| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/19/2008 08:39:52 AM · #1 |
Okay......I'm learning sports photography/photojournalism, and the local paper has me on their stringer list. One thing that I encountered when I was talking to the photography editor was the usage of PhotoShop. He was very specific on sizing,color matching, and how he wanted certain imagery done. He showed me an image that he had used in the paper and asked me what I would have done with it. The image was an outside basketball shot that was reasonably clean except for the slightest rear corner of a car in the lower potion of the image. I said that I would have cloned out the car.....at which point he became almost incensed and explained to me that you cannot remove distinct items from the images because of that being a truth in editorialism kind of thing.....I dunno if that's the right term.
So....I guess what my question is, going back to what  MattO stated in a sports thread,
"Three things matter in a sports shot Faces, ball, and action(preferably peak). IMHO you need at least two to submit a shot to an editor. The third makes it an outstanding shot usually. Work for peak action shots. Shoot tight, open the lens, and get the exposure for the face."
and what Man_Called_Horse commented here on my image.....sports photography can be exceedingly difficult due to something as basic as location.
"The grey lines cutting through the athletes are not desireable in a well done sports picture."
As well as the grey lines (They were the park waliking path and the road by the park where the soccer field is located.), there's the obvious issues with the cars in the parking lot at the one end, and the fence and building that are the township offices at the other end.
So.....how critical is the background before a shot becomes unusable, and how much PP work is "Legal" before you really can't offer up an image as truth in reporting?
[thumb]731930[/thumb] [thumb]731929[/thumb] [thumb]731951[/thumb] [thumb]731932[/thumb] [thumb]732008[/thumb]
I thought that the first three were okay except for the road & path, the fourth on has the township builing fence, and the last one I would probably submitted at all because of the cars....(Even though that's *my* little princess in the purple!)
So I would appreciate y'all's thought on A: Background Crap, B: usability, and C: "Legality" of PS work......I cannot change what the photogrphy editor at the paper will ot will not accept, but I'd like y'all's take on whether or not he's living in the real world. This is a dinky, not very high circulation newspaper in a small town.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2008 08:53:13 AM · #2 |
My personal feeling- Nothing that appears in a newspaper of news magazine should be altered beyond minimal adjustments- Color, density, contrast and cropping (and even then very limited cropping).
A couple of years ago I shot "backup" for a friend of mine from the local paper. I learned alot in the two weeks that I helped him out. At the time he was shooting Soccer and Football he picked his spots largely for uncluttered backgrounds. At the end of the day we'd sit down at the computer and he would sort his images based on overall quality of the action captured and then go through and pull things out that had poor backgrounds. When he submitted to his editor he sent him two folders- one with good backgrounds, and one with good action but less than ideal backgrounds.
He told me that he had missed some great action because he'd be shooting into poor backgrounds (this was very true of the two soccer fields we worked), but it didn't matter the editor wouldn't have used them anyway. |
|
|
|
10/19/2008 08:53:46 AM · #3 |
| From talking to one of the photo editors at the local paper here before, his take was that photoshop should be used in PJ for color adjustment, sizing, and cropping. You gotta think as a pj, you are just trying to capture exactly what the scene was, not what the scene should be. |
|
|
|
10/19/2008 08:54:32 AM · #4 |
This might give you some insight:
DPC thread linkie
I hope to ask him about his side of the story some day.
Message edited by author 2008-10-19 08:55:17. |
|
|
|
10/19/2008 10:40:59 AM · #5 |
I can use photoshop to make simple basic editing adjustments to shots I submit to the newspaper. However cloning, removing objects or anything distracting.........well that has to be done prior to pushing the shutter. As a member of NPPA I have agreed to uphold this code of ethics.
Our editor gave the three sports photographer a good talking too a couple of years ago when one of the photographers decided he needed to fix redeye and did an awful job, it made it past the editor and others who proof and it went to print. Was an awful job and was obvious. The owner of the paper a long time editor, who started out as a journalist gave the editor a long talk, and it was then past along to us.
Short answer, if you dont like the background, or the items in your photo, dont submit them to the paper. Sometimes news and sports happens and you cant help the background, not everyone can shoot in a pro arena with great backgrounds. Thats why fast lens help you blur them into oblivian. :D
Matt
|
|
|
|
10/19/2008 11:07:41 AM · #6 |
I worked at my University's newspaper and when shooting sports, as Matt said, you simply have to use a wide-open aperture to place the background out of focus, and you have to use a lens of at least 200mm, hopefully 300mm or more, depending on the sport and your proximity to the action.
The exception to this would be if you're going for a 'concept' shot and not an action shot, then use whatever lens you want to achieve the effect, otherwise long lens + low aperture = shallow depth of field = no distracting background & interesting action photo. The photos you posted have way too high of depth of field, everything is in focus!
And you can't clone things out in newspapers, not even incidental power lines. Only lens blemishes and such. |
|
|
|
10/19/2008 12:50:02 PM · #7 |
Jeb, the only thing I can add to Matt suggestions is this...
..locate the best bg, with the best light, and let the action come to you.
Don't run from one end to the other on a field or court, because you will miss shots, and it is just physically impossible to get to point A to point B all the time. You will wear yourself out.
Let the action present itself to you, anticipating what is going to happen. Know your sport.
I know baseball and football. Those are sports I am comfortable with shooting.
If you can afford it, get another camera and put a pocket wizard rig together so you can get other angles like the angle above the net during a basketball game, or the angle on home plate, or the angle at the other end of the soccer, or football field.
I can not stress enough however,...KNOW YOUR SPORT.
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2008 01:28:02 PM · #8 |
| You mention that it is a good idea to pick your background and use a shallow depth of field, but would it not be acceptable to use Photoshop to create your blurred background. I understand that you should keep as much as possible in camera but there may be certain instances when a shot looks good but would benefit from a little blur of the background. |
|
|
|
10/19/2008 07:16:51 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Axleuk:
You mention that it is a good idea to pick your background and use a shallow depth of field, but would it not be acceptable to use Photoshop to create your blurred background. I understand that you should keep as much as possible in camera but there may be certain instances when a shot looks good but would benefit from a little blur of the background. |
That technique is useful on sites like DPC.
It doesn't fly with professional magazines, papers and trades.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/09/2025 08:49:18 AM EDT.
