I photograph a lot of University of Guelph scientists, usually those involved in agri-food research.

 

If they’re applied researchers working on a commodity, the photo might lend itself well to a field shot of the researchers doing their work, depending on the season.

 

Readers expect a certain kind of shot. They want to see the researcher, the commodity, and some engagement between the two.

 

No matter if a researcher is working with plants, food, livestock, insects, manure or autopsied animal parts, I urge them to handle it. I tell them: People want to know you’re engaged with your research.

 

Safety is paramount, of course. But to as great a degree as possible, I want them to get uncomfortably close to the object they’re holding. That’s because objects held at what would be considered in real life to be a normal distance from the subject look like they’re a million miles away in a photo. Lay-out artists end up with huge patches of endless space in between the subject and the object. Such a waste.

 

You can try this on your own farm, when you’re promoting yourself and your produce. Get close. Now, get closer than you think is reasonable. Finally, get even closer yet. THEN take the photo.

 

Photos in the lab are a similar story. There, researchers seldom balk at wearing a lab coat for a photo, even if they rarely wear one day to day.

 

They know that’s what people think they wear. People feel comforted knowing their researchers are professional looking and have some sense of cleanliness about them, outfitted in their clean, white lab coat…which in reality is probably clean because it’s so seldom worn.

 

But visually, why do some things change when it come to farmers?

 

The twitterverse had a mild eruption last month when the new Costco Connection magazine published a front-page photo of a potato farmer and chip producer promoting his wares in stereotypical garb from days gone by – straw hat, bib overalls, plaid shirt and well-seasoned work boots.  Some readers were fired up that the stereotype was being perpetrated by such a huge consumer publication.

 

But a closer look at the cover line revealed the reasoning: the photo supported a feature story about local farmers whose products were sold at local Costco. The cover photo was of fourth-generation New Brunswick potato farmer Ryan Albright, who sells his Covered Bridge brand potato chips to regional Costco stores. Inside, there were a half-dozen more examples, including a piece I wrote about Kawartha ice cream being featured in Ontario Costco stores.

 

Some twitter users accused Ryan of perpetrating a hick image for farmers.

      

Maybe. By cooperating with the photographer, he did indeed truly annoy some people.

 

However, he also managed to get farming and agriculture (not to mention his business) onto the cover of a hugely popular magazine. The photo has superb stopping power; the magazine and the local food feature will definitely be read.

 

(And interestingly, the inside photo of Ryan shows him in a company golf shirt, holding the local potatoes that are turned into his local chips. No straw hat, no overalls, no plaid shirt).

 

I don’t want to dismiss the down side of this image problem, because it goes deeper than photography and in some cases it holds agriculture back.

 

For example, to chart a course towards better food literacy, the Ontario Federation of Agriculture (OFA) surveyed 1,000 Ontarians to see what they knew about food and food production, and what their concerns about it are.

 

The results of that fact-finding mission, released last month, show there is a load of room for food literacy improvement here.

 

“Many thoughts and opinions about farming are old fashioned,” the federation said. Respondents “neglected to consider the fact that modern agricultural practices need to produce enough food for more people than they did in the past.”

 

The federation found common misconceptions about Ontario agriculture practices related to the treatment of animals, pesticides, hormones, antibiotic use, agriculture’s environmental footprint and the size and farm ownership.

 

It blamed these misconceptions on the disconnect between rural and urban Ontario.

 

“Reconciling this disconnect may improve attitudes towards farming, and help members of the general public understand the need for modern technology in agriculture today,” says the report.

 

How many of these misconceptions are related to what farmers wear? Do golf shirts send a better message than plaid shirts?

 

These sound like silly questions. But the answers may lead to conversations that help attitudes improve on both the rural and urban side of the fence.