In another sign that print newspapers are dying, this week the Chicago Sun Times laid off it entire photo-journalist staff, and is training its reporters to use iPhones to shoot photographs for the paper! (ick)

Story

i don't know that paper very well. i know the Trib a lot better.

Well, I don't know that newspaper at all. The issue here is whether we might be seeing the beginning of a new trend where reporters will be asked to take the photos rather than using professional photographers?

Keep in mind that all major newspapers, and even most minor newspapers, have their editions online. The same photographs that appear in print also appear online. A lousy photo in print might pass the muster, but the poorer quality will likely be readily noticed in the online edition.

Also, a professional photographer is much like an artist. You can hand a group of people pads and pencils and ask them to draw pictures, but do you think their pictures will be as good as ones drawn by artists? You can hand a group of reporters cameras and ask them to take photos, but do you think their photos will be as good as ones taken by trained photographers?

A professional photographer not only knows the right lenses, camera settings, and lighting to use to produce good photographs, but they have the eye of an artist, knowing just how to position their camera to take an appealing, interesting, or substantive shot. You simply cannot get those same kinds of results from people not trained in taking photographs.

To use an analogy: You can hand anyone lumber and nails and ask them to build a shed, but the end result won't be the same as if a professional carpenter built it.

The Sun-Times is the "liberal" paper here and the Trib is the "conservative" paper ~ I'm thinking the Sun-Times is ahead of the curve with this move ~ newspapers, ALL in-print newspapers, are in trouble financially ~ and the web is largely responsible for that ~ the web provides virtually instant news, where at best print newspapers have 2 editions a day [and many are down to 1 edition] ~ personally, I haven't subscribed or even bought a print newspaper in years ~

Change is often unsettling ~ I don't know how much the photogs earn, but using the typical [not big name] reporter salary, I'm guessing the photogs earn less ~ but whatever the amount, multiplied by the number of photogs on the payroll, could add up to a print newspaper staying afloat or going under ~ this could work out well for the Sun-Times, with other newspapers following ~ or it could open a new revenue stream for professional photographers, who will sell their work to the same papers they used to work for ~ we'll have to see how this plays out ~

Sooz

Right! And some guy with an I Phone 200 feet away is going to capture a high speed car chase in the middle of the night while a building goes up in flames in the background. Sorry, folks, as handy as I Phones are, the technology and the skills just aren't there.

Also, a professional photographer is much like an artist. You can hand a group of people pads and pencils and ask them to draw pictures, but do you think their pictures will be as good as ones drawn by artists? You can hand a group of reporters cameras and ask them to take photos, but do you think their photos will be as good as ones taken by trained photographers?


My thoughts exactly. No more awards for photo journalism in their future, except as free agents and probably none for the paper. I'll bet the paper will be buying photos from the same people they are firing.

lol jim, did you know that you can buy a tele-photo lens, fish-eye and others for an iPhone? They would certainly help.

http://www.photigy.com/selecting-the-ri ... -review-1/

Cheap and quick crap over quality.
That's the "trend".

To go with the quick quip that passes as "news". Maybe a tweet or two quoted with that.

Pretty soon it'll all be outsourced to China or India.
Whether it's true/accurate or not won't matter as long as it's cheap, cheap, cheap.
FOX could do that right now and no one would notice the difference.

Oh, the Sun Times is liberal and the Trib is conservative. Well now it all makes sense...

It doesn't have so much to do with the Sun Times being ahead of the curve as it has to do with that they don't have as many readers and so they must cut corners to save on expenses -- just as liberal talk radio doesn't have as many listeners as conservative talk radio, and the liberal news-talk network (msnbc) doesn't have as many viewers as the conservative news-talk network (Fox News).