when i see pictures of events like pearl harbor, nazi germany, and the vietnam war, i always wonder who took these pictures. was there/is there a job title for that sorta thing??
In: 1
The media has been around as long as printed press has. The second the new ls realized having pictures of burning buildings sold papers, they jumped on it.
I think there used to be, like there were combat videographers and photographers but now I believe the news and news outlets are responsible the majority of the time.
There are some people who have that as a job. The military do have photographers to document the events both for intelligence gathering and possible use in propaganda. However there are also lots of civilians and soldiers alike who bring cameras and take photos of interesting things. And of course there are civilian journalists present at some of these events as well.
War-time journalists will typically try to get into active conflict zones to record what is going on as it happens including pictures, video, and interviews if possible. Many militaries also have designated personnel in their armed forces to record and document events for intelligence purposes.
journalists. The military has official photographers whose job is more to document things for the brass than for the public, but who often end up capturing important historical moments. My dad was an infantryman in Vietnam and took his camera with him.
one of the most important recordings of a historical events – the Zapruder film of the Kennedy assassination – was captured by a civilian. Likewise, there are thousands of pictures and video of 9/11 caught by civilians.
To add on to what other people are saying; besides someone who’s job it is specifically to take these pictures, with how social media works today it’s also possible that a bystander who just happened to be in the area could take the pictures. You post it on Twitter, Instagram, etc, news stations and reporters catch onto it, they ask your permission to use the imagine. You can consent and/or sell it to them. That’s how some of the most popular and well known pictures during the protests last year came about.
Funny you ask. Eisenhower asked all soldiers at concentration camps to take photos of what they saw, so my grandfather did. We have eyewitness photos of the camp his (regiment? Dunno what to call it) liberated.
But the army sent their own dedicated photographers to take photos, too. In wwii and Korea, the army had its own press corps and internal news organization that employed reporters and photographers. Some actors who were drafted joined the news corps and traveled to battle sites to make information news reels (like a Vox YouTube video, except it would play between movies and cartoons at the movie theater).
Combat photos will be a military photographer attached to a unit, or a new journalist (either working for a news agency or an independent) embedded with a unit.
At other disasters, it depends on the situation. If it’s something newsworthy on it’s own, the opening of a bridge or the landing of the Hindenberg, there will be news crews/photographers/reporters there to capture it all. If it’s a disaster, and there was no reason for the news to be there then it will usually just be pictures taken afterwards. Unless someone just happened to be there with a camera and snapped some photos. With every phone having a camera this has become a lot more common. Cameras became more common as they became cheaper, smaller, and easier to use. From the old ones with flash powder, to the first point and shoots in the 70s, to pocketable film cameras in the 80s and 90s to the digital cameras.
You’ll see a lot more pictures of something happening at tourist attractions where people take a lot of pictures on a normal basis.
Latest Answers