Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/08/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Steven - First off, any photographer is his or her own worst editor - so throwing out 90 percent of what you shot and only turning in 10 percent almost guarantees that there will be days when you will discard for all eternity the best shots of the day - if not of your career. Second, had you shot that assignment on film, you would keep every frame, you would not cut out 30 individual negs and throw the rest away. You can easily burn CDs and stash them somewhere, if the paper isn't willing to provide the necessary hard disk space. And 2000 assignments a year - you mean that you are shooting apx six assignments a day, seven days a week, 52 weeks per year? Wow! Best B. D. On 8/3/05 1:08 PM, "Steven King" <sking@trivalleycentral.com> wrote: > Dan: I work for a daily newspaper in Arizona, and I've just spent the past > two hours shooting pix of storm damage from last night. I went to about > five different venues and shot about 300 pix on my D1 MkII. After I got to > the office, I edited in camera to about 30 pix, and those will get > downloaded to my G4 for processing in PS and placement in today's edition. > If I kept every shot ever taken on my digital, I could never work my way > through all the shots of a particular assignment to locate the select ones. > Just the practice at my paper. Besides, when you shoot 2,000 assignments a > year, the cost of archiving every trip of the shutter would be just too > great. > > Happy snaps. > > Steven > > ---------- >> From: Dan C <bladman99@yahoo.ca> >> To: lug@leica-users.org >> Subject: [Leica] Question for photojournalists concerning digital photos >> Date: Wed, Aug 3, 2005, 6:53 AM >> > >> An article by Freeman Patterson in Photo Life magazine raised a question >> about how photojournalists using digital cameras treated their images. He >> suggested that the norm was for them to essentially delete their older >> unused images, as opposed to film photographers who tend to keep their >> negatives. He illustrated this with the example of an old photo of >> Monica >> Lewinsky meeting Bill Clinton in public that some photographer discovered >> amongst his old negatives, and which has appeared numerous times in the >> press. Patterson claims, "None of the digital photographers had any such >> visual records. All their old images had been deleted." >> >> Is this a valid argument (or even a true one in the above example)? I am >> not a photojournalist, but I have kept the vast majority of the digital >> images I've taken in the past 4 years, since I first started using digital >> cameras, probably numbering between 15,000 and 20,000 images. The only >> images I delete are the ones where I am fooling around with or testing the >> camera. >> >> But what about working photojournalists? Do they routinely delete photos >> (images) that aren't needed for a current assignment? >> >> -dan c. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information