Para colocar as suas mensagens tem de efectuar primeiro o login.
Clique aqui para efectuar o seu login ou registar-se se for um novo utilizador.
Página: 2 |
Exibindo mensagens 21 - 40 de 86 |
| New feature: Introducing the Newsroom |
| Autor |
Mensagem |
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 01:23:52 AM pela Thereisnosquare |
 |
 |
Hmmm, not sure what to think about this.
Having worked for newspapers before, the only time we would alter photos is to a. crop them to fit on a space on a page, b. to cover up the faces of people who shouldn't be identified (eg. minors in court cases). If an image was altered for any other reason, it was usually acknowledged in the caption with "This image has been digitally altered" or something similar.
If we didn't want a logo in a photo (to avoid giving free publicity to some company), news photographers would ensure it wasn't seen in the frame when they shot. They would never clone it out afterwards. And often, we'd have to juggle pesky unwelcome politicians or mayors who wanted to be in a photo op so the photographer would try to position them last in a line of people so they could be cropped out. But if they shot an event and the pollie was smack bang in the middle, they would never remove someone digitally. We might try to crop it or just use another photo.
Although I kind of get the idea of what is being offered, I too wouldn't call it photojournalism. The point of photojournalism or being a news photographer is capturing an event "as it is". |
|
Canon EOS 300D, some filters, Photoshop
|
Arquivos enviados: 34 | Total de vendas: 255
|
|
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 01:35:35 AM pela Martinapplegate |
|
|
I work for the FA taking pics of soccer and have had to sign a form saying that i will not alter the image in any way - from cropping to bluring - nothing at all - surley news agencies would want the same thing ?? |
|
Nikon D2X and D100 and now the Nikon D3
Nikon 85mm F1.4
Ni...
|
Arquivos enviados: 1843 | Total de vendas: 1772
|
|
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 02:52:06 AM pela Nyul |
|
|
People, this is not that kind of news photography you are talking about with big and pathetic words. This is not about a war correspondent who is risking his life in Iraq.
This is not news photography what can be used as stock, but this is still stock photography what is news related. I do not think it would be used by daily newspapers.... this is something what can be used as an illustration or as a webpage advertisement... etc. This is for those who do not want to pay 3-500$ to Ghetty for a news related illustration. At least this is what I think.
Another thing: if you say masking faces is not allowed in news photography then I don't know what to say. Don't you read newpapers or what? Or you just never take a look at the pictures? Yes, it is not neccessary when you take shots of people in 3rd world countries, but in europe - as we all know - there are strict legal limitations. |
|
Body: Canon 1DsMkIII, 5D, 10D
Lenses: 24/1.8, 50/1.8, 85/1....
|
Arquivos enviados: 7672 | Total de vendas: 23870
|
|
|
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 03:10:45 AM pela Sophieso |
|
|
Then don't call it photojournalism. It's not. It's RF stock photography. All around the world there are no MRs required for fine art and news photography. New photography = photojournalism = the blazing big words used to announce this new feature.
If a photograph is altered, is it not photojournalism. Serban has already said not to call this editorial. What's left? Just plain old RF stock photography and nothing new, other than the question of what type of client would buy these types of images.
Photojournalism is the realm of RM, and it's worth every penny paid for it through the RM agencies.
I really do think that administration needs to be in closer contact with NPPA with this before launching it on any scale under the title of photojournalism. If you want to call it royalty free stock, have at it. But calling it photojournalism during a time when that profession is so heavily under fire and in danger of losing its credibility is just not a good idea. If there was ever a time when we need a free and trusted press to bring us the images of the struggles of this world, it is now.
Where the heck is administration on this one? Why the silence? |
|
|
Arquivos enviados: 268 | Total de vendas: 821
|
|
|
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 03:40:26 AM pela Nyul |
|
|
Sophiseso: the attack what newsphotography and even the whole media gets is just very partly about altering images. It is much more about being non-evenhanded. Taking a photo or not, and if you got it then showing it in a newspaper or not, just because it isn't represents what we want to say. Which photo of a politician to publish: the one where he is a simpatic guy or the other one where he looks like an evil bastard. These are much wider problems then altering images. Well, we all remember that famous case with the clouds. We all know it was done on a so bad, bad, bad quality that anyone who uses photoshop just laughs on it.
I don't say it should be allowed to alter news images, but in stock it can happen... if it happens I agree it should be denoted. |
|
Body: Canon 1DsMkIII, 5D, 10D
Lenses: 24/1.8, 50/1.8, 85/1....
|
Arquivos enviados: 7672 | Total de vendas: 23870
|
|
|
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 03:51:11 AM pela Sophieso |
|
|
This is the Code of Ethics of NPPA. They have been established because the public is losing trust and faith in the press. If we want to be a part of that loss of trust and faith, well........Why?
Code of Ethics
Application.
Every member in NPPA is required to endorse the Code of Ethics.
Code
Preamble
The National Press Photographers Association, a professional society that promotes the highest standards in photojournalism, acknowledges concern for every person's need both to be fully informed about public events and to be recognized as part of the world in which we live.
Photojournalists operate as trustees of the public. Our primary role is to report visually on the significant events and varied viewpoints in our common world. Our primary goal is the faithful and comprehensive depiction of the subject at hand. As photojournalists, we have the responsibility to document society and to preserve its history through images.
Photographic and video images can reveal great truths, expose wrongdoing and neglect, inspire hope and understanding and connect people around the globe through the language of visual understanding. Photographs can also cause great harm if they are callously intrusive or are manipulated.
This code is intended to promote the highest quality in all forms of photojournalism and to strengthen public confidence in the profession. It is also meant to serve as an educational tool both for those who practice and for those who appreciate photojournalism. To that end, The National Press Photographers Association sets forth the following Code of Ethics:
Photojournalists and those who manage visual news productions are accountable for upholding the following standards:
Be accurate and comprehensive in the representation of subjects.
Resist being manipulated by staged photo opportunities.
Be complete and provide context when photographing or recording subjects. Avoid stereotyping individuals and groups. Recognize and work to avoid presenting one's own biases in the work.
Treat all subjects with respect and dignity. Give special consideration to vulnerable subjects and compassion to victims of crime or tragedy. Intrude on private moments of grief only when the public has an overriding and justifiable need to see.
While photographing subjects do not intentionally contribute to, alter, or seek to alter or influence events.
Editing should maintain the integrity of the photographic images' content and context. Do not manipulate images or add or alter sound in any way that can mislead viewers or misrepresent subjects.
Do not pay sources or subjects or reward them materially for information or participation.
Do not accept gifts, favors, or compensation from those who might seek to influence coverage.
Do not intentionally sabotage the efforts of other journalists.
Ideally, photojournalists should:
Strive to ensure that the public's business is conducted in public. Defend the rights of access for all journalists.
Think proactively, as a student of psychology, sociology, politics and art to develop a unique vision and presentation. Work with a voracious appetite for current events and contemporary visual media.
Strive for total and unrestricted access to subjects, recommend alternatives to shallow or rushed opportunities, seek a diversity of viewpoints, and work to show unpopular or unnoticed points of view.
Avoid political, civic and business involvements or other employment that compromise or give the appearance of compromising one's own journalistic independence.
Strive to be unobtrusive and humble in dealing with subjects.
Respect the integrity of the photographic moment.
Strive by example and influence to maintain the spirit and high standards expressed in this code. When confronted with situations in which the proper action is not clear, seek the counsel of those who exhibit the highest standards of the profession. Photojournalists should continuously study their craft and the ethics that guide it. |
|
|
Arquivos enviados: 268 | Total de vendas: 821
|
|
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 04:10:10 AM pela Jeanniemarie |
|
|
[quote]This sounds great and like lots of fun, but it's not photojournalism if there is any alteration to the photograph, even if it is to hide faces that need an MR. Just the fact that an MR is needed and all logos are to be cloned out takes this entirely out of the realm of photojournalism and news....unless your client is Fox:-)
I completely agree. I studied telecommunications and have worked in and studied the news industry. Any image alteration - sometimes even cropping - takes away the newsworthiness of the image.
If the site isn't ready to get into the field of journalism, it shouldn't create such a section. It's like a censored version of the news. I don't think any responsible journalist or publisher would be willing to take such a risk.
Removal of bystanders and logos may seem harmless as relevant to the story, but you never know what parts you remove may become part of the story's development. Perhaps a face in the crowd is actually involved in the story...
Let's just hope no newworthy events happen at Times Square! :-) |
|
|
Arquivos enviados: 93 | Total de vendas: 1529
|
|
|
|
Mensagem editada em 10/05/2006, 04:22:51 AM pela Administração |
|
|
| Originalmente enviada por Alistaircotton: |
 |
Mensagem Citada:
BTW - how are you going to treat images which have been doctored in PS (like that Lebanese photographer who (badly) cloned more smoke into the sky to make his image more interesting?
Will working with PS still be okay? If so, how much? I think the major press agencies have all kinds of directives for this . . .
|
This is a good question and I am sorry for not being more clear in the first post. It will also answer to Sophieso's remarks.
We don't expect you to modify the news. How much PS will be okay? As much as possible if it doesn't alter the message and it just removes technical issues such as noise or logos that are not related to the news.
If someone is caught being involved in such a way as that Lebanese photographer, the measures will be drastic.
If the news is about a certain company and the logo MUST appear or else the news is not objective, then don't submit it.
If the news involves a certain company but the logo is not really needed then you have a story. Think about the recent events with spinach E coli killer bacteria that did affected a US company. Sure, a real PJ would include the company's package or maybe not. You can cover that news by shooting plain spinach at your local grocery store and have a stock news-worthy photo.
We are not calling the submitters of such photos photojournalists. I did use the term in this thread, sorry for creating confusion. This section is going to be called Newsroom. Contributors can be anyone from the site and they will not have a different name. The photos will be news-worthy images. So it's a glance of photojournalism but not as the real PJs do, especially as we have our own set of rules. Think about them as stock combined with snapshots. The idea came from snapshots actually and tried to turn contributor's passion for real life in something we can actually accept.
|
|
Nikon D300 / Nikon N80 | Nikon 10.5mm f/2.8G ED AF DX Fishey...
|
Arquivos enviados: 2315 | Total de vendas: 14898
|
|
|
|
|
Mensagem editada em 10/05/2006, 04:27:11 AM pela Administração |
|
|
. |
|
|
Arquivos enviados: 93 | Total de vendas: 1529
|
|
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 06:13:49 AM pela Afagundes |
|
|
Just as an idea to think about.
The lastest news in Brazil was a picture of a huge amount of dollars in a room.
No faces, except Benjamin Franklin :-)
The Federal Police has apreended this money with a polititian assessor, so it has great impact on the media.
But, since we are not photojournalists we probably wont have access to this kind of information, so I think we could go more into a pictures that tell a story, you know.
I was looking at a magazine showing an archeologist hanging on a tunnel in Rome and flashing an astonishing mosaic on a wall.
Thats most certainly news, you cant see the guys face, and it tells a story.
Now, the challenge is how to tell our stories with a stock oriented pictures.
Brazil is ellecting the next president at October 29th, for instance, how could I tell that story? Any ideas? |
|
Canon EOS 50D
Canon EFS 10-22mm USM f/3.5-4.5
Canon EF 24-...
|
Arquivos enviados: 2453 | Total de vendas: 3763
|
|
|
|
Mensagem editada em 10/05/2006, 07:33:58 AM pela Kcphotos |
|
|
Is there a way we can move an already accepted image in a portfolio into the Newsroom? I was thinking of someone who might have several Amish images taken a year ago and suddenly the events of earlier this week make them newsworthy. Is there a mechanism to post them in the Newsroom? |
|
Nikon D300, D70s, Nikon 70-200mm f2.8VR, Nikon 105mm f2.8VR,...
|
Arquivos enviados: 1469 | Total de vendas: 5629
|
|
|
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 07:51:22 AM pela Wysiwygfoto |
|
|
I've been thinking about this a lot and I think the big issue here is it sends a mixed message. Serban, I know you have told us not to compare DT to other agencies but it is very difficult to do. Here is what I percieve as being confusing:
Graffiti and Protest Posters are generally looked upon by agencies as artwork. I have a picture of a tank in my portfolio draped with spray painted sheets where I have cloned out some of the graffiti that pointed to a specific soldier or armament division. I felt the image could be used in a lot of different ways. When I submitted the image, I had to keep in mind that at some agencies, I had received refusals for graffiti in an image. This is why I altered my submission. What I am reading is that graffiti or hand drawn signs are now going to be acceptable in the realm of Royalty Free Microstock?
I also have to be very honest, I absolutely refuse to point fingers, but I have seen various images in the collection (and I don't mean Nyul's) that would not pass a review at other places in that faces are recognizable. In fact, there is one agency that is requiring model release for children whether the face is visible or not. My position is I take a conservative stance, and I don't submit these images in that I don't want the personal liability. It is understandable that each case is different, but I honestly feel there are instances where we are pushing the gamut too far. I would hate to see anyone that doesn't understand the implications of not having a model release get in trouble for this. I recently discovered that the DreamFinder had a new option to sort through images with and without a model release. Again, my personal opinion, but I think it would be a much more conservative position to categorize those images as not having releases and have a clause, statement, or notification somewhere that these images must not be used commercially in order to protect the agency and its contributors.
I also have to agree with Sophieso as far as respect and ethics over a buck or two. Please, don't take offense to this, but there are some award winning photographs that have been taken over the years that would not have required a model release where the photographer just happened to be at the right place at the right time. One recent image that I can think of relating to the U.S. is a military plane full of coffins draped in American Flags. This is only my personal opinion but an image like that does not have a place in Royalty Free stock of any kind (Micro or Macro). Honestly, it would disturb me greatly to see an image like that on the cover of Time magazine knowing that the photographer made $1.20 on an image so moving and powerful. I'm sure that will be left to each individual contributor, but it would be a very hard lesson to learn. |
|
|
Arquivos enviados: 0 | Total de vendas: 919
|
|
|
|
|
Mensagem editada em 10/05/2006, 08:49:27 AM pela Alistaircotton |
|
|
Thanks for clearing some of the issues up.
Just a few more comments and 2c worth:
Please, please, please consult some leading news agency guru in order to develop clear and precise guidelines for images which are heading in a news or editorial direction.
Whilst studying journalism I remember this case (newspaper settled out of court but it could have cost them a lot):
Journalist and photojournalist go to a colourful Hindu festival in the city. They cover the story and take pictures all day. The photojournalist sees a woman and child walking over a bridge and takes the picture. (Let's just say, for arguments sake, that the photographer approached the woman and child and got a DT model release signed.)
They returned to the newspaper and the photographer types in "Hindu woman and child at today's festival in the city" as a caption.
The image runs in the paper with the caption.
The next day the newspaper gets a call (or magazine/newspaper/website phones DT at this point) from the woman who is hopping mad because she is a very, very observant Muslim. She didn't mind appearing in print, but she takes offence to being identified as a Hindu when she is actually a Muslim.
You see - even with a model release if you get your facts wrong you can land up with real problems.
As a former journalist, I realise that we do need to face up to the facts of citizen journalism. Why can't DT use its pool of now very talented photographers to capture news events around the world? What's wrong with that?
In fact, I've been waiting for a forward-thinking RF agency to get its talent together in order to take on the large agencies in this way. And why not?
One of the main principles of journalism is that a journalist is not somebody special. It is critically important that journalists are seen as part of the community - as members of the people they serve. It's unfortunate - but this is rarely the case these days. The media is often not seen as being on the side of the people - but rather a pesky breed apart - like vultures. Their own special way in to events and their own special way out. Free food for restaurant reviews. Free this, free that for a good review?
The news agencies are not some God-like bearers of truth. They make mistakes - often. They have no special rights to provide the news.
You can provide the news too. And it's quite possible the media will be more balanced with multiple viewpoints anyway.
But . . . it's critically important that those to choose to submit to this know the rules of the game. Remember, that woman who is hopping mad will come for you first - not some newspaper or photo agency located in a distant land.
|
|
|
Arquivos enviados: 1496 | Total de vendas: 3384
|
|
|
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 08:42:52 AM pela Achilles - o membro é um administrador |
|
|
| Originalmente enviada por Kcphotos: |
|
| Mensagem Citada: Is there a way we can move an already accepted image in a portfolio into the Newsroom? I was thinking of someone who might have several Amish images taken a year ago and suddenly the events of earlier this week make them newsworthy. Is there a mechanism to post them in the Newsroom? |
Unlike assignments, we won't allow approved images to be uploaded for this section. You are supposed to come with an idea related to the event which is at least from the same moment in time (in most cases it will be from the same geographical moment, too). |
|
Nikon D300 / Nikon N80 | Nikon 10.5mm f/2.8G ED AF DX Fishey...
|
Arquivos enviados: 2315 | Total de vendas: 14898
|
|
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 09:17:30 AM pela Adashi |
|
|
| Originalmente enviada por Afagundes: |
|
Mensagem Citada:
...
Brazil is ellecting the next president at October 29th, for instance, how could I tell that story? Any ideas? |
You could submit photos of people queueing to vote, or putting in their vote etc. (framed so that they don't show faces, unless a MR is available - hand dropping the vote in the urn, queueing people from the back etc.) |
|
Canon EOS 30D, EOS 50E, 580EX II, EFS 10-22, EF 70-200 4L, E...
|
Arquivos enviados: 669 | Total de vendas: 968
|
|
|
|
|
Mensagem editada em 10/05/2006, 10:09:57 AM pela Administração |
|
|
One more (extremely important) thing that needs to be clarified. It was sent on email.
We will not accept any kind of news and any kind of photo. Photojournalism is a large pool and we will not dive blindly into it, just to get kicked back or to drown ourselves. We will not accept images related to harsh news (such as the Amish news). We will not accept images that are violent in nature or that depict humans or animals in a degrading way. Maximum care will be given to this and the ethics will be a primary criteria in selection.
There will be only a few parts of photojournalism news that can fit into this subject. We expect less than one news per week. Browse CNN and see how many news will not even qualify. |
|
Nikon D300 / Nikon N80 | Nikon 10.5mm f/2.8G ED AF DX Fishey...
|
Arquivos enviados: 2315 | Total de vendas: 14898
|
|
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 11:10:06 AM pela Jsnover |
|
|
I've read through the posts so far and share the concerns about presenting this new feature. Even after clarifying things, Achilles' last post refers again to photojournalism, which this is most certainly not.
So perhaps we should all try to help DT come up with a good name for what this actually is, so they can stop calling it a newsroom or phhotojournalism?
Topical stock
Current events in stock
Stock scoops
Stock with a story
InfoStock
There's got to be a good and catchy name for stock photos with themes that relate to the news - achilles' example of spinach because of the recent e-coli outbreak. Any ideas? I'll be the first to admit that mine won't earn me a marketing job, but I thought I'd try and get the ball rolling |
|
Canon 20D, D60 and Elan IIe
|
Arquivos enviados: 0 | Total de vendas: 5830
|
|
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 12:14:38 PM pela Stuartkey |
|
|
I think Newsroom is a perfectly acceptable name for this feature, and I think that with hindsight the biggest mistake was mentioning photojournalism at all.
I'm sure that when the feature actually goes live, there will be a thorough explanation available...
|
|
|
Arquivos enviados: 526 | Total de vendas: 3986
|
|
|
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 14:34:34 PM pela Sophieso |
|
|
Jo Ann, I think you're absoloutely right that the current name implies something no RF site is and should be rethought and changed.
It is deeply disappointing that anybody would look at their portfolio and see an image that relates to a current tragedy and think they've hit the bonanza and scored another dollar or two. With a world that is deeply distressed at the moment, i feel that going out to look for photographs that are "news worthy" is asking eager and enthusiastic amateurs to put themselves in harms way, or at the very least misunderstand what it is they're doing and harm others.
Spinach is always in the site's catalog. If a designer can't spent two minutes doing a search to find it, they're lazy and probably wouldn't design anything that properly represents the situation.
I think a door has been opened here that encourages amateurs to do the unethical and violate every moral law of photojournalism, news coverage, editorial content, or whatever you want to call it. There is nothing to stop the hungry member from staging scenes like the protesters being arrested in the portfolio or the contributor whose photo was used to announce that DT wants us to be photojournalists. (I know, I know, an unfortunate choice of words and an error.)
Royalty free photography is commercial photography. We shoot to sell products, ideas, and decorate. We are not news gatherers. We don't know anything about gathering news. Did anybody read my posting of the code of ethics of news photographers?
We shoot spinich because it has many uses, not just the representation of the near fatal illnesses of dozens of people. I'd hate to think that anybody is photographing carrots at the moment to cash in on the recent deaths caused by botulism in carrot juice. I would hope that we are photographers, not ghouls.
I'm sure the individual who wanted to move their photos of the Amish countryside over to the newsroom was not consciously thiniking of cashing in on the slaughter of children, but that's exactly what it was, and that's exactly what this site will get in the future if it continues on with this feature.
|
|
|
Arquivos enviados: 268 | Total de vendas: 821
|
|
|
|
Mensagem enviada em 10/05/2006, 14:42:28 PM pela Pinfoldphotos |
|
|
Well said Sophieso, I agree with all you've written there.
Ian. |
|
|
Arquivos enviados: 170 | Total de vendas: 807
|
|
Página: 2 |
Exibindo mensagens 21 - 40 de 86
Hora local do servidor: 11/09/2009, 12:02:39 PM |
|
