amateriat
We're all light!
The link is here :
http://tinyurl.com/hgjdo
Michelle McNally is the Assistant Managing Editor for Photography at The New York Times, and is fielding general questions this week concerning photography. Some of the Q & As on the page are rather interesting, particularly the last one regarding shooting film.
The main reason this Q and A column interested me is that, for the last handful of years, the majority of PJ work that's made it to the front pages of our Major Metropolitan Newspapers, IMO, has been a collective snoozer, more for adding a splash of color (argh, newspaper color...won't go there this time around) to better sell the text than anything else. The Times has generally been the exception, and I think it's because they tend to rely more on their own shooters (even in far-flung locales) than the tabs. Yes, like a good writer, PJs rely on editors to make the final call on what works for the next edition; technology hasn't changed this, merely speeded-up the process.
A few interesting factoids:
- Film isn't quite dead at the Times, at least in formats larger than 35mm. Of course, the Canon "D machines" are all over the place.
- It is not impossible, it apppears, to land a job as a staff shooter at the Times; merely more than a little nerve-wracking. Of course, that's likely nothing compared to what you'll deal with if you actually get the job.😉
- Ms. McNally apparently takes no pictures herself. Happily, this does not appear to be an analog of the record company chief exec who can't sing or play an instrument to save his/her life.
In all, an interesting read.
- Barrett
http://tinyurl.com/hgjdo
Michelle McNally is the Assistant Managing Editor for Photography at The New York Times, and is fielding general questions this week concerning photography. Some of the Q & As on the page are rather interesting, particularly the last one regarding shooting film.
The main reason this Q and A column interested me is that, for the last handful of years, the majority of PJ work that's made it to the front pages of our Major Metropolitan Newspapers, IMO, has been a collective snoozer, more for adding a splash of color (argh, newspaper color...won't go there this time around) to better sell the text than anything else. The Times has generally been the exception, and I think it's because they tend to rely more on their own shooters (even in far-flung locales) than the tabs. Yes, like a good writer, PJs rely on editors to make the final call on what works for the next edition; technology hasn't changed this, merely speeded-up the process.
A few interesting factoids:
- Film isn't quite dead at the Times, at least in formats larger than 35mm. Of course, the Canon "D machines" are all over the place.
- It is not impossible, it apppears, to land a job as a staff shooter at the Times; merely more than a little nerve-wracking. Of course, that's likely nothing compared to what you'll deal with if you actually get the job.😉
- Ms. McNally apparently takes no pictures herself. Happily, this does not appear to be an analog of the record company chief exec who can't sing or play an instrument to save his/her life.
In all, an interesting read.
- Barrett
Last edited:
