Or maybe they don't have the time, ability or inclination to do so. Today's newsrooms are barely staffed.
Or maybe they don't have the time, ability or inclination to do so. Today's newsrooms are barely staffed.So why can't the news organization do the final edits on a copy of the trustworthy file to make daylight images look like they were actually taken in daylight conditions? Maybe they can, and normally do. I dunno.
In the deepest realms of history, photographers and editors would have had a chance to communicate about these technical issues - and frequently that communication worked well for both sides.
Of course, those were also the days when there was a photographic print in the middle of that chain.
I used to frustrate my editors sometimes, because when I had a decent idea where they wanted to use my work, and the approximate size and shape of the window they needed filled, I would give them stuff that they could only use one way, no matter how much they wanted to wield that crop mark pencil!
Alan contacted her and she said she set the exposure to not clip the highlights. Reuters did not adjust the exposure. So, it's a combination of underexposure plus a lack of post-processing.
I;ve read in magazine days, photographers would shoot both landscape and portrait views of each shoot to allow editors to choose the one that best works in the magazine, hoping they'd get selected for the cover shot which is portrait format. They'd even leave empty space where the magazine's title and contents are added to the cover shot.
Most of my work was for a tabloid (not broadsheet) format newspaper that published three times a week, and used a style sheet that favored "art" that had a roughly 3:4 aspect ratio. Most photos were in landscape orientation, but some of the feature sections would have large covers in portrait orientation.
I was using 35mm Tri-X, which meant that everything was going to be cropped anyways.
Reproduction quality was reasonable - it was high speed offset printed, with half-tone reproduction of photos using a moderate dot-pitch.
I would often avoid tight, in-camera cropping, because I needed flexibility.
While I sometimes shoot both landscape and portrait views, I would more frequently add that flexibility at the printing stage - both a landscape crop and a portrait crop from the same, generously framed negative.
Reuters is one of the largest news agencies in the world, with around 2500 journalists and 600 photographers working for them. The parent corporation Thompson Reuters has over 25000 employees.
Reuters was criticized for publishing doctored photos in the past. They were also criticized for cropping photos. So perhaps they now only publish the photos they get and don't alter them in any way.
I;m not a pro so my style is different. When I go on vacation, I plan to do slide show of it on my TV or monitor. I dislike the black bars on the sides with portrait views. So I shoot all my shots in landscape mode even switching to 16:9 format to match short video clips and the TV screen format.
I can't fathom why a news service would be criticized for cropping photos. The end-user has that option, the photographer exercised that option when framing the shot. It's photojournalism, not art.
I was a volunteer, on a not-for profit publication which had high standards. It was gratifying, but also exhausting.
Generally speaking though, it is really good to both be working with a team, where people were relying on me, and I was working with a reasonably clear idea of what sort of result was needed.
As for photography in general:
Working with an editor can be really good for you as a photographer.
Working with an editor can be really frustrating for you as a photographer.
Two things can be true at the same time.
I can't fathom why a news service would be criticized for cropping photos. The end-user has that option, the photographer exercised that option when framing the shot. It's photojournalism, not art.
I'm not sure of your point Matt. Was it a tender way to say, I need help?Could you elaborate?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?