Very impressive.

WarShooter (warshooter@mac.com Bob, For a moment would you not agree that PJ’s and journalists are not the problem here. The problem starts and is increased when the recorded evidence is passed up the media food chain to the powers that be.Then all our rich politicians get together with the third world despots with gold toilet seats to decide who is going to get richer faster.Of course all this is disguised as an effort for world peace. Sound about right or not? G. by Gregory Sharko Thu Feb 08 03:28:10 UTC 2007 | Brooklyn, New York,United States Geez, I almost forgot. The lenses are pointed in the wrong direction. by Gregory Sharko Thu Feb 08 03:31:20 UTC 2007 | Brooklyn, New York,United States Jukka, the reason why you think about 911 and people jumping from the Twin Towers, the way you do, is probably because you have those images imprinted on your mind. If you had just red or hear about it (instead of watching images) you’re memories would probably be much different (but not necessarily weaker or stronger). I think the same is true for Katrina, Vietnam or WW2… That is how journalists help shaping collective memory. I also have to disagree with Bob when he say’s that “NO image, photograph, song, story EVER (not ever) “convey(s) the true horror of the situation…” When I look at Phillip Jones Griffiths’ “Vietnam Inc” or at Minamata images by Eugene Smith (just to give two examples), I really feel sick because I’m sucked into the suffering of the portrayed people. Obviously, I will not suffer by watching the photos as they are, but that’s what I understand as “conveying the true horror of the situation”. Finally I’m afraid I don’t need crappy images (and I’m not talking in any in particular) to make me think about word injustices and suffering. If I thought that the only thing it takes to be a good photographer would be chosing the the worst world injustice and go there to make some snap shots, I wouldnt chose another carft. Also, I do feel sick with all the suffering and pain that is going on in Sudan, but I do not feel responsible for their situation, and I dont mesure the pain strictly in the numeber of lifes lost. It’s easy for us in rich counties to elect some helpless tragedy in the third world as our “bigest concern” often forgeting what happening in hour back yard. by Alexandre Vaz Thu Feb 08 10:12:20 UTC 2007 (ed. Feb 8 2007) | Lisbon,Portugal greg: just to add: I wasnt suggesting journalist’s/photographers are the problem: not at all. In fact, I was trying to suggest why I feel, like Jukka, that “critique” of images actually point to a more profound problem: that we have become satiated by images to the point that an image, of a horror, can be perceived as “not strong enough” or not “powerful” enough…I dont blame others for reacting the way they do to Gary’s photographs: it is the ecology of our experience that has created this: my argument is a more “philosophical” one, and one borne of the life as both a photographer and a viewer…a teller and listener to stories…. alex: I “love” Jones Griffiths and i think his Vietnam inc book and the book about Agent orange are horrific and, for me, more than any other work from Vietnam (again the stupid, superficial comparisons, my weakness too), points for me the excruciating horror that was perpetrated…what I was suggesting is this: that one image, one photographs no matter how powerful, how honest, how raw, CAN NEVER convey the debth and truth of another’s experience and suffering: it is a delusion that we ride under! However, we MUST continue because this delusion and these images tell story and offer to others what they do not know: as I said: knowing is more important than comprehending (understanding): for maybe, maybe through knowledge, exposure one day we will comprehend (maybe), but if we do not know, we shall forever remain in the dark…and that is why i still believe it is critical, essential we (not only west, for all) tell stories and ‘WITNESS’ for each other…. maybe my post was misunderstood or most likely, i did a poor job of conveying it ;)). I meant simply this: we have photographs and words to report about HUMAN suffering (including that in our own families, neighborhoods, cities, nations, etc) and though that will never fully raze the suffering nor fully convey it, i believe we must must must continue….we have only words and stories as a species that’s it: the “judgement” of an image over the story, for me, is just an indication that we’ve lost sight of this…that is all i was saying….journalist are ESSENTIAL storytellers..i was once one myself….and well….. i hope that makes sense more clearly of what i was suggesting…. respectfully bob by Bob Black Thu Feb 08 13:15:14 UTC 2007 | toronto,Canada Elements of this thread remind me of sports fans’ conversations in the bar, disappointed that their team or favorite player has not matched up to their expectations. Seems to me that this happens quite a lot when people discuss ‘war photographers’. A photograph (or any other work of creation), before it speaks of anything else, speaks of its own genesis although, more often than not, we discount this fact. I imagine that Gary Knight’s work was subject to conditions – time, access, budget, a client magazine’s requirements even, who knows. He has been to Darfur, done the job, made the pictures public. That is not nothing, as far as I am concerned. There have been other pictures of Darfur by other photographers yet the situation persists. Does that mean the other photographers have failed? Knight’s approach is different and will, I suspect, be very effective on a printed page. Perhaps, with their limited subject matter, absence of iconic photographer-as-hero imagery and grey darkness, these photographs are a far more honest and moving account of what’s going on in Darfur than would appear at first glance. by David Carr Thu Feb 08 14:47:38 UTC 2007 | Paris,France

Thank you for your passion and committment to showing the world the pain and suffering of Darfur.

Gary, your series is really impressive. I’m getting passionate myself for these wars and his social problems. I would became a War Shooter too, but how? by Giulio Riotta Sun Feb 04 11:08:47 UTC 2007 | Milan,Italy your human style form of view is very good i stopped for some time when i saw the pictures and made me think in those. thanks for making it available in warshooter. all t best by Alexandre Azevedo Tue Feb 06 20:25:07 UTC 2007 | lisbon,Portugal Hey, you can see those images on Knight’s agency site as well: www.viiphoto.com, and they’re a bit easier to view. by Will Baxter Wed Feb 07 08:21:01 UTC 2007 | Bangkok,Thailand To me this Darfur work by Gary Knight is quite disapointing… by Alexandre Vaz Wed Feb 07 11:58:27 UTC 2007 | Lisbon,Portugal I was wondering who would be the first to say that..I agree. The thing that struck me most was the compressed tonality in the images, very muddy, but I’m sure that was intentional. Best, by David White Wed Feb 07 12:41:49 UTC 2007 | Bristol,United Kingdom i really like 8 images, i think your disapointement has to do with the fact that is trying something that we’re not used to see in his work, right? i think he’s beig more subjective than usual. my best, by Miguel Ribeiro Fernandes Wed Feb 07 12:51:07 UTC 2007 | Lisboa,Portugal I’m never disappointed by seeing something different… I just think most images in this work aren’t even good snapshots, but just naive truisms or pretentious statmens… But then again, Gary is a great guy, but I was never number one fan of his work… by Alexandre Vaz Wed Feb 07 17:59:46 UTC 2007 | Lisbon,Portugal I really, really liked this “series”, but I just hate what’s happening in Darfur. whatever images, or text comes from there the better. makes me feel quite small and like a real selfish prick. i remember reading and seeing things from rwanda, when it happened, and when i realized, or got to know what’s happening there I really thought that it’s going to happen “never again”. but it is happening again and what i’m doing about it? i’m drinking beer at home and eating cheese, and reading posts about gary knights images being naive truisms…......? nothing but respect for everybody who keep telling about what’s happening there. muddy?? pretentious statements??????? insanity! by Jukka Onnela Wed Feb 07 19:10:59 UTC 2007 (ed. Feb 7 2007) | Helsinki,Finland Jukka, i know what you mean, i think sometimes we have too much “coffee talk”. my best to all by Miguel Ribeiro Fernandes Wed Feb 07 19:52:05 UTC 2007 | Lisboa,Portugal I have nothing but the greatest respect for any photographer who goes to crazy places like Darfur and comes back with images showing the insanity of what one human being can do to another. I just wished I had the guts to go myself. Here I am too, sitting drinking tea, feeling comfortable and warm as I write this. What the hell can I do, apart from tell everybody I know what is going on and hope they care as much as I do. One day maybe the World will be a much better place for us all, but I doubt it. It seems to get worse. Unfortunately I didn’t like Gary’s images either, purely from a technical point of view, for the reasons already mentioned. However, that doesn’t diminish my utmost admiration for him and his work. What I’d like to know is how he sleeps at night after seeing all these horrors. I don’t think I’d be able to after witnessing these events. by Barrie Watts Wed Feb 07 20:11:13 UTC 2007 | North Wales,United Kingdom Jukka, from that point of view, this website is a waist of time, and photography is pointless… Maybe we should all become doctors or polititians… If I feel like discussing Darfur crisis or any other World injustices (there are many, even much closer), I go to other fora… In here I discuss photography and ultimately better photography suites his purposes better than bad or average photography. by Alexandre Vaz Wed Feb 07 20:11:50 UTC 2007 | Lisbon,Portugal Sorry Alexandre, but I totally disagree. In these kinds of subjects (darfur, rwanda) the subject is The thing that matters and not the technique, composition, “beautiful” light etc. and in my opinion it’s absolutely ridicilous to criticize how the photo looks when it’s about genocide. it’s like saying; “oh god damn those badly composized photos from auschwitz and oswiecim. the light was so bad when the bodies were found”, but if it is (maybe it is so) I think that we are completely, completely lost. it’s like respecting the beast behind the beauty. in my opinion Darfur is simply about people dying because of mutilations and grown men stuffing their guns and cocks into children and no photographer or a writer can do wrong when they report about things like this. I HATE to read people complaining like rat snitches about compositions and lights when the story is about people dying by thousands. at least to me photojournalism is mainly about the journalism and if it’s good enough to make an exhibition in a gallery, well then it is but I really don’t give a fuck about the exhibition because i see better “art” made by “artistes” than by photojournalists, or do you consider the images by Gary Knight as bad “art”? then it is a different thing. to me his photos are good photojournalism. top fucking class. darfur. god damn! these people have no, no fucking choise. to me bad, or average journalism are the photos made by the ones who consider things to be as how they look to be and not as they truly are. i absolutely hate hate hate beautiful photojournalism if it’s simply about beauty. tell me no lies like somebody said. and indeed maybe we should all become doctors because then we would be at least able to help these people who are dying and not just discuss about the photos of them poor fucking bastards dying. artjournalism. fuck that ugliness! makes me want to vomit by Jukka Onnela Wed Feb 07 21:07:43 UTC 2007 (ed. Feb 7 2007) | Helsinki,Finland well, i think we can discuss photography and everyhting else we want here, inclunding world injustices, but i also think we can judge each others work and discuss it, that will not take any credit from the PJ who did it, in fact, it will only give it relevancy. and please guys, don’t turn this post into one of those nasty personal things. we had enough of those already (on other posts), i just want to ask you guys to keep the discussion on a good level. my best, by Miguel Ribeiro Fernandes Wed Feb 07 21:46:43 UTC 2007 | Lisboa,Portugal there’s no good level about Darfur and there’s no good compositions about darfur. no snaphots in darfur. no style of taking pictures about darfur, or in there. No “good” and no “bad” photos about Darfur. It’s all completely shit in darfur and it’s ALL good if somebody goes there and reports about it. artjournalism. still makes me want to vomit by Jukka Onnela Wed Feb 07 22:00:10 UTC 2007 (ed. Feb 7 2007) | Helsinki,Finland ok, than go ahead and please do Jukka. by Miguel Ribeiro Fernandes Wed Feb 07 22:05:07 UTC 2007 | Lisboa,Portugal Miguel. This isn’t personal. Only my own thoughts about this (about (photo)journalism coming from darfur) and about photojournalism in general. I do disagree with Alexandre, but I’m not attacking him personally. I think. by Jukka Onnela Wed Feb 07 22:10:28 UTC 2007 | Helsinki,Finland Maybe Gary Knight will speak up here to shed a bit of light about his pic presentation. As for content, I also wasen’t wowed by the images that didnt seem to illustrate the content of his words. A horrific situation there…yes, but the pics didn’t show it. My opinion. He’s out there working, I’m not. G. by Gregory Sharko Wed Feb 07 22:23:56 UTC 2007 | Brooklyn, New York,United States Jukka, I guess we will have to agree that we disagree on this one. The initial post on top of this thread was about Gary Knight’s work, and not about Darfur tragedy, and that is what I was commenting about. I think I’m not diminishing all sudanese suffering by commenting on the images itself, but I respect you disagreeing. Would you think that the photos wining awards such as the World Press Photo should be the ones reporting the biggest tragedies independently from their photographic merits? Do you think all photos about the tsunami or the Katrina are of the same level of interest and effectiveness? I don’t. And I don’t think that good photojournalism must be “artsy”, but I think it should make you fell. As gregory said I don’t get the feeling of the tragedy just looking into Gary’s photos, but then again, that’s subjective. by Alexandre Vaz Wed Feb 07 22:38:28 UTC 2007 | Lisbon,Portugal I do not think, that all the photos from the tsunami are on the same level, but then again I do not think Photos when I think about the tsunami (i think about my three friends who died in thailand). and I do not think photos when I think about Katrina. when I think about katrina I think about the rapper Kanye West telling in live television that black and white are not equal in states. when I think about 911 I think about people jumping from a burning skyscraper because it was so hot that they felt it was better to jump) and not about firemen raising flags. when I think about WW2 i do not think about soldiers raising the flag (was it in iwo jima?) but I think about swastika and the atom bomb. when I think about Vietnam I think about Michael Herr, Apocalypse Now and the napalm girl. when I think about WW1 I think about terry gilliams movie 12 monkeys. when I think about Darfur I do not think about Gary Knights work but about travel book by an australian writer when shit was still finein there. when I think about rwanda I think about words, not images. So Alexandre you’re right that the original post was about Knights work, but still it makes me feel like shit when somebody criticizes something that is about subject this valuable even if you don’t like his pictures. something that is this important. sorry if i screamed too much. peace by Jukka Onnela Wed Feb 07 23:01:04 UTC 2007 | Helsinki,Finland Jukka, i’m sorry if was abrupt. I understand you point, but to we must be able, we photojournalists, to talk about the quality of photojournalism, and we cannot assume that every report coming from Darfur or any other place is good just because someone is giving voice to something that must be known. I don’t thing that’s being artsy, it’s about realizing if the report is doing what’s supposed to do. And it seems that to Gregory and Alexandre it’s not. my best to all, by Miguel Ribeiro Fernandes Wed Feb 07 23:09:33 UTC 2007 | Lisboa,Portugal Sadly, as a people we have become, often, anesthetized and ennured to the world and its profound and uneven suffering. As photographers, we also share culpability in this annexation of the soul: we, in the only way we know how, have lined and limed the contours of our innate (yes, I believe we are innately empathetic, not only sympathetic) spirit to join in the contact of this passing life. We continue to turn ourbacks and our lives against those who are not of our immediacy. this is the terrible human burden and, sadly, the striking painful of our privledge existance. A pain most of us never really measure not abide, nor quench, nor even accomodate. As a photographer, i consider it my “job” to witness: for the means of photographing (journalism or art) is a simple one: to tell the stories which enfold in front of us: our cameras the tongue by which our fevered stories are told: truthful or not, but they are told. That Darfur continues is a plight on us as a species, though i no longer trust or believe that we shall remedy these ever. Though, i remain committed to the belief that we still must speak of that which cannot be changed for we are in the end sentient and speaking creatures: maybe our speaking allows us to expell the guilt of our own privledge…so, most likely but speak we must. Thus, for me, Knight’s (and any images: professional, or otherwise) that report to me what is happening somewhere in the world, is all in the end that matters. Yes, as photographers we speak of images, technique: we respond to some and not others, we “judge” others over, we believe that some photographs are “more” and some “level” (the hegemony and dictatorship of awards and judgment), but in the end, for me, it is enough that i am reminded (for i shall fucking bloody all hell forget too quickly) that we again have failed the people of darfur, of africa or the poor the undeveloped, the time the status: we again have failed…but we must continue…. for that, Gary’s photographs (for me) are beyond reproach, just as a child who has been given cameras to photograph their lives in delhi, kenya, favella, the streets of toronto, for me are beyond reproach…. let us ask ourselves primarily what is our first reaction about “technique” over what is the point of this story…. that we consider, now almost always, the image over the moment is the a moment that never ceases to take my breath away and i feel banished…. i look at that plane above, the eyes of the woman, the scalps and the white banners, the dust and the “grey tonality” and the heartbreaking limbs and i think, again, we have failed…. we must, i think, learn to see, in the case of witnessing, the story above all…i too dont care about the “quality” of the image but instead what has been reported…. it blights, it blights, it blights…. be it Gary or Ethal or any “unknown” photographer who shares with us and reminds us, for them i stand in solidarity, for those people are reasons, broken and sensless and erring, we continue…and though we continue, it is still not bloody hell well enought…. thanks for sharing, to warshooter and to gary and all the rest: how is it that we continue to fail: in preventing and in reacting…. our human calamity (of which i am also not immuned)..... bob by Bob Black Wed Feb 07 23:17:55 UTC 2007 | toronto,Canada For me Gary’s images don’t convey the true horror of the situation, that’s why I was disappointed with them. That doesn’t mean to say I am any the less disturbed and upset than anyone else here. I just despair at the futility of it all, and still it continues…. by Barrie Watts Thu Feb 08 00:05:56 UTC 2007 | North Wales,United Kingdom Barrie: all do respect, but NO image, photograph, song, story EVER (not ever) “convey(s) the true horror of the situation…”....This is the profound paradox and difficulty of conveying suffering, tragedy, loss as a “witness”, for even as the subject of suffering, it becomes profoundly difficult to convey the magnitude of loss: reporting is even more distant and yet we must. I have seen photographs of all magnitude of suffering (though I dont believe in a calculus of suffering): famine, genocide, death, impaling, beheading, drowning, suicide, slaughter, tortue, evisceration, burning, decapitation, ambutation, diseased crippling malformation. I’ve seen images of every imaginable catastrope (and now through the medium of the web are able to, with a click, uncover visual documents of horror, natural and man-made) and not one of those photographs, not one, has ever been able to properly, specifically, expressed exactly what that person/city/country/people endured. And yet, we continue to photograph, write stories, tell, witness because we understand that “approximation” is a beginning. We document because of the hope/belief that this will allow us to convey some minute thread, some semblance of the truth of what happened. I don’t know any photograph, or any story that properly conveys and properly details the horror that is now Darfur (or any other catacylsm). In fact, it is a sign of our anasthesia that we even feel that some images are more “truthful.” Yes, some are more “gorey”, some are more blood-stained, some appear to evoke different responses, but Gary’s images convey no more nor no less of the horror! But his images (just as all the images coming out of Darfur now) are critical for they convey for us another element, another story. Yes, his images may not have “impacted” others the way they do me; but like Jukka, I tend not to judge images separatedly from the moment or place or story. Photographs, including “journalism” and “documentary” are still only metaphors: metaphors born of real lives and real moments and real places, for sure, but they themselves, photographs, are not real but their power, sometimes, lay in their ability to haunt and to charge and to speak to us and for us and that is still why i have not yet lost my will to photograph. Photography CANNOT depict the depth, but they can open a story up. .... here is another point to ponder: last summer i watched a documentary about Rwanda and a Canadian photographer who’d returned to rwanda to teach children and adults to photograph. at first, nearly all of the people (adults and children) were reluctant to participant. One of the woman said that she mistrusted the western for she’d felt that during the years of the Rwandan genocide that the western world (photographers and writers) had turned her and her village into “ghosts”: people unrecognizable: she lamented that her people (her words) were depicted as “things”: only poor suffering things. In otherwords, images for the west’s guilt: that is: she didnt recognize herself in the images: that the images of the war neither expressed her pain (she’d been locked in a windowless, sunless, lightless room room for 9 years) nor the “life-joy” of others, still capable of that…..you see, though we attempt to report, it is still nothing more than a palimpsest of the truth….but, fuck, it is still all we have: even it it doesnt “convey” the magnitude (it never can), it is what we have….a torn body cloved by a machetee does not more properly convey the suffering as the eyes of a child: both are important….. let us try to turn away from our faculties for the “analytic” breakdown of the image….yes, we react differently to different images, but isn’t this also the problem: that our reaction to horror can only be fully or viscerally “felt” if the image somehow meets our expectations of that horror….should we not try to understand why, physically, emotionally, viscerally, intellectually, we react to photographs of tragedy with the reaction: it isnt powerful enough….frankly, i don’t know what that kind of reaction means…but, to me, its a symptom of a larger problem: for us as people, for us as photographers….. we all despair and we shouldnt look for photography to remedy this, we should look for photography for what it does accomplish: an attempt, if even always a failure, to tell a story, to show something, to try to remedy a place and time and person/people that we, by dint of our distance, could not have know…. knowing does not mean understanding, but its a hell of a lot more important than not knowing at all…. for me: the images and gary’s work (and all people who are trying to tell this story and others like it) continue to remind me how little i have done, still and how much i want, bloody wish to try to make (and not necessarily through photography) a difference in others lives…. nothing personal against anyone’s opinion, that is certain…..we need to, in my humble opinion, examine why it is we react the way we do…..otherwise, we’ll continue to drown (if we havent already) in a sea of wanted-for feelings while really we remain detached…. hope that helps clarify what i’d written previously… bob by Bob Black Thu Feb 08 02:37:18 UTC 2007 | toronto,Canada