By Jim Colton
“Without tradition, art is a flock of sheep without a shepherd. Without innovation, it is a corpse.” -- Winston Churchill
When the photography industry went digital, I can still remember the arguments...the resistance...and mostly the comments. "The quality just isn't there." "It will never be as good as original film." "I'm never going to shoot digital!" The last comment came from diehards and "arteests," who steadfastly rejected the new medium.
The first digital camera was invented in 1975 by Kodak employee, Steve Sasson. It weighed in at a hefty 8 pounds and produced a 0.01 megapixel black & white image that took 23 seconds to create. It was met with mixed reviews by the company that was the industry leader in the analog market and took almost twenty years through R&D before being officially introduced to the public.
Sasson was an innovator, whose ideas dramatically changed the photography business. In 2009, President Barack Obama awarded Sasson the National Medal of Technology and Innovation, the highest honor awarded by the US government to scientists, engineers, and inventors. It is the critical thinkers and dreamers that change the way we conduct our business and produce a more functional and creative atmosphere for us to work in.
Nancy Andrews is one of those critical thinkers.
Andrews’s passion for photography started at an early age, cutting out photographs from National Geographic and trading them like baseball cards. Her first picture that "affected change" was for her high school newspaper, The Spark, showing cigarette butts in the school's toilet which she titled, "Student Smoking Room." Upon graduating college, she had a short stint at the Free-Lance Star in Fredericksburg before landing a staff photographer's position at the Washington Post.
Assistant Managing Editor for Photography Joe Elbert describes her interview process as "unconventional." Elbert says, "Nancy had worked in a vacuum and didn't know about the packaging going into a portfolio. I'd look at slide sheets and she'd pick up the ones that fell on the floor. I'd ask her if she had something along the lines of...and she'd go digging into her bag and pull it out. I was totally charmed by her wit, intelligence and interpersonal skills. When I looked at a photographer's work, one image would often tell me everything I needed to know -- Nancy had that one image...and the rest is history."
During her ten years at the Washington Post, Andrews was named Newspaper Photographer of the Year by the University of Missouri and the National Press Photographers Association in 1997 and was named White House Photographer of the Year in 1998. The list of other photography awards she garnered over the years is much too lengthy to list. She is the author of two books, "Family: A Portrait of Gay and Lesbian America," and "Partial View: An Alzheimer's Journal."
Andrews is currently at the Detroit Free Press where she was the Managing Editor for Digital Media for 9 years and now has (in my opinion) one of the industry's best titles, "Chief of Innovation." She heads up a newsroom of talented journalists that in addition to doing conventional coverage utilizing photography, video and multimedia, has also made forays on their website into the virtual world of 3D.
And in a bit of breaking news, always looking for the next challenge, Andrews just announced that she will be taking a version of that title with her on her latest venture into the world of academia as the Ogden Visiting Assistant Professor in Media Innovation at the Reed College of Media at West Virginia University later this year. This week, zPhotoJournal has a chat with the forward thinking and incredibly talented Nancy Andrews.
Jim Colton: Tell us a little about your early years. What was your first introduction to photography? When did you realize that this was your calling? Who or what were some of your earliest influences?
Nancy Andrews: When I look back, there’s not an early pivot point. I left Patrick Henry High School in Hanover County, Virginia and started at the University of Virginia thinking I’d be a lawyer…that’s how I would do my little piece to change the world and make it better. I had not yet realized that I would do my part with a camera and words. But, there were plenty of glimpses to the future in my childhood. As a kid I’d cut out pictures from National Geographic and trade them like baseball cards with another kid across the road. We ruined the magazines.
In elementary school everyone else could draw and I couldn’t, so I began to take pictures instead. In hindsight I realize that none of them probably drew very well either. But that was my perspective. In 8th grade my big brother took me to a camera store where I used my entire life savings of $205 and bought my first 35mm camera, a Canon TX. My mom spent a small fortune developing film, but she never complained.
With this camera I had my tool, I kept it for years, but I only have the box now. In my twenties the camera was stolen/lost/whatever while on loan to a high school kid I was helping with photography. It’s funny how these objects carry such emotion; they are trigger memories, just like photographs.
People have been generous with me, so I try to do the same. My high school biology teacher would loan me and other kids camera equipment. I once dropped her Mamiya – it had a big dent in the top, but Mrs. Tenney was fine, she was more concerned about the pictures. (It still worked, but I never used that camera again, maybe I need to address my childhood failures and shoot medium format.)
Once I had a camera I was influenced by the local photography around me; Bruce Parker, a great photographer at the local weekly, the Herald Progress, and later at the Richmond Times-Dispatch. Robert Llewellyn, a photographer based in Charlottesville made beautiful images of the University of Virginia and rolling Blue Ridge Mountains.
And, as a young photographer I was influenced by the incredibly strong photojournalism in Virginia. We all looked to Bob Lynn and the Virginian Pilot with great photographers like Ray Gehman, Michele McDonald and Bill Tiernan – they set the standard. But there was great photojournalism across the state from Roanoke to Richmond to the seashore. I was lucky enough to land my first job at the Free-Lance Star in Fredericksburg, and work with people like Norm Shafer and Editor Jim Mann. It was a photo-centric place…even the janitor would talk to you about your pictures.
But, I’ve always been driven by the fact that pictures matter. You can take a picture of something, and then show it to other people and they will ACT. I learned this at my high school newspaper, The Spark, taking a picture of all the cigarette butts in a toilet and captioning it “student smoking room.” Reaction was swift.
For me photography at its best is a universal form of communication. And, using the language of photography we can share what we see, experience with one another and together we can grow and change.
JC: You were a student at the very first Eddie Adams Workshop. What do you remember about that experience? Why is this workshop so important to you that you have returned about a dozen times as faculty?
NA: I was scared to death. I was just two years out of college and young… very young. I had not gone to a journalism school so I didn’t know anyone else there, not one person. I’d never before been in a situation shooting with so many other people. I shot horrible pictures. I’d get a little seasick on those country roads on the school bus rides bouncing along the curves. I was one of those students who learned a lot, but no one could tell at the time.
The Eddie Adams Workshop is special because of the people. Each person brings something unique to the table. Selfishly, I think I learn more now as a faculty member than I did as a student. I admire the volunteers --the Black Team. They are the heart and soul… to me they personify the best of our photojournalism profession – they help one another, and through their volunteer work they help educate future generations of photographers. I love the mix that Eddie and now Alyssa Adams create with the variety of perspectives on photography. I think Alyssa is doing a wonderful job. It’s one thing to start a workshop; it’s another thing to keep it going.
Animated “debates” take place. I remember an early debate among my team back in ’88, about how much you can influence a situation by your presence… how much can you change a scene, if at all. Same types of questions we debate today. And, each photographer, each generation must address those questions. After all, the first faked photo dates from the earliest days of photography, pre-1850.
Why do I return? The passion for photography, the learning and the sharing draws me there. Passion is the very air you breathe at the Farm, and compassion for your fellow photographers grows from it. And, while I don’t want to be too naïve about it, all -- It’s not perfect, nothing is… but it is one of the places I choose to give back. I try to be a calming influence. I try to be the person that lets students know you can still succeed in this profession even if your pictures at the workshop happen to suck.
JC: How did you land your job at the Washington Post? What stories do you remember working on that you are most proud of?
NA: The Washington Post Assistant Managing Editor for Photography at that time, Joe Elbert, used to say I still had “corn behind my ears.” And, he was right, for years to come I had corn behind my ears. (I still do.) But I think quite simply I landed my job at the Post because of my pictures. Joe, to this day, makes fun of the fact that I brought in my portfolio in one of those plain brown manila envelopes, he says I had slides falling out of my pockets and when he’d ask about something, I’d pull something else out from somewhere. My point is that I wasn’t flashy, it was about the pictures, the moments. But, in some ways, you’d have to ask him, he hired me.
I am proud of stories that made people pause, think and perhaps make a difference. I shot complex, often “non-visual” stories. When people couldn’t pre-visualize the story, or the story would take a lot of finesse to gain access, those would go to me. I love the challenge of the puzzle too. One of my favorites was a piece for our Sunday magazine where we compared the life of students at the then all-male Virginia Military Institute to the all-female alternative created at a nearby women’s college. The case was going before the Supreme Court and I really wanted to give a fair and accurate comparison of the life in the two programs for the members of the Supreme Court to see firsthand.
JC: The Washington Post had (and still has) an incredible photography staff. Unfortunately, we lost one of them last year in Michel DuCille. What do you remember about Michel? What was it like to work with him?
NA: I remember his voice. I can hear him in my head. I think of his funny Michelisms (he had a good whine when he wanted to whine). And I think of his seriousness too. He and Joe were quite a team, each with different strengths. Michel was the studious one. He knew the story. He cared about impact. When you ask this question, I feel like I am sitting inches from him at the light table, and I am looking into his eyes, and we’ve paused, he’s looking back at me about to impart some great wisdom, and he’s holding a loupe and the long, uncut length of negatives cupped in his hands. Our big light table was like a family’s dinner table. You might have five or six of us gathered there, telling the story of the day, or solving all the world’s problems. It could be loud, or quiet. And, Michel, a commanding presence, was soft spoken, and he’s telling me, this works, or this doesn’t work… he’s the guy you did not want to disappoint.
Then, in my mind’s eye, I jump to 2014, and it’s his voice again, and he’s talking to me on the phone. We haven’t worked together in 14 years, but we’re methodically reviewing a situation a mutual friend is facing and weighing the best options to help. What I remember first is Michel’s caring. And, what’s interesting to me is that folks on my staff who met him at a conference or heard him speak, they remember the same thing too.
JC: You've published several books during your career. How did you come up with the ideas for them and how does one get a publisher interested these days? Are self-publishing and crowd sourcing the only viable alternatives?
NA: I did my books because I had something to say. They weren’t just collections of pictures, I had something I wanted to share that I was not seeing out there in the world. Something I thought the world needed to see.
As a gay person coming out in the 1980's, I was a bit lost. I didn't have any role models. I didn't know many other gay people; my head was filled with stereotypes...I didn't see versions of me anywhere. So my first book, “FAMILY: A Portrait of Gay and Lesbian America,” (See links below) was really a personal journey for me. But, I felt it was my duty, with my gift of photography, to make the journey for others who were like me too. My goal was for anyone to be able to see a bit of themselves and their lives reflected in the book. This purpose drove every decision. Times were different 25 years ago, and people were shocked to see portraits of gay cowboys, a 93-year-old African American lesbian and a couple that had been together 63 years.
The Alzheimer’s book, "Partial View: An Alzheimer's Journal," was similar in importance, however it wasn’t my story. It was the story of Cary Smith Henderson, his wife Ruth and their daughter Jackie Henderson Main. I understood their story of dealing with Alzheimer’s disease. It was important, but it was their story and I was merely the medium to make it happen. And, I was privileged to be their medium.
Today’s publishing world is so different, and that’s not a bad thing. If you do work that speaks to people then that work can be seen by more people than ever. Even back in the 1990's, more people experienced my “book” work through articles and excerpts in newspapers than the mere 15,000 copies of the book. And, that’s a lot for a photo book.
So today, one could do a project and have it published and seen in so many places on social media and on your own web site, it doesn’t have to have that “book” stamp of approval to be shared and have impact. And now, there are so many ways to publish. There are elegant sites one can use for free to publish digitally…and…to sell books too. I’d encourage people to not be so focused on the paper book, but rather ask, what are the best methods for people to see and interact with your work?
Crowd sourcing is great. And people are pretty familiar with crowdsourcing for funding, so I think that’s made MORE funding available. People get to feel like they are involved…that they helped make something happen. I plan to use it myself for future projects. I did my own version of crowdsourcing in 1994. I really needed some help with the exhibit at the Corcoran Gallery of Art, so I spread the word among friends, friends-of-friends, family, colleagues, and if you gave me $25 you got your name on the wall at the Corcoran as a supporter. So, asking for help is not new. What is new is how you can raise huge volumes and reach more people than ever. And, that’s a very good thing.
JC: You've been named White House Photographer of the Year and Photographer of the Year at POYi. How important are these various contests? It seems every year, there's always controversy regarding manipulation and excessive toning to the point that everything is being scrutinized. Are contests really a barometer of good work?
NA: I think it is important that we have a method to describe exemplary work and hold it up for others to see. The discussion that happens around the work is important to have. So, it’s work that is already published, out in the world being seen, so if winning a contest causes the work to be more discussed, including its ethics, then that’s a good thing. The contests are serving an important purpose there too.
But, as to how important these contests have become, I think the high volume of entries in contests erodes the power of any single competition. But, it’s also a reflection of our world, less and less monopoly power. Really the more important thing for journalism and images is not a contest, but rather impact. Did that work help people better understand a story? Did it help a community of people? In that community, whether it is a city block or an entire nation or the world, how many people had the opportunity to see the work? How many people were touched by the work and moved to action? People can use contests to help amplify their work, but it’s not an end-all, be-all.
The bottom line is that contests are a barometer of good work, but they are not the only barometer. Rarely does poor work get recognized, but generally there’s more good or great work that could be recognized.
JC: We are in an age of sensory overload with an abundance of available images...and everyone thinks they're a photographer now with the quality of images becoming better and easier to produce. What distinguishes a professional photographer in your eyes?
NA: First, everyone with a camera IS a photographer. We need to stop fighting that… but, that doesn’t mean everyone is a professional photographer. But, it also means that many, many more people than before can make pictures and show them to more people than has ever been possible. We can’t use old standards. One can be a professional, and only ever have been published on Snapchat or Instagram.
Pros distinguish themselves by consistent high quality and integrity. A pro has to make a good picture when one’s not readily apparent. A pro brings back the story every time, and on time. And, for journalism, a pro is thorough, accurate and ethical. In short, they are dependable. We know even among the old school measure that we had pros that had different skill and artistry levels…that variance certainly remains.
JC: Is there room for citizen photojournalism these days? And how does one vet them for authenticity?
NA: It doesn’t matter whether or not we think there is room for citizen journalism - it is here, and it’s made room for itself. These terms like “citizen journalist” can be loaded, but essentially anyone can record, report then publish and comment today. That’s one of the things that’s disrupted our monopoly model with publishing and turned our world askew. We have more information than ever, and more photographs and videos are being made than at any other point in time. Our business model is failing, but the audience consumption is higher than ever.
Authenticity today is from the reputation of the author or bearer of the news. Sometimes when the crowd is the main or first source of news, the authenticity is through speed and consistency of the report from many sources. When multiple people at an event all have different versions of the same thing, it’s more believable. When you have unique content, then you have to make contact and understand the source – who are they, what was the situation, what’s their connection to the story, what’s their motivation? And, of course, there is examination of the content itself.
I think it’s important to NOT OVERSTATE. When showing the photograph, report also what you know about the person who made the picture, and what their relationship was to the scene. Don’t treat it like it was shot by a person known to you because of their relationship with a news organization, but rather still treat it with respect, but simply describe the author accurately and people will judge it accordingly.
JC: You are now with the Detroit Free Press. How did that transition happen? Please tell us a little about your history there and please explain, as best you can, your new title of "Chief of Innovation."
NA: Back in 2000 I was searching for something different. The Washington Post was really good to me as I struggled. The theory, I think, was that someone who excelled in one area would also excel in another area. So, I was offered a job on the business side, it was going to be like getting an MBA, but through the Post. I was so torn, I felt 50/50…so Joe Elbert pulled a quarter out of his pocket and said, “Great, you’re 50/50 so we can flip a coin to decide.” In a heartbeat, I’d grabbed the coin sitting on top of his thumb and shouted, “No.” He laughed his little Joe laugh and said, “Well, you must not be 50/50, you must know what you want to do.” He was right… I knew I didn’t want to leave the newsroom. I wanted to stay in storytelling. But, I wanted a change.
I looked at going to the Free Press because I was interested in looking at journalism from the standpoint of being an editor and how one could teach, make coverage decisions, and give people opportunity by hiring them. I thought I could have a larger impact. The Freep had a great tradition of photojournalism, but it was still struggling from the strike in 1995. I went to the Free Press because of the people and the opportunity…and I have stayed at the Free Press because of people and opportunity. And, just like at Eddie Adams, my staff…they are my teachers…and I have learned so much from them; people long retired like William Archie, and people still on staff like Brian Kaufman, Kathy Keiliszewski, and Rashaun Rucker.
And, I’ve continued to grow… Craig Porter, and now Kathy Keiliszewski, took over the photo and video department years ago. While the department still reports up through me, my focus as the managing editor for digital from 2006 to 2014 has been on running the Detroit Free Press’ web site, mobile site, apps, social media and its digital strategy. We’ve been talking photo nearly exclusively, but I could just as easily talk bout digital philosophy, management of news and entertainment sites or morph into a chat about metrics and audience development, smart ways to use Adobe Analytics (aka Omniture), Chartbeat and comScore. Oh, and we did a TV show for a year and half…but I digress. But, what I am trying to note is that for the last 9 years, my focus has not been exclusively photography. I’ve moved into being part of the overall senior management team, and even leading coverage that has very little photography, such as our project on “How Detroit Went Broke.” (See link below)
Now, as Chief of Innovation, I am in a position that takes me out of day-by-day and minute-by-minute reacting to news and focuses exclusively on new digital strategy and new tools for storytelling.
JC: How are you trying to integrate new technology at the paper? What are some of the innovations that you are currently working on?
NA: I have always been the person about change. I don’t do things because I know how to do them, but rather because no one else knows how to do them. So, in 2005 when we entered multimedia, albeit a bit late, we entered the realm with gusto. I’d search Google info, call people up… people like Travis Fox at the Post or Bruce Strong who was at Ohio University at the time. People were incredibly sharing of their knowledge.
I think it’s important when you bring in a new technology or tool that you have a clear mission and a sense of purpose. For us, with video, (See links below) we didn’t want to just do video… we wanted to do a style of video that combined the best of photojournalism; story-telling and artistry (that we knew how to do) with the best of an NPR style of storytelling with audio (that we did not know how to do at the time.) But with that mission and talent on our staff that included David P. Gilkey and Stephen McGee, and now others I’ve mentioned like Kathy, Brian and Romain Blanquart, Eric Seals, Mandi Wright… and more… if you hold on to your sense of purpose, you can do great things. That led us to four national Emmy Awards, but also videos that made a difference.
A story on kids in foster care by Brian Kaufman, Kathleen Galligan, Regina Boone and Robin Erb led to 7 kids being adopted. At the Free Press we’re exploring the long form documentary. Kathy and Entertainment Editor Steve Byrne have spearheaded this with our Freep Film Festival. (See links below) We’ve had thousands buy tickets to see our docs in person. We’ve also shown videos at community centers… and even a jail.
Innovations – that’s a tricky word. Some people see it in all CAPS – INNOVATION – they think it has to be big. But, innovation is iterative. You can innovate quite simply…when you see something new – try it. Jump in. Use Meerkat, and then when Twitter announces Periscope, load it up and use it on the first day too. Now, you’ve done some something a 12-year-old can do, and that’s a good thing. It’s not disparaging, because that 12-year-old is exploring and learning. So should you. One of our biggest photographer successes is Diane Weiss and her Instagram account, and her story of her neighborhood -- an NPPA grant winner -- was all her drive and initiative.
I try to teach people to explore. I try to show that it’s good journalism to know your audience through the tools we can use to understand them. It is good journalism to be able to capture a moment in video with your phone, because for most, the option would be to NOT capture the moment…and our audience wants to see it…and hear it.
My current explorations are around 3D and virtual tours. It’s fun to explore and push the limits of what technology can do for you. We’ve been using it to tell the story of “place”…simple things like exploring a local Catholic church that’s been named a basilica. (See link below) Right now, we are documenting the restoration of a 113-year-old Great Lakes passenger boat, the SS Columbia. It's fascinating.
JC: Do you think the "old school" way of the newspaper business is a dying breed? Has social media and instant gratification gotten in the way of dissemination of the news? Where does one look for balance?
NA: I think the biggest adjustment I see from the “old school” is that they would benefit from embracing the notion that photography comes to us in many forms and one form is not inherently better or worse than the other. It’s all a form of documentation, art, and expression and the tool and how it’s published is situational.
Yes, social media has elements of instant gratification, but it also has elements of being in the moment and of the conversation and of the group experience. Are the “best pictures” the ones you see right now on your phone on Twitter or Instagram as the event is happening? These instant pictures allow you and others to share the moment “live,” and you are experiencing it too. Or are the best pictures the ones you see a day later or a week later, when the event is over and you and others are reflecting back?
I’d argue they both are best. They both serve a need…but at different times.
JC: Will the next generation of photojournalists have to have an arsenal of proficiency in matters other than photography as we know it? Has multimedia and new technology become the mainstay for storytelling in the new age?
NA: You could write entire books on most of the questions you are asking me…you make me laugh. Oh, and scratch that, you could make a documentary video or interactive graphic about most of the questions you are asking.
Yes, new technology and multimedia are the mainstay. We’re not in a plateau situation where you can stay hovering with technology, you’ve got to assess new technology and continue to improve to be competitive. Is there a place for people who want to specialize in one media type? Yes, you can have your specialty. But if you are a photojournalist, you’ve got to even be better at the basics than you needed to be ten years ago.
For argument’s sake, let’s forget video for a moment and let’s just talk basic photography, writing and reporting. These are things we can all agree have always been requirements of a strong photojournalist. However, in the past it was easier for some photographers to skate by with just good photography because good photo editors or copy editors were part of the production process and eliminated any sloppiness in the photographers’ work.
Now, with fewer photo editors, fewer copy editors and often the requirements for the photographer to publish directly without review on social media or even on a news site itself, that photographer must now be more accurate and be a better writer than 10 years ago. And the good thing is that we’re doing more writing, and our writing is improving.
So, is the photographer doing more? Yes. But also, is the photographer doing less? Yes. Think back to all the pictures MISSED because you had to head back to the office or hotel to develop film and send it. Step back even more years when you had to print it before sending. Step back a little more and you could only go to an office. Now, one can send instantly from the field anywhere in the world. Photographers have always had to do more than just photography to be successful.
The weaponry in the “arsenal” is always changing. If you are asking, do photographers have to do more than simply make a photograph? Then yes, and that’s ALWAYS been the case. But the skills and jobs to be done in the field are changing. A great photographer knows how to work the crowd, make contacts, and assess the situation. Now, in order to do that, they are using new tools; first cellphones, then social media, digital maps and digital translators. Smart use of tools gives a photographer an advantage over another.
Rather than seeing these things as a burden, these things can make one’s job better and easier at newsgathering. And then, publishing live… some look at it as a burden, others see it as a good way to get feedback. Which tweets get more re-tweets? Are they timelier? Are those tweets better written? Which photos do people respond to on Instagram? Granted, these social channels have their own distinct audiences, but still, it’s feedback and that makes you better. As for video, stills, audio…we must face that fact that some of these things have simply become easier to do with a certain proficiency level in many situations.
Photographers of the previous generations had their own issues to overcome. They had to be chemists in the field to develop film accurately. They had to be mechanics to fix mobile enlargers to make prints. They had to be pack mules to carry satellite phones that weighed 80 pounds. Or they got one shot – just one shot only on their 4x5 and it had to be right. Today we’re blessed with abundance of options…not where to take my ONE shot, but which tool to use and how.
The tasks are different, but the key differentiator is still one of making good choices. Decision making. That’s the skill that makes the difference. That was the case 20 years ago, and that’s still the case today.
JC: What would you be looking for in a photographer that may want to work for the Free Press?
NA: First, we look at our staff and we look at what we need. What skills, attributes do we need on our team right now? Sports? Video? Projects? Spot News? Social? Portraiture? Essentially, do we need reactive photographers or proactive photographers?
Next, while we look at the photography, video and social media of the person…we are ultimately hiring a person – not a portfolio or Instagram feed. It might sound strange, but we look at every part of the interview process to get a full view of the person. We want evidence that the person can cover the basics – and I don’t mean basic photography. I mean the basics of working with others, following directions, contributing ideas to the process, showing up on time, completing assignments accurately and timely… those basics. Then we get to the photography.
Finally, I ask everyone – copy editors, web editors, entertainment staff, digital analysts and reporters that I’ve hired too – I ask everyone the WHY questions. Why do you do what you do? Why are you a journalist? Why do you want to work at the Free Press? Why now?
Those “Why” questions lead to conversations that help me understand the motivation of the candidate. Ultimately, I do not hire people that are all about themselves, that only talk about the cool experiences they have. I must hear words like community, readers, difference, change, help, and responsibility. I do my best to hire people who believe that they serve a community and can make it and the world better through their work as a journalist.
JC: What advice can you offer to the young photojournalist who may be seeking a career in our industry?
NA: Stick with your passions. Understand WHY you do what you do. And, don’t be afraid of any perceived lack of opportunity. The opportunities change, and there is always opportunity for those who make their own through hard work, drive and talent.
JC: Any last thoughts that you'd like to share with our readers?
NA: Really, is anyone still reading?
You can reach me at email@example.com or on Twitter or Instagram: @NancyAndrews
* * *
Nancy Andrews Website: http://www.nancyandrews.com
Detroit Free Press: http://www.freep.com/
Book: FAMILY: A Portrait of Gay and Lesbian America: http://www.nancyandrews.com/family-portrait-gay-lesbian-america-1994-corcoran-book/
Book: Partial View: An Alzheimer's Journal: http://www.amazon.com/Partial-View-An-Alzheimers-Journal/dp/0870744380
3D tour of the Shrine of the Little Flower Basilica: http://www.freep.com/pages/interactives/little-flower-shrine-basilica-3D-tour/
Video: Packard: The Last Shift: http://www.freep.com/videos/entertainment/2015/02/15/23454655/
Freep Film Festival: http://freepfilmfestival.com
Freep Film Festival iPhone Portraits: http://freepfilmfestival.com/portraits
DO YOU HAVE A STORY YOU THINK IS A GOOD CANDIDATE FOR ZPHOTOJOURNAL? EMAIL YOUR SUGGESTION TO: JIM.COLTON@ZUMAPRESS.COM