Chicago Sun-Times Fires Photo Staff, Will Train Reporters to Use iPhones For Photos

[needfx]

ever since camera smartphones and point&shoot cameras (lately with wifi connectivity) every person in the world is a potential photojournalist for any major event, at any given location, at any given time, at which newspaper staff are not present. Only after the fact and with delays.

For example CNN-iReport & BBC-Have your say are already taking advantage of the fact that everybody has such a device on their person and are asked to share photos & comments of/on the event.

Even though this is drifting away from the original context of the article, it is evidence of the changing world in journalism & how depiction of major events comes in their "presses".

on another note, maybe the newspaper in case is going to rely on outsourced material instead of employing full time photographers.

 

[Lancer]

Not a good day for professional photographers, while I agree in some situations the iPhone will work just fine it will degrade the quality of their publication.

Not a good move!

 

[mrxak]

Pretty much the Chicago Sun-Times is going to have either really bad photographs or a lot of stock photographs. Newspaper photographs are rarely high res or even have a lot of technical quality. What they're good for is capturing a particular moment or emotion, or a creative composition that makes a statement. It takes decisiveness (a skill you're not going to learn in a 30 minute class on how to use your iPhone's camera), a good eye (either you have it or you don't, it's not easily learned), and a certain creativity to figure out what kind of shot you want before you even start shooting and then make that shot happen (something learned after a lot of experience shooting).

Speaking as a professional writer and as an amateur photographer, this is not going to be the sort of solution they probably think it will be. Somebody who has no clue about photography made this decision and it's a pretty dumb one. If they can't afford to pay photographers, they should just eliminate all photos from their newspaper instead.

They also probably should have considered training some of their photographers in journalism, and fired some of the journalists. Any journalist who sucks at taking pictures, a photographer who is good at writing can take their place. It's not so unusual for somebody to have skill in both writing and photography, but it's also not unusual for somebody to be terrible at one or the other. Eliminate the people who can't be trained in the other job.

This whole thing seems ridiculous. I hope they get some training with some changeable lens cameras, at least, since the iPhone is incapable of several kinds of photography.

 

[smirking]

That's a lot different than using freelancers. Or even buying wire images.

There's nothing saying that they won't do either on top of using the iPhone army.

I find this story to be sad, but neither surprising nor do I find it idiotic as many people here do. I say this as a friend of a couple of professional photographers and as a photography enthusiast who still scoffs at anything taken on a non DSLR (ok, I exaggerate). It costs a lot of money to support a fleet of photographers and the unfortunate thing is that most readers won't appreciate the difference between professional shots and amateur shots.

A lot of smaller dailies and weeklies have already made the move to rely mostly on freelance and citizen shot photos.

 

[mixel]

Err.. This is a hilariously bad idea.. All the situations where an iPhone wont cut it.. Fast movement, low light.. I hope they aren't expecting *good* photos.

 

[martygras9]

Don't agree with this at all.

Hopefully they'll have the sense to at least bring on freelance. People are visual. Yes, the headline has to draw them in and the story has to be compelling. But come on, a (good) picture is worth a thousand words.

An then, Getty and corbis saw a rise in purchases from the Sun Times.

 

[RickyB]

If this is so "idiotic," the Sun-Times will regret the decision, and lose tons of money. We'll see just how idiotic it ends up being.

If I was one of the fired photo staff I'd think it was idiotic, and would have a lot of stronger words to use too.

 

[ScottishDuck]

Good thing the world of printed media is collapsing because it's been a cancer on society for a long time.

 

[jlc1978]

Photography has been turning more into hobby that anyone can pick up for years... It's a shame, and professional photographers will still be necessary, but as someone else mentioned that's life...

While that is a common belief I think people confuse the widespread availability of tools with the ability to use them. The advent of digital removed many of the steps needed to produce a print and made it easy to machine gun photos since, unlike film, it cost as much to take 10 shoots as 1; so people set the camera to auto and rapid fire and gun away. That hasn't made them a good photographer, all it does is produce many more crappy photos. The basics of photography are still the same - framing, lighting, composition, etc.; all things that take time to learn and skill to master. Yes anyone can take pictures but that does not make one a photographer.

From a budget perspective this is a no brainier.... And it's a newspaper not a magazine... iPhone photos will do just fine.

The problem is the reporter is getting information so they can tell the story with words and the photo is merely an addition to the words; the photographer is telling a story with a picture. Sure it saves money but something is lost in the process; but since papers are struggling to survive the move is understandable.

 

[pittpanthersfan]

Deleted.

 

[Kissaragi]

I had to double check it wasn't april 1st after reading this!

 

[sweetbrat]

This whole thread highlights the ridiculousness of poor context.

The newspaper lets go of it's photography staff. In the article, it's pretty explicit that freelance photographers will be utilized to augment. The firm is simply managing their OPEX costs for retained staff. News organizations contract Getty, AP, and other image providers to provide high quality photographic content - because that's what those companies are good at.

The second article explains that they are training their journalists to take pictures. In no way was there any mention that iPhone photography would be the exclusive photographic content source for the newspaper.

Sure, that's what the AP does. What they don't do is cover anything local. If there's one thing people do still read in newspapers, it's local news. Take this from someone that, up until recently, worked for a newspaper. I left by my own decision, in case you're wondering. Local news stories are what's going to be hurt by this. We have two full-time photographers on staff. You can tell the difference in the photos they take compared to the ones the reporters take. Easily. It's a matter of skill and equipment both. Those photos of local festivals, accidents, crime scenes...those photos don't come from Getty or the AP. They come from well-trained local photographers. That's what you'll be losing.

 

[Shrink]

Sure, that's what the AP does. What they don't do is cover anything local. If there's one thing people do still read in newspapers, it's local news. Take this from someone that, up until recently, worked for a newspaper. I left by my own decision, in case you're wondering. Local news stories are what's going to be hurt by this. We have two full-time photographers on staff. You can tell the difference in the photos they take compared to the ones the reporters take. Easily. It's a matter of skill and equipment both. Those photos of local festivals, accidents, crime scenes...those photos don't come from Getty or the AP. They come from well-trained local photographers. That's what you'll be losing.

The sad truth is, newspapers seem to be going the way of the dinosaur...and that is a tragedy!

As a reader of the Boston Globe for about 40 years, the loss of advertising is shocking, and I fear for the papers continued existence. I recently switched from the print version of the paper to the online version...which is an exact copy of the print paper. As silly as it sounds, it was a decision I contemplated for about 3 months before I pulled the trigger...but it still requires the print paper to exist as it is an exact copy of the print version.

What's left is online junk, and TV news...which is beyond pathetic.

 

[milo]

With that mindset, why don't they just train janitors to write news stories? Obviously actual skill and experience means nothing to them.

A real shame, I've preferred the Sun Times to the trib for a long time but this is not a good sign.

 

[rtdunham]

You're never more than a few feet away from the story so no need to splurge on the iphone telephoto lens. Idiots.

That's a very uninformed comment. The arrogance makes it almost ironic.

<Also, there are TONS of camera lens accessories for the iPhone and they produce DSLR (if not BETTER than DSLR) quality>

How can people so wrong be so sure of themselves?

< And it's a newspaper not a magazine... iPhone photos will do just fine.>

I guess it depends on how discerning you are, or what papers you've been reading. The tampa bay times, for example, frequently runs photos that stop me in my tracks, and later in the day I run across people saying they were similarly affected. Great photography does exist--sometimes in newspapers.

(My brief: retired journalist. When freelancing I often doubled as photo-journalist. For personal use, I've replaced my SLR with compact digital cameras and now find myself using my iphone for most shots. But give me a camera with a bigger sensor and a 24-to-120 mm or more zoom, and I guarantee you my pics would be notably superior to those taken by any equally skilled, comparably trained iphone photographer.)

 

[Roller]

iPhones will be fine for many routine photographs. But in situations that call for better equipment (such as low light, rapid action, zoom), they'll be inferior. However, I'm more concerned by what this new task will do to reporters' ability to "get the story." It's going to be very difficult to balance taking decent shots against accurately recording the details of an event, whether it's with written notes or voice recordings.

 

[MegamanX]

I've been a staunch supporter of the iPhone as an amazing camera since the beginning, and it's only gotten better with every model.
I'm even a co-instructor of some popular online courses in how to take better images using a mobile device. The future will most definitely require journalists to be both reporters AND photographers, and I think upcoming models of the iPhone will definitely be the right tool for the job.

That said, I just don't think we're quite "there" yet, and I agree this is a dumb move (at least right now). Not only does the iPhone's camera capability need to be a little more advanced than it is currently, but you can't just expect non-trained journalists to have the necessary photographic eye to take the RIGHT kind of pics, and do it well. It's one thing to BE THERE where a story is unfolding with a camera in hand, and it's a completely different thing to know how to best CAPTURE that story in a clear, concise manner that gets the full meaning of the events across.

One of the mobile workshops I teach is actually a documentary/journalism class -- and even students who've had previous practice with regular cameras aren't always able to easily capture a "news" story well with an iPhone. It takes a lot of skill. And while it CAN be done, a trained photographer with a more professional camera is STILL going to take photos that are infinitely more appropriate, compelling and attention-grabbing.

I DO think training people to be both reporters AND photographers is inevitable, but it needs to happen more naturally and not be as forced as this.

Sorry but I can safely say the word that will never happen.

Smart phones in general will get better cameras but they will never be of the quality of DSR and what not. There is an issue of the lens and to be blunt you just are not going to get the quality of lens in something that small nor will you get the zoom factors. That is more of a matter of science.

It is not megapixels. It comes down to lenes. Smart phones have made it up to a level point and shoots but point and shoots had crappy lens in general.

To top all that off DSR are what not are going to keep getting better so smart phones will not be keeping up.

On top of all that there is a true art to taking pictures and lets face it most people do not have that eye. I sure as hell do not and to top it off I have no interested in trying to learn that craft. I can have the best camera on the market and true photographer would beat the crap out of me with a point and shot in terms of pictures and quality of them because they would under stand light, angles and what not. They would get better shots.

I never buy their paper nor go to their website, but now I'm for sure never going to support their business.

Pretty much the same here. A link from the chicago times now I will refuse to click on and sure as hell will never buy one of there papers. I used to read some of their stuff on the internet. No any more.

 

[lolkthxbai]

From a financially perspective it makes sense but the quality of the photos will suffer. I don't think journalist have the proper experience to take over the photographers job. Not only that but the controls, sensors and lens that a DSLR has makes taking near impossible photos easy to shoot. Sports photography, for example, requires an insanely fast shutter speed or a zoom lens.

 

[Jimmy James]

On zoom fits all. Very minimal manual control. No shallow DOF. And it's a secondary focus for reporters.

We'll see how this develops.

 

[Binarymix]

Hah ha?



Oh wait, it's real.

FAIL!

 

[dysamoria]

Alex Garcia is 100% correct. This was an idiotic move. Maybe they should fire the rest of the staff and just let the executives do all the photos, reporting, website, printing... That might give them some worthwhile work for their money.

 

[Shrink]

On zoom fits all. Very minimal manual control. No shallow DOF. And it's a secondary focus for reporters.

We'll see how this develops.

Oh, shame on you!

 

[ValSalva]

With the state of writing these days maybe the Sun Times could have saved more money by firing the writers and just given the photographers a weekend crash course in writing. In this 'new age' aren't the pictures more important anyway?

 

[mslide]

Geez, photographers are so full of themselves. People who read newspapers don't give a crap what the photos look like. Nobody cares about your "art". iPhone pictures are more than good enough for most things. If I want to experience art, I'll go to a museum, not look in a newspaper.

Face it. As these small cameras get better and better, the need for an expensive SLR, and a dedicated person to operate it, goes down and down.

 

[Shrink]

Geez, photographers are so full of themselves. People who read newspapers don't give a crap what the photos look like. Nobody cares about your "art". iPhone pictures are more than good enough for most things. If I want to experience art, I'll go to a museum, not look in a newspaper.

Face it. As these small cameras get better and better, the need for an expensive SLR, and a dedicated person to operate it, goes down and down.

It's so good of you to speak for all of us who read the newspaper.

I wasn't aware that I didn't care about "art" in the paper.

Thanks so much for clarifying this for me...I must have been badly confused before.

Please consider the possibility that not everyone feels as you do about art in the papers. Photos, IMO, can make a major contribution the the impact of a story.