October 31, 2014, 02:47:11 PM

Author Topic: Newspaper Dumps Photographers, Wants Video  (Read 11691 times)

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2451
    • View Profile
Re: Newspaper Dumps Photographers, Wants Video
« Reply #45 on: June 06, 2013, 09:21:58 AM »
 the graphic quality of newspapers is pretty bad.   you really don't need 22  megapixels to put a print in the newspaper.   sure,  if  someone wants the print later...  but otherwise nope. 
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L->85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm ->100L & 85L

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Newspaper Dumps Photographers, Wants Video
« Reply #45 on: June 06, 2013, 09:21:58 AM »

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: Newspaper Dumps Photographers, Wants Video
« Reply #46 on: June 06, 2013, 11:38:04 AM »
A little secret...  I work within the print media, and yes it is making the difficult transition...

We still do video, but what is really want are online galleries.  Online galleries are cheap and quick to make and generate the main thing that's useful to our business - page impressions. 

Video has it's place when it's well done. Cameraphones can tell a story much more effectively than 1'000 words sometimes (witness the footage from the Woolwich murder), the place for properly produced, crafted video is on TV, for newspapers the cost and effort per page impression is less good value to the business than a gallery.

Video no more killed the photographer than it killed the radio star.  Times evolve.  I've lost a lot of colleagues who just wouldn't adapt.  Bums on seats is what matters. Giving the customer what they think they want is what matters.  This is my head speaking.  My heart is screaming how wrong it all is.

jhpeterson

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 150
    • View Profile
Re: Newspaper Dumps Photographers, Wants Video
« Reply #47 on: June 06, 2013, 12:44:39 PM »
As a photojournalist, I feel a need to weigh in. I posted the following on this very topic in a social media site yesterday:

"I'll admit to having a bias, but this seems such a tragic loss. Not only for photographers, but also for the publishing world in general, and, even more importantly, for an educated public. Too many stories these days are not given the treatment they deserve, and many others are missed entirely.
I still consider myself a photojournalist more than anything, and, despite the fact I've done this well for more than three decades, with each passing year it become more challenging to succeed in this field.
And, replacing the articles and photos with video? I may be a very visual person, but this doesn't fly with me. It's that I seldom have the patience to wait for one to load, then often wait some more to wade through a sponsor's ad, only to watch a six-minute clip when all I needed to see could have been told in sixty seconds. Not to mention having to pull out my headphones, so I can listen without disturbing those around me.
Am I the only one who finds that looking at words and pictures is actually a much more efficient use of time?"

While video has an important place in journalism (think insightful interviews or a story that needs to be told as a continuum), I find it used far too frequently as a poor substitute for good still photography.
1D iii (x2), 1DS iii (x3), 6D, 16-35L ii, 24-105L, 70-200L IS ii, 24/3.5 TS-E, 40/2.8 STM, 50/2.5, 100/2.8L IS, 135/2L, 300/2.8L, 500/4L IS, 430EX II, EF 1.4x ii, EF 2x iii

distant.star

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1538
    • View Profile
    • Tracy's Shooting Gallery
Re: Newspaper Dumps Photographers, Wants Video
« Reply #48 on: June 06, 2013, 01:59:25 PM »
.
Good to see the working journalists weighing in.

Ramirez: You're right that you don't need a 22MB file for newsprint (or Web), what you do need is an eye for visual storytelling. I can put words on paper that will make you joyful, tearful or any other appropriate emotion, but I can't do that with a camera. I'll get a picture that connects you to the story (with any kind of camera, including my $35-P&S), but I rarely bring that spark a real professional photojournalist delivers consistently. Here's a page that shows the kind of work I mean:

http://guncrisis.org/category/crime-scenes/


Paul, your:

"Video no more killed the photographer than it killed the radio star.  Times evolve."

reminds me of two people who did not transition from radio to TV. Jack Johnstone, one of the top five radio drama producer/director types walked away. In the early fifties, he was directing Marilyn Monroe, Jimmy Stewart, etc. in radio drama productions. In October, 1962, he sat in his living room listening to the last two radio dramas produced in the "golden age" of radio. When they finished, he walked over to the radio, turned it off and said, "Well, that's the end of an era." He was offered work in TV and film, but he was done at age 56. He considered TV and film "dirty business." So he moved to Santa Barbara, spent the next 30 years fishing and lawn bowling.

Radio actor Bob Bailey was a big star in the fifties. He tried to transition to film/TV, but he didn't have the physical appearance to match his big voice, so he failed. His big claim to film fame was a bit appearance in "Birdman of Alcatraz," ironically as a reporter. By the mid-sixties he was a drunk on skid row in Los Angeles calling his brother for money. He died in a nursing home 10 years later; even he did not remember who or what he had been.

Finally, Peterson, I agree completely. Unfortunately, I think we have become an attention-deficit-disorder generation. That and technology that serves it are forming a great storm that's chewing up old delivery systems. Few people seem to be able to concentrate for more than 10 seconds on anything. There seems an almost monumental level of self-absorption and narcissism that makes people look for no more than a quick dose of whatever "news" confirms their view of society/world. Good pictures are no more appreciated than blurry cell phone shots or horrible utube videos. The expectations are driving the creation of product. If crap sells, why serve filet mignon?

Oh, and stikk, good to meet you! I knew there had to be one photographer who could string good words together.
Walter: Were you listening to The Dude's story? Donny: I was bowling. Walter: So you have no frame of reference here, Donny. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know...

jhpeterson

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 150
    • View Profile
Re: Newspaper Dumps Photographers, Wants Video
« Reply #49 on: June 06, 2013, 06:21:45 PM »
Finally, Peterson, I agree completely. Unfortunately, I think we have become an attention-deficit-disorder generation. That and technology that serves it are forming a great storm that's chewing up old delivery systems. Few people seem to be able to concentrate for more than 10 seconds on anything. There seems an almost monumental level of self-absorption and narcissism that makes people look for no more than a quick dose of whatever "news" confirms their view of society/world. Good pictures are no more appreciated than blurry cell phone shots or horrible utube videos. The expectations are driving the creation of product. If crap sells, why serve filet mignon?
Perhaps, I too, have attention deficit disorder. Or, I am just impatient. But, I'm far less likely to wait for a video to load, when I can see words and still images right in front of me.
1D iii (x2), 1DS iii (x3), 6D, 16-35L ii, 24-105L, 70-200L IS ii, 24/3.5 TS-E, 40/2.8 STM, 50/2.5, 100/2.8L IS, 135/2L, 300/2.8L, 500/4L IS, 430EX II, EF 1.4x ii, EF 2x iii

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: Newspaper Dumps Photographers, Wants Video
« Reply #50 on: June 06, 2013, 06:31:02 PM »
The great loss to me isn't the articles you seek out, which you can do quite easily with google, it's the articles, reviews, interviews that you stumble on quite by mistake.  Sometimes because a strong image has drawn you in.

Blame the democratisation of the technology if you will, but everybody reading this thread has a DSLR and probably uploads their images to the web be it on facebook or flickr, and most of us will have a smartphone, and probably last bought a newspaper god knows when.

Can't be poacher and gamekeeper. 

The tragedy is that, once newspapers die, what are we going to be left with?  Mad forums with trolls and braggarts?  How many will pay for news or analysis now that we are so accustomed to getting it for free?

These are questions that are above my pay grade.

AmbientLight

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
Re: Newspaper Dumps Photographers, Wants Video
« Reply #51 on: June 07, 2013, 04:02:32 AM »
Paul, you raise a very good question here and I don't think this is beyond your pay grade at all. I also wonder about how information will be spread after newspapers as we know them have become more or less extinct.

On the positive side this trend might remove a lot of political agitation and propaganda, but what happens once we have only unchanneled information? In case of democracy taking away layers of obfuscation and manipulation is quite a good thing, as seen in the Swiss example. If you compare YouTube to old-fashioned TV, there is also a noticeable freedom of unwanted advertising, but then there are user comments out there on YouTube, which you wouldn't want to read at all, especially in case of religious themes. In such cases the quality of information actually becomes dependent on corporate censoring, which in such cases is a good thing.

The same trend may be happening to news and media in general, but we must all beware of companies misusing available streams of communication for viral marketing and how our precious information suddenly becomes dependent on very few corporate information sources such as Google.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2013, 04:05:01 AM by AmbientLight »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Newspaper Dumps Photographers, Wants Video
« Reply #51 on: June 07, 2013, 04:02:32 AM »