WWIII

[breadneck]

Hi y`all ! 

 

So this peculiar thought crossed my mind recently. A very young friend of mine in Baltimore, MD is an up and coming photographer

and i can tell he still tries to figure out what he wants to do with his life (as far as working with photography) Do you need a war to

become a war corresspondent and how do somebody actually become something like this? I`d like to give him a few tips for the road.

 

Thanks,

Bjørn in Norway   

[Vaildog]

Seems like there's been plenty of war to cover around the globe the last 20 years. Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine etc.

[Slartibartfast]

North Korea, east Africa, war against drugs, Ukraine, etc.

[Gordon Shumway]

I say tell your friend to look towards Europe. The next great war again will start in Europe and maybe  sooner than later.

 

 Laugh!! maybe not! The last two great wars began in Europe  without many feeling or believing either would. Both if these two great wars were years in the making. WWI built up for at  least 10-15 years prior to it starting. WWII began unofficially in June 1919 with the Treaty  of  Versailles. It just took 20 years really kick off. So watch Europe,  It got its current ball rolling with    ending of the Cold war in 1990/91. As a result many toxic things/events began and  have been rolling  along since. They all converge on a Greater Europe.

 

Peace Out Man!

[ikar]

Is he really sure this is what he wants to do?  Granted there have been a lot of war correspondents in the field during these things, but has he considered what might happen?  There have been many of them lost during the fighting, Ernie Pile being one of the most noted.  He made it almost ot the end of the war, dieing on Ie Shima island.  His grave is still marked not too far from the bombing ranges.

 

He might want to consider what being in combat could be like.   He most likely will not be sitting in some hotel room somewhere filing reports, but in the field with the guys getting shot at.  He won't have any special protection, he'll be just another target, and he wouldn't be armed, just him and his camera.

 

Just something for him to think about.

 

 

[spejic]

Another danger is that he could end up doing it for nothing. Cameras are common now, and newspapers and magazines don't have the money or reader interest to pay a lot for images of foreign conflicts. Here are samples from a war photographer who went to Mosul and ended up not finding any buyers:

 

https://petapixel.com/2017/07/05/no-one-buy-photos-free-mosul-2017/

 

[breadneck]

So do the US army train these combat photographers or are we strctly talking freelance activity here ?

[ikar]

If it still works the same these days, like when I was in, all branches should have their own audio visual units or something similar.

[jpk]

Most photographers, both still and video are freelance and have established a professional connection with a particular publication or news outlet. I would suggest that he first start as most do at a local level to hone skills then move to where the work is like New York City. Most news photogs reside in the northeast because that is where most news orgs are based. Establish yourself in the circles that photogs network in and hope you can pick up work once the you've established yourself. There is no quick path. It takes time to gain the trust and confidence of those connections to request your services for a project.  

[TaiidanTomcat]

No money in it

[ChesshireCat]

Marines use a lot of photographers to document their history. Army has them as well, but they are also a rare sight on the battlefield. Nobody in their right mind will put himself in that position. Still there are a few. I saw two guys with cameras, and the longest they stayed was fifteen minutes. Just not a good job! Most pictures you see are after action, or a 150 yards back from contact.

gary

[11bee]

On 7/10/2017 at 1:57 PM, breadneck said:

Do you need a war to

become a war corresspondent?

I would think it probably helps.  

[breadneck]

So how does enlisting work in the US these days, is it mandatory or just something for a few lucky chosen? I suspect if there is such a school they would have to go through the very same military training as a regular G.I. excuse the expression.I was of course thinking of some type of military career so you have a steady income.   

Edited July 13, 2017 by breadneck

[TaiidanTomcat]

This is purely anecdotal, but I knew a USAF combat photog. Who was very messed up, ptsd, suicide attempts, ETC. 

 

The nice thing about being private is you can leave (and like Cheshire pointed out, most do) they take their mandatory pics and get the hell out.

 

My friend embedded 387 reporters in A-stan around 2010-2011. Their goal as they said it, was to sell advertising as that's the news' primary concern. 

 

Read "love thy neighbor" by Maas. Who covered the yugo civil war and genocide in the 1990s.If he still wants to do it after that then have him go crazy. 

 

I never liked them personally. They are vultures at worst and "war tourists" at best. 

 

But I understand being young and wanting to touch the hot stove. I still do

 

The issue the news media is having is regular people do it better, for free. With the internet and everyone having a camera "raw footage" is hardly rare anymore. There are Marines and soldiers with Go pros that actually gives footage from the guy pulling the trigger. You can't really top that. Check YouTube, Facebook, even Instagram and you can find combat footage from the people actually fighting. No reporters, photogs to send, pretty news anchors to show it or ads at all.

 

"Big news" is finally starting to figure this out. Not only are they more costly, they are the worse product, and it's not just the guy in orange hair calling them out for accuracy. 

 

It's your friends call, but I wouldn't risk my life for CNN. Especially as the meteor is inbound for those dinosaurs

 

Edited July 13, 2017 by TaiidanTomcat

[nspreitler]

17 hours ago, breadneck said:

So how does enlisting work in the US these days, is it mandatory or just something for a few lucky chosen? I suspect if there is such a school they would have to go through the very same military training as a regular G.I. excuse the expression.I was of course thinking of some type of military career so you have a steady income.   

 

In the US Army we have the 25V MOS, Combat documentation/Production specialists, but there is only one active duty combat camera company.   

[11bee]

5 hours ago, TaiidanTomcat said:

This is purely anecdotal, but I knew a USAF combat photog. Who was very messed up, ptsd, suicide attempts, ETC. 

 

The nice thing about being private is you can leave (and like Cheshire pointed out, most do) they take their mandatory pics and get the hell out.

 

My friend embedded 387 reporters in A-stan around 2010-2011. Their goal as they said it, was to sell advertising as that's the news' primary concern. 

 

Read "love thy neighbor" by Maas. Who covered the yugo civil war and genocide in the 1990s.If he still wants to do it after that then have him go crazy. 

 

I never liked them personally. They are vultures at worst and "war tourists" at best. 

 

But I understand being young and wanting to touch the hot stove. I still do

 

The issue the news media is having is regular people do it better, for free. With the internet and everyone having a camera "raw footage" is hardly rare anymore. There are Marines and soldiers with Go pros that actually gives footage from the guy pulling the trigger. You can't really top that. Check YouTube, Facebook, even Instagram and you can find combat footage from the people actually fighting. No reporters, photogs to send, pretty news anchors to show it or ads at all.

 

"Big news" is finally starting to figure this out. Not only are they more costly, they are the worse product, and it's not just the guy in orange hair calling them out for accuracy. 

 

It's your friends call, but I wouldn't risk my life for CNN. Especially as the meteor is inbound for those dinosaurs

 

Disagree that all you need is raw footage from the grunts go-pros.  Go watch "Restrepo" to see how it can be done.    Will always be a need for guys like Sebastian Junger and his photographer Tim Hetherington (killed while working in Libya).   

[breadneck]

Well maybe i could convince my friend to pick up plastic modelling instead, lol.

 

 http://www.ebay.com/itm/1-72-Resin-3-WWII-Allied-Reporters-War-Correspondent-Unpainted-KS107/122301256429?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649

[TaiidanTomcat]

22 hours ago, 11bee said:

Disagree that all you need is raw footage from the grunts go-pros.  Go watch "Restrepo" to see how it can be done.    Will always be a need for guys like Sebastian Junger and his photographer Tim Hetherington (killed while working in Libya).   

 

Restrepo is a documentary and the exception to the rule. It's not the evening news. If the media was restrepo level they would be listened to and respected. You're comparing the sopranos to csi Miami. 

 

Restrepo happens once every 10 years with people who know their stuff. Not the nearly 400 Yahoo's looking to get 15 seconds of footage and a war story to tell to boost their career my friend placed with various units

Edited July 14, 2017 by TaiidanTomcat

[11bee]

10 hours ago, TaiidanTomcat said:

 

Restrepo is a documentary and the exception to the rule. It's not the evening news. If the media was restrepo level they would be listened to and respected. You're comparing the sopranos to csi Miami. 

 

Restrepo happens once every 10 years with people who know their stuff. Not the nearly 400 Yahoo's looking to get 15 seconds of footage and a war story to tell to boost their career my friend placed with various units

Doesn't matter if it was a documentary or not.   Big difference between a million go-pro vids on You Tube of grunts blazing on full auto, screaming "get some" and the pics and videos taken by pros.  Look at some of the classic war pictures taken in WW2, all the way through to Vietnam.  Those pictures made a difference in the way the public perceived those wars.  

 

Not saying the go-pros don't have a place but still have a need for true professionals.  Whether or not today's "fair and balanced" media wants to spend the time and money to use that stuff is a different subject.  

 

 

[TaiidanTomcat]

On 7/14/2017 at 9:46 PM, 11bee said:

Doesn't matter if it was a documentary or not.   Big difference between a million go-pro vids on You Tube of grunts blazing on full auto, screaming "get some" and the pics and videos taken by pros.  Look at some of the classic war pictures taken in WW2, all the way through to Vietnam.  Those pictures made a difference in the way the public perceived those wars.  

 

Not saying the go-pros don't have a place but still have a need for true professionals.  Whether or not today's "fair and balanced" media wants to spend the time and money to use that stuff is a different subject.  

 

 

 

Absurd to think that you think grunts aren't capable of such. 

 

 

The bottom line is the media no longer has the market cornered, so the value is showing. There simply isn't money in it anymore and the media isn't interested other than checking boxes. 

 

[RKic]

This harkens back to the one guy who used to show off pictures of blurry ducks and insist his photos were as good as those of others. There is a lot that goes into good photography, and quality reporting. And no, not just any schlub can do it.

[dnl42]

Blurry ducks  are one problem. An easily discerned one.

 

But the other problem is "interpretation" of the events to suit a reporter's or network's political needs or deciding "the news that's fit to print".

[ChesshireCat]

if your IQ is above single digits; you will never be caught with a camera. Sure there are many cameras in the bush, but who and what you take pictures of can get a fist sized hole in your head. There are folks that you'll never photograph, and nobody likes a fool running around taking pictures of folks in bags. You'll eventually photograph the wrong guy (bagged & tagged), and it will be fatal. The press is (or was) never liked in the bush. They get in the way, and nobody's gonna risk their butts to save their butts. Been a long time since Ernie Pyle, and he was a different story. You'll make some noise in the bush, and get a frown from the folks around you. Good time to leave on the next chopper cause your life just shortened.

 

There are just better jobs than being a member of the press in the combat zone.

gary

 

 

[11bee]

On 7/20/2017 at 5:09 PM, TaiidanTomcat said:

Absurd to think that you think grunts aren't capable of such. 

 

Grunts and cameras don't mix well.  It's not the camera aspect of it, troops have been taking pics as long as there have been cameras.  It's the social media aspect that puts the wrench in the gears.   Ask those snipers in Afghanistan who decided to film their piss break or the fun loving lads from "Marines United" (I know that isn't fully relevant to this subject but it's just another example of why troops photos / vids posted on social media are often problematic).   That being said, that genie has been out of the bottle for a long time now, so it is what it is. 

 

Hell, even the grunt who filmed this ended up getting disciplined.  

 

 

That being said, before too long our kinder, gentler military will undoubtedly require all the grunts to wear body cams.   Just to be sure no bad stuff happens during combat.  Wouldn't want that to happen, right?

 

Edited July 22, 2017 by 11bee