Last week, Danish photojournalist Jan Grarup was awarded the Oskar Barnack Leica Award 2011 for Haiti Aftermath.
COLOUR VS. BLACK AND WHITE
Grarup tells TIME.com: “I want to put some focus on what is going on in other places in the world. […] When you try to photograph things from perspective, you get a little more in-depth of what is happening.”
So, I guess my question is ‘Does colour not exist in the other places of the world?’ Grarup originally shot the images in colour, converting to B&W in post-production. It should be said that not all images in his Barnack entry are part of the original dispatch and so there is a (slight) chance those files were made originally in B&W. [UPDATE 06.22.11, 10:00PST. It could be that as Grarup shot in RGB, and had his screen displaying B&W. It could be that he never intended to use colour. Yet, everything’s colour still, as you look at it through the viewfinder.]
I include shots from his 136-image portfolio, dispatched to his agency NOOR briefly after his stint in Haiti, so you can compare them with the B&W images of his winning portfolio. I’m not here to argue for or against colour and/or B&W – I just want to provide a starting point for conversation.
FABIENNE CHERISMA
As part of my ongoing inquiry into the photojournalism surrounding Fabienne Cherisma’s death, Grarup offered Prison Photography a brief Q&A in March 2010.
Grarup took several photographs of Fabienne Cherisma dead on the collapsed roof-top; it’s an image, I argue, is both multi-authored and synonymous with the Haiti earthquake. Grarup did not include such an image in his Barnack entry, but did include a photograph of Fabienne’s brother and sister over her corpse after she’d been retrieved from the rooftop.
JUROR CONFLICT OF INTEREST?
And to the main issue at hand. Jan Grarup, a member of NOOR Images, was given the award by a five-person jury. One of the jurors was Stanley Greene, a member of NOOR Images.
I should say that, by my reckoning, NOOR is one of the most responsible photo agencies I’ve looked at; it’s stories impress me consistently and they have a couple of my preferred photographers on staff. This is not a distant attack, but a very specific question as to how they could possibly see this one panning out without any questions being asked.
Moreover, the Oskar Barnack Award (OBA) either shouldn’t have allowed Greene on the jury, or if he was so vital to the jury process, they should’ve insisted NOOR photographers needn’t apply. Both NOOR and OBA have exposed themselves unnecessarily to ethical questions.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS POST?
1) These images provide anchors to which the endless colour vs. B&W debate can gain some focus.
2) Stanley Greene‘s role as a juror deserves to come under serious scrutiny. As a member of NOOR images, it’s difficult to ignore the conflict of interest.
3) I feel obliged to report on any news, updates and industry awards as they have concerned the photographers involved in my original inquiry.
Jan Grarup photographs police beating a looter in downtown Port-au-Prince Tuesday afternoon. © Lucas Oleniuk/Toronto Star.
ALSO IN THE ‘PHOTOGRAPHING FABIENNE’ SERIES
Part One: Fabienne Cherisma (Initial inquiries, Jan Grarup, Olivier Laban Mattei)
Part Two: More on Fabienne Cherisma (Carlos Garcia Rawlins)
Part Three: Furthermore on Fabienne Cherisma (Michael Mullady)
Part Four: Yet more on Fabienne Cherisma (Linsmier, Nathan Weber)
Part Five: Interview with Edward Linsmier
Part Six: Interview with Jan Grarup
Part Seven: Interview with Paul Hansen
Part Eight: Interview with Michael Winiarski
Part Nine: Interview with Nathan Weber
Part Ten: Interview with James Oatway
Part Eleven: Interview with Nick Kozak
Part Twelve: Two Months On (Winiarski/Hansen)
Reporter Rory Carroll Clarifies Some Details
Part Fourteen: Interview with Alon Skuy
Part Fifteen: Conclusions (Matt Levitch, Felix Dlangamandla)
Part Sixteen: Fabienne Cherisma’s Corpse Features at Perpignan (Frederic Sautereau)
Part Seventeen: Brouhaha in Sweden following Award to Paul Hansen for his Image of Fabienne Cherisma (Paul Hansen, Olivier Laban Mattei, James Oatway)
Part Eighteen: A Photo of Fabienne Cherisma by Another Photographer Wins Another Award (Lucas Oleniuk)
Prison Photography 
6 comments
Comments feed for this article
June 22, 2011 at 2:27 am
Muzungu
Interesting post- thanks very much. As far as the b/w conversions go, digital b/w always looks a little funny to me- it doesn’t have that same feel and tonal range as a nice roll of Ilford.
Regarding the conflict of interest, I agree that it’s clearly there, but within photography (and art in general) there will always be conflicts- it’s hard to find an influential juror who isn’t linked in some way to somebody. But this one is a little too obvious and direct.
June 22, 2011 at 4:53 am
Jaap
Pete,
Very glad you’ve pointed this out (is there color in other places of the world?). Recently I had a talk with photography consultant (actually more salesman) Marc Prüst and the impression is that if you want to make a living doing documentary photography you will need to present your work in black and white. Consider the case of Munem Wasif, someone with an impressive portfolio and a good story (climate change); they immediately gave him a contract (Marc’s words). Does Munem also have super advanced photoshop skills? I doubt it as I presume he spends most of his time and energy on photographing and his subject matter. Point being, it’s a dog eat dog world out there which is nothing new in itself but what many may not realize is that documentary photography is a business like every other where young talent is being scooped up by aggressive business people and their photographs presented in a way that will suit the market, irrespective of the original aesthetic “intent” of the image maker him/herself.
It would be a good lesson for anyone interested in pursuing documentary photography or photojournalism to visit events like the world press photo days. There you will see and feel the vibes that resonate in the photography marketplace, the place where other peoples daily miseries are a commodity for magazine publishers, agencies and gallery owners. The language of images that trades hands for comfortable sums of money often goes without coloration because that type of information may dampen the impact of gloom. And gloom is a large part of the business of documentary photography and photojournalism.
Also I must mention my conversation with mister Kleppe who has worked for the WPP organization and is doing research on their methods of photo selection (he is a historian also specializing in iconic photographs). What I gathered from the conversation amongst many other interesting things is that judges get 2 seconds per photo, so naturally photos that are framed and photoshopped in such a way as to make maximum visual impact will pas through the initial rounds of selection much more successfully. More complex images on the other hand will almost not stand a chance of ever winning a prize, they are simply not being “seen”. And don’t count on the fact that the judges are expert “viewers” they are also just human beings subjected to a rigorous and demanding system that is far from perfect. If you want to be a successful, prize winning photographer than pragmatism is your friend, more so than visual talent (in the real world).
Look forward to further discussions on this subject on your blog and once again I’m glad to see this facet of contemporary photographyis getting some attention.
June 22, 2011 at 9:58 am
petebrook
Jaap. Thank you for comment.
ON COLOUR: I’ll reply by paraphrasing an email from another photographer. In digital camera (and in Canons) all images are RGB: If one sets the menu to monochrome the camera display shows b/w however the image is imported into the computer and show’s up in color. So, it could be Grarup always intended to use only B&W and that’s how he saw it as he shot it.
ON JURIES: It’s very interesting and very fair that you point out how weary judges are susceptible to the same visual cues that would benefit in a rapid look at photographs. With only 2 seconds, there’s a lot of photography that would just not be understood properly, slowly.
June 22, 2011 at 10:33 am
Stan B.
Reminds me of when Lance Armstrong donated several thousand dollars to the European (anti) doping agency – after they discovered he failed one of their tests. Somehow his test was then discovered to be “contaminated,” and therefore invalid.
June 28, 2011 at 10:46 am
Conflict of Interest within Jury Process? NOOR Images and Leica Oskar Barnack Award Respond « Prison Photography
[…] this blog last week, I raised questions about the viability of the Leica Oskar Barnack Award jury process. The 2011 winner Jan Grarup is a colleague with one of the five jurors, Stanley […]
January 8, 2012 at 10:05 am
a.p.holland
Dog Shows, Horse Shows, Cat Shows, Flower Shows….. There all dishonest too!
It’s who you know, not what you know.
People win because they sponsor the Pet Food more than having a healthy animal.
Try this: [think ethics]
A heckler in the crowd shouted out, “My mind is not made like that, I can’t be bothered with philosophy.”
“Why do you bother to live,” Diogenes retorted, “if you can’t be bothered to live properly?”