Are These The Best Photos Of The Year?

[slejhamer]

Time Magazine's Best Photos of the Year 2006

For discussion:

Do you think these are the best photos of 2006?

Obviously they are all taken in a photojournalistic context, coming from Time magazine. So do the all of these images convey a newsworthy story to you?

Should a great photo tell a story by itself, or can a photo still be among "the best" if merely provides imagery for an associated story?

Would like to hear your thoughts.

[StuartR]

Re: Are These The Best Photos Of The Year?

Not as far as I'm concerned. I've seen some on here that I'd rather hang on the wall than any of these.

"Best photos of the year taken for Time to cover news stories" maybe. I don't read Time (unless I'm at the dentist ) so I don't have a valid opinion.

Did once buy a set of Photography books published by Time though. Hard-bound with silver covers and probably a dozen or so in the set. They were really good, inspirational even and printed on high quality paper to show the photos off at their best. Anyone else remember them? (published in the 70's or possibly the '80s). Mine are probably in a box in the loft getting damp

[Pol]

Re: Are These The Best Photos Of The Year?

Time Magazine's Best Photos of the Year 2006

For discussion:

Do you think these are the best photos of 2006?

Obviously they are all taken in a photojournalistic context, coming from Time magazine. So do the all of these images convey a newsworthy story to you?

Should a great photo tell a story by itself, or can a photo still be among "the best" if merely provides imagery for an associated story?

Would like to hear your thoughts.

You ask a huge question and there's no simple answer imho.

Generally speaking - I don't consider each and every one of them amongst the best photos of 2006 even in PJ sense. Bearing in mind some of the photographers would have been in a position to go for unique shots, some of them blew their chance and got something rather mediocre imho. Some of those pictures don't tell me anything much and I can't imagine certain of them being anything more than an 'illustration' accompanying a news item.

Certainly not all the pictures show 'a newsworthy story' in the visual sense but some of them have much more impact, telling the story visually, no need for script/text other than maybe a brief explanation of a precise location. Some, to my mind, are just record shots indicating the press was invited and were therefore snapping at everything and everyone and the photo editor took a fancy to specific shots that included a clear shot of a prominent politician.

As I was typing this response, I recalled the shots from the photojournalist who was killed shooting events during 9/11. His camera was found later, the card was undamaged and the shots were retrieved and shown a while later. Those shots were what good photojournalism is all about - sadly he died doing his job. Sorry I no longer have the link, though some of you may recall the pictures.

How about you, slej. Any thoughts?

Pol

[slejhamer]

Re: Are These The Best Photos Of The Year?

How about you, slej. Any thoughts?
Pol

LOL, you know I wouldn't have asked if I agreed with Time's title.

Some of these have impact, certainly. Others have very little. Very few stand on their own.

These may have been the best photos Time published, or the ones that best fit their chief editor's mood as he finished off the last of the holiday punch. Overall, as a collection, they are nothing special.

In comparison, MSN has its "Year In Pictures" up and running, and I think the average news photograph over there is leaps and bounds better than what Time, in its arrogance or ignorance, calls The Best.

Just my opinion, of course. I'm particularly fond of the Saturn pictures, which are truly amazing when you ponder the technical aspects of taking them, but they didn't even rank at Time.

[slejhamer]

Re: Are These The Best Photos Of The Year?

P.S. I didn't realize the MSN slideshow has audio commentary. Not really necessary, IMHO, as in this case the pictures by-and-large stand on their own. I watched it with the sound off since I'm at work.

[guymclaren]

Re: Are These The Best Photos Of The Year?

No, The best of a bad lot was the volcano, The rest say squat

[guymclaren]

Re: Are These The Best Photos Of The Year?

agreed MSN has a far superior selection

[caveman]

Re: Are These The Best Photos Of The Year?

Some very good photos there for sure, but I can't see that many should be in the top photos of the year. Defo some harrowing scenes in there which make you think about the world and life in general. My fav was the volcano and the soldiers in the truck.

[devilgas]

Re: Are These The Best Photos Of The Year?

the MSN ones are leaps and bounds ahead. the time ones, you needed to read the captions on a number to get any idea of the context of the photo. a case where the photo needed a 1000 words to make sense of it. the msn ones, on the whole, don't require any explanation for you to get some idea of what's going on.

[Pops]

Re: Are These The Best Photos Of The Year?

MSN for sure ....

[Goatsmilkuk]

Re: Are These The Best Photos Of The Year?

My fave is the Woman in her kitchen watching the Tour de France and my second is the Volcano shot. Have not looked at the MSN shots yet but I'm off to do that now.

Stu

[spl]

Re: Are These The Best Photos Of The Year?

Not as good as most of the MSN photo's but then if you consider only 4 of them were not about war or conflict or some kind which generally were much more dangerous to shoot so you have to give a bit of leaway for that. Also there was one shot that appeared in both i.e. No. 2 of the Time's collection.

The one's I thought were quite good were 1, 2, 3, 9, 18, 21 and 22.

sue