| 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
This is extremely disturbing
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
 |
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 9:59 AM on 07.14.09 |
->> So folks wonder about the difference in TV ethics and photojournalism. Look no further than this piece from the "Newsvideographer" website. Watch the whole piece and see if it doesn't truly disturb you. Bad backgrounds? No problem, use a green screen background during the initial video and then during post production insert the background of your choice. Wow.
http://newsvideographer.com/2009/07/13/create-shallow-depth-of-field-in-int... |
|
Jason Joseph, Photographer
|
Dublin | OH | USA | Posted: 10:32 AM on 07.14.09 |
| ->> That background looked ridiculous! I like a nice shallow depth of field as much, if not more than the next person, but that was horrible! There was nothing "Real" looking with that at all. Geez, if you are going to throw your ethics out the window, at least do it for a good reason. This isn't a good reason (well, no reason is a good reason) |
|
Jeff Mills, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 11:50 AM on 07.14.09 |
->> There are also plenty of softwares that will give a shallow DOF look in still images though, and many of those look just a bad. You can't say TV news lacks the ethics of photojournalism simply on one mans actions or suggestions. I'm sure if you look hard enough you'd find a "photojournalist" somewhere on the net showing how to achieve shallow DOF with a selective blur to make the "storytelling" images look better. Probably wouldn't even have to look that hard.....
The issue isn't the technology, but rather hows its used. Green screen on the tv weather girl, fine. Same thing on a reporter who's "supposed" to be in Iraq or in front of the White House, not fine.
I'm friends with a number of videojournalistic and they definatly know the difference.
Its odd how much we as photographers love to talk about how ethical we are though. We've all seen 35% or more of our friends or coworkers face layoffs. We've spent tens of thousands on equipment and years gaining experience to see those resulting images be valued at mere pennies on the dollar due to a flood people willing to shoot for free and a lower entrance cost to photography. We even face a rather uncertain longterm career outlook due to hybrid systems like the RED line of cameras and have to wonder if in 5 years clients would even want a dedicated still photographer, yet we still take such pleasure in talking about how moral and ethical we are and how "everyone else" isn't and how badly the world needs us, even if they seem to have forgotten that fact. I miss the days where we as a whole were too busy working and earning an honest living to have time to debate such topics. |
|
Dave Doonan, Photographer
|
Kingston | TN | USA | Posted: 12:58 PM on 07.14.09 |
| ->> When the NPPA started catering to television, I dropped out. |
|
N. Scott Trimble, Photographer
|
Lake Oswego | OR | USA | Posted: 1:11 PM on 07.14.09 |
| ->> Wow. I am so glad I redirected my dues to PDN, rather than NPPA.. |
|
Mike Anzaldi, Photographer
|
Oak Park | IL | USA | Posted: 1:12 PM on 07.14.09 |
| ->> someone owes me three minutes. |
|
Ric Tapia, Photographer, Assistant
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 1:50 PM on 07.14.09 |
| ->> I think he works for the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. |
|
Bradly J. Boner, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Jackson | WY | USA | Posted: 2:00 PM on 07.14.09 |
| ->> Ric - no way does he work for the Daily Show. Their dropped-in backgrounds look waaaaaay better! |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 2:13 PM on 07.14.09 |
->> The prime-time infotainment shows do this type of thing all the time. Dropped-in cutaways that look like they were shot on location but in fact were shot in the studio. Keyed backgrounds and other elements. Switched timeline so that it appears something was said in a certain sequence (and with different meaning) than what was originally said. It's all commonplace. Doesn't make it right, mind you...but it's common. That's why I'm amazed that people still go on these shows.
A common background for many a TV news set is a large image of the city skyline with monitors and other visuals to give it a "near the newsroom" look. A common set-building technique is to intentionally blur the background imagery before it is printed and installed on the set. Monitors are blurred with glass panels and such - or faked altogether. As a result, the background looks like it's a dozen feet away from the talent when in fact it's only a few feet.
I'm sure that's where this guy came up with the "idea" for his "technique"... |
|
Ric Tapia, Photographer, Assistant
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 2:29 PM on 07.14.09 |
| ->> Bradly - VERY true! |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 4:05 PM on 07.14.09 |
| ->> Jeff, I seriously think you missed the whole point here. That is supposedly a site for videojournalists where you have some dimwit telling people it's okay to "fake" backgrounds and replace them? No wonder we're in trouble. If you're not outraged about this you should be. And to address your other comment about ethics concerns. One of the reasons there is so much talk nowadays about ethics is because quite frankly ten or fifteen years ago the technology wasn't readily available for every GWC to have, as one former member of SS used to say about himself, "mad photoshop skills". People losing their jobs has nothing to do with ethical concerns? I would say just the opposite. I humbly suggest with the loss of good PHOTOJOURNALISTS and the use of the "citizen GWC" submitted photo we are very close to the day when no one will trust what we do. Just sitting on the sidelines and thinking about the past is a waste of time. I would suggest that part of our jobs, now more than ever, is to inform and educate the general public about what we do. At least I feel that's part of my job. When someone wants me to "pose" a shot I calmly explain our company policy and how we as photojournalists are not allowed to "set up" photos. I usually receive a stunned look but then they usually say, "Wow, that's cool I had no idea." And to be honest I know a lot of really great TV videographers but as I have said time and time again with us having to adapt to video there is a huge gap in the way TV guys do there job and the way we do. It's comparing apples and oranges a lot of times. Watch any TV newscast of "news magazine". You think the photographers randomly saw that subject wistfully walking down the sidewalk in their Sunday best with fresh make-up. Come on. |
|
Aaron Rhoads, Photographer
|
mccomb | ms | | Posted: 4:10 PM on 07.14.09 |
| ->> Hey, I love those, walking down the sidewalk for no reason shots. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 4:40 PM on 07.14.09 |
->> I humbly suggest with the loss of good PHOTOJOURNALISTS and the use of the "citizen GWC" submitted photo we are very close to the day when no one will trust what we do.
A - freaking- MEN!!!
At the very least in most professions or segments of professions, there is a certain peer respect and review that keeps most people in line. The GWC journalist has no such tie to the 'profession' and has no vested interest in journalism. I know that I'm stereo typing but to the average (here comes the hate mail) GWC the goal is to get PUBLISHED not to split hairs on whether the sky was deep deep red, or slightly pink. Those are minor details, deep deep red LOOKS better when their neighbor sees the photo in print with the courtesy Glenn W. Canon. |
|
Delane B. Rouse, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Washington | DC | US | Posted: 5:34 PM on 07.14.09 |
| ->> Damn, I just wasted 11 minutes of my life looking at that crappy "work" and I'll never get that back |
|
Bradly J. Boner, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Jackson | WY | USA | Posted: 5:35 PM on 07.14.09 |
->> "I humbly suggest with the loss of good PHOTOJOURNALISTS and the use of the "citizen GWC" submitted photo we are very close to the day when no one will trust what we do."
And a few years after that, no one will CARE what we do, because we won't even be around anymore. I fear the day will come when news outlets rely on "citizen journalists" for a majority of their visual content because they are willing to sacrifice credibility in the name of reducing costs. |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 6:18 PM on 07.14.09 |
->> Oh it just keeps getting better. Read the response from the woman who runs this website (she's getting blasted by journalists from all over the place) Here's her response to the piece:
"Okay, full disclosure! I found this at the end of my feed reader, and it was late at night by the time I got to it. I watched about 1:15 of the tutorial and I thought it would be helpful for some readers. I posted the tutorial without watching it all the way through. Based on previous posts from Steve, I really thought it was legit.
Now that I’ve watched the entire thing, and you’ve pointed out the ethical implications of what Steve is suggesting, I totally agree with you.
I’m sorry I’ve posted this, and I’ll take more due care in the future (even if it’s 3 AM!)."
Yikes, might have been funnier if it had turned out to be a porn tutorial..... |
|
Dave Doonan, Photographer
|
Kingston | TN | USA | Posted: 6:24 PM on 07.14.09 |
->> the vid has been pulled down!
Power to the people! |
|
Jamie Roper, Photographer
|
Portland | OR | United States | Posted: 6:27 PM on 07.14.09 |
| ->> Go Jeff Mills! |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|