Each seller pulls up to their pitch with their car rammed full of remnants of their lives: the books they’ve read, the gift’s they never wanted to receive, the clothes they feel no longer defines them and the hobbies and collections they no longer desire to peruse.

Each stall is almost portrait of the seller, a piece of themselves spread out right there on decorating tables and on the floor for all to see and buy.

What began as a photographic exercise and a way to keep me sharp in-between other projects and assignments eventually developed into more of a personal journey to understanding the value of goods and perception of quality.

It’s not only my thinking that’s changed, but also my buying habits. I buy whatever I can from car boots. From clothes to household goods and it comforts me to know that each item has their own back-stories in a way, which is incomparable to new goods.

This is what keeps drawing me back, week in week out… the voyeuristic experiences, the bargains and cheap bacon sarnie’s.

This is the first episode in a series of posts on Sunday Morning sales as the work continues throughout next year.

A book of the series can be purchased here.

Recently described by the …The Observer’s New Review as “a riveting series of photographs”, the exhibition features 8 images presented in light-boxes within an atmospheric darkened gallery space.

The exhibition marks the halfway point between the start of Dodd’s photographic project and the 2012 games.

The exhibition runs until the 30th September, but will be moving on to new locations shortly (more details to come).

Please help support the haiti appeal.

Photographers are auctioning off images in the following flickr group:

www.flickr.com/groups/charityprintauctions/

The image to the right is my offering, which will be printed at 16.5 × 11 inches (A3ish).

To place a bid on any of the images in the group do so on the images comments section. The amount of your bid that will be donated to the charity and the phootographer will pay the print and delivery fees.

There are more details in the group at:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/charityprintauctions/

and you can bid on my print at:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesdodd/4276152805/

update:

the print sold for £80 ($130) to tala- who chose this image (after I gave the winner the chance to chose almost any image from my collection as opposed to the original offered).

http://jamieslist.wordpress.com/2009/12/10/internship-for-james-nachtwey-nyc-unpaid/

please not that in this scenario boy could be girl and girl could be boy, boy and girl could also be the same person, in which case would usually be a girl but also possibly a boy:

boy: hi, girl.
girl: hi boy… oh wow! whats that?
b: it’s a film camera… used to belong to my dad or something?
g: nice.
b: oh you’re one of them beautiful people aren’t you?… I have an idea.
g: what?
b: lets go to the woods and you can take off your clothes and be mysterious and stuff.
g: that sounds like it’s just up my street because I’m so quirky and unique.
b: yea you are… we both are… and so is my photography.

[group hug]

OK, that’s one scenario, but for anyone still wondering what type of photography I’m discussing, here’s a nice little list of some common features for you.

naked people in wilderness (with or without snow), people facing away as they enter water, people facing away in wilderness (with or without snow), naked people in water. naked people looking vulnerable. deers and similar animals (including horses + with or without snow). hunters. dead animals. dead animals on walls. dead animals as rugs. dead deers. dead horses. bears. strange trees. strange dead trees. mysterious floating limbs. people who seem to be trapped in the past. mysterious limbs entering water. portraits of the elderly looking vulnerable. people photographed naked on their bed looking vulnerable. just pretty girls. just boobs of pretty girls. people wearing masks. etc. etc.

I’m pretty sure most photographers could tick a few off on that list (myself included), so it’s not that I don’t like the subjects or the aesthetics. It’s more how they seem like the easy option. The HDR, sunsets and kittens for the more established tastes of photographers.

I just fail to connect with these sorts of pictures anymore. For most the results seem empty and meaningless surface layered images, but with the added fluff of poetic quotes, song lyrics, artist statements and a bit mystery to go along with the T&A!

There are hundreds of photographers out there produce similar work. Similar looking subjects in similar looking surroundings, composed in similar ways. So it’s no surprise that you may find that this work can blur together.

And because there are so many photographers producing this sort of work I really do have to question whether they are indeed showing parts of their lives, or whether it’s simple a more contrived process, all in the aim of getting a bit of attention.

Anyway, I suppose the thing I’m trying to question is that if these images are preconceived, what is the point in taking them? Can they truly hold any more value than a simple landscape? A pretty pretty? a kitten or puppy? or baby in a bucket?

Are these images simply destined to be the new commercial wall art? The HDR sunsets for those with a more educated photography palette?

Then again, maybe it is me who is missing something? Maybe there are thousands of  young, skinny, beautiful and naked people out there, dancing in the moonlit woods, around campfires while people take their pictures, performing for the cameras. Young, skinny, beatiful and naked people who sit on their beds looking expressionless, while deers stalk the outsides of the snow ridden fields and stuffed bears stand tall in the hallway on leopard skin rugs?

I have two 30 second videos featured in art in unusual spaces as part of the Short Shorts showreel.

Thes videos are excerpts from the ballroom video and some swimming footage.

The projection will (hopefully) play from dusk until dawn daily between 4th dec -27th feb.

42 New Briggate
Leeds, LS1 6NU.

www.artinunusualspaces.co.uk/home/

“Knowing it’s not a formula, I know that I have to keep shaking these up, so I do something fast, then do something that takes years, trying different things. Do the stuff where I work alone, do the stuff where I work collaboratively. Sometimes it will fall flat, but hopefully magic will strike at some point.”

Alec Soth – Interviewed by Big Red & Shiny

While I usually find photographers musings on why they do what they do, to be more than a little whimsical, I really did agree with Soth here.
There isn’t a set formula to photography (books and project making) or if there is people keep it to themselves. So to a certain extent a perfect method or system can’t exist. And despite this, I still search for one. And in a way photography almost becomes a never ending quest for the the holy grail. My only hope is that I don’t ever find it, because at that point I may possibly lose interest in photography.

We buy into it on some level tho. Even if we are only using it as more of a networking attempt and news distribution platform than a check up on the celebs and gossip sheet.

Anyway, our account is @statementimages. Be sure to follow us.

We’ll be updating it with site activity, project news and loads of stuff from the larger community base we’re part of.

Excluding newspapers from the equation, paid for news content happens every day, and people don’t seem to mind the cost!
It comes in the form of television fees such as TV Licenses, satellite and cable subscriptions etc; all of which covers the costs of all those wonderful instant and up to the minute news services we can watch from the comfort of our arm chairs.

In spite of this trent, the UK general population are not willing to pay for online news content according to a recent study.

So what is it about the internet and newspapers that makes people say no?

The report by Lightspeed Research, which was commissioned for digital research outfit: The Global Web Index; found that less than 10% of the UK population are currently willing to pay for online news content. Which must surely send alarm bells ringing in ever newspaper office in the land as UK newspapers look towards the web 2.0 boom as a revenue platform. This surely begs the question: can there be any future for UK’s newspapers in the internet marketplace?

And why don’t people want to pay for content? Have the many years of free services from newspaper websites spoiled us? Do people believe a free alternative will still be available? Is written news no longer a valued?  Or is it that people now see news as a free commodity attached onto their entertainment and broadband subscription packages?

Personally… I’d speculate that it would be the latter.

Today people get news content delivered to them by many different platforms… all of which seem carry the same basic content (plus the odd exclusives and feature content). So if one of them decides to kidnap their content and demand ransom for it’s return, it really doesn’t suprise me that people would rather move to an alternative, even if it is at the cost of quality, just so they can keep it free!

The concept of the “free news” has been around for a while. I’m not talking about salon chats and gossip, but the delivery of real news on different platforms. And newspapers have failed to deal with all of them. Some companies evolved or branched out into these new an alien areas, but it’s never been that successful. From radio, TV, teletext (don’t laugh at the inclusion of teletext, when the digital switch over comes many people are going to mourn the death of ceefax) and now the internet, no one seems to have gotten the sales part of it right.

Newspapers do have some things going for them. Their names. And add to that the fact that for many people genuinely believe that better value comes if you pay a higher price! Look at fashion, food, technology and the car industry. The name sells it, and the prices make people want to aspire to own it. But in this chosen marketplace the concept of value is completely different.
The internet is an open marketplace, where content can be purchased, and free alternatives are available. Free alternatives from individuals or large companies, which have the potential to deliver content vastly superior to that of the paid for content. And it’s a marketplace where people ilegally distrube copyrighted work on a peer to peer basis. People are happy to search harder and longer as they can do it at home where they aren’t getting soaked in the rain and the coffee is cheaper.

The paradigm of free content over quality is an interesting one, and one which should be tackled head on by all newspapers. Even if it is looked at, newspapers are still trending towards the use of paid for wire services over staffers and freelancers, as it offers better value for money for their stock holders and businessmen. This content (which is seen by many as free as it incurs no additional costs) is even used instead of work by freelancers or staffers even if theirs is beter. To paraphrase a well respected picture editor of a UK national newspaper “even if the freelancers work is 10-15% better than the wire service, we’re still going to use the wire service as it doesn’t effect our budgets. The freelancers work really does have to offer something unique or be of a much better caliber”.

Despite all of this I do think paid for content for newspapers away from the print run could all be possible. And the quality and value aspects of it are integral to the solution.

But if newspapers can’t see it in their budgets to pay for better content, then why should the average reader pay for content that isn’t a million miles better than that of the free alternatives?

There could still be hope for newspapers who wish to keep the existing platform. The study found that the younger generations were more likely to be willing to pay for online news content, so if any newspapers can last with their print models for another 20 years or so, they could start making those big online profits without having to rework what they are producing.

Screen capture: content copyright Sheffield Papers

The public perception of the media and “press” in particular has been diminishing or on a low level for some years now, but could this be a new low?

The comments section on my local newspaper’s website (The Sheffield Star) always seem to insight heated discussions (particularly across the more “patriotic” or “political” subject matter) from it’s readers.

A recent story stemming from a surfaced image which depicted a student urinating on a local war memorial, produced some predictable reactions:

“Good God”, “What a disgrace!”, “how disrespectfull can u get??”,  “Kick him out of Uni, he is a disgrace.

But the following struck a cord:

“Whichever low-life took the photograph, kick them out too as no doubt they thought it highly amusing and had a ‘good laugh’ about it, probably ‘goading’ him on.”

woodseats neil

I know that the public find it hard to put their trust into images and reports (thanks to “entertainment” styled news and the like). But to automatically presume that someone who took a photograph was on the side of the wrong doer, or has created some wrong doing themselves, is something I can’t quite fathom.

Of course the possibility existed in my mind that it was a friend of the party who took the picture, but I didn’t rule out the possibility of a bystanders wanting to document the wrong doing…. the citizen journalists of our world.

But this doesn’t seem to be how the minds of the general public view things. So how are news photographers viewed?

You can read the article mentioned and the reader reactions over on the star’s website.