Staff photogs shooting advertising
Richard Sitler
photography and I was wondering what others out there think.
At smaller papers it is often common for staff photographers to have to
shoot for the advertising department. Our discusion is does a paper
that requires the photographers to shoot advertising effect the paper's
appearance of objectivity?
I have worked at papers that required the occasional ad shot and ones
that don't. Fortunately I am now I am not shooting any advertising.
Rich Sitler
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Eric Welch
>Our discusion is does a paper
>that requires the photographers to shoot advertising effect the paper's
>appearance of objectivity?
Other than the fact that literal objectivity is impossible...the short
answer is, maybe. I think shooting advertising is a conflict of interest.
If you are shooting for a business - and that's what you're doing if you're
shooting ads - it would be harder to go back and do something they find
negative. They'll expect you to cooperate, because that's the role they
have come to expect form you.
I think it shouldn't be done, but there are lots of papers that think
otherwise. And small papers don't have the luxury of hiring a separate
advertising photographers. It's their choice, and you have to deal with it
as best you can. I have always thought the ad pictures would be better
(bean counters, please read: sell more ads) if someone who specializes in
it is more enthusiastic in the execution and doesn't have to worry about
any conflict.
Eric Welch
St. Joseph, MO
http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch
Never forget: 2 + 2 = 5 for extremely large values of 2.
Emily L. Ferguson
it's been a great shoot except for the pouring rain.
How do people keep their lenses unfogged and raindrop-free under these
circumstances?
Emily L. Ferguson - Cape Cod, Massachusetts
e...@cape.com
Photographer, English Country Dance leader
Small brave carnivores
Kill pine cones and mosquitoes.
Fear vacuum cleaner.
from "Kitty Haiku"
Emily L. Ferguson
>answer is, maybe. I think shooting advertising is a conflict of interest.
>If you are shooting for a business - and that's what you're doing if you're
>shooting ads - it would be harder to go back and do something they find
>negative. They'll expect you to cooperate, because that's the role they
>have come to expect form you.
My paper shoots all the ads in town. There's no space for a commercial
photog in this town because of that. Recently I've been invited to
consider the job described in the paragraph below. Aside from the learning
curve I'm still conflicted about the ethics of the whole situation. Not
only does our service rob commercial photogs of a living, but we are
grossly underpaid for doing the work, compared to the real world.
>
>I think it shouldn't be done, but there are lots of papers that think
>otherwise. And small papers don't have the luxury of hiring a separate
>advertising photographers. It's their choice, and you have to deal with it
>as best you can. I have always thought the ad pictures would be better
>(bean counters, please read: sell more ads) if someone who specializes in
>it is more enthusiastic in the execution and doesn't have to worry about
>any conflict.
I'd really like to hear some discussion about the ethics of this on this
list. It bothers me a lot at my job. Also if your paper has guidelines
for usage of reprints from ad shoots I'd like to see them. Is there a
universal position, for instance, on reuse by the customer for advertising
in other publications, newsletters to customers of the business you shot
the ad for, citations and credits, web usage? Does your paper pay you or
even just your tuition and costs to go to school to acquire skills? Does
your paper have a table top studio set-up for this commercial shooting?
TIA
Steven E. Frischling
I can't help you with how to keep rain drops
off your lens, aside from the suggestion to
shoot while aiming your lens slight in the
downward direction. I do this sometimes with
wide angle lenses in crummer weather, and if
that is not an option I hope the incident is
far enough away so I can use a 300f2.8 with
a lens hood.
As for fogging, go to your local ski shop and
ask for an anti-fog cloth. I used to use
these while snowboard racing, and eventually
figured out that I could use these anti-fog
rags on my lenses with no adverse affects.
In the winter I usually give my front element,
rear-element, focusing screen, mirror and
view finders the once over. Works pretty good
(of course it only wears off when you least
expect it).
Happy Hunting !
Steven E. Frischling
Photojournalist
1(516)791-6114 - Voice
1(630)982-5179 - Fax
ste...@frischling.com
http://www.frischling.com/steven
-
Basic Elemental, Instinct To Survive,
Stirs The Higher Passions, Thrill To Be Alive
-
Sent by Discovery Mail
Jeff Broddle
>for usage of reprints from ad shoots I'd like to see them. Is there a
>universal position, for instance, on reuse by the customer for advertising
>in other publications, newsletters to customers of the business you shot
>the ad for, citations and credits, web usage? Does your paper pay you or
>even just your tuition and costs to go to school to acquire skills?
Emily and all:
My view on this is that ultimately you have to go along with the wants of
your publisher, or feel free to move on to another paper that doesn't make
you shoot for advertisers.
Overall, though, I think that some publishers just don't realize their
shooters are photoJOURNALISTS and not photographers. After all, would the ad
department ask a reporter to write ad copy if they were short handed? Does
it seem fair to get your hourly wage for making a nice photo for XYZ
Company's $900 ad?
And businesses should not be allowed to take the images shot by a newspaper
staffer and use them anywhere else. I imagine management is within its
rights to do so, because the copyrights would be theirs under work for hire,
but a newspaper should know better than to give away its stuff for free.
Apparently some don't.
Jeff Broddle
jeffb...@yahoo.com
_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
Elaine M. Thompson
the "Seattle sunshine." Umbrellas, towels, plastic bags, home-made covers,
hide it under the jacket, etc. It's always a challenge.
Best solution for me so far are the Tenba rain covers I discovered this
past winter--one of our wettest on record. They're costly (but much less so
than a trip to the repair shop), made of lightweight nylon and cleverly
designed to fit around a camera (slightly more awkward with digital bodies)
and lens with clear plastic located over the viewfinder. They fit very well
in a bag or pocket and go on and off pretty easily and dry fairly quickly.
They come in various sizes and you can skip the Velcro if you want and just
rubber band on the end of the lens. The downsides are few--the
controls are harder to get to, so they work best with auto expose and
focus. Inexplicably, they're not designed with a camera strap in mind, but
two minutes with scissors and duct tape solves that. That and a clean
bandana in the bag or pocket seems to work pretty well.
Elaine T.
Wetside, Washington