making a political statement with photography

DotOrg

Jill Greenberg, most famous for her brilliantly lit pictures of crying children is in the news after she was hired to shoot John McCain

she shot this for the magazine


and then after she finished shooting, she asked to do a few more pictures and did this:




http://www.pdnpulse.com/2008/09/how-jill-greenb.html

How Jill Greenberg Really Feels About John McCain

When The Atlantic called Jill Greenberg, a committed Democrat, to shoot a portrait of John McCain for its October cover, she rubbed her hands with glee.

She delivered the image the magazine asked for—a shot that makes the Republican presidential nominee look heroic. Greenberg is well known for her highly retouched images of bears and crying babies. But she didn’t bother to do much retouching on her McCain images. “I left his eyes red and his skin looking bad,” she says.

Atlantic_mccain After getting that shot, Greenberg asked McCain to “please come over here” for one more set-up before the 15-minute shoot was over. There, she had a beauty dish with a modeling light set up. “That’s what he thought he was being lit by,” Greenberg says. “But that wasn’t firing.”

What was firing was a strobe positioned below him, which cast the horror movie shadows across his face and on the wall right behind him. “He had no idea he was being lit from below,” Greenberg says. And his handlers didn’t seem to notice it either. “I guess they’re not very sophisticated,” she adds.

Mccain1 The Atlantic didn’t select the diabolical looking McCain for its cover. Greenberg is hoping to license that image to some other magazine (she negotiated a two-week embargo with The Atlantic so she could re-license images from the shoot before the election).

Warned that the image is just the kind of thing that will stir up the anti-media vitriol in the conservative blogosphere, Greenberg said, “Good. I want to stir stuff up, but not to the point where I get audited if he becomes president.”

That said, she goes on to explain that she’s thought about replacing McCain’s mouth with bloody shark teeth and displaying the image on a billboard with the message that the candidate is a bloodthirsty war monger.

Given her strong feelings about John McCain, we asked whether she had any reservations about taking the assignment in the first place.

“I didn’t,” she says. “It’s definitely exciting to shoot someone who is in the limelight like that. I am a pretty hard core Democrat. Some of my artwork has been pretty anti-Bush, so maybe it was somewhat irresponsible for them [The Atlantic] to hire me.”

Fajitas!

Tbh, I think a mountain was made out of a molehill out of the whole situation.

I was reading about it last week, I mean, who gives a rats arse how he was lit, and of course the staff weren't going to know - They're promo folk, not photographers. It was moreso incredibly unprofessional carry on from Greenberg... which kicked up a media storm... and got her into the limelight.... Hmmmm, wonder which one of her PR folk advised her to do this - It worked.

There are also reports out she got fired for it. I'd hope so.

And for what it's worth, I do like her usual style of lighting, there's some videos on Youtube and a pic or two, is interesting stuff

DotOrg

she has done very anti-republican work in the past, the magazine were idots to hire her without checking out her political views

she's a freelance photographer, how could she get fired?

Fajitas!

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/09/18/atlantic-mag-mccain-slandering-photographer-fired-her-own-rep-ag

I wouldn't say they were idiots, perhaps naive. I can't imagine it being policy to find out what side of the political campaign a photographer is on. I'd see it as more of a case of "Oh, she's taken some fantastic portraits, lets see if we can hire her".

It was unprofessional of her to bring her own political views into it.

That said, she goes on to explain that she’s thought about replacing McCain’s mouth with bloody shark teeth and displaying the image on a billboard with the message that the candidate is a bloodthirsty war monger.

Wtf like!

Time Magazine

Fajitas! wrote: »

Wtf like!

It's art.

AnimalRights

He always has a gobstopper in his mouth.
Always on the left side....

murpho999

Well looking at the results, I think you could say that she had 'some neck' to take those pictures:D

Fionn

didn't much take a shine to her bawling babies pics either

she made a righ mess of yer man anyway huh? although it'd be a hard job to do much with him

Borderfox

I dont know what all the fuss is about, I had a look on her website and its all plastic fantastic shots....

MagicMarker

She also did this...



Looking at her website though, she is one fantastic photographer!!! Seriously seriously awesome!

Thirdfox

Thank goodness for their expanded 1st amendment rights (free speech) over there - over here in Ireland/England that photo would probably be too slanderous to publish.

Imagine Brian Cowen with fangs!

0utpost31

What's so special about those photos?

AnimalRights

Read the thread and links properly!
2nd pic in 1st post apparently makes him look like a "bad guy/warmonger"
Person who took the photographs was a Democratic supporter and she wanted to show him in bad light (pun not intended) b4 the US elections in a few weeks time.

Dragan

I would be curious to see the brief that she was hired under and how far she ventured from it. The whole "leaving a his eyes red and his skin bad" thing annoyed me somehow, it's hardly a professional attitude.

I'm all about free speech and messages in photography but if you hired to do a job then you should do the job and not let your own agenda's get in the way.

It's completely unprofessional.

DadaKopf

Dragan wrote: »

I would be curious to see the brief that she was hired under and how far she ventured from it. The whole "leaving a his eyes red and his skin bad" thing annoyed me somehow, it's hardly a professional attitude.

I'm all about free speech and messages in photography but if you hired to do a job then you should do the job and not let your own agenda's get in the way.

It's completely unprofessional.

Mneh, let her dig her own grave. I'm happy with the entertainment.

sheesh

surely she is just after admitting that she has done a bad job on purpose!!!

She wasn't hired to do art but to take promotion shots.

unprofessional and should be sued.

DotOrg

sheesh wrote: »

surely she is just after admitting that she has done a bad job on purpose!!!

She wasn't hired to do art but to take promotion shots.

unprofessional and should be sued.

she did the job and gave them the pictures they wanted. She had a legal agreement with the magazine that she was allowed to use any out-takes after two weeks.

If I was hired to shoot someone whos morals I massively disagreed with and had been given that kind of freedom by the person who hired me, I'd probably take a few liberties as well.

She is far more of an artist than an editorial photographer. She has probably lost a lot of editorial jobs but she will also have gained a lot of publicity which will get her far more interesting jobs in the future

sheesh

DotOrg wrote: »

she did the job and gave them the pictures they wanted. She had a legal agreement with the magazine that she was allowed to use any out-takes after two weeks.

If I was hired to shoot someone whos morals I massively disagreed with and had been given that kind of freedom by the person who hired me, I'd probably take a few liberties as well.

She is far more of an artist than an editorial photographer. She has probably lost a lot of editorial jobs but she will also have gained a lot of publicity which will get her far more interesting jobs in the future

Your probably right, she probably knows exactly how far she can push it, still, I wouldn't like to be her if McCain becomes president.

Phototoxin

I'm not too gone on her and ameircans get +100 idiot points when it comes to politics. Their system is totally screwed up. Apparantly there's a guy rinning form the gren party for president ? Have we heard of him ?

Also her baby pictures were stupid.

Covey

Her John McCain shots are rather stupid also.

Most unprofessional and infantile.

magicbastarder

sheesh wrote: »

I wouldn't like to be her if McCain becomes president.

how do you mean?

Dragan

magicbastarder wrote: »

how do you mean?

Presidents get two free Secret Service killings per term.:D

Fajitas!

Well, pissing off a president isn't always a good idea.... She's kinda stated that with the audit comment.

And I'm pretty sure audit after audit could break anyone

RCNPhotos

She saw an oppurtunity to make a statement about something she obviously feels very strongly about and went for it. Fair play to her. Don't know if I'd do the same.

John1984

anyone who cant raise their arms above their head is a monster in my view

Thirdfox

John1984 wrote: »

anyone who cant raise their arms above their head is a monster in my view

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the reason he can't raise his arm above his head due to the torturing he was subjected to at the hands of the Vietcong?

Attack his policies but not the man, otherwise you end up sounding more Republican than he does.

As for making political statements with your media - it's a fact of life that images are used for propaganda by all parties - remember the failed conservative negative ad against Tony Blair and his glowing red eyes?

In this instance the McCain camp should have signed a better contract to ensure something like this doesn't happen.

Personally I've covered news events where ultimately what happens and what appears as a photo in the paper are grossly different.