tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904006.post3652790470035533387..comments2023-05-31T08:23:32.968-05:00Comments on PhotoJournalism: What's "replacing" PJs?Mark M. Hancockhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09437709649380849793noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904006.post-19948788264211479592007-02-19T22:23:00.000-06:002007-02-19T22:23:00.000-06:00True. The short-term jobs are shifting from small ...True. The short-term jobs are shifting from small papers to stressed-out AP editors (they'll need to hire a <B>lot</B> more).<BR/>However, significant news is seriously falling through the cracks. <BR/>For example, all this week you'll see Mardi Gras images on this site. Our staff literally shot thousands of images. AP got none. I'm sure AP thought the 200,000+ CJs who attended would submit. AP Mark M. Hancockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09437709649380849793noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904006.post-11467333644072056752007-02-19T21:54:00.000-06:002007-02-19T21:54:00.000-06:00I finally found enough time to pop over to NowPubl...I finally found enough time to pop over to NowPublic to browse the current batch of just-in pix: some from a lunar New Year celebration, and some from an SF convention. Not much information except titles and confusing license information. (Creative Commons has a bunch of different licenses, so saying the photo is distributed under a CC license doesn't say much.) If AP or other old-line news cehwiedelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10552223185165015882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904006.post-82670375754007502792007-02-19T19:53:00.000-06:002007-02-19T19:53:00.000-06:00At least you're trying to make people pay for your...At least you're trying to make people pay for your work. If you get the "once in a generation" shot, I hope you work it right and get rich from it.<BR/>This isn't a competition for a gig or even a job. When anyone hands a company their work for free, the company has no need for staff or freelancers. As people retire or move, those jobs are eliminated.<BR/>It's a war of attrition. The loser who Mark M. Hancockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09437709649380849793noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904006.post-44990252333286125942007-02-19T11:32:00.000-06:002007-02-19T11:32:00.000-06:00Oh, dear. I am tiptoeing in where angels fear to t...Oh, dear. I am tiptoeing in where angels fear to tread, but I am compelled to say *something*. I fall into the "citizen journalist" category, though I style myself as "freelance" and have earned a vanishingly small return from royalty-free stock. I have been working hard at turning myself into some level of professional for over a year now, but make no claims beyond a willingness to try, poke at cehwiedelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10552223185165015882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904006.post-51034769047502466452007-02-15T06:43:00.000-06:002007-02-15T06:43:00.000-06:00That's what happened in Lebanon. If a PJ deliberat...That's what happened in Lebanon. If a PJ deliberately manipulates an image, the PJ is done in the biz. <BR/>A CJ isn't in the biz. What do they have to lose?Mark M. Hancockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09437709649380849793noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904006.post-62080817412261529942007-02-14T15:09:00.000-06:002007-02-14T15:09:00.000-06:00One day, an editor somewhere will get burned by an...One day, an editor somewhere will get burned by an image that was well Photoshopped by an ambitious amateur. And what happens to journalistic credibility then?adamonse@gmail.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09755468204581933938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904006.post-11951144475948231092007-02-14T08:02:00.000-06:002007-02-14T08:02:00.000-06:00Rather than getting in an "us vs. them" argument (...Rather than getting in an "us vs. them" argument (all pros started as amateurs), I'd simply prefer everyone gets paid. If a magazine wants to pay $300 for three cell phone shots with no cutlines, fine. I'd bet they'll hire a pro next time.<BR/>If there's a pile of horse poop, there's a pony somewhere. We just need to find it.Mark M. Hancockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09437709649380849793noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904006.post-90200800649488156912007-02-14T01:23:00.000-06:002007-02-14T01:23:00.000-06:00" This year, AP stopped paying contributors tra..." This year, AP stopped paying contributors transmission fees for feature photos. It was a token amount, but some underpaid PJs used it to make ends meet. Those PJs must now consider leaving the biz. So, yes, it does matter. If CJs don't demand money for their images, pro PJs must quit their jobs. If CJs demand payment, then clients would rather hire a pro."<BR/><BR/>excellent point...I am Jen Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03490304196231997482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904006.post-55762279411637478032007-02-14T00:41:00.000-06:002007-02-14T00:41:00.000-06:00Yup. I've noticed some stuff that could be challen...Yup. I've noticed some stuff that could be challenged for copyright. Luckily, it's considered an "editorial" site or there would be scores of trademark and trade dress issues as well.<BR/><BR/>I'm just waiting on the first CJ libel, false light, intrusion, trespass and invasion of privacy cases. It ought to get fun about then. ;-} <BR/><BR/>Does anyone think AP will legally defend the free CJ Mark M. Hancockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09437709649380849793noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904006.post-11250537811605438382007-02-13T12:50:00.000-06:002007-02-13T12:50:00.000-06:00OK I stand corrected. Given all the issues you ra...OK I stand corrected. Given all the issues you raised in the original post (lack of info about the photos etc), I failed to see how these CJs would be much of a threat. I guess time will tell how large the impact will be.<BR/><BR/>PS When I clicked on their latest images link yesterday I saw mostly Anna Nicole Smith stuff . . . I wonder if they were even original images?Phliphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08339600171438628502noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904006.post-59573894200971830152007-02-13T07:31:00.000-06:002007-02-13T07:31:00.000-06:00Yes, you are paying for the "hobby." You don't pay...Yes, you are paying for the "hobby." You don't pay as much as a pro might for camera equipment, but you made an investment to make the images.<BR/>This year, AP stopped paying contributors transmission fees for feature photos. It was a token amount, but some underpaid PJs used it to make ends meet. Those PJs must now consider leaving the biz. So, yes, it does matter. If CJs don't demand money forMark M. Hancockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09437709649380849793noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904006.post-7887771504120214752007-02-12T23:26:00.000-06:002007-02-12T23:26:00.000-06:00The worst part is CJs are paying to provide conten...<I>The worst part is CJs are paying to provide content. They pay for the equipment, they pay for fuel, they may purchase access to an event, they pay an Internet Service Provider to transmit images. Any way we look at it, the CJs are paying to have their images taken from them.</I><BR/><BR/>Unless they are "photo hobbyists" who just carry their cheap digicam everywhere they go (like I do) at no Phliphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08339600171438628502noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904006.post-36774529551631555052007-02-12T19:01:00.000-06:002007-02-12T19:01:00.000-06:00I'm kind of dumbfounded by all this. Part of me th...I'm kind of dumbfounded by all this. Part of me thinks the AP is smart to align themselves with this group. The majority of the stuff the CJs produce will be useless to the AP, but if something happens and one of these CJs get something breaking or significant, AP will be the first news service to have it. <BR/><BR/>Most of me, however, is outraged that some photo hobbyist with a half-decent Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08792813682923795094noreply@blogger.com