Have you ever worked as a photo editor?

I wish I could spend a day with a photo editor to see how critical she/he is when selecting the right image for print.

I also wish I could get a photo editor's perspective on 35mm film, medium format film and the change to digital film.

On this forum I have seen many images posted for critique and I have seen varying opinions about certain images. Who is right?

I wished I had the service of an experienced photo editor to get their critical view of some of those images.

Any present or ex-photo editor on this board?

I'm the asst. photo editor at my campus paper, but neither I nor my editor could answer your questions. We shoot digital only; he uses Nikon D70s, I use my EOS 20D, and we only have variable-aperture lenses. He had some prior film experience with an EOS 3, but hasn't used it since 1999.

Since we don't pay any of our photographers, we have to make do with whatever someone brings in. if it's a static object or thing that can easily be re-photographed (such as a gallery), he'll send me to go retake it. I've only seen him send people out to do retakes twice in a year.

I was an assistant for a night at my university! I am not an editor, but let me chime on what I've accumulated:

Some pictures are chosen because of who's in it, other pictures for their size or shape (horizontal, vertical, square, etc), some because of what's in it. For PJ, it is more important of what's in the photo than if any artistic component exists. Then too, it depends on what the editor personally likes. (Such as, taking only crooked angled shots at the OSU/UM men's basketball game - I absolutely loathe crooked shots for PJ, and that's all of what the asst. editor wants to do, so she can make up her own slideshows while very few of my events make it. /End Rant.)

Only two of the ever growing number of photographers shoot with Canon; all shoot with digital. For MF and film, you can almost through it out the window unless you shoot something over the weekend and doesn't have to be in soon (assuming the paper only publishes on weekdays). Digital, while maybe not as good IQ size as some film and MF - but you can throw that out the window when shooting sports and how, is much easier to use quickly. Maybe Nat Geo is the only publisher that uses film, everybody elses bread and butter is digital.

So in all, you have the editors' personal preference (like crowd shots instead of dunks), politics, size restraints, who or what is in it, and getting the shot.

Call your newspaper and ask to speak with the photography editor

If you ask ten editors the same question you're likely to get at least fifteen different opinions. Editors are people too, with built in likes and dislikes, just as photographers are.

Guys thanks for taking the time to respond. Your input is much appreciated.