The phase out of photographers at some of our cheaper examples of journalism

We (owned by Ogden) have no staff photographer. With the exception of the local D2 university, which has strobes that only our tech guy has permission to access (he's a hobby shooter), we have no choice but to shoot for ourselves.

Is it unfortunate? Perhaps. But when it's the way I've had to do it my entire career (we had a photog at our previous shop, but she was also responsible for photo editing and an hourly employee, so we were only allowed to use her in important situations, such as football Fridays), it doesn't bother me that much.

 

A question-and-answer from two coaches who were scouting the high school game I covered this weekend:

Coach A: What happened on that play?
Coach B: I don't know. I was texting.

 

I had to do both writing and photog at my first paper. My strategy was to get a few good pics early in the game and then go sit down, put the camera away and focus on the game. Hell the paper only runs one photo with the story anyway so why do you need to take 500 pics? As soon as I would get 2 or 3 decent ones I'd call it a night and concentrate on the game. I always found that taking pics distracted me from what was happening in the game. Not from a a statistical standpoint but it took my attention away from details like what kind of defense are they playing, which players are they trying to exploit, etc. Much easier to soak in that kind of stuff from the press box or the scorers table.

 

You are insane if you think you can keep full stats and a running PxP for basketball with a camera in hand.

 

I'm pretty sure every professional in every field in all the world is convinced they could do better quality work if they had more fewer responsibilities. It's true, I'm sure, but so what? It's a job and you do it.

I take photos, shoot video and keep stats as best I can. Does the quality suffer? Sure. But oh well, it's a living.

 

i guess i'm insane because i did it for 4 years covering high schools. kept running pxp, points, rebounds, assists, turnovers, blocked shots, fouls, etc., and got some pretty decent photos, too. the complete stats were for team i was covering only while i kept just points for other team. double-checked against scorebook and stat sheets afterward and i was usually pretty close to dead on.

 

I would be fine with it for some sports - I did it for lacrosse, soccer and tennis with no issues, and I've done book for basketball for six or seven years now, so I can imagine doing it for that too. But football seems like it would be hellish, and it's a horrible sign if your company can't spring the $40 to $100 to just hire a freelance photog for what is normally the marquee sport of the week.

 

Call me insane, but I'vebeen doing it for years. I have a great system. It helps I'm working at a p.m. paper. At an a.m., there just wouldn't be time to process photos and write. I keep a running play by play, rebounds and turnovers.

Do it for football too. Really not that difficult if you do it right. I'm able to keep notes and all on the sidelines. And, I get some pretty good stuff.

But, I prefer that our photog shoot a gam naturally. We only have one, so we have to take our own photos.

 

The bottom damn line on this shit is that some penny counter who does NOT give a shit about quality thought he could propose this on the cheap, and apparently it has caught on. Your industry is on a plank, and we hear splish, splash....as the pirates count their pennies.

 

If you're paper is going to take its sports coverage seriously, then, if they have a shooter, get him/her out there on Friday nights. In addition to letting reporters do what they do best, a photographer can see angles someone trained for print might not. That, and he/she can take off at halftime or the third quarter, get back to the office and have shots ready by the time you get back. Otherwise, if I'm shooting, you're gonna get a lot of shots of guys talking with their coaches or the cheerleaders, since that's about the limit of my photo abilities.

There's other benefits too. Last December, I was covering a championship game that was played in a fog bowl. You could barely make out players on the hash marks from the sideline. I was at the end of the field opposite the one scoreboard at the stadium and we couldn't see that either. Someone asked how much time was left in the game, the shooter aimed at the area of the scoreboard, and quickly gave the time.

 

Again, quality is a foreign concept to your bosses, unless of course, they could get you to work for third-world dollars. It has to be frustrating for journalists who were wired to "create" to see their work being cheapened by these pissants.