| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Sports Shooter Members in Canon Add pt 2
Al Bello, Photographer
 |
Merrick | NY | USA | Posted: 3:55 PM on 02.11.05 |
->> Hi,
Regarding the ad in SI. I was in it. Canon asked us for some help. I was happy to help them out. I would like to think everyone in the ad felt the same way. Canon has been good to me personally over the years and I never thought twice about helping them out. It was fun to do and would do it again. I never thought about being compensated because of all the support I have gotten from Canon. They have shipped, repaired, and supported my gear without fail the last 15 years. It was also a chance to show my kids what I actually did for a living . |
|
Stanley Leary, Photographer
 |
Roswell | GA | USA | Posted: 4:55 PM on 02.11.05 |
->> While I completely am aware of the difference between advertising and photojournalism, how many of the shooters had to get permission from their publications to participate?
While it isn't unethical for advertisers to run illustrative ads--is it ethical for "photojournalists" to be shown in ads which clearly show a bias?
Just think about it, can Katie Couric or other journalists endorse products? From what I understand they generally are not allowed to do so.
Brings up another ethical question for Sports Shooter who are also photojournalists for newspapers--can you eat the free meal provided by the school you cover? Some media outlets do not let their personnel do this.
I like to stir the pot a little more for the discussion and see how people think. Personally I don't see the conflict unless the photographers were later in a situation where they had to cover Canon for a news story--could they do it or would they need to excuse themselves from this situation due to their now bias state? |
|
Jonathan Castner, Photographer
 |
Broomfield | CO | USA | Posted: 5:52 PM on 02.11.05 |
->> I don't have a problem with people like Al Bello advertising for Canon or Dave Black doing ads for Nikon. That's something that is pretty much "in our little relm" and doesn't create violation of ethical boundaries because nobody but silly photographers care. The fact of the matter is that photographers aren't significant personalities like, as Stanley suggested, Katie Couric. Katie has pull and Al, sorry buddy, doesn't in a large market sence. If Al is in a print advert that says "Canon has been there for me for 15 years" that's not the same as Katie doing one endorsing Megacorp International's "Super Widget XL-2".
Now as for the larger ethic question, there is a difference between a buffet for the media at an NFL game and you getting personal attention/gifts because you represent a certain publication. The former is to me a professional courtesy and the other is often a bribe.
I don't take any gifts from any subject, period. There have been situations, like large all-day sports events - golf?, that have food and drinks for the media in the media tent. To me, that's a lovely gesture from the promoters to us who are working our butts off and making them look good in the process. Now if there were a buffet tent but they take me aside and give me access to anything that I want from the celebrity chef they flew in just for me, I would drool and turn it down.
But that's me and I'm a bit wrong in the head. |
|
David A. Cantor, Photo Editor, Photographer
 |
Toledo | OH | USA | Posted: 6:49 PM on 02.11.05 |
| ->> Alright, I broke down and went to sports to look at the ad and while I was there a copy editor opined that at first glance he thought it was the "Leading Off" image..........sigh........ |
|
Jason Grow, Photographer
 |
Gloucester | MA | USA | Posted: 7:01 PM on 02.11.05 |
->> I will say it again and again and again until someone FINALLY hears me....
I am available for any and all product endorsements, ads, explorers of light thingies, whatever... if you need my number, you just whistle... Are you listening Canon? Mamiya? Profoto??? I'm RIGHHHHHT HEEEEEERRRREEEEEEE.....
jg |
|
Jeffrey Haderthauer, Photographer, Assistant
|
Norman | OK | USA | Posted: 7:54 PM on 02.11.05 |
| ->> I didn't know Katie Couric was a journalist. I always thought of her as a talking head. |
|
Louis Lopez, Photographer
 |
Fontana | CA | USA | Posted: 9:07 PM on 02.11.05 |
| ->> I would like to say that in the event that Jason is overwhelmed with offers, that I would be more than happy to take on the additional endorsements. Please contact my personal assistant.......okay just call me direct. |
|
Stanley Leary, Photographer
|
Roswell | GA | USA | Posted: 10:19 PM on 02.11.05 |
->> Jeffrey:
That's what President George Bush (the first thought) remember the White House tour interview. She is heavily rumored (may not happen but still rumored) to be the one to replace Dan Rather and this is the reason I cited her as an example. |
|
Bryan Oller, Photographer
|
Colorado Springs | CO | USA | Posted: 10:51 PM on 02.11.05 |
->> Stanley,
I'm bored tonight (on assignment in Iowa for the love of God). I feel like I've singled you out and I'm not trying to. As a working news photographer I do not see this as a problem. Lets face it in our business it's either you use Canon or Nikon and that's OK. We may as well be recognized for what we do and what better way than this.
You ask the question,
"Can you eat the free meal provided by the school you cover?"
Good point.
If they were covering a major story about Canon then yes, this question is a good one. But this is nothing short of an acknowledgement of the profession and the advances of Nikon and Canon are what have gotten us there. I personally see nothing wrong with this. In fact today it is nothing short of great advertisement for the particular news organization the PJ is representing. In effect we see a similar thing happening often in our business. Newspapers love to show a photo of the photographer and reporter who will be sent to Iraq, Haiti, Sri Lanka or wherever else a major story is occuring. Is this wrong; unethical? I don't think so personally. Unfortunately I've had to have my mug attached to a situation like this but this is how the business has adapted to the times.
It doesn't mean we're not being good journalists. |
|
Jason Grow, Photographer
|
Gloucester | MA | USA | Posted: 11:29 PM on 02.11.05 |
| ->> I will do ads with Katie Couric too, if that's what it takes.... |
|
Jason Kaye, Photographer
 |
Tacoma | WA | | Posted: 11:49 PM on 02.11.05 |
->> ". . .is it ethical for "photojournalists" to be shown in ads which clearly show a bias?"
Do a quick search of the web. Look through PDN. There are well known photojournalists endorsing all kinds of things Nikon, Canon, Leica, Apple, Profoto, Elinchrom, etc.
Are you questioning their ethics? |
|
Brad Penner, Photographer
 |
Neptune | NJ | USA | Posted: 11:59 PM on 02.11.05 |
->> My only question is this:
Did Max find himself with a bad case of lens envy after this shoot?
-b. |
|
Jason Grow, Photographer
|
Gloucester | MA | USA | Posted: 12:03 AM on 02.12.05 |
| ->> It's not the size of the lens, it's the shutter speed..... |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
 |
New England | | USA | Posted: 12:10 AM on 02.12.05 |
->> Jason
It is the extention of the zoom.
A 28-300f3.5-5.6 for example beats a 70-200f2.8 by a mile :0) |
|
Chris Large, Photographer
|
Okotoks | AB | Canada | Posted: 12:30 AM on 02.12.05 |
->> Finally..........some people realizing that we are not saving lives here.....just a silly advert that I'm sure the people in it enjoyed for what it was.......a lark, a chance to hang out with other shooters....and to support their brand of choice....nothing at all to do with ethics....what a bunch of crap.....lighten up you guys. Life it way too short to bother with things like this.
Chris |
|
Ron Scheffler, Photographer
 |
Hamilton (Toronto area) | Ontario | Canada | Posted: 12:31 AM on 02.12.05 |
| ->> That's right Steven - not to mention unequalled versatility for most situations thanks to that great zoom range. |
|
G.J. McCarthy, Photographer
|
Columbia | MO | USA | Posted: 12:50 AM on 02.12.05 |
->> Taking Ron's last post a step further (and meaning no disrespect to anyone in the process) ——
How about we stop bickering over Canon, Nikon, who's "endorsing" which ...
... or who's shooting for what company ...
... or what the terms are ...
... or which bag's the best ...
... or whom you saw on the sidelines ...
... or what Omar did this week ...
... or etc ...
... etc ...
... And just look at some really, REALLY inspiring work:
http://www.worldpressphoto.com/
Again, no disrespect meant to anyone —— just a well-intentioned thought.
Now let's all get out there and make some great photos, eh!?
Regards,
- gerry - |
|
Richard Walker, Photographer
|
Honolulu | HI | USA | Posted: 8:32 AM on 02.12.05 |
| ->> It's interesting to me that an advertisement like that which has been 'set up,' featuring legitimate journalists features few or no Nikon users. While it may seem tantalizing to "get in an ad" and "reap the rewards," I personally wouldn't have anything to do with false advertising - which is essentially what this is. It makes it seem that there are absolutely no photographers using Nikon. Which is why they had to "set it up" -- there are photogs who use Nikon (yours truly included, albeit switching to Canon) -- but god forbid they actually show up in a "real" photo alongside a Canon user. Frankly I'm a little saddened that Canon feels it needs to stoop to that level of fakery. I think shooting a legit photo with a smattering of Nikon users would drive the point home much better (and would be honest). |
|
David Bernacchi, Photographer
|
Milwaukee | WI | USA | Posted: 9:49 AM on 02.12.05 |
->> As a freelancer, I'm suggesting that publications must put the name of my camera manufacturer next to my byline.
Now that's advertising. |
|
Walter Calahan, Photographer
|
Westminster | MD | USA | Posted: 10:21 AM on 02.12.05 |
->> Do we as SportsShooters take black ink markers and cover over the "Canon" or "Nikon" or "whatever" on your equipment face plate? Don't we appear as walking advertisements to all our subjects when we show up for an assignment?
Me, I put black tape over the new on my Leica's, but don't do it on the rest of my cameras. I find the Leica rangefinder camera with the bright white lettering covered much more invisible to the subject while I work.
And how many time have we looked in a "photo" magazine to see which photographer is using what equipment? Do we question that? So and so is using this type of lighting equipment, perhaps I should buy it too so I can shoot like her!
I've got a image in this years Nikon Produce Guide Book and was paid for its use. Does that make me "less" of a freelance photo-journalist? Frankly it helped buy a new Nikkor lens, so the money went right back. |
|
Robert G. Stevens, Photographer
|
Steven Georges, Photographer
 |
Garden Grove | CA | USA | Posted: 2:41 PM on 02.12.05 |
->> I don't have a problem with Canon faking the photo, it's an ad!
I don't have a problem with journalist promoting stuff.
I don't have a problem with previous Canon ads with photojournalist sitting around a table. No one really thought it was real and it was not trying to deceive anyone.
However in an industry where we go bananas over removing a coke can using a computer because we fear that we will lose the public trust in what is real, I wonder what the public will think when they discover that photojournalist faked that photo.
It WAS designed to fool you into thinking the photo was real. It fooled me. Fortunately most people will never find out it was staged.
I do not believe it was wrong to participate in the photo, it was an ad, and as I stated earlier, I would probably have participated in it myself. But I can still feel a little uncomfortable about the way it turned out. |
|
David Griffin, Photographer
|
Concord | NC | USA | Posted: 3:56 PM on 02.12.05 |
| ->> I am kinda miffed that Canon did not call me up and fly me to the event so I could participate in the ad! |
|
Doug Holleman, Photographer
 |
Temple | TX | USA | Posted: 5:05 PM on 02.12.05 |
->> I wonder what the Taster's Choice coffee guy thinks about the Canon shooters who gave their image to a free ad. Just food (or drink) for thought.
We read a lot of posts here championing the cause of charging adequate rates for our professional photography, but few seem concerned about giving away one's own image to a corporation to use how they wish.
I'm not making any judgments here, but I just find it a bit ironic. There are always at least two sides to every story. |
|
Doug Holleman, Photographer
|
Temple | TX | USA | Posted: 5:15 PM on 02.12.05 |
| ->> So that nobody is mislead by my previous post, I just read in the other related thread that there apparently was some compensation involved. |
|
Neal Vaughan, Photographer
|
St. Joseph | MI | USA | Posted: 7:02 PM on 02.12.05 |
->> " Be careful what brand you are pictured using...
http://www.theomahachannel.com/news/4191531/detail.html"
Sounds like maybe the photographer should be fired, not the guy drinking. Since when is it acceptable to pose pictures like that? |
|
|| Sponsor Special Deals
We BUY & TRADE you OLD Gear
|
Available from:
Adorama Camera
|
Price: $0.00 |
Notes:
We all have some cameras & lenses sitting around collecting dust right?...Or you work at a Newspaper that has downsized?...What to do with your excess photographic equipment? Adorama's Used Dept is looking for your used gear to purchase or take in trade. Contact me directly jsnyder@adorama.com or 1-800-223-2500 X2435 and I can fill you in on the details. Cash in your pocket is better than sitting on the shelf, right?
|
|
-- More Info -- |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|
