Some amazing shots that will live with us forever. Explore the stories behind 100 images that changed the world, selected by TIME and an international team of curators
http://100photos.time.com/ Click at top "view by date"

This is one i had a hard time accepting at the time it came out, as did many..



A photojournalists job is to document, not to participate


Kevin Carter knew the stench of death. As a member of the Bang-Bang Club, a quartet of brave photographers who chronicled apartheid-­era South Africa, he had seen more than his share of heartbreak. In 1993 he flew to Sudan to photograph the famine racking that land. Exhausted after a day of taking pictures in the village of Ayod, he headed out into the open bush. There he heard whimpering and came across an emaciated toddler who had collapsed on the way to a feeding center. As he took the child’s picture, a plump vulture landed nearby. Carter had reportedly been advised not to touch the victims because of disease, so instead of helping, he spent 20 minutes waiting in the hope that the stalking bird would open its wings. It did not. Carter scared the creature away and watched as the child continued toward the center. He then lit a cigarette, talked to God and wept. The New York Times ran the photo, and readers were eager to find out what happened to the child—and to criticize Carter for not coming to his subject’s aid. His image quickly became a wrenching case study in the debate over when photographers should intervene. Subsequent research seemed to reveal that the child did survive yet died 14 years later from malarial fever. Carter won a Pulitzer for his image, but the darkness of that bright day never lifted from him. In July 1994 he took his own life,( 2 months after winning the prize) writing, “I am haunted by the vivid memories of killings & corpses & anger & pain.”

Thank you PK Richard, that was the most productive use of my time so far today, and for those that can please allow yourself more time to peruse this collection.

Very US-centric
TIME is a US icon - it sees the world thru US eyes and it presents the world from through that same lens.
Very distorted.

Not saying that is bad, or that these pictures are not good.
But they are not representative of the world - don't make that mistake.

I am biased to that world view, point well taken though

SternAAlbifrons wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 4:27 pm Very US-centric
TIME is a US icon - it sees the world thru US eyes and it presents the world from through that same lens.
Very distorted.

Not saying that is bad, or that these pictures are not good.
But they are not representative of the world - don't make that mistake.

behind 100 images that changed the world, selected by TIME and an international team of curators

Yep time magazine is a US institution
BUT does that take away from what these photos represent??

Feel free to put together ur 100 most influential photos

I was just saying they are not representative.
but i will go further now.
.

And because they are not representative they are NOT the most influential.
globally speaking.
Any claims that they are just highlights a distorted US-centric mindset.

Born and raised in Europe I had a hard time recognizing quite a lot of the picas....... They are US centered. Also lacking some recent pictures IMHO.

John Bingham wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 6:10 pm

SternAAlbifrons wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 4:27 pm Very US-centric
TIME is a US icon - it sees the world thru US eyes and it presents the world from through that same lens.
Very distorted.

Not saying that is bad, or that these pictures are not good.
But they are not representative of the world - don't make that mistake.

I don't agree, most of the pictures are well known events from outside the US.

i did a count and came up with a conservative 58 that were in US, of US citizens, or of US generated events.
Sorry but the world ain't 58% american.
The world's most influential events were not 58% american
and the 100 most influential photographs ever published are not 58% american.
pull the other leg, it squeaks too

imo, only