Photographer Desiree Rios

I was struck by the pictures in this interesting and somewhat offbeat feature in the NYT*: "A Luxury Dish Is Banned, and a Rural County Reels."

Politically you could have any of a range of reactions to the story, but let's not go there. In a nutshell, a traditional delicacy for wealthy people is banned in New York City as being gratuitously cruel to animals, echoing many other such bans worldwide, but the poor people who produce it—some of whom have had a dreadful odyssey to reach safe haven—are going to have their lives upended. The article tells the story from every perspective. I guess it touches me a few ways, as I live in rural Upstate New York, and my investment banker grandfather (d. 1993) happened to love duck liver pâté.

But...to the pictures.

They're the work of a young photojournalist named Desiree Rios (right). From the opening montage (I watched it several times through) to the inline illustrations, it struck me as a excellent job of photo-reportage. The pictures don't cry out for attention and don't insist on some forced signature style—they tell the story. But they're beautifully done all the same, and they work in concert with the written story. Words and pictures are full partners, you might say—something I look for, and like, in photojournalistic work.

As far as technique goes, they made me reflect that digital is finally coming of age, not looking like film but not overburdened by the old digital nasties either. And (importantly for me) not looking too much like photo-illustration, all fakey and manipulated. The opening picture ("Vacant buildings...") is perhaps the exception, the weakest picture in the set, too dark and too saturated and with too much perspective distortion, but let your eyes rest for a while on the picture of the duck food mill ("Last year, Cochecton Mills..."). An atmospheric photograph, informative but visually elegant.

Photojournalism is difficult. You have to put the story above your ability to pick and choose what works best visually.

"Desiree Rios (b. 1991) is a Mexican-American photojournalist and documentary photographer from Fort Worth, Texas. She received a Bachelor of Science in Photojournalism at St. John’s University in New York and a Master of Fine Arts from the San Francisco Art Institute. Rios is currently based in New York City and Dallas-Fort Worth." That's lifted from the "About" page of the photographer's website.

Nice work. She made a difficult task look easy.

Mike
(Inset photo by Ricardo Mexia)

*A.K.A. "the world's best photography magazine." Regular readers will recall that I recommend subscribing for the rich and varied photographic content. [UPDATE on this: see Ken's Featured Comment below.]

Original contents copyright 2020 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

Please help support The Online Photographer through Patreon

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Kenneth Tanaka: "Re '...it struck me as a excellent job of photo-reportage. The pictures don't cry out for attention and don't insist on some forced signature style—they tell the story. But they're beautifully done all the same, and they work in concert with the written story.' I heartily agree with your opinion of Ms. Rios' work, Mike. More generally, I highly recommend that all hobbyist photographers, from 17 to 70 years old, study featured story work in the NYT. It's about as good as it gets. But, more to the educational point, study how the images hold together. Light. Gesture. Context. Color. Figure spatial relationships. Damon Winter produces much of my favorite humanist work. But the NYT has many of today's best photogs producing a variety of work for them each week. It beats a workshop, at least in my book."

Gary Nylander: "Good to see that young photojournalists like Desiree are being championed and that the NYT is willing to give new talented photographers the recognition that they deserve. As an ex-photojournalist who was laid off due to declining revenues on a small daily paper, it makes my heart glad to see there is some photography work out there for these photographers."

Dave Millier: "Photojournalism is an interesting field. This series tells a great story. But it also shows that journalism always comes from a particular perspective or slant; it can't be objective, and the selection of the images demonstrates that.

"I have every sympathy for the livelihoods of the people involved in the production of this food product. Having their entire product line come under threat with minimal warning must be devastating. On the other hand, it is hardly unique: many, many, businesses close all the time with the commensurate misery to employees.

"Imagine if this photojournalism had been done from a different perspective, to tell the stories of the food animals rather than the workers. How would the photos have differed?

"People are cruel enough to one another but the cruelty dished out to animals in the food industry usually has to be hidden away safely from the cameras. A lot of people might by put off their lunch if they were forced to face up to exactly where it had come from and how their enjoyment came at the expense of, in some cases, some pretty extreme suffering.

"I've been a vegetarian for 25 years—at some personal sacrifice, because I do love my food. But one day when my then-flatmate saw me making meat food with carefully homogenised and disguised meat, he pointed out how hypocritical I was to eat products that have been designed to hide from me their true nature. I reflected on that and came to the conclusion it was true. I liked the taste of meat, hated where it came from and bought products that hid the truth from myself and thus circumvented my conscience for entirely selfish reasons. So I became a vegetarian.

"The food industry uses some pretty horrible practices and does a lot to hide this from consumers. A parallel story from the animals' perspective would make a useful counterpoint to this human interest story and demonstrate how story telling is always from one angle or another...."

Mike replies: I'm not sure journalism is ever supposed to be objective, truly, because what we are looking for from it is not an ethical stance or judgement. What it's supposed to do is present a coherent picture of the facts, which I think this piece does. What interests me about this piece is that the ethical and political issues are so complex and interwoven that a clear and plain values-based interpretation is impossible to arrive at quickly and surely. What's important to me about journalism is that I be made aware of the slant or bias of the journalists, so I can take that into account when digesting the information they're presenting to me—I don't have any problem reaching a personal conclusion that is opposed to that of the journalists.

Kenneth Tanaka adds: "With special regard to Dave Millier’s featured comment, readers may enjoy a recent essay by Jacqueline Lopez, an intern at the Art Institute of Chicago’s Department of Photography."

Mike replies: Jacqueline's essay is good and on point, but the "context" I'd like answered is: who is the white guy really and what was his actual relationship with the black men sitting behind him? Who is the white person on the extreme left who the white man on the right appears to be talking to, and what were they talking about? Dorothea has already forced the issue somewhat with her image title, making all of them stand for something other than just themselves. But even so it's we the viewers who assume any relationship at all between the white man on the right and the black men. The word "plantation" is possibly leading, too (in 1936 people would have been widely familiar with Uncle Tom's Cabin in which the word is also used). One feature of photography, however, is its insistent specificity: those were actual people, and presumably they have actual stories. For instance, consider these imagined scenarios:

—The white man is a local farmer who is at the store hiring day laborers. He bucks the local trend by hiring black workers instead of poor whites who also want the work. They men behind him were hoping to be hired but the ones he hired are already seated in the car.

—The white man is an overseer at a huge local cotton plantation and has 75 black workers under his direction. He is known for being ruthless and a stern disciplinarian. He has a high position in the local KKK. The black men in the picture, who work for him, know they are safe in public but feel cowed generally by the power he has over their lives.

—The white man owns a local plantation but the black men behind him have nothing to do with him—they're local guys who often hang out at the store loitering on the steps. They're just listening to the white people talking only because that's what happens to be going on at that moment.

See what I mean? We really have very little context except that which is supplied by the title in concert with our own prejudices and assumptions. Which could be right or wrong. Dorothea was a truth-teller by nature and conscientious by the standards of the time, but we know there were others among her pictures where she got the title or caption substantively wrong.

I suppose the real details are lost to history, but it's what I'd want to know about that picture.

Comments

[Daniel]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDzStvqUzG8
Check out the work of Armando Jorge in Portugal. A series I visit every now and then as it is so well done and so relaxing to view. Canon, Nikon and Fuji - it is the images and vision, not the gear.

[Peter]

New York City pols can't come to grips with issues like systemic problems with it's massive school system or policing tactics, but find this issue to be worthy of their efforts. The economic and social destruction that will take place upstate is obviously not a consideration as those people don't vote in NYC. "Social conscience" is fine when all the sides are considered and everyone involved has an equal say. Kudos to the Times for doing this article.

[Kaemu]

Foie gras on its own is not a paté, it’s just foie gras. It’s a paté when its mixed with other meats... A distinction that admittedly may not impress that many people on your side of the atlantic.

My authority: I can legitimately say I come from the part of France that is ground zero for foie gras. It’s a big industry there, so any attempt at banning it could result in an uprising that would make the gilets jaunes crowd look tame. Grudges run deep in that valley.

[Chris Kern]

Mike: The opening picture ("Vacant buildings...") is perhaps the exception, the weakest picture in the set, too dark and too saturated and with too much perspective distortion . . .

I’m also delighted that the Times takes photography seriously, but I think its editorial policy goes overboard in prohibiting simple corrections to perspective distortion in pictures of buildings.

The paper’s Guidelines on Integrity ( https://www.nytimes.com/editorial-standards/guidelines-on-integrity.html ) don’t explicitly address the point, but apparently that is how the editors interpret the requirement that photographs which “purport to depict reality must be genuine in every way.”

I learned long ago that if you’re going to write for publication, you must accept the publisher’s style guide whether it makes sense to you or not. But every digital photograph is manipulated (i.e., post-processed following capture), either in the camera or outside it: RGB light sensor data are only the raw material of images.

The Times’ editors recognize that exactly what comes out of the camera may not produce an acceptable image, but while they permit “[a]djustments of color or gray scale . . . limited to those minimally necessary for clear and accurate reproduction, analogous to the ‘burning’ and ‘dodging’ that formerly took place in darkroom processing of images,” post-processing to correct keystoning or other perspective artifacts that result in an unnatural appearance seems to cross some virtual line—which, at least in my opinion, sometimes leads to pictures which are so distorted that they really do seem unreal.

[Dave Jenkins]

Another example of the law of unintended consequences brought about by (presumably) well-meaning government regulations. Reminds me of the time a few years back when a high tax was placed upon luxury boats. It was an inconvenience to the well-heeled and did not yield much tax revenue, but was a disaster for the employees and owners of the boat building companies, who shortly found themselves in unemployment lines.

[robert e]

‘The pictures don't cry out for attention and don't insist on some forced signature style—they tell the story. But they're beautifully done all the same‘

Agreed. It looks to me like they share at least a distinctive and consistent tonality (tone curve) and saturation (and focal length(s) too perhaps?). I don’t know if that amounts to a style per se but it creates visual coherence while allowing flexibility.

The composition of the force feeding shot is chilling; deft use of backgrounds and perspective all around—fundamentals matter, little else does.

[Chuck Albertson]

I've noticed the NYT running a lot more multi-page features, with a lot of photography, in the print edition lately. The online edition of the same story tends to feature even more photos, such as Ivor Prickett's reportage on Northern Ireland in the Magazine a couple of weeks ago.

[Brian Stewart]

Mike, I recall you recommending the NYT as the best photo magazine, but IIRC that was partly driven by their Lens blog. That blog was suspended at the end of May 2019, although the suspended blog is still there, and there's now a Lens section. Do you feel that there are enough stories like the one you featured to compensate for the formal ending of the blog?

[Timothy Auger]

Mike, could you define ‘old digital nasties’?

After nearly two decades of using digital, I have my own views (as have other people), but I would love to see a summary of your pet digital peeves.

[01af]

Did you know that Metzger (NY senator Jen Metzger) is the German word for butcher? And poor Mr. Leland (the NYT author) apparently cannot tell gourmet (= someone who likes to eat well) from gourmand (= someone who likes to eat much).

Moreover, force-feeding looks much more cruel to beholders than it actually is to the geese and ducks. Just look at the animals how they behave when the farmer comes with the feeding hose—they're not scared, they don't panic, and they don't try to get away. Sure, it's detrimental to their health but then, being slaughtered at the end of the process even more so is. There's MANY deficits in industrial livestock farming—especially in (but not limited to) the mass production of cheap eggs, milk, and pork—that could use public attention, outcry, regulation, and betterment more than foie gras production.

[That is certainly true. Make every citizen witness the butchering of a few hogs and cows and there would be a flood of new vegetarians overnight. Along those lines, Note that the "grass farmer," profiled in Michael Pollan's The Omnivore's Dilemma ( https://amzn.to/2TCMDsY ), Joel Salatin, believes that everyone who buys one of his chickens should be responsible for killing it. --Mike]

[Dan Khong]

There are two schools of thought to eating meats. One is that animals are there for human consumption and our responsibility is to rear them in natural as possible environment and harvest them humanely.

The other is to eat mock meat derived from plants. Some cultures have been using soy products and gluten for centuries. Ah..but then, do we know enough about plants to say that trees and grass don't feel pain when we cut and harvest them?

And where did that roll of film come from?

[Xf Mj]

See what y’all did there? I’ve never seen that Dorothea Lange photo until this post. Quite a photo. And I’ve also never seen ducks being force fed. Yes, photography requires interpretation, and yes a photo takes a perspective. But geez what a magnificent and rich mechanism for witnessing, recording, and reporting it can sometimes be. Especially when it is shared, and carefully so.

[Daniel Speyer]

I find her images to be too contrasty. The dark areas have little or no factual content which I miss given the subject matter, and even more so/out of keeping for a newspaper.

[Hans Muus]

This discussion (Johnston-Tanaka-Millier-Tanaka-(Lopez)-Johnston) is for me TOP at its very best. And I agree with, and heed, Ken Tanaka’s advice - even though (hopefully) I’ll be 71 within a couple of months.

[William Schneider]

Mike - Do I sense an affinity for photos of poultry farmers? Back in 2013 you (um, well, an "anonymous judge") selected a photo of a farmer raising turkeys for frozen TV dinners as one of the "People Working" selects found here...

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2013/09/people-working-contest-the-finalists.html

The b/w photo by Dave Levingston still remains one of my favorites.

BTW, a traditionally-trained photojournalist is told to "Tell your subject's story, not yours." Much, but maybe not all, of what is perceived as photographer bias is simply a reflection of the beliefs of the people pictured. I would hope that good writers uphold that philosophy also.

[Gerardo Korn]

Regarding "vacant buildings...", that photo caught my attention more than the others - could it be dark because it was taken at night? At least it has that look...

[McD]

See also Mary Beth Meehan portraits and notes:

http://www.marybethmeehan.com/

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/19/us/newnan-art-georgia-race.html

[scott kirkpatrick]

Mike, to prove your point, take a look at today's https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/19/us/newnan-art-georgia-race.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage exhibit of portraits of diversity in a small Georgia town, along with the story of how the residents have reacted.

[Dave Hodson]

I'm guessing everybody is wondering where he got the hat.

[robert e]

I'm glad I checked back to read the comments. Maybe a follow-up or "bump" post is merited?

There's lots of food for thought here, but I'm newly struck by how asymmetric the relationship between image and story can be. Maybe there's a spectrum, with Lange's portraits near one end, demanding context to be properly read, while a photo like "Earthrise" might be toward the other end: the power of that image is the context it provides--to just about everything else.

I'm also reminded that photographs themselves are merely accurate, as someone (Avedon?) said, and realizing that it's the reading of them that is truthful or deceptive.