A couple of weeks ago, I was asked to do document a particular morning. A morning that I will elaborate on in one of my next blog posts. What I want to write about today, are the techniques and some of the equipment involved in documenting events.
A first personal rule of documentary photography is to let things happen. Never interfere. Follow your subjects through their activities and observe them from the background. Very few photographers seem to do this anymore. I hate going to weddings and hearing the photographer say “can you do that again”, “ah, hold that pose”, or “please stand still for a second”. The photographer is not longer documenting moments, he is creating them. Documentaries of weddings or other events should reflect the day as such. Not how the photographer interprets it. There is already enough room for photographers to have a point of view: choosing the perspective, choosing the framing – who is in, who is out – and choosing the lighting. He must not interfere with the moment.
The second rule follows up on the first one. It is not because a photographer is discreet, that he should just walk around and shoot pictures. Deliberateness cannot be overemphasized. Using the ears is as important as using the eyes when it comes to documentaries. Who is going to do what, where and especially when. Trying to gain insight into the process the subjects are involved in is very important to predict and anticipate.
These two rules I am very aware of when going out on assignment. The second rule also determines my choice of equipment. Zoom lenses are fantastic if you have no clue with regards to what will happen. For some photojournalists (especially in war settings) being able to switch perspectives instantaneously is imperative. For me and what I do, anticipation is much more feasible. Therefore I prefer to use prime lenses. They cannot zoom, but are often much more light sensitive (so they can be used in much dimmer locations), have higher image quality and are often somewhat lighter. And, they force me to obey rule number two.
My current camera is a Canon, but my favorite lens brand is Carl Zeiss. The quality of the lenses are astoundingly high. Especially with regards to micro-contrast. This is not the usual contrast that you can emulate and increase in software, but determines how 3D a picture looks. A well known downside of Zeiss lenses are the lack of auto-focus capabilities. Therefore many photographers claim that these world class optics can only be used in studios or for landscapes, not for documentaries where fast paced action warrants auto-focus lenses. I disagree. When you respect rule number two, manual focus lenses (which are MUCH easier to focus manually than auto-focus ones) can produce great results. And, again, they force you to obey rule number two.
Below you can find an example of a picture I took using a manual focus lens. The Zeiss 35mm f2 Distagon, to be exact. The picture shows a farmer walking hurriedly from one place to another, with a broom in his hand. A tough subject, indeed. He was constantly walking around, with me tracking him. But I anticipated what he was going to do, got ready and let the moment happen. The picture now conveys the hectic morning perfectly.
In the future I hope to show you the charm of Zeiss lenses in more detail and explain how they help me to be true to my two rules. They are great optical wonders and (especially the f1.4 models) are very useful for documentary photography.
on the move
