A single photo will always be more powerful than a video and I can prove it

When you make a purchase through our article links, Future and its affiliates may receive a commission.

Even today, photography is our primary means of communicating the impact of important moments in history. | Credit: Getty Images / Anna Moneymaker

We live in a world where the use of video is superseding all forms of media. From short social media clips and attention-grabbing YouTube clips to Netflix’s flavor of the month, it’s video, video, video. As a photographer who can feel a little disappointed, especially if your quality as a creator and dies is your Instagram, which has long changed from the first image to the first image of the video.

I will not deny that the importance of photography has diminished. But it’s like written words, they don’t work anymore. That’s because a photo has something that a video can’t, and ironically, that’s what made the video so popular: The still image is still the image – does not move.

Marilyn Monroe wearing a strapless dress and hairstyle that was popular in the mid-1950s. — Think of a cultural icon like Marilyn Monroe and your mind may go straight to the famous photos first, despite her brilliant film career | Credit: Getty Images / Bettmann

Therefore, a moving image stimulates the brain more, producing more satisfying dopamine. Combine that with the short rapid fire genre content and you have an addictive loop that will have you ignoring the pins and needles and back pain while you “leave” the toilet for 40 minutes. Has anyone ever done that while pouring over Bresson’s The Moment of Decision? It’s not easy…

So how can moving pictures be harmful? Well, it goes, it goes by fast. The creator has little control over the point at which the viewer engages or disengages with the work (they can miss the crux entirely). And although the viewer can watch the video multiple times, stop it or rewind it, it is very difficult to cross over the crux, the climax, the decisive moment.

On the other hand, a still image gives the creator and the viewer more control. The first gives a decisive moment to the spectators, if they can’t walk, they can’t avoid it. And the viewer is able to deeply relate to the content. This has the potential to increase impact, remove ambiguity and encourage deeper analysis.

NEW YORK - SEPTEMBER 13, 2001: (SEPTEMBER 11 RETROSPECTIVE) Rescue workers search the grounds of the World Trade Center on September 13, 2001, in New York City, two days after two private jets crashed into the twin towers, flattening them in an alleged terrorist attack. (Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images) — Some of the most important moments of the 19th, 20th and 21st centuries have been immortalized by the power of photography | Credit: Getty Images / Mario Tama

And the proof is in the pudding. When you think of describing moments in human history like the moon landing or 9/11, as well as cultural icons like Marilyn Monroe and Bob Marley, you tend to think of photographs. Photography has become synonymous with the times, and despite the rise and rise of video, I would argue that still images are more popular (not entirely) today.

I recently watched an episode of Disney+ Love+Wara film about Pulitzer Prize-winning controversial actress Lynsey Addario. When I think about the war in Ukraine, I find it difficult to separate the many video clips that have been played over and over in the news and social media. But Lynsey’s gruesome photo of four dead Ukrainian citizens, published on the front page of New York Timesit’s stuck in my mind.

KHARKIV, UKRAINE - FEBRUARY 18: Lesia Komaritska, 41, visits the grave of her husband, who was drafted into the Ukrainian army in January 2023, and killed in Bakhmut in February 2023, and buried in a section of the cemetery reserved for soldiers on February 18, 2024, in Kharkiv, Ukraine. Two years after Russia's all-out invasion of Ukraine, the Ukrainian people are dealing with the loss of tens of thousands of soldiers and civilians, and they are exhausted, though remarkably resilient. (Photo by Lynsey Addario/Getty Images) — The work of conflict artists such as Lynsey Addario remains an important form of reporting Credit: Getty Images/Lynsey Addario

The same can be said for the assassination attempt on Donald Trump in Pennsylvania. The video footage was repeated in the news, ad nauseam, but interestingly, that’s it photo by Evan Vucci of a bloody Trump, fist raised, surrounded by Secret Service agents and framed against the star-spangled Banner. Why? Because that was the defining moment and Vucci’s camera immortalized it in a way that video cannot. You won’t be able to remember it.

And that is the power of the big picture. It reaches out, grabs the viewer by the handle and shakes them. There is no waiting for influence, influence is immediate and lasts as long as the speaker allows it. A video can provide a lot of context, it can take a longer, more complex journey, but the photo is what beats the heart.

I am not suggesting that photography is superior to video, but I am making it clear that photography is by no means inferior. We need two types of media. But in this ever-changing AI-infused world where people are becoming more critical of art than ever before, professional artists must be protected at all costs. A photograph, a still image, a single frame is more important than ever.

A single photo will always be more powerful than a video and I can prove it

You may also like…

Leave a Comment Cancel reply