Photo issues

Okay,

I'm on the horns of a dilemma. I work for a small weekly and have one stringer photog. The guy is fairly unreliable and it's a crap shoot whether I'm going to get a photo by deadline, much less the shot I hope for. The only alternative right now is a small, 35mm camera that I've got a snowball's chance in a hot place of getting a coherent/interesting action photo from. The paper used to have a staff guy (downsized) and then had a decent digital cam (sold for cash) that I used and had no qualms about using. I still need action pix and have no idea what to do. Can't bust out the $1000s from my own pocket and photos are suffering badly. Any suggestions?

 

Not to be a wiseass, but ...

www.journalismjobs.com

If your paper's that cheap, then that's your best option.

 

they sold the digital camera? run, forrest, run.

 

Good, I'm glad I'm not the only one.

Also, in the interest of offering some practical advice, you could buy a digital camera and write it off on your taxes as a business expense (I think).

 

Unless you are the owner, publisher or editor of the small weekly, I would suggest that your best options are:

1. Making sure management is aware of these concerns.
2. Looking for a more reliable freelancer.
3. Not worrying about it. If the powers that be are that cheap, don't get an ulcer over it or spend any of your money to help fix it. Run those bad, grainy photos real big and maybe it will hurry things along.

 

If he were to buy a digital camera to use, he'd then have a digital camera to keep when he moved on to another paper.

And yes, he'd be able to deduct it off his taxes (well,whatever percentage of it he used for work).


The only bad thing about leaving things as is is that it could detract from his ability to get a better job.

 

Personally, I would not buy a digital camera of my own to use for a paper that sold its camera.

 

Doc,

Not a problem. You can be all the wiseass you want. Just don't have the power to use that option. Not the hire or fire guy and have kid no. 3 on the way so I can't escape using that just yet.

Thanks though.

 

Rox,
I agree with the one of the previous posters. After making management well aware of the situation, you get that tin-type camera, shoot the best photo you can.
You take that photo, and run it six columns. you run it so big, that you can count the pixels on one hand. If/when someone says something, you email this link:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7705156&type=product&productCategoryId=pcmcat99000050010&id=1138085156631

12x optical Canon for $300. If they can't invest that into their product, you keep running their those grainy photographs.

 

That's the best option I can think of, too. Illustrate the problem ... in a large manner.

 

Or, don't run any photo.

Fill the page with copy. It'll look ugly, someone will ask why you did that and you can explain. Of course, that means more work since you would have more copy to write or edit, so solution No. 2 is ...

Just run a big, empty white space where the photo should be. That would be equally effective in illustrating the problem.

But I think the best solution here is to find a more reliable stringer. A photography class at the local community college would be a good place to start. I'm thinking you could get someone with a decent camera to do it for dirt cheap or even free.

 

Actually, that would result in getting his ass fired 96% faster than the other methods suggested. I'm betting you know that.