Reuters ban RAW ?

[Ladislav]

If banning RAW speeds up the workflow and the known shortcomings are acceptable to Reuters then who are we to judge?

If Reuter's customers wants faster deliverables and and want it that way then that's the way it has to be.

Customer's always right, if you disagree then do not accept their business.

100% agree.

+ many people who are complaining about this seem to trust more their post processing skills than their photography skills.

 

[dolina]

If banning RAW speeds up the workflow and the known shortcomings are acceptable to Reuters then who are we to judge?

If Reuter's customers wants faster deliverables and and want it that way then that's the way it has to be.

Customer's always right, if you disagree then do not accept their business.

100% agree.

+ many people who are complaining about this seem to trust more their post processing skills than their photography skills.

More likely, they read the headline and made up their own "body of the news article" to fit their position on RAW vs JPEG.

The topic is moot as I know what both file formats strengths and weaknesses are. I use either to make it most convenient for me.

When I do parties I shoot 99.99% jpeg. I often go a step further and select a JPEG resolution that's around 2MP.

Why 2MP? Because 99.99% of the time it'll be viewed on Facebook or some online photo album.

Once Facebook and other sites go 4K or 5K then I will adjust with the times.

I used to shoot RAW but it eventually occurred to me that it makes no sense fix people up as they themselves made sure they dressed well for the party.

Heck, I wasn't paid for to do this job.

For birds and wildlife I would insist on RAW.

Any of my SLR + L glass or Leica images will outdo any point and shoot, SLR + kit lens or smartphone present there.

Now, if you enjoy doing that sort of thing then more power to you.

 

[whothafunk]

While we aim for photography of the highest aesthetic quality..

that's funny. because compared to EPA and Getty, Reuter's sports photos are just beyond terrible.

 

[blanddragon]

Any image can be photoshop'd so the first paragraph doesn't make sense.

It's what NancyP said - Reuters don't want to waste time creating an image, they want the finished product. They don't care if it is JPEG out of your DSLR, iPhone or Photoshop. Just don't expect them to spend time doing "photograph developing."

Sports photographers nearly always shoot JPEG and not just for performance reasons. They shoot lots of images that they will throw away so they don't want to fill up storage space with lots of garbage. Similarly they don't want to waste time "getting the image right in post" - they aim to get it right when the shutter button is pushed so that they spend more time out taking photographs and less time in the office "developing photographs." Plus what newspapers, etc, want from them isn't raw files (which may or may not work with their software.)

Agencies, etc, need to be able to take output from the latest camera as soon as it hits the shelves. They don't want to complicate their workflow with needing the latest copy of raw conversion software from each camera maker nor be reliant on ACR, etc, to accept images from photographers. So they arrive at the "lowest common denominator" - which is JPEG. Anything else costs time and money that is of questionable benefit.

Imagine being Reuters: a car bomb goes off in New York and images start pouring in. On the one hand you've got submissions in JPEG that you can use immediately and sell on to others "now" and on the other hand you've got submissions in XYZ's raw format that you need to hand off to someone specific to render before selling. On the one hand you've got a finished product, on the other you've got a product that is not ready to be sold.

btw, I'm pretty sure that Reuters isn't alone in this and that other agencies (such as Getty) and newspapers in general will all only take submissions in JPEG format.

Hey dilbert, if I give you a dollar, will you go buy a clue? Pretty please??

+1 For dilbert it probably needs to be $100, clueless seems to be his way, and there's some catching up to do.

 

[Northstar]

Does anyone here know the answer to these questions...

if I sent them a JPEg, how would Reuters know if the image was originally shot in RAW or JPEG? What if I had simply converted to JPEG from RAW before sending it to them? Is there a way to determine this?

 

[dolina]

Does anyone here know the answer to these questions...

if I sent them a JPEg, how would Reuters know if the image was originally shot in RAW or JPEG? What if I had simply converted to JPEG from RAW before sending it to them? Is there a way to determine this?

EXIF data and forensic software.

 

[neuroanatomist]

EXIF data and forensic software.

How do you reconcile citing speed to press as a factor in shooting in-camera JPG with the idea that they'll perform forensic analysis on submitted images?

 

[frumrk]

You guys all have it wrong... it has nothing to do with Camera processing/capabilities/etc. It's all because RAW is not a PC term. If only they had named them something else like "Negatives". oops ... that doesn't sound very positive either... ;D

 

[AcutancePhotography]

Seems to me that Reuters can make pretty much any legal rule they want. Their game, their rules.

Don't like the rules, don't send stuff to Reuters.

It is not like they are gonna miss anything. ;D I am sure they will have plenty of submissions that will be good enough and fast enough for the purpose of reporting the news.

 

[Maximilian]

You guys all have it wrong... it has nothing to do with Camera processing/capabilities/etc. ...

Somehow I suppose it has to more to do about copyrights.
No RAW -> no proof that you're the rightsholder. All rights got to Reuters.

Maybe I'm wrong here, too.
But this really seems fishy to me.

If you pros out there have no problem with that, please excuse our headaches about your future business.

 

[Maximilian]

You guys all have it wrong... it has nothing to do with Camera processing/capabilities/etc. ...

Somehow I suppose it has to more to do about copyrights.
No RAW -> no proof that you're the rightsholder. All rights got to Reuters.

Maybe I'm wrong here, too.

I doubt Reuters would do that - photographers would desert them plus they'd get sued for copyright infringement.

Yeah! That was the reason I didn't write it in my first post.
But the whole behavoir gets me puzzeled.

I can understand that Reuters want to slim down their internal processes.
But if a photog delivers a pic in a format that they'd accept, e.g. JPEG with a certain MP number and claiming to be according to their "ethics" it shouldn't matter, how his PP was.

And I cannot imagine them running all the pic through any process to find out if they are OnCam JPEGs or converted JPEGs. And the question of how to do the detection was asked before.

As for the "ethics"... no, I'd better not share my opinion about ethics of press and jounalism.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

Has anyone been able to find this story on a Reuters' website? I can't.

All I have been able to find is internet sites that simply repeat/repost stuff... which is hardly a good source.

But when I go on the various Reuters websites there is no mention at all of this.

Does anyone have a link from Reuters on this issue?

 

[Spokagrapher]

Is this for real posted on Facebook ?

How are you supposed to know if a jpeg originated from saved raw file anyway ?

You can't unless you can forensically examine the photo for evidence of editing. I don't know if that's possible, but if it is, it's probably not worth Reuters' time to do that.

Reuters says that its freelancers can shoot RAW all they want, but they need to shoot JPEG at the same time, and send only the JPEGs to Reuters.

It's a simple, reasonable request. To ensure credibility and speed, Reuters doesn't want its photographers to waste time editing photos more than just the very simplest editing, such as adjusting levels, so they can meet their deadlines and deliver trustworthy images to the public.

I don't see why any photographer would object to that, unless they rely on post-processing to correct their mistakes. If they do, they're probably in the wrong business.

 

[rfdesigner]

One thought.. what does Reuters do when NASA publishes an image of Pluto or the Cosmos?

Sorry.. it's not out of camera JPEG, we can't accept it?

(clue for the clueless.. most NASA images are extremely heavily processed ususally from many many sub images being glued together to either get sensitivity or field of view, or both)

 

[AcutancePhotography]

One thought.. what does Reuters do when NASA publishes an image of Pluto or the Cosmos?

Sorry.. it's not out of camera JPEG, we can't accept it?

For something like that, I am sure they will handle it on a case-by-case basis.

 

[dolina]

EXIF data and forensic software.

How do you reconcile citing speed to press as a factor in shooting in-camera JPG with the idea that they'll perform forensic analysis on submitted images?

I shall clarify.

A simple way of verification would be the EXIF data.

If doubt still remains then a more thorough digital forensic process would then be used.

Making all submission be in-camera JPEG would give Reuters the leeway to discipline erring employees.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

Making all submission be in-camera JPEG would give Reuters the leeway to discipline erring employees.

I think that is the right answer. Reuters wants to have a official policy so that if, in the future, some photographer submits an altered photograph, and is caught; Reuters can state that the photographer violated their rules.

This may be just a form of preemptive corporate CYA

 

[geekpower]

i was under the impression that 99% of editorial photos are shot jpeg anyway. making it "official" seems like a non-issue.

 

[dolina]

Making all submission be in-camera JPEG would give Reuters the leeway to discipline erring employees.

I think that is the right answer. Reuters wants to have a official policy so that if, in the future, some photographer submits an altered photograph, and is caught; Reuters can state that the photographer violated their rules.

This may be just a form of preemptive corporate CYA

With everyone being so P.C. these days... you just have to.

 

[Solar Eagle]

My clients hire me for my final product. How I get there is literally my business.

I'm pretty sure this type of attitude is the reason they now have this policy. They don't want a product, they just want the shot. If they were not having problems with people producing their own artistic versions of their shots they would not put out a policy like this.