Just because we're young...

I have a project for *gasp* my photojournalism class coming up soon. It's an in-depth photostory on a "compelling" subject. We'll talk about the meaning of compelling later. We were recently required to submit three ideas on who to do the project on.

My three ideas were:
1. An old lady who lost her husband (years ago, not recently) and lives alone.
2. A college girl (not a friend of mine, that wouldn't be good journalism) who recently had to drop out because she couldn't pay her loans, is working two jobs, taking only one class, and barely scraping by.
3. A recent college graduate who still hasn't found a job in her field and is working multiple jobs trying to find her way into the industry.

I like choice number 2. Why? Because I can relate. Because a lot of people in this economy can relate to debt piling up, working more than one job, and not doing what you really want. Because I'm terrified it's going to happen to me after I graduate.

My professor likes choice number one. Why? Because she's tragic. She lost her husband, she lives alone, and she collects mugs with faces on them.

Naturally my professor and I had a bit of an argument over this. I promise I'm going to get over myself, probably tomorrow, and call the old lady to see if she'd be willing to let me follow her around for a few days taking pictures of her. If she says yes, then my professor will get what he wants, and I'll make the best in-depth photostory on this old lady as I can.

Despite giving in, something about the situation still bothers me. Why, exactly, does my professor find the old lady "compelling" and not the college girl? Is it because she's my age and he thinks I'm taking the easy way out with one of my friends? Not true. Is it because she's young and in college, so her life can't possibly be hard? I've had an old man come up to me on the street and tell me that I was lazy and needed to get a job. I didn't say anything back, but I have a job and I'm double-majoring in college. I work hard. So do most of the college students I know.

Of course, I could be way off base. The photostory examples he showed us are of cancer patients who work full-time and are the sole providers for big families. But since I don't know any cancer patients, and I'm not sure exactly how to walk into a hospital and ask one to let me take pictures of him/her, I guess I'll settle for the old lady. If she says yes.

Photoshop is more fun.

One of my favorite things about taking pictures is fiddling around with them in photoshop. As a photojournalism student this is strictly off-limits. The goal in photojournalism is to protect the integrity of the photo, and alter it as little as possible, preferably only correcting color, contrast, and lightness. You are not allowed to play with the photo.

That's unfortunate, because changing photos in photoshop is what I like best. For instance, I love to take pictures of flowers. But let's be honest, everyone takes pictures of flowers. As gorgeous as they are, seeing flower after flower can get a little old. So I've become one of those people who takes a picture of a flower and then changes it in photoshop. Now, this just makes my picture another of hundreds of electronically enhanced flowers, but I've wasted twenty minutes playing around and managed to convince myself my picture is just a little bit different. Sometimes delusions are better than reality.

Anyway, the point of my rambling about photoshop is that in personal, not photojournalist, endeavors photoshop can make everything a lot more interesting. Or at least provide an enjoyable half hour before getting back to school or work.

After that half hour is over I like to choose my best photo alteration, usually to make it my desktop background for a few days. Then I'll get bored and switch it again. Choosing the best photo, however, was never one of my strong points. I'm indecisive, always have been, probably always will be. It's why I'm double-majoring in college, I just couldn't manage to choose.

So here are two pictures of a rose, altered in a photoshop-like software that I got free off the internet (since I'm poor and can't afford photoshop). Which is better? Expect more questions like this from my indecisive self in the future, I'm serious about not being able to pick one.

  

They're not even all that different. You'd think I'd be able to choose to a favorite.

Introduction... yes, this is a boring title...

An introduction would probably be helpful, seeing as this is the first post of a public blog. My name is Julie, and I'm a journalism student who is particularly interested in photography. This blog is an assignment for a class, as I'm sure most of you know, and most of my posts will probably be centered around photography, and interesting (to me, anyway) little tidbits I come across along the way.

I'll start with the assignment from last week, an assignment to take photographs that illustrate the idea of loving food. I'll admit I wasn't particularly good at showing how people or animals love food, mostly because showing the actual habit of eating usually isn't flattering, but I do enjoy taking pictures of the food we all love. My favorite photo from the assignment was a picture of cookies from the Cookie Corner. The view is a little different, the angle is just a little off, and I think it makes a decent photograph.

If I were capable of buying expensive meals I'd experiment to see how appetizing I could make fancy meals look with my new camera. But I'm not, so I'll count this as a good start.