‘I’m gonna show you what it’s really like out here’: the power and limitation of participatory visual methods

Packard, Josh. (2008). Visual Studies, 23 (1), 63-77.

Packard explores the boundaries of participatory visual methods based on his empirical research with the homeless. He finds the most dedicated effort of power-leveling research methods in handing over cameras to the research participants. In his argument, he contends that the ubiquity of low-cost cameras is important to participatory methods as participants are equally equipped with technology aptitude. For Packard, it is problematic that researchers have to "teach" participants how to operate a piece of equipment, for it tends to coalesce power to the researcher.

[This view is problematic primarily because of his deterministic perspective. The price of visual equipment tends to drop down, however, it does not guarantee that research participants may have equal access to the equipment.]

The research design Packard used was to giving a disposable camera to a homeless with the minimum instruction and the promise of remuneration of $5 upon their return with the camera the next day. He conducted interviews driven from the content of the photos they took. He wrote that there was little skepticism from participants when he explained his goal of this research--helping the homeless, etc.

Interpreting the styles of photos taken by the participants, Packard remarked its tendency of less affected convention and dominant photography rules. However, he rightly contends, "In order for knowledge to be truly powerful, it must be mobilized. Knowledge is power only to the extent to which it can be communicated" (p. 73).

[This sharp observation critiques overemphasis on non-dominant knowledge and practices outside of the mainstream. There may be a potential in a sense, but non-conventional practices and performances are not themselves a form of resistance.]

Packard combined in this research photo-elicitation with participant-driven data generation. However, in my opinion, this participatory visual method does not constitute participatory action research, for the data analysis is done solely by the researcher himself.