| 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
the most awesome photo from Haiti!
Joe Cavaretta, Photographer
|
David Welker, Photographer, Student/Intern
 |
Springfield | MO | USA | Posted: 2:01 PM on 01.22.10 |
| ->> wow.. very awe inspiring. |
|
Mike Strasinger, Photographer
|
Nashville | TN | USA | Posted: 2:42 PM on 01.22.10 |
| ->> Good to see some good news in a photo. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 3:31 PM on 01.22.10 |
->> Joe, Why could that still not have been derived from a full-motion capture?
--Mark |
|
Steve Ueckert, Photographer
|
Houston | TX | | Posted: 9:48 PM on 01.22.10 |
| ->> I saw this as a video clip and thought at the time I hope someone has this as a good, clean, tight still. It is by far the best moment I have seen since I first learned of the quake. |
|
Jacob Langston, Photographer
|
Orlando | FL | | Posted: 9:54 PM on 01.22.10 |
->> Mark,
That ship has sailed.
We aren't grabbing stills from video. People were wrong when they made that prediction. They were so wrong that now every still camera has a video function instead of us grabbing stills from video. |
|
Luke Sharrett, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Matthew Bush, Photographer
|
Hattiesburg | MS | USA | Posted: 10:46 PM on 01.22.10 |
->> Nice.
I may be nuts but has anybody noticed were (PJ's) are showing up more and more on national news ? I have seen probably 4 interviews with shooters about something they have shot/did this week on cnn or fox. |
|
Jamey Price, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Charlotte | NC | USA | Posted: 11:48 PM on 01.22.10 |
| ->> funny photog too. Great link. THANK YOU! |
|
Debra L Rothenberg, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 12:25 AM on 01.23.10 |
->> Matthew McDermott from NYC
great photo! And I am fairly certain he went to Haiti on his own (without an assignment) |
|
Scott Strazzante, Photographer
|
Chicago | IL | USA | Posted: 12:21 PM on 01.23.10 |
->> It would be refreshing if that image won a Pulitzer.
I preferred the days when a single image won the Pulitzer instead of a photo story from one or multiple photographers. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 2:14 PM on 01.23.10 |
->> Jacob,
That ship is just pulling into port. Still and video equipment is still in the process of merging. Eventually, we will stop distinguishing between the two types of gear.
--Mark |
|
Joseph D. Sullivan, Photographer
|
Jacob Langston, Photographer
|
Orlando | FL | | Posted: 4:22 PM on 01.23.10 |
->> Mark,
No offense, but you are way off.
The truth is many of the people preaching this video gospel are now out of the business.....doing video! They tried to push it on everyone else because they enjoyed doing it. Many of the people making guesses about the future of our business have been dead wrong and now are out of the business completely.
Video is expensive to produce, takes a long time to produce AND edit and the equipment and extra personnel are costly. That is a big investment for a small return.....video and multimedia just doe not get many clicks on news websites. We had very low numbers on our multimedia even though we produced well done and thought provoking pieces. Our photo galleries get TONS of clicks. Big investments with small returns are a failure in any industry. As much as we love what we do, we have to remember it is a business first.
People forget we can offer what the TV stations can’t. That is original content in a completely different format, still photographs. Here in Orlando on a typical news scene we will have the big 3 stations (NBC, CBS, ABC), Fox, CFN13 (our local news station owned by the cable company), and 2 Spanish speaking news stations. Our newspaper has zero competition in the area for what we do. We are IT.
I just believe and will always believe in the still photograph. Not to mention that when you read a print story with still photographs it leaves a little bit to the imagination, which I love. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 6:41 PM on 01.23.10 |
->> Jacob, I admit that I'm out of the still business and am doing video. But I did spend more than 25 years as an editorial still photographer, primarily for newspapers.
I also have an extremely good track record of prognosticating what is coming, from the widespread adoption of digital imaging, to the death of newspapers as we have known them.
Are video captures currently as good as dedicated stills? No they are not. But digital imaging wasn't good enough for even newsprint use in 1990 either. Digital SLRs then also cost north of $20,000 for less than two megapixels.
These days, you can't even find a consumer camera that doesn't have both still and video capabilities.
Video and still have been converging for a couple of decades. Nobody is suggesting that the process is going to even slow down, let alone stop. There have been a couple of recent major magazine covers shot with Red One cameras. The Red One doesn't have a "still" mode.
One of the reasons for video's "failure" in newspaper websites is that the underlying infrastructure of users has yet to catch up to the medium. Video is still a pain to watch online for many people.
There is also the wrongheaded evaluation of video's place in the editorial continuum. It can't be held to the same viewership standards of broadcast or cable television. In newspapers, it's also operating within a medium that has largely been rejected by techno-savvy (meaning young) people. Newspaper home pages are being operated to function like the front page of a printed newspaper. The problem is that people don't consume news that way any more. They come up in the middle of the product -- often for a single story.
The killer reason though, as always, is money. If you can derive both media from a single piece of equipment, that is the way the marketplace is going to force it to be. There is no plausible technical obstacle to exactly that happening.
--Mark |
|
Jacob Langston, Photographer
|
Orlando | FL | | Posted: 7:28 PM on 01.23.10 |
->> Sorry to get a bit off topic on this, but the photo from Haiti was a beautiful photo.
Mark, I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
Anyone with a pulse could have predicted that newspapers were going to go through some changes. The ones that do succeed will be the ones that realize that video and multimedia weren't the savior that everyone believed.
It looks as though still cameras will have a video function instead of us grabbing stills from video. I would be willing to bet that you didn't predict that one. And honestly how many publications can afford the Red One cameras? It would not make a bit of sense for a publication to buy one of those for the possibility of grabbing a still every now and then from video when stills are their main focus.
It looks as though you proved my point exactly. You are a video guy no longer in the industry.
You say that the one of the reasons for videos failure on newspaper websites is that "the underlying infrastructure of users has yet to catch up to the medium". Is that a fancy way of saying that readers on newspaper websites don't want or care about video? Because that is the truth in all of this. You can't push something on them that they do not want.
Newspapers aren't dead as we know them. They are changing. You left the industry, you gave up, you moved on. I did not. |
|
Frank Niemeir, Photographer
 |
Woodstock | GA | usa | Posted: 8:22 PM on 01.23.10 |
->> Wonderful moment and captured quickly. Reminds me of Cassius Clay over Sony Liston by Neil Leifer, where it happened in the blink of an eye.
But, is it just me or something else disconcerting that in this day an age, that some designer at CNN would flop the image at the 1:21 mark, and that an editor, in this day and age, would let it get on on-air with it being manipulated? |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 8:46 PM on 01.23.10 |
->> Jacob,
I've been talking about these things for more than 15 years. The Red One is the NC2000 of today. (Massively expensive, only a hint of capability to come.)
Still cameras with video functions are a precursor to dedicated still functionality disappearing entirely. And yes, since the first consumer digital still cameras were actually still-video cameras, a lot of people predicted that one.
Just because I'm not making a paycheck from newspapers doesn't mean that I'm not "in the industry." As an industry writer, I make it a point to be involved in the newspaper industry on a daily basis on every level short of going out and personally shooting assignments.
"the underlying infrastructure of users has yet to catch up to the medium" means that computers and bandwidth are still too slow for many (not all) people -- something we've seen many times, including with digital still images themselves. People used to say that users would never put up with a 40k image loading on a slow dial-up connection.
You're right, I have given up on newspapers, I've also recognized and written that a critical mass of the market has also given up and has been doing so since the end of World War II.
--Mark |
|
Jacob Langston, Photographer
|
Orlando | FL | | Posted: 9:03 PM on 01.23.10 |
->> Just because you have been talking about this for 15 years does not mean you are right. Your photos on your page are 30 years old.....you obviously are not a still guy.
You are ignoring all of the evidence showing the complete opposite of what you say. We are not grabbing stills from video. Still cameras are adding video capability not the other way around. Stills will always be here. There are hundreds of members on this website that still believe in the power of the still image.
Do you also believe in flying cars and getting out meals from a single pill?
I am about done commenting on this. Respectfully, I still believe that you are 100% wrong. You believe what you believe and I cannot change your mind.
If we are all running around with a Red One in 10 years please find me and tell me I was wrong. How many people on this website do you think own a Red One? |
|
Debra L Rothenberg, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 9:24 PM on 01.23.10 |
->> WHIPLASH, as I turn my head thinking "WTF???"
I came to this thread to read more about "The Most Awesome photo from Haiti" and...am I reading another thread? WHy not create another thread if you boys want to bicker about the life of stills vs. video and video grabs.
I want to read more about that awesome, wonderful photo that Matthew McDermott took. A photo that makes me smile and brings tears to my eyes. A photo that moves me like no other photo has moved me in such a long time.
Now back to THE topic of THIS thread.... |
|
Jacob Langston, Photographer
|
Orlando | FL | | Posted: 9:32 PM on 01.23.10 |
->> Debra,
I am trying to carry an educated and respectful conversation about the future of our industry.
In no way do I find it bickering.
If you read the original post by the original author it stated IMHO, video just can't do the same thing as stills."
Our conversation is about as on topic as it could be. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 9:50 AM on 01.24.10 |
->> Jacob, With all due respect, when it comes to what you know about me, you don't know what you're talking about.
--Mark |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|
