|
Also I don't know if anyone looked at the list of the best Reuters photos but I would say more than half of them are an uninspired, mediocre photo of an important or interesting event. There are a couple of really great photos on there to go with the great stories they are companion to, but most of them could have been taken by anybody with a camera that happened to be in the area at the time of the event. It's less the best photos of the year and more the companion photos to the most important or interesting news stories of the year. To be fair, some of the photos are "get whatever shot you can or you won't get any" and the quality can't be fairly judged, but a lot of them aren't. Does anyone know how modern professional photojournalism works? I've read that it's really difficult to get hired as a journalist these days without passing off some photography experience because most media outlets can't afford individual, specialized staff, but I don't know if this would be an issue that Reuters has.
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 18:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 10:25 |
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Also I don't know if anyone looked at the list of the best Reuters photos but I would say more than half of them are an uninspired, mediocre photo of an important or interesting event. There are a couple of really great photos on there to go with the great stories they are companion to, but most of them could have been taken by anybody with a camera that happened to be in the area at the time of the event. It's less the best photos of the year and more the companion photos to the most important or interesting news stories of the year. To be fair, some of the photos are "get whatever shot you can or you won't get any" and the quality can't be fairly judged, but a lot of them aren't. most of photojournalism is being in the right place at the right time and knowing a thing you take is something people want to see. I'd think it's similar to paparazzi work, most photojournalism images are uploaded to image libraries like Reuters, Getty etc. and if images are purchased the photographer gets the sale and the image library a percentage of that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 19:09
|
|
|
There's a reason for that saying "be there and f8." With the abundance of phone cameras and amateur photographers who are too happy to give away photos for free, there's not as much need for journalist photographers to cover a lot of things. Kind of a shame really.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 19:22
|
|
|
the hope is that quality will keep going and that we'll have less people who just buy their way into photojournalism with a camera. I still think having an eye for what is newsworthy is important or how to tell a visual story. citizen photojournalism is all well and good to capture a huge obvious event as it happens but you're missing out on narrative driven stories about how a village is building infrastructure in africa or the integration of immigrant communities in XYZ city. Of course you also have international events that you can't just go to without having some kind of organisational support like Syria or other global conflicts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 19:39
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Also I don't know if anyone looked at the list of the best Reuters photos but I would say more than half of them are an uninspired, mediocre photo of an important or interesting event. There are a couple of really great photos on there to go with the great stories they are companion to, but most of them could have been taken by anybody with a camera that happened to be in the area at the time of the event. It's less the best photos of the year and more the companion photos to the most important or interesting news stories of the year. To be fair, some of the photos are "get whatever shot you can or you won't get any" and the quality can't be fairly judged, but a lot of them aren't. are you being serious did you really say this
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 21:20
|
|
|
A bit late to the party, but... I think I have a problem with lenses   EDIT: And a bit of shame from yesterday's shoot. I really need to make sure my swivels have all the required parts before I leave the house. 
SoundMonkey fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Dec 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 22:02
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:A bit late to the party, but... I think I have a problem with lenses That's nothing, sometimes I don't even bother attaching poo poo 
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 22:09
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:That's nothing, sometimes I don't even bother attaching poo poo I'm the threaded plastic locking device on the flash.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 22:11
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:I'm the threaded plastic locking device on the flash. My Yongnuo flash owns bro.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 22:18
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:My Yongnuo flash owns bro. I had one of those before whenever it was that they started actually making them 'good', and hot drat was it a piece of poo poo that underexposed by 2 stops at all times. I take it they aren't terrible any more? Does it do CLS and poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 22:20
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:I had one of those before whenever it was that they started actually making them 'good', and hot drat was it a piece of poo poo that underexposed by 2 stops at all times. I take it they aren't terrible any more? Does it do CLS and poo poo? Nah, I just got the cheap 580 something seomthing model. I only use it in manual mode for macro shots, so it's perfect for me. Never misfires, will slave to the onboard flash ok too. Great flash for the 60 bucks or whatever I paid
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 22:21
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Also I don't know if anyone looked at the list of the best Reuters photos but I would say more than half of them are an uninspired, mediocre photo of an important or interesting event. There are a couple of really great photos on there to go with the great stories they are companion to, but most of them could have been taken by anybody with a camera that happened to be in the area at the time of the event. It's less the best photos of the year and more the companion photos to the most important or interesting news stories of the year. To be fair, some of the photos are "get whatever shot you can or you won't get any" and the quality can't be fairly judged, but a lot of them aren't. I dunno dude, you might be missing the point of photojournalism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 22:38
|
|
|
Chill Callahan posted:I dunno dude, you might be missing the point of photojournalism. Or are you?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 22:40
|
|
|
I like this game, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 22:41
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:Or are you? Photo journalism is art except when it's not art, but also then it's sometimes art, except when it's not (always).
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 22:42
|
|
|
ahmeni posted:It's easy, just follow this handy guide: And so accordingly, Dorkroom rule 9a exists.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 22:45
|
|
|
If you don't think photojournalism should be artful, there are plenty of National Geographic photographers you should probably look into. Relevance may be a factor for making a good photograph, but it doesn't make it a great one. Everything can and should be shot better always.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 00:00
|
|
|
A website is using one of my photos from last weekend's event, of course without any credit or permission. I'm so proud. I've finally made it as a photographer.
DanTheFryingPan fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Dec 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 23:05
|
|
|
dakana posted:are you being serious Really not seeing what was so controversial but I appreciate your "I get photography more than you" incredulous wankery. aliencowboy posted:If you don't think photojournalism should be artful, there are plenty of National Geographic photographers you should probably look into. Pretty much this. There's no reason it can't be artistically competent and culturally important at the same time and I think it's silly to say that it doesn't matter. For specific examples, go to Reuters best of 2012 and look at the Korean pool photo which is pretty much technically terrible, then look at the photo of the man being dragged through the streets which is "if I spend too much time on these photos I could literally be killed" and so the technical aspects are largely irrelevant, and then look at the photo of the two hunters with bows framed around a helicopter at dawn/dusk and appreciate that it tells an important story while also being a really interesting photo in itself. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 23:18
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Really not seeing what was so controversial but I appreciate your "I get photography more than you" incredulous wankery. mr. mephistopheles posted:most of them could have been taken by anybody with a camera that happened to be in the area at the time of the event. There is no pretentiousness needed to understand the stupidity of this statement.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 01:54
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Really not seeing what was so controversial but I appreciate your "I get photography more than you" incredulous wankery. I just want to butt in and use this discussion as an excuse to post some Luc Delahaye. His pictures often have the immediacy of typical photojournalist pictures, capturing the decisive moment. At the same time, he frames it almost like a tableau, more similar to Jeff Wall.  Ambush, Ramadi, 22 July 2006, Ramadi, Iraq, Fragrag fucked around with this message at 02:13 on Dec 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 02:09
|
|
|
dakana posted:There is no pretentiousness needed to understand the stupidity of this statement. I would like to think there is more to being a photojournalist than just happening to be in the right place at the right time with a professional quality camera in your hands and only a vague understanding of how to properly compose and expose an image, but I guess that makes me stupid so whatever. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 04:17
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:I would like to think there is more to being a photojournalist than just happening to be in the right place at the right time with a professional quality camera in your hands and only a vague understanding of how to properly compose and expose an image, but I guess that makes me stupid so whatever. You need to have the right connections and you need to save the random man from point-blank gunshots and be part of the 9/11 inside job http://stevenwarran.blogspot.com/2009/11/peter-turnley-and-david-turnley.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 04:36
|
|
|
I like how number 20 (of Tiger Woods) explains that the photographer thought the shot was bland until he saw THE LENS FLARE and someone else told him to crop it to accentuate it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 05:01
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:That's nothing, sometimes I don't even bother attaching poo poo wait wots goin on here?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 06:23
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:wait wots goin on here? What ISN'T going on there 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 06:31
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:wait wots goin on here? Seven step up rings and a reverse mount adapter, and me holding a p67 lens onto it to take pictures. Works pretty well if you don't slip.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 07:10
|
|
|
Sick L lens bro!  Now you just need a Pentax 67 reverse ring 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 07:38
|
|
|
Polarize posted:Sick L lens bro! Well now, that's just silly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 07:51
|
|
|
i guess it'd actually be more economical to shoot with pentax 67 glass than a L lens. hmmm.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 10:04
|
|
|
Sent an e-mail to the website that's using my shot for free without any credit. They took it down and replied.quote:At this time we don't feel it's necessary to pay licensing fees for image use. I understand what they mean, but holy hell the wording.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 16:44
|
|
|
Send them an invoice for their use. You don't have to feel it necessary to enable their dickery.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 18:25
|
|
|
Exactly. They used your image, they profited from it. You deserve to get paid for your work. PS. A good article by the Guardian about photography. http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2012/nov/16/sean-ohagan-photography-art-form quote:Like several of Gursky's works, Rhein II is a digitally manipulated image – a factory building and some dog walkers were removed from the original photograph by a high-end version of Adobe Photoshop. When asked to comment on this, Gursky said: "Paradoxically, this view of the Rhine cannot be obtained in situ, a fictitious construction was required to provide an accurate image of a modern river." bobmarleysghost fucked around with this message at 18:49 on Dec 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 18:34
|
|
|
I want one of those high-end versions of Adobe Photoshop, presumably with the slider marked "Photo value ($)".
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 19:20
|
|
|
big scary monsters posted:I want one of those high-end versions of Adobe Photoshop, presumably with the slider marked "Photo value ($)". That's easy just become a famous artist so that your work is collectible, like Gursky's.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 19:21
|
|
|
I hate how artists talk. Why couldn't he just say he didn't like having a dog and a factory in the photo, so he edited them out? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 19:24
|
|
|
xzzy posted:I hate how artists talk. Why couldn't he just say he didn't like having a dog and a factory in the photo, so he edited them out? But that is what he said. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 19:37
|
|
|
Yeah, like he used a thesaurus to pick each word.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 19:39
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Yeah, like he used a thesaurus to pick each word. Being literate is so gauche.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 19:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 10:25 |
|
|
Your 2 year old could probably make art, but could your 2 year old shoot warzone photography?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 19:45
|
|