NC photographer fired for manipulating photos

The photographer was fired for insubordination, not post processing. His form of insubordination was PP after being told not to. I'd fire him too.

It's my understanding that there are many skilled and talented photographers who'd love to work for a daily metropolitan newspaper, and relatively few openings for them. This being the case, I don't blame the Charlotte Observer for refusing to put up with Mr. Schneider's refusal to obey the rules. I suspect their biggest difficulty in finding a satisfactory replacement will be sorting through the hundreds of portfolios and resumes which have probably already begun showing up from eager job applicants.

Schneider may be a gifted photographer and I wish him well in whatever he goes on to do. But I wonder if he wouldn't be happier in a job where he could be his own boss, set his own policies, and work as an independent artist - not as a journalist and newspaper employee. Of course, he'd still have to keep clients/customers happy, if he expects to earn a living from his photography. And often that's even more demanding than keeping an employer happy. But it's a different kind of challenge, and perhaps one more suited to Mr. Schneider's personality.

They are. I talked to one of the photo editors from the Sacbee. Even my own Photojournalism teacher(many years experience working on many papers and chair of the California Journalism Association), though his choices during a slide show on ethics weren't that good. A jokingly asked question was, has he ever photographed before?

And that's part of the problem.

I do agree with this.

But I disagree with the initial problem. Well we have to draw the line somewhere in journalism when it comes to imagery, but some people will pay the price for a line that might not be in the best spot.

Still bunk.

He was told not to do it, and he did it anyway.

I'd have shown him the door, as well...

In my view, a journalist may not tell the whole story (there's no such thing as an unbiased report). A PJ does the same thing by his framing, composition and exposure.

But, neither the journalist nor the pj should be allowed to alter the facts they see/hear/capture on the scene.

And that it is done everyday in the newspapers does not in any way justify a reporter on the scene for doing his own editorializing.

I have a question about the link provided above:

http://www.poynter.org​/resource/45119/done.s​wf

This implies the retouched photos were submitted for a competition, but were not the original images that were published. If this is so, and the competition required only published images, then that would be dishonest, right?

If they were published retouched, I'd agree that blacking out the background in the firefighter's image was too much, but the other two appear only to have colors punched up a bit. That could presumably be simply to overcome the limitations of newsprint, could it not?

What the **** is wrong with those ****s?

A white balance adjustment is going to do the same thing.

This is biased? And framing isn't? And cropping isn't? And the photographer being there isn't?

If you want to photograph objectively - do it from the outer space with a very quiet leica. (forgot the (C) )

So true!
Any jpeg is processed in the cam. OTOH, after being warned, he could have used a filter & kept his job. His choice.

Well, it looks like they just lost themselves an awesome photographer. And one who can see with his own eye that the effect created in no way creates any side issue, and so personally makes the decision to create a winning image...... Kudos to them for now having less dramatic images in their pages from a 'stand-out' photographer to attract readers. I beleive there is always a positive to a negative, so I'm sure it will be a blessing for him and he'll move on to creating the images he likes doing and getting very well paid for it, as he should!

hmm maybe i should go put in my application?? ummm no I like to manipulate....