Yesterday Scott Winerton and I were assigned by our papers to shoot a late-breaking press conference at the capitol to announce some surprising changes in Utah’s legislation having to do with the LBGT communities. We stayed for the full press conference, made those photos, and then we stayed way after to look for something unique and spontaneous. I was able to follow Democrat Rep. Christine Johnson and Republican Senator Howard Stevenson onto the floor of the Senate as they said goodbye after the unique bipartisan partnership.
Here’s how it played out in print today:
As I was once told by a great friend of mine and multi-Pulitzer nominated photog, “Don’t look.” As in, don’t look how or what they run, or how they crop it… you’ll just be disappointed. Can’t say I do that all the time, but it’s good wisdom to live by.
yes true. But it’s like a train wreck – sometimes ya can’t help but watch. Good luck in Vegas P.
isn’t that a color page? I wonder why it was black and white?
This might be an interesting topic to take further. How many others here have decided “not to look” as Patrick wisely suggests?
Can we take an informal poll here? I can’t seem to help but look – even though it does disappoint me more often than not. I just can’t seem to let that part of me die – caring about how the work makes it’s way into print. Tell us what you feel……
Gotta look. Have to. Rage at photo editors keeps me warm.
Scott,
Keep on looking at the paper…it is great for my beer business. But seriously, this is the beauty of photo blogs like this one. We have complete control over what pictures we publish and how they are toned & cropped. On a photo blog, only you can decide whether or not text will molest your photos.
Don’t get me wrong, I still look. But on days I do and I am furious, I always think of my friend. I am just glad we don’t crop bacon strips. That’s a whole new topic! Hahaha.
It wasn’t that long ago that the photo department had complete control over how photojournalism was displayed in the Tribune. Good times to remember. I would have relished them more at the time if I’d known how things can change. As for looking at the paper, I went for a long time not looking because it had the potential to put me in a terrible mood for the rest of the day and that just wasn’t worth risking. I’d rather be happy. But for the past couple weeks I’ve been looking. There is amazing work being published on a daily basis in the two papers I get – Deseret News and Tribune. I try not to get worked up any more when things go wrong. There is nothing I can do about any of it in the current system. But things do change and I’m not going to give up the hope that it will get better in that respect.
If you dilute with your image submissions with weaker photos then you also dilute your reputation. To paraphrase/tweak an old saying, photographers are their own worst enemies; and to use another saying, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. To the first, only submit what you want to be printed because if you leave it to an editor that has no photographic background (second saying) the first photo that will be picked is the one that fits the page layout hole that was designed hours earlier. When you put together your portfolio or enter a contest you eliminate your weakest photos. Do the same with the images you submit to your desk. Reporters don’t write multiple stories of various lengths or angle takes. So why turn over multiple photos when only one will be used? If you tease them with one or two top notch photos they may come back wanting more — if there is more space. Then razzle/dazzle them with your other images by turning the story into a picture package or say there aren’t any more pix. And if there isn’t more space, then your top selects get published and not the ones you later complain about having been run instead.
Doug, you make a good point in your message about sending in the strongest edit “…. a chain is only as strong as it’s weakest link …. ” I agree with that one.