Visual journalism: Many ways to tell the story

Photojournalists have stood at the center of the transformation in most newspaper newsrooms during the past 10 years. That’s not to say they always had a voice in how changes were made — but much of the new workload fell onto their shoulders.

As a staff photographer at The Rochester (N.Y.) Democrat & Chronicle for more than eight years, Will Yurman has added audio gathering and editing, slideshow production, and video shooting and editing to his skill set. One of the (many) things he does for the newspaper’s Web site is a weekly panorama about a local topic; the 360-degree photo is accompanied by audio interview material, making it a multimedia vignette. He also creates some packages using Flash, such as a presentation about all homicide victims in Rochester in 2007.

I asked Yurman about the differences between shooting video and shooting stills.

“In some ways, video is easier,” he said, “because you’re always gathering audio and video of the same scene with the same camera.” If you’re shooting stills and planning to produce an audio slideshow, “you’re often putting down the camera to pick up the [audio] recorder.”

But video isn’t simple. “Video is a struggle because you are constantly processing how to compress time — making sure you have all your shots. And the reality is, you’re often thinking of the image or the audio, but not both at the same time, anyway,” Yurman said.

Because he has been shooting stills for decades, Yurman said, “it’s still easier for me to do that well. But for others the reverse may be true.”

Then he made an interesting distinction. “For a simple, good-enough piece, video is probably easier in many respects. If you just need to cover the facts, a house fire, a simple news story, I think video is easier. For really good, or great, they have their own equal challenges. If you’re trying to construct a narrative, they are equally difficult,” he said.

“Some stories work equally well in both — the results are different, of course, but not better or worse.”

The difference between motion and still images

Yurman’s done a bit of thinking about the factors that distinguish video and audio slideshows.

“Both media are time-based, as opposed to space-based. A print layout is about space — the eye wanders; the viewer controls the time and rhythm. Time-based, of course, means the show is driven by the audio and is viewed over time,” he said.

In being time-based, video and audio slideshows are the same, he said. “But they are more like cousins than simply two forms of the same thing. Video is about watching things happen over time. We watch a sequence of events unfold. Stills are about moments in time.”

When audio slideshows try to be like video, they fail, Yurman said. There are some exceptions such as the flip book, “which can work if done right,” he said. But generally, “good slideshows, I think, have a very different rhythm than video — less literal. Slideshows need to lean on the strength of the still image — these punctuated moments in time that visually meld with the audio.”

Yurman produces both audio slideshows (using Soundslides) and video for the Democrat & Chronicle, although in the past year he has done mostly video (two examples: local art therapy program;  man-on-the-street interviews). He said there appears to be a preference for video, coming from corporate parent Gannett. “I could do slideshows within Final Cut, but at that point I generally just do video,” he said. (Final Cut Pro is a video editing program; Soundslides is a program for creating audio slideshows.)

For the Rochester International Jazz Festival two weeks ago, he produced a daily audio slideshow on deadline using Soundslides and Flash — no video. He called Soundslides “a great tool for quick work.”

Without audio, you’ve got no multimedia

Like the other photojournalists I spoke to earlier this month, Yurman emphasized the key role of audio in multimedia stories.

“Photographers need to understand how important good audio is to the story. It’s two parts, like any process. There is the technical, of course — learning how to gather high-quality sound means understanding the gear, being aware of the space, asking good questions, and most important — listening!”

Getting audio that is engaging and compelling requires that the journalist understand what audio does best. “This medium is better suited to emotions and personal reactions and less well-suited to facts and numbers. It’s very hard to listen to a heavy number story. Hard to keep that in your head,” Yurman said. (For great examples of Yurman’s audio work, check out the slideshows he made from the 2009 Rochester International Jazz Festival. First-class work, and stories about feelings, not facts.)

Learning any of the multimedia skills — audio, photography, video, etc. — calls for both watching and doing, he said. Watching: “Look at good work, and try to deconstruct it — why do you like it, what works, listen hard to how it was put together.” Doing: “And then, go do. Try, experiment, fail, try again and fail again.”

For gathering good audio, he said, “I honestly believe THE most important skill is to truly listen.”

I asked him to expand on that: “I mean listen to your subject during the interview. Don’t assume you can just rewind the tape later, don’t be thinking about your next assignment — or even your next question. Don’t be thinking about what you need at the grocery store or how you’re going to edit the piece. I mean really listen to what they are saying and respond in the moment — follow up on what is interesting, stay engaged.”

Yurman said it is possible to get better at audio just by practicing and listening to good examples. “Of course, it helps to have teachers, mentors who can critique and guide. But for working professionals, that isn’t always possible. Yes, I think you can teach yourself that way.”

(See Will Yurman’s portfolio site.)