My problem with this is the company I work for has a publisher who is
absolutely bowled over by anything with a "gee-whiz" look to it like this.
Instead of encouraging her budding photographers to look for different
approaches (especially to serious topics), they have come to believe that
any wierd-angled or off-center snap shot is a photojournalistic masterpiece.
She has had several stories in her large weekly that could have seriously
benefited from a well-thought-out photo, only to turn it down in favor of a
dog scratching its ear or (as one reporter did for EVERY issue) a picture of
a child grinning ear to ear for the camera (Say cheese!), terribly distorted
from the 17mm lens the girl had six inches from the child's face.
She's a very depressing publisher to work for, and while she enjoys those
rather strange pictures, many readers are tired of the lack of content in
the paper. Did I mention she's rabid about getting press association awards?
I really do appreciate the humor in the emu shot. I think it's interesting,
and it's a fun type of shot to run every now and then -- I do those myself,
and you can get away with a lot at a weekly newspaper. I guess with where I
work, I've just gotten so very tired of being forced to use gimmicky photos
in the place of photos with real quality.
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 5:46 AM
Subject: Photojournalism Was:Re: ha
> Hello All.
>
> While there are images, February's PUG an example, which would not
normally
> qualify as "photojournalistic" (because they were, or are "planned"), the
> image of the Emu would lead nearly any "b" ("Living," "Style,"
"Neighbors")
> section in most serious newspapers. The local Zoo society would also
> appreciate a copy for next year's "petting Zoo" brochure.
>
> Because the image *and* situation were so impromptu, the decidedly comic
look
> on the Emu's face so untypical of most images of birds (or Emus) as we are
> used to seeing them, a reporter getting that photo would have received a
> "little extra" in their paycheck (at least from me) for their presence of
> mind.
> __________________________________________
> Photojournalism: pho*to*jour*nal*ism (noun) (from Websters)
> First appeared 1938
>
> : Journalism in which written copy is subordinate to pictorial usu(sic).
> Photographic presentation of news stories or in which a high proportion of
> pictorial presentation is used.
>
> -- pho*to*jour*nal*ist (noun)
> -- pho*to*jour*nal*is*tic (adjective)
> ______________________________________
> So you see, it *is* photojournalism, missing only the reporter's brief
> caption to complete the story.
> *The accompanying text of the intro would do.
>
> Suda Mafud,
> A member of the http://www.Africana.com online community
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
>
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
