Photojournalism dos and don'ts

Found this article on CNN, a bit old by nearly four years, but still relevant
http://edition.cnn.com …edit.photo.boot​camp.irpt/

It basically says you can't remove items or people (or add them to make a more dramatic story)

Do's
Convert them to black and white, but not use filters like sepia (and the instragram filters or others)
It also says to take the first shot at the widest possible angle
You can make exposure, contrast, color balance, cropping (but remember, using content aware is a big no no)

There have been photojournalists who have been sacked and had their entire stock of photos removed by agencies/publications they have worked for because their integrity was no longer trusted because they removed and/or added bits from their photos

I once lost a very high-paying cover shot for a leading (printed) magazine because I was accused of photoshopping the picture. I didn't. And the accusation wasn't something as egregious as removing or adding objects. The accusation was that I added a little saturation to one color in one part of the picture. I didn't and tried to convince them of that, but ultimately they disqualified the picture and published another.

The point being that some publications are so strict that even simple (what we consider common) adjustments to an image will cause them to toss it. Printed publications are disappearing fast. But there is still some change to be made there. Be careful to strictly adhere to their standards.

That's terrible to get kicked for that accusation thrown at you

Well, that knocks out 99.9% of people here. They could not live without PS or LR

THat's sort of silly. One can simply bump saturation in the camera just as easily, or contrast or other settings. Some cameras allow even more editing. So is the rule in camera editing is ok but anything external is not?

Good point. All those things can be set "before" the photo is taken in camera. It appears they do not like tampering with the photo after the fact.

gjl711 wrote in post #17578761
THat's sort of silly. One can simply bump saturation in the camera just as easily, or contrast or other settings. Some cameras allow even more editing. So is the rule in camera editing is ok but anything external is not?

Yes, in my experience with publishers, that is exactly the rule that many of them go by. Anything in-camera (prior to the image being taken) is fine, but absolutely no editing is allowed.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #17579058
Yes, in my experience with publishers, that is exactly the rule that many of them go by. Anything in-camera (prior to the image being taken) is fine, but absolutely no editing is allowed.

Exactly. Depends up the publication and even the AD within that publication. I worked with ADs at the same pub that were not as strict.

gjl711 wrote in post #17578761
THat's sort of silly. One can simply bump saturation in the camera just as easily, or contrast or other settings. Some cameras allow even more editing. So is the rule in camera editing is ok but anything external is not?

The article says you're allowed contrast adjustments

PeteD wrote in post #17578753
Well, that knocks out 99.9% of people here. They could not live without PS or LR

99.9% of users of this site are not photojournalists

I've been lucky enough to sell a few photos to the local newspaper of our High School sports events. Especially where our team has done well and the paper had not sent in their photographer. In every case, they have insisted on the RAW, unedited images. Their in-house photographer has then edited my photos. But they have definitely not wanted me to touch them before sending. I've got paid a flat rate for every image used. I suspect that is common when using photos from non-professionals, but I don't know the rules from accredited photographers.

All the magazines I shot for, and the paper too, wanted files from camera with no PP because they make any adjustments themselves...