TCS sure could hire a few better photogs...


Status
Not open for further replies.

sehsuan

Deregistered
Dec 12, 2002
6,598
0
0
38
Singapore
www.sportsshooter.com
#1
i was looking through their site for the NKF fundraiser, although the photos were of the artistes doing their practices and rehearsals sans makeup, some of the pictures were erm, horrifying. i mean i clicked a thumbnail only to see this:



the shadows on the eyes are horrid - they shouldn't even have posted it up. sigh. the other photos, apparently taken at night, have a high level of digital noise - definitely not film quality - that should be alright, since they're not going to have full time photogs with them.... but i was thinking, wasn't there this photographers' ethics - like not posting pictures that would somewhat make the subject look bad? :p
 

#2
Originally posted by sehsuan
i was looking through their site for the NKF fundraiser, although the photos were of the artistes doing their practices and rehearsals sans makeup, some of the pictures were erm, horrifying. i mean i clicked a thumbnail only to see this:



the shadows on the eyes are horrid - they shouldn't even have posted it up. sigh. the other photos, apparently taken at night, have a high level of digital noise - definitely not film quality - that should be alright, since they're not going to have full time photogs with them.... but i was thinking, wasn't there this photographers' ethics - like not posting pictures that would somewhat make the subject look bad? :p
Probably taken by their fellow colleagues on consumer digicams. :)

Regards
CK
 

sehsuan

Deregistered
Dec 12, 2002
6,598
0
0
38
Singapore
www.sportsshooter.com
#5
Originally posted by ckiang
Probably taken by their fellow colleagues on consumer digicams. :)

Regards
CK
but the amount/quality of the flash seems to tell otherwise... what do you think, ckiang? ;)

i'm speculating a bouncecard, minimum.
 

Zerstorer

Senior Member
Jul 8, 2002
3,437
0
0
#6
Originally posted by sehsuan
but the amount/quality of the flash seems to tell otherwise... what do you think, ckiang? ;)

i'm speculating a bouncecard, minimum.
Actually the quality of the flash is just like any digicam, looking at the deep DOF, it shouldn't be a DSLR in any case.
 

sehsuan

Deregistered
Dec 12, 2002
6,598
0
0
38
Singapore
www.sportsshooter.com
#7
Originally posted by Zerstorer
Actually the quality of the flash is just like any digicam, looking at the deep DOF, it shouldn't be a DSLR in any case.
then again, you're right. no way would they asked Wee Khim to cover such "behind the scenes" photos... :D
 

clive

Senior Member
Oct 9, 2002
2,537
0
0
Visit site
#8
i suppose press photogs usually dont worry too much about flash shadows...its quite a stress job to catch the moments at right timing
 

Jed

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
3,911
0
0
UK
Visit site
#9
Originally posted by clive
i suppose press photogs usually dont worry too much about flash shadows...its quite a stress job to catch the moments at right timing
Excuse me?
 

Prismatic

Senior Member
Feb 25, 2003
1,323
0
36
38
In the void.
Visit site
#10
Originally posted by clive
i suppose press photogs usually dont worry too much about flash shadows...its quite a stress job to catch the moments at right timing
Though me not exactly press photographer, I resent that statement. It's professional ethnics to do your best all the times. The arrival of digital cams are a god-send, it took a lot of stress off press photogs since now they can shoot and shoot with less worry of losing the "moment".
 

#11
Originally posted by sehsuan
but the amount/quality of the flash seems to tell otherwise... what do you think, ckiang? ;)

i'm speculating a bouncecard, minimum.
Look at the harsh shadow behind her hand, and the deep DoF, cannot be bounce card + DSLR lar. Very harsh flash typical of those built-in flashes on consumer digicams.

Regards
CK
 

Jed

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
3,911
0
0
UK
Visit site
#14
Originally posted by Shadus
Are you a press photographer? :bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie:
What do you think? And even if I weren't, as Prismatic says, it's not a comment any photographer should take, or make, lightly.

Maybe it is the high photography standard in Singapore (never worked in the press in SG so I can't say), but where I work, at press conferences, I have either used or seen used, off camera flash, bouncing (ceiling/wall), ambient shooting, remotely triggered flash units, and coloured gels. I'm not even talking about features or editorial work, I'm talking 20 photographers in a room with Sven or Sol. Including in that specific instance, pictures by Reuters and Allsport snappers that would have been great posed pictures, let alone grab shots, with attention to background play, side lighting, and spotlighting.

The fact is the competition is intense, and if you can't get something different and better than the rest, then you won't get published. If you work for a specific paper, and they have to use someone elses' better pictures on a regular basis, then you won't work for them much longer. And if you just blast flash head on, then you won't be in a job much longer.

And the level of editorial and features photography is of a different level altogether.

Mind you, I speak for the press here, not the paparazzi. Who are a different breed altogether and work under different conditions. No offence to them.
 

Feb 3, 2002
1,741
0
0
Singapore
#15
Originally posted by Prismatic
Though me not exactly press photographer, I resent that statement. It's professional ethnics to do your best all the times. The arrival of digital cams are a god-send, it took a lot of stress off press photogs since now they can shoot and shoot with less worry of losing the "moment".
You mean ethics right? ;)
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom