It was the clear image of a ratty Saddam Hussein, feeble, meek, lost, confused and submissive. Saddam did not appear high and mighty. The bearded man was docile, calmly allowing a doctor to search for lice and probe his mouth.

Robert Gould, vice president of the National Press Photographers Association, said Dec. 23, "I think the video evokes a tremendous amount of emotion for whomever you talk to. The sight of his fall from the top and how haggard he looked certainly makes for a stirring image."

Barring some huge event in the last days of the year, the photo of Saddam will be this year's most powerful image on all year-ender pages and programs.

"The Saddam pictures are certainly historical," Gould said. "For years to come, we will be seeing those images. They will be ingrained in our head."

Gould, photo chief at WZZM in Grand Rapids, Mich., said, "The visions of the U.S. officials inspecting his head for lice and giving him that medical exam will be images not soon forgotten."

Leading up to the capture photos, and a good second place for the year, was the news picture of the Saddam statues toppling after being pulled down by a U.S. tank.

We also saw the pictures of the bodies of Uday and Qusay Hussein. But the brothers were dead, and many viewers don't care for such portraits.

The images of the brothers certainly are less memorable than the Saddam pictures.

We saw some footage and stills of the hole where they found him. When has America spent so much TV time looking at a hole that looked much like a rural cesspool, complete with intake drain? The farmhouse pictures were not that interesting.

It is people, in this case Saddam, who make the image powerful.

The footage of the "bearded and bedraggled Saddam Hussein - including the video of him undergoing a physical examination - was that rare kind of indelible and iconic image that instantly earned a place in history books," The Boston Globe stated in an article a day after the capture.

CBS News President Andrew Heyward told the Globe, "People will remember that extraordinary image."

"These images are now part of history," Gould said. "I believe they will be put right up there with other U.S. triumphs like the fall of the Berlin Wall, or historical moments like the Zapruder film of Kennedy being shot."

Ironically, the same day as the Saddam Hussein pictures were being devoured, the Sunday New York Times published a story, "Good as a Gun: When Cameras Define a War," dealing with how photojournalism has influenced world affairs.

It's those still pictures that come back time and time again. Those of us over 30 may resurrect the picture of the Chinese demonstrator out on the street in front of tracks of a rolling tank. That photo brought the Chinese problems to the minds of people around the world. The one photograph showed both sides of the conflict.

Several Vietnam War images helped shape the direction of that action. Many young editors today would shudder if asked to use a photo of a 12-year-old girl displaying frontal nudity. However, it was exactly that photo of the girl, running from fiery napalm, that precisely conveyed the real plight of the South Vietnamese.

Some editors, because of sensitivity issues, would shy away from news photos showing grisly, brutal or bloody scenes.

Another Vietnam War image, shot by famous photojournalist Eddie Adams, showed the Saigon police chief executing a young Vietcong prisoner, shooting him in the head in a city street.

The violence of the picture was so apparent, the reader could see the man's head jolting to the side from the force of the bullet. It was another picture people remember. Adams said the police chief's wife later scolded her husband for failing to confiscate the film.

And, who had been thinking about Somalia until the picture of a U.S. soldier's body being dragged through the streets appeared in newspapers around the world?

Let's go back a few weeks to the image of a smiling President Bush presenting a platter of turkey to the troops in Baghdad. That would have been high on the annual media top-10 photo lists, but the iconic image of the scraggly Saddam usurped Bush for the No. 1 photo spot.

The Saddam pictures were not shot, processed and delivered by photojournalists. The U.S. government provided them.

Gould, in an online interview, said, "He or she may not be a photojournalist by trade, but the images are definitely the epitome of 'photojournalism.'

"Whether you look at video or still images of Saddam after his capture, they most definitely tell a story - a journalistic story," Gould said.

"The old adage of "a picture is worth a thousand words" may ring true here," Gould added.

"And those pictures say it all," George Stephanopoulos said on ABC news.

In a news conference announcing the capture, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez said, "What we will see next is a picture of Saddam Hussein at the time he was captured on your left. And on your right is Saddam Hussein after he was shaved.

CNN anchor Aaron Brown commented: "Those pictures you've been looking at of Saddam Hussein will be pieces of video that will be seen for years to come. Not since the fall of the statue back last spring has there been a picture anywhere nearly this dramatic out of Iraq. A man who lived in extraordinary luxury and wealth arrested in a hole in a farmhouse not far from Tikrit."

Lt. Gen. Sanchez, in his memorable news conference, told the world, "And here you see Saddam, a historical picture."

William F. Greer, an associate professor in the Department of Journalism at the University of Arizona, is a longtime Arizona resident and a retired Associated Press correspondent. His areas of research include media ethics and photojournalism.