Every picture tells a story

Q: According to organizers, there were about 96,000 submissions this year. You said there are several rounds of judging, but how does that huge number end up as just a few top finishers in 10 categories?

A: It's almost like a game show: we all have a little clicker in our hands. There are nine of us in this extremely dark, extremely cold room for about 14 or 16 hours every single day. We do that for about a week. When you want to select an image, you press your button. But of course it's done anonymously, so I don't know how the person beside me has voted, nor the person across the room.

With the final round, we end up with anywhere from four to six to eight selections. Then, we each apply a numerical combination of numbers to what we'd like to see as first, second and third. Then the World Press organization goes and tallies the results and then they come back and they tell us what won first, second and third.

Q: Some of this year's winners truly command a viewer's attention — like the otherworldly Chilean volcano erupting (nature category) or Anthony Suau's gun-toting police detective (photo of the year). What do you look for during that one or two seconds each image is given in those initial rounds?

A: First and foremost, each image starts with a story, starts with a compelling point that the photographer would like to communicate. You're looking for the images that provoke your curiosity, that get you to ask questions about the context and the people, place, things.

If it causes you to question and to learn and to educate yourself about the world around you, in the end, that's what makes a great photograph.

Q: In the final rounds, are there debates or disagreements between jurors?

A: Everybody was extremely professional and very articulate and quite able to communicate their point of view, and their perspectives [on] why they felt this photo was worthy of discussion.

Q: So no fighting?

A: There was always discussion, there was always debate, there [were] always different perspectives that were presented, even with the premier award. But in the end, everybody was very comfortable as a group that we had made the right selections.

Q: Did you have any personal favourites?

A: That's a hard question.… I'd say I have 376 favourites. I feel very confident about our selections.

Q: Did any appeal to you as a Canadian juror?

A: As a Canadian, no. I think I'm interested in global issues and global news.… I feel that [the jurors' selections] well represented what happened in 2008.

I think Canadians are really interested in the world around them ... [the exhibit] is an amazing opportunity to explore and educate yourself and to ask questions and ponder and wonder and consider issues from around the world.

Q: As a two-time juror, have you noticed any photographic trends?

A: We certainly see a real change in the submissions. We got 96,000 submissions. Digital technology is everywhere. We have to be very cautious about certain kinds of techniques that can be used through digital photography, [such as] "Photoshopping" and saturation of colour and things like that. We are aware of it and we try to strike a balance of what is used and used within certain boundaries.

Q: Photojournalism has not gone unscathed amid the budgetary cuts in journalistic organizations. Is it in danger?

A: I personally feel there's never been a better time to be a visual journalist. I think there are so many opportunities. Perhaps the traditional models are under threat and the traditional models are changing, but there are other avenues that we're seeing open up.

The world is becoming increasingly literate in visual terms. I think it's a tremendously exciting time.