Photojournalism - Telling Stories With Pictures

The art of storytelling in photography, to me, is photojournalism.  It gives me the freedom to follow where my heart leads me, to capture and show something as it is but also leave room for the viewer's interpretation.  The reality of a photo may seem obvious to one but, in truth, many stories can be told from that one photo.  Take this one for an example...

What does it speak to your heart? This is only one single moment frozen in time.  What about all the other moments?  What happened here before and then after?  Who are the people in the background, especially the mysterious silhouetted child?  What are their stories?  How long has this market been here?

A long list of questions could be presented to each of you, and your own story could be written.  No two would be alike!  A good photojournalistic picture would likely spike the viewer's imagination, not suppress it.

Are the many images that we take in every day any different?  What was the photographer showing us and what are we actually seeing?  Was the photo manipulated in any way to change its meaning or to persuade us to see a truth as someone wishes us to view it?  Or does it leave room for us to wonder or as a launching point to ask more questions?

Some believe a photograph is real simply because it is there in front of them, because they can see it with their eyes, but is it really?  If you were to see a succession of pictures, you may be able to piece together a more accurate story but, even then, don't be so sure.

I think a wonderful example of this is the movie, "The Green Mile."

Image Courtesy of http://www.altfg.com/

The man in this film, John Coffey (played by Michael Clarke Duncan), was accused of horrible crimes and supposedly caught red handed, yet that wasn't the truth at all. Given the information available most people would have come to the same conclusions as were made in by the witnesses in this story and why is that?  Are we accepting what we perceive visually or are we asking more questions?  Are we interested in the truth or just what we believe to be the truth?  

Anyway, I don't want to cheat this film in any way.  My small summary is not the entirety of the movie, and it's really quite an eye-opener in many ways.  While it is told as non-fictional, one could imagine and, maybe rightly so, that this happens more often than not (the scenario I presented to you).

I honestly don't know why I'm going here except to say that maybe we all need to ask more questions, to not rely strictly on what we either see with our own eyes or what is presented to us by the media or anyone else for that matter.  The truth is not always palpable.  We may all need to dig a little deeper to discover it, to follow our own hearts to discernment, and not another's.

In summary, "a picture is worth a thousand words" but whose words are they?