from Norwegian film director Erik Poppe, and the film stars stars Juliette Binoche as a war photographer. Many films on the subject of war photography and photojournalism have something that will make anyone in the business cringe, be it unrealistic behavior, poor camera handling or a silly love story. Not so in this case. Erik Poppe himself has done his fair share of conflict reporting, and a number of current photographers have contributed to make it authentic.

For me, having been to many of the places and experienced some situations similar to those in the film, I almost felt like brushing the Kabul dust off my clothes afterwards. The opening scene, with an Afghan, female suicide bomber made me feel quite uneasy. Personally I photographed the aftermath and the mock funeral of the first female Palestinian suicide bomber (You can see some images here , warning: graphic). So that certainly hit close to home.

But this isn't a story on photojournalism as such. But rather a story about realationships and how "She must weather a major emotional storm when her husband refuses to put up with her dangerous life any longer."

Thank God this "emotional storm" doesn't turn the film into a mushy-soppy-escapeism drama only fit for women hell bent on shedding tears in their red wine!

Well, you risk getting misty eyed for sure, but the film very believably explores the emotions involved in having an extreme drive and passion for your work, exposure to danger and what it can do to family life. While photojournalism is the vehicle to tell a relationship story, and a number of professions could be used for that, I think the film is also able to shed some light on the passion that drives some people to grab their camera and run towards danger, rather than away from it.

The film also features Game of Thrones star Nikolaj Coster-Waldau and U2 drummer Larry Mullen Jr. if you care about that kind of stuff.

UPDATE: you can now see the trailer here: http://vimeo.com/76213467

Police, Guns, Cameras & The Truth

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:21:00 +0000

Lately the Norwegian police union has pushed for all police officers to be armed at all times. Today, as one of few remaining forces in the world, they are only armed when ordered to do so in high risk situations. Fortunately, most senior commanders and politicians have not jumped on the band wagon.

But what has this got to do with photojournalism?

Well there is a case study where armed police, the public and documentary photography/filming meets. On June 15th 2001, during anti EU protests, Swedish police shot three people, nearly killing one of them. As it happened I was there, a young man was shot in the abdomen just a few meters to my right. You can see us in the red circle, Hannes Westberg (protester/victim in grey jacket,black hood) and me (white helmet). Westberg very narrowly escaped death.

It is obviously shocking to see someone get shot under any circumstances, but this incident was shocking on many more levels:
It was the first time Swedish police had used live ammunition against protesters since 1931. Shot were fired randomly into the crowd. Two of the victims where no where near the police at the time. No police man (or anyone else for that matter) were in such danger that lethal force was required. And the police and prosecution lied about the events.

All this can perhaps be in part be explained (though not excused) by the events leading up to this, with two days of utter chaos and mayhem in the streets of Gothenburg. Police training and tactics left much to be desired. As the dust settled police and government Prosecutors office compiled video footage, cross cut it, manipulated sequencing and sound, then introduced it as evidence to justify the shootings. Not long after that, Swedish broadcaster SVT program Uppdrag Granskning was able to show the manipulations.

Yet, presumably angered by the wrecking of their town, the public and some of the media largely chose to ignore or forgive their law men for actually fabricating evidence in court. Very disturbing!
To this day the Gothenburg police have expressed no remorse for shooting blindly into the crowd, or the wilful shooting of an unarmed protester.

Later professor Göran du Rées did a research project "THE GUNSHOTS AT VASAPLATSEN", dvelving furter into the police spin and putting the (ab)use of images into a more academic perspective. His project shows in detail the many factors that needs to be taken into account for images to be used as proof, and how easily it can be manipulated. I recommend it for anyone remotely interested in the events in Gothenburg or images - still or moving - as evidence. I think most will agree photojournalism is personal interpretation of events, and one should be vary of its use when presented as 100% accurate facts.

Facts are also in short supply when many police discuss their desire to be armed at all times. Fortunately there are both more senior and more experienced voices, such as the leader of the Norwegian anti terror squad Delta, who says the police should not be armed at all times.

Having photographed demonstrations and troubles around the world for over 20 years I am in no doubt we are better off with an unarmed police force. I have seen fewer police face off and hold their own against more aggressive crowds, without using live ammunition.

There is no reason to think Norwegian police are any better than their Swedish counterparts. Which means they too WILL - without a shadow of doubt - lack training, they will panic, they will over react, they will make mistakes, they will lie about it. And they will fabricate evidence.

I've seen many over reactions by stressed out police officers in Norway over the years, I am so glad they did not have a gun to reach for.

If the images from Gothenburg prove anything, it is how easy access to guns can lead to disaster. To that end the images serve an important purpose.

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 08:39:00 +0000

Open publication - Free publishing - More photo

Camera Beats Pen

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Fri, 23 Nov 2012 11:23:00 +0000

Photojournalism has been pronounced dead many times (I may even have said it myself). But after a few years of doom and gloom I think we can feel a pulse, and it may be getting stronger. Traditional newspapers don't seem to be providing the cure, but healing powers may be coming from elsewhere.
I see signs of life, reading ever more stories on how important visual storytelling is becomming. And you need more than an Instagram account to stand out. You need professionals.

Granted, it is not all independent, editorial photojournalism. Some of it is cleary commercial, dressed up as editorial content. But it is a good sign, not only are the likes of Coca-Cola choosing reportage over classic advertising pictures (they new website is in the form of a magazine) , but the world is growing vary of free but fake hurricane pictures by "citizen journalists". Could this mean a new spring for photographers using the photojournalistic toolbox?

Here are some up beat stories to consider:

If Pen Beats Sword, Camera Beats Pen

Photographers Will Soon Be The Most Valuable People In The News Room

Coke Revamps Web Site to Tell Its Story

‘Content is king’ again: why Bill Gates may be right after all

Of course, for a serious photojournalist, doing "branded content" isn't without problems. Even when it pays for your "proper photojournalism", or is for a good cause:

When Interest Creates a Conflict

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Wed, 07 Nov 2012 15:12:00 +0000

Today we got the new Felix Features logo from talented graphic designer Anna Maria Pirolt. And we are very happy with the result!

After quite some time of pondering what direction to go, we decided for a retro look which originates from our love of art deco design. We also decided it would be interesting to make it more personal, with wings eluding to my own interest in aviation photography.

Art Deco " is an influential visual arts design style which first appeared in France during the 1920s, flourished internationally during the 30s and 40s", as Wikipedia puts it. Incidentally this is also the time period we associate with the birth of what is today called "classic photojournalism".

Felix Features is indeed a picture agency founded on classic photojournalism, we represent many great photographers who see themselvs - and photograph - in the light of that tradition. In a world overflowing with hype, -grams,filters and fakes, we don't mind holding firm with some old school photojournalism. And a retro logo.

We hope you like it too.

Omdal skyter budbringeren

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 08:33:00 +0000

Sven Egil Omdal har i Aftenbladet.no en kommentar med noen gode poeng i forhold til hvordan bilder beskriver "virkeligheten", men skyter til en viss grad budbringeren. For selv om fotografene har ansvaret for bildene de tar, så har de sjelden ansvaret for hvilket bilde som faktisk kommer på trykk. Jeg vil tro at de fleste fotografene som fotograferte grekere i naziuniform også fotograferte "med vidvinkel" og fikk med seg menneskene forøvrig (uten uniformer). Men avisene, ikke fotografene, har valgt å publisere de mest dramatiske bildene.

Omdal snakker også om "bilderedaktørene hjemme". Som om det faktisk fantes "bilderedaktører". Omdal burde vite at det knapt finnes noen som har den tittelen lenger, og enda færre som faktisk har mandat som en en slik tittel skulle tilsi. Selv i våre største aviser er fotoreportasjelederne i stor grad redusert til bildeekspeditører, uten særlig myndighet eller ansvar for hva som faktisk kommer på trykk.

Nedleggelsen/reduksjonen av fotoavdelinger i avisene de siste årene reduserer antall fagfolk i redaksjonene. Faktum er at de som styrer bildeleggingen av avisene har liten kompetanse eller interesse for fotojournalistikk.

Hvis Omdal vil se på hvilke bilder som velges, bør han se nærmere på de som faktisk styrer butikken.

Famines: only skinny people can report?

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 10:32:00 +0000

Famous reporter Robert Fisk of The Independent has written a commentary on war reporting called "The heroic myth and the uncomfortable truth of war reporting".

I am always sceptical when someone claims to know the truth, even when it is the herioc and mythical Robert Fisk.

In the commentary he reflects on his chosen profession, his colleugues, and how they operate in a war zone. It seems "after four decades, he feels ambivalent towards his profession". It is easy to agree with one of his points: reporters wearing flak jackets for theatrical purposes on screen is plain silly.   However Fisk is also suggesting that reporters should not wear flak jackets at all, basically in solidarity with the war victims. The contrast between the protected journalists (we mustn't call them hacks!) and the people they report on is apparently too uncomfortable to watch. I wonder, would Robert Fisk like to stop white, well fed journalists from reporting from famines in Afrika? Only skinny people can report?

Robert Fisk dismisses the notion of journalists (we can call them journos, that's ok) can suffer any psycological trauma in their work. After all they "can fly home if the going gets too tough, business class with a glass of bubbly in their hands." Perhaps The Independent is overflowing with money and retreats in style when the going gets tough, but it is rarely what reporters do. And certainly not how the reporters in Homs got out of that hell hole. Dismissing Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as if is a condition one choose to develop isn't very scientific, Fisk. Disrespectful to those unfortunate to suffer from it as a result of their work, is what it is.

Fisk commends the Palestinian reporters that brought us the news from Gaza when foreign reporters weren't able to enter. "They did a fine job". Indeed they did! But I am unsure what Fisk is saying with the comparison to Homs, and his reference to "colonialist" practice of foreginers becoming famous for reporting on other peoples' wars. If he is suggesting Western reporters stay home and leave the reporting to the locals, then I think he is forgetting the how much pressure local reporters are under in a war situation. While many are dedicated to bring the news out truthfully, it is a fact that some local reporters will be leaning towards propaganda. Surely more eyes on the ground is a good thing, even if they are Western.

I would easily agree that it often is troublesome when the reporters becomes more important than the story. However I think Robert Fisk greatly exaggerate the "stardom" war reporters enjoy, and how it totally eclipses the situation of the actual victims. How much would the world know and care about Homs, had we not had the drama with the Western reporters? While the returning reporters have been in the spotlight, have they not also been doing a great job of directing attention to the situation in Syria while in that spotlight?

Robert Fisk seems to imply that beacuse British photographer Paul Conroy has been mentioned a lot in the Western media lately he is being elevated, while local vicitms forgotten. Fisk can name many non-Western vicitms, especially colleagues he suspects we don't know the names of. Personally I suspect that if you stopped passers by in the street, most wouldn't be able to name a single war reporter. Not Paul Conroy, not anyone. Perhaps Robert Capa if given the chance to think a bit. But the fixation with war reporters and their status is mainly an in-media obsession. One that Robert Fisk certainly is part of himself. Much like finacial traders will know the names of other successful traders. While ordinary people may be interested in their money, they are not likely to remember much more than their bank's name, let alone the name of anyone working there.  

Robert Fisk remembers the name of his fallen colleague Terry Lloyd. This isn't very unnatural is it? Most people would remember a colleague killed. But Fisk then asks: "who can remember the name of one of the quarter or half a million Iraqis killed as a result of the invasion". This is where it becomes silly. Names are mentioned in newspaper and in TV reports every day, from disasters all over the world, but does Fisk really expect us to memorize the names? Besides, as pointed out elsewhere, people in conflict don't always want to be identified (as was the case in Homs).

As if to underscore the narcissistic nature of war correspondents Fisk's commentary is illustrated with a picture of... well, yes: Robert Fisk. We won't forget that name so easily.

July 22 RAW

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:19:00 +0000

Following the terror attacks on July 22, 2011, in Oslo and on Utøya island the popular response was "more openness, more democracy". It was repeated by the Prime Minister as well. Sadly many people in position have not taken these words to be meant for them.
Since the attacks there has been a debate on the media's coverage as well. In my opinion most Norwegians don't realize just how insulated and sheltered they are in terms of media showing them, or rather not showing them, what happened on July 22. They got a glimpse last week when World Press Photo awarded a prize to a Swedish photographer, showing the full horror of Utøya.
I covered the bombing in Oslo. I have entered some of these pictures into the World Press Photo and Picture of the Year myself. I didn't see or photograph any dead bodies. I probably would have photographed them, if I saw them. I've asked myself a lot of questions regarding what I photographed and how I photographed it. What could I have done better (a lot!)? And what could the press in general have done better? I have some answers but many remain elusive.

All of the pictures I took in the centre of Oslo that day can be seen here. Unedited. No Photoshop. It is my way of saying : more openness!

(Due to a wrongly set time in one of my cameras, they are not in the exact order they were shot. So first there are the pictures from one camera (in the order they were shot), then the next. I've included the last frame prior to the bombing. Don't ask why. Think.)

Too Close For Comfort

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:10:00 +0000

The opening of the exhibition at Nobel Peace Center. Pictures by Tim Hetherington and Lynsey Addario takes us on a journey to the most intimate and vulnerable situations of two normally very closed groups of people. American soldiers and Afghan women, they are wildly different. But they share one thing: they don't easily let their guard -or veil - down in front of the camera.
No wonder it is packed inside the gallery. It is an opportunity to see great photjournalism and get a peek into lives - and deaths - so far removed from ours. We see the bare, dying body of 15 year old Zahra. We see the America soldiers reactions as they find they comrades killed in an ambush. We come to see this. To learn, to be informed, to be shocked, and to enjoy the art. Yes, to take pleasure in the craftmanship of the work in front of us.

I grab my camera. I see a girl straining to hear the Linsey Addario talk, she leans into a crack between the pictures to hear, but to me it look almost as she is looking closely into the eyes of a soldier's portrait. But I don't get the picture, she sees me, she turns away. She is too quick. She is too damn Norwegian! Then she leaves, the camera obviously to discomforting. She isn't going to let a stranger capture a moment without her say-so, however trivial. She came to see people at their most exposed, vulnerable, compromising and horrific times. Yet, as most Norwegians, she doesn't want share even an uncontroversial moment in a public place with someone with a camera.

It is symptomatic for Norway. Every day a bureaucrat will make a new regulation restricting access. Every day another security guards is added to the army of ignorance that is patroling shopping centers and subway stations. Every day a policeman will act outside the law to stop a picture being taken. Every day he will get away with it. Every day a politican hide an uncomfortable truth in a stack of papers. Every day money wins over nature.Every day someone will refer to other peoples privacy and security to protect their own.

But is OK. For we are Norwegians.

Crowdfunding - the new busking?

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 13:35:00 +0000

As the classic way of making a living as a photojournalist - selling pictures to newspapers and magazines - is dwindling many try crowdfunding as an alternative. There are different ways of reaching out to the public and many photographers have successfully raised an impressive amount of money. You can read more about varoius crowdfunding and even "crowdediting" in this Photoshelter Blog.

And at the time I am writing this fellow Panos photographer Patrick Brown is well underway to funding his campaigning photographic book called "Trading to Extinction."
I hope he reaches his goal, both the idea and pictures are great. It is an important issue (it really is - more on the word "important" later).

I have donated to such projects myself, which felt good. But in some ways I also find it troubling. Many of the projects I have looked at has been backed by a lot of other photographers. I am thinking : is this were we are now, photographers funding photographers? While it is nice to be supportive of each other it doesn't seem like a very viable business model, photographers swapping money with each others?

Ok, so the money is in, then what? This is a danger I see once the project is funded: The stories are are sold for pennies, so at least they are published. Becuse you told everyone this was an important story to "tell the world" when you asked people to give you 10.000 dollars or so. If the story only reach your 50 backers you really haven't "told the world" about your important issue, so you sell it cheaply. So in fact the photographic community (mostly) has sponsored the publishing media, often large media corporations, establishing even lower rates for stories. This in turn is undermining those seeking to get actual assignments or proper pay for their self funded projects.

Another concern is the approach taken by some photographers, where funding of their project have become so important it is the only thing we hear from them. Unless you pay them to get the "behind the scenes" story, that is. Personally I have endend some Facebook relations because there was nothing but endless calls for support and donations. Like a mariachi band you couldn't shake. Rather than sought after professionals, some photographers now unwittingly paint themselves as buskers. I fear it sends the wrong signals.

Some photographers certainly are not buskers, they are more like rock stars of our trade. I can understand why some photo interested people would back the latter. Famous by proxy if you like. But herein lies another problem: to what extent is the most "important" stories backed, that would otherwise go unmade? Are the " rock stars' " projects really the ones that need funding?

I see some names, and in their breif the list of clients include all the major publications of the world, Newsweek, Time, National Geographic, Geo, Der Speigel, etc. etc. And I am thinking: surely, if this is an important story one of these magazines would back it, have it made, and publish it? And if you are a well known member of any of the top pictures agencies, surely they would be able to sell your story through their channels?

So how, or to who, is the story important, if no publication wish to produce this story with its own money? Is it important merely to the photographer and the photo aficionados that is backing him or her?

One Facebook acquaintance of mine is a rather influentual photo editor, using many opportunities there to make calls for donations for various projects. It is very kind to spread the word, but after a while the phrase "very important project" has been totally watered down for me. I've had a look at many of these projects, they may be interesting, but I find few qualify as "very important". If they really were I'd also expect the photo editor to actully hire the photographers to do the job.

Now, this may sound as if I am opposing crowdfunding. For the record: I am not! I particularly like the fact that photographers can reach their audience unfiltered, and engage with people directly. And it is great that photographers can take charge over a story and bring it to the finishline themselves.

However, as this concept evolves I think photographers would be wise to carefully consider how they portray their projects and themselves in the pursuit of funding. And think twice about undercutting what market is left out there.

Looking back at 2011

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 09:38:00 +0000

If you can't see it properly then click HERE.

Open publication - Free publishing - More media

Same same but different

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 11:23:00 +0000

A reminder to self (and others) to check white balance settings. Appears two photographers were at the same place at the same time, yet not quite.

October News 2010

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Thu, 14 Oct 2010 18:36:00 +0000

Just sending out our newsletter now. It is in Norwegian only for the moment so there is only a preview here. But the main points are:

* We are delighted to hook up with NOOR agency!
* We welcome Morten Hvaal as a Felix Features photographer!

For all you English speaking fans out there: head over to our main site at www.felixfeatures.com to check out the lates features from our partners. If you read Norwegian and want this newsletter drop me a line at fredrik @ felix features.com

Yeah, I'd be pretty pissed too ....

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 21:04:00 +0000

.. if I were the president and my country was attacked by my own country!

Conspiracy theory: someone at BBC is trying to make Chavez look loonier than before.

Criminal parent

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 08:07:00 +0000

Feeling like a criminal, perhaps suspected of being a child molester, my heart rate was increasing. The guard had just passed me on his round, I knew I had a couple of minutes before he would be back. So I did it. I reached for my camera. I quickly shot a few frames. Then some more. I had photographed my own daughter.

Restrictions on photography are nothing new, and there seem to be no limits to the silliness. At Frognerbadet, an outdoor swimming pool set in a park in central Oslo, lifeguards regularly take action to prevent parents photographing their own children. The same entity, Friluftsetaten, also look after public beaches in Oslo, but has no restrictions on photography there. However by putting a fence around Frognerbadet swimming pool, it would seem someone feel they have powers that includes preventing people from doing something that is legal in all other public places. I am not going to ramble on about the legal issues here (though I am pretty sure Friluftsetaten wouldn't have a legal basis for their ban). But as a parent I reserve the right to photograph my own child during key moments in her life.

For further reading, here is a link to a case where British parents won the right to photograph their children at school events.

Berlin glimpses

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 20:03:00 +0000

At least 38 degrees C in the shade. Too hot to write. So here are a few glimpses of Berlin. More will be in the archive shortly.

Happy Birthday Photoshelter!

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 10:04:00 +0000

If I ever were in doubt about the value of old photos I got a pretty good reminder the other day when a single pictuer of mine sold for the equivalent of a months salary. This sale was done through my UK partner agency Panos (thanks guys!), but there are quite a few good sales through my own archive on the Felix Features website as well. These are sales that I would not have had it not been for taking the time to properly caption and keyword thousands of my images during my workflow, then making them available online. Like this picture, recently published in Japan, which the client found on the Felix Features website:

Photoshelter is the name of the service that we use to run the Felix Features archive, and recently Photoshelter celebrated five years in business. We've used their services for three and a half years, and they provide a tool and a service that deserves a special mention. I don't usually promote the tools I use everyday. Not my camera, not my computer, nor my phone. I've paid lots of money for them and they just perform as expected, nothing more. And if your try to contact the companies that made them over some problem they're likely to try to worm themselves out of any blame. That's if you even manage to get in touch with them.

Photoshelter is different, and that's why I think they deserve a a plug. The CEO still surfs the user forums and will contribute to discussions. The product gets upgraded/improved every few months, and the folks at Photoshelter seems genuinely passionate about photography so they provide much more than just storage space for pictures.

Go have a look for yourself and by using the referral code FE6FE5R53W you can save a few dollars as well. Disclosure: we get a small credit too, but really don't need it to tell you Photoshelter is a great tool.

The most popular girl

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Fri, 11 Jun 2010 11:59:00 +0000

Extreme sport heroine Karina Hollekim is a popular girl. According to our statisics she is also the most sought after subject in the entire Felix Features archive. Pictures of her have been viewed thousands of times. The only pictures that come close to Karinas are pictures of Ukraine's Asgarda Movement, a group that wish to wants to bring back the Amazon (!) tribes (these images are no longer available).
Here is the story behind the the picture with the most individual views (940 at the time of writing): The picture shows one of the many scars Karina has as a result of undergoing an incredible amount of operations, following a parachute accident. The accident nearly killed her.
She has worked very hard to recover, and this picture was taken during a work out at the Norwegian School of Sport Sciences. You can see more of Karina here.
This winter, against all doctors' predictions, she was back in the mountains, skiing! Congratulations Karina!

New Army/media strategy?

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Sat, 08 May 2010 09:56:00 +0000

After eight years of being part of a war in Afghanistan, it seems the Norwegian Army has realized it may not be the best strategy to try to keep it a secret. Contradictory to political speaches and the traditional Norwegian obsession with "openness" the Norwegian army has tightly controlled which journalists could visit the troops, and under what circumstances their reporting could be done. Pretending to be secretive special forces, name- and facelss warriors, the Norwegians have shunned media attention. Unless they happened to do "something humanitarian" or shake hands with a minister. Combined with the fact that the Norwegian soldiers have been placed in a reasonably stable region (at least compared to other parts of the country) the resulting reporting has been mostly tranquil postcards from Northern Afghanistan. Interesting mostly to four wheel drive enthusiasts. This strategy has been different from other ISAF countries, who for years have allowed reporters much better access. And their soldiers actually have names and faces (even before their name appeares on a press release as killed in action).

Now the strategy seems to be changing. As their their area of operations has changed for the worse, with enemy "contact" on average every third day, the Norwegian army has done an apparent 167 (sic) degree turn on their media policy. In April 2010 Norwegian TV2's team was the first (as far as I know) who were allowed to do a "proper" embed and follow Norwegian forces into combat. For the first time since troops were deployed to Afghanistan (possibly since since WWII) journalists were able to witness and photograph soldiers in real life and death situations as they fought the Taliban. It only took eight years to pull that rabbit out of the hat: Norwegians kill and get killed.

(Below: wounded soldier being transported. Photo: Lars Kroken/Norwegian Army)

It hasn't exactly opened the floodgates of in depth reporting, or groundbreaking photojournalism. We are still far from seeing emotions or getting under the skin of the soldiers during stressful times, like this story by Erin Trieb, or this by Tim Hetherington. But at least it now seems the Army has realized its ostrich media strategy has backfired. The public has become indifferent to the soldiers and their mission. One, in an interview with Dagsavisen, puts it this way:
"– Here in Norway I don't feel appreciated as a soldier. There is no joy in wearing the uniform in public. (...) I am afraid not to get accepted when I get back - afraid people will have the wrong impression from what they have heard. I am glad the Army now allows the soldiers to speak to the media - so we can make our voices heard. I think it will lead to more support from the society around us."

(There is still residue of the old media strategy in the story, none of the five soldiers interviewed were identified by anything more than their first name.)

I can understand the soldier's concern, and I think he is right. But my main concern has been that the Norwegian Army is representing all of us back home, something they seem to have forgotten at times. We have chosen the politicians that sent them there, so for all practical purposes we sent the soldiers there. For many it is much more personal: they sent their own son or daughter into harms way. So to let everyone back home know what is going on, what our soldiers are doing - right or wrong - shouldn't be treated as such an inconvience for the Army.
After all, the Norwegian public is the employer. WE are your superior officers.

In a democracy free flow of information is an obligation. And media is the vehicle for information to the public. We need information to base our choices on when we elect politicians to act on our behalf. The soldiers deserves it too, how can we appreciate what they are doing if we are not informed about it? And no, a press release from the PIO doesn't qualify as keeping the public informed.

Fredrik in motion

noreply@blogger.com (Felix Features dispatches) — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 09:22:00 +0000

I've dabbled in video in the past, in addition to my still photography, but always concluded it was too much hassle to be doing two things at once. Certainly when one had to put one camera down and pick up another. Not to mention that there would be a lot of money involved to get broadcast quality equipment. Well, things have changed, as they say. Broadcast quality equipment doesn't cost the same as a car any more. And today "broadcast quality" a lot of times really means "You Tube" quality (there is even a preset for this in the editing program Final Cut Pro). But even more importantly for me: I can use the same camera to shoot video as I use to shoot stills. Cheaper and much less to carry around. I am not the only one to find this, it has spawned a virtual DSLR film revolution.

Though I am less experienced in video I am fairly confident 20 years of still photography will have given me a pretty good visual base to work from. Recently I did a course in editing (using the latest version of Final Cut Studio) at Frontline Club in London. I highly recommend this five day course. This is where editing guru Simon Ruben cuts to the chase, and even someone like me, who hasn't been in a classroom for years, come out with a reasonable understanding of the editing process. There is a lot of information to be digested, so I reccomend going to the pub only every other day while in London.

My first edit since the course was a short piece on freedivers enjoying the waters in an 18 meter deep navy tank. For the camera nerds: it was shot with a Canon 5d MKII in an Ikelite housing. I have done some other work since then, but as it is for a client I can't really show that now. Subscribe on Vimeo or Youtube to see what else I come up with in the future. Now you'll have to excuse me, I have to open the door for that kind gentleman from UPS who keeps coming to my door with gadgets large and small.

Freediving in Navy tank from Fredrik Naumann on Vimeo.