How do picture editors choose photos

bigrob

bigrob

Suspended / Banned
Messages
4,225
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
I am wondering how the process actually works.

So let's say the chap/chapess is at a national newspaper HQ on a Saturday afternoon.

What would they actually see on their screens? I have heard on here people say that some would have contracts with Getty or Action Images. So would they have a separate monitor with a feed of those images?

Would the process be different for local newspapers - e.g. Lanc Tele, South London Press etc

etc etc
 
:D:D
 
There's software which will pull down all the images from every FTP upload and email and place into a viewer which can be scanned quickly. This is essential for the snap decisions they have to make - the sheer quantity of images pouring in at 5pm on a Saturday must be colossal!

I have been told this software can also identify/redline images sent in that they would have to pay for (ie. not on subscription with agencies) as senior permission would need to be sought before publication.
 
dafphotographer said:
I have been told this software can also identify/redline images sent in that they would have to pay for (ie. not on subscription with agencies) as senior permission would need to be sought before publication.
Click to expand...

^This..stuff they need to pay for is clearer marked to them.
 
I often wonder were all these Editors and staff who work in the media are!They are never on any of the forums to answer these questions.There is never an article in any of the many photography magazines answering these sort of questions,it's like its a closed shop and there is a "don't tell em whatever you do" attitude :shrug:
 
kestral said:
I often wonder were all these Editors and staff who work in the media are!They are never on any of the forums to answer these questions.There is never an article in any of the many photography magazines answering these sort of questions,it's like its a closed shop and there is a "don't tell em whatever you do" attitude :shrug:
Click to expand...

Seriously? Why on earth would one of the few remaining picture editors want to spend time on a photography forum?
 
There are lots of editors and people who work along side them, there are pro togs on this forum,but there is hardly ever any answers to these type of questions.What do you mean "few remaining picture editors" there are hundreds of them if not thousands just in the UK alone!:eek:
 
Last edited:
kestral said:
I often wonder were all these Editors and staff who work in the media are!
Click to expand...

They are hidden away protecting their jobs. Indeed, they've always been like that...

They are never on any of the forums to answer these questions.There is never an article in any of the many photography magazines answering these sort of questions,it's like its a closed shop and there is a "don't tell em whatever you do" attitude :shrug:
Click to expand...

Back in the 80's I photographed Scottish football for the Daily Record, and the Glasgow Herald group sometimes. It may be a by-gone era, but let me tell you that the relationships between the staff photographers and picture editors, and their staff, in those days, was frosty to say the least.

Woe betide any photographer who dared to enter the hallowed territory that was the darkrooms and editing suites of these people. To say it was closed shop was a complete understatement: on average you had about 25 staff doing the job of about 10 people.

Yep, they never wanted to talk or answer questions. Why? Because most of them had it real cushy, did a minimum amount of work, and they and their jobs were well protected by a spineless Union.

Anyway, that was back then! It's mostly changed now because the whole industry has changed so much.

Rant over! ;)

Happy New Year.
 
DemiLion said:
Seriously? Why on earth would one of the few remaining picture editors want to spend time on a photography forum?
Click to expand...

We have all sorts on here, why not picture editors? They may be keen amateur photographers as well.
 
I've been having a work placement in a national paper magazine a few months ago and as far as I understood they do have contracts with picture agencies indeed, they do also have a software where they get images directly from the agencies which was the most common way to get images. I also used quite frequently IDS. It wasn't a sport desk but i believe they are all using pretty much the same procedures.
 
Last edited:
It would seem to me that whoever submits whatever to wherever the pin method is still the method used to actually choose which photo to publish, come on guys in all seriousness it must be this method, you only need to look at the Sunday/Monday sport supplements to see this process in action.
 
The papers are skint because we the public don't pay for our news anymore. Hence the agency subscription model presents best value to them. Of course they won't pay for an image when there's a near identical (and yes sometimes poorer) version of the same moment done by 10 other people, including the subscription agencies. I'm sure all self respecting pic ed's genuinely want to use the best possible images all the time, but sadly withering budgets just do not allow it.

But they will pay for something truly unique (the person who got the only frame of Suarez flipping the bird at Fulham fans last season did very well), and in my experience they will pay for something quick (i've had the back page with a muzzy crop because I was faster than everyone else to get it in late on a Tuesday night), as quite often editors are eager to fill a hole, sign off and go to print so they can go home.

The trick then when working for smaller agencies is to have a unique approach and work against the grain. Sit where everyone is not (even if it means you're against the run of play), be keen for interesting stock (older frames of Muamba were flying out after he collapsed), stay alert when others are packing up (Suarez example above), and always, always keep your head on a swivel, because you just never know.

Oh, and stay away from Prem unless you want to compete with 40 others.
 
kelack said:
We have all sorts on here, why not picture editors? They may be keen amateur photographers as well.
Click to expand...

I was replying to the implication that picture editors were duty bound to come on to a photography forum and answer questions, not whether they would be here as a passtime!
 
Kestral was saying any forums though. Not particularly just photography forums. The implication was yours that they were duty bound. It was just the outraged tone of your post that made my eyebrows raise. I could even hear your voice saying it :lol:
 
dafphotographer said:
quite often editors are eager to fill a hole, sign off and go to print so they can go home.
Click to expand...
Agreed on this one :plusone:

dafphotographer said:
Oh, and stay away from Prem unless you want to compete with 40 others and upset the established pro's who will do anything to protect what they have got and make a newcomers life as hard as possible
Click to expand...
Corrected for reality :thumbs:
 
dafphotographer said:
The trick then when working for smaller agencies is to have a unique approach and work against the grain. Sit where everyone is not (even if it means you're against the run of play), be keen for interesting stock (older frames of Muamba were flying out after he collapsed), stay alert when others are packing up (Suarez example above), and always, always keep your head on a swivel, because you just never know.
Click to expand...

This is great advice :thumbs:
 
kelack said:
Kestral was saying any forums though. Not particularly just photography forums. The implication was yours that they were duty bound. It was just the outraged tone of your post that made my eyebrows raise. I could even hear your voice saying it :lol:
Click to expand...




It would make life a lot easier on both of us if you read what I've typed, rather than choose to interpret any inflection that you think might exist. There was no outrage, indignation or paper rustling implied at all.

Whether on a photography or any other public forum, picture (and other) editors just don't have the time to go around posting answers to questions about how they do their job.

A National picture desk can get upwards of 25,000 images wired to it on a busy day. As things stand they don't need to tell anyone how they select which they will publish because they have a massive resource to pick from anyway.

Very few local or regional papers have a full picture desk left nowadays, if they have a picture editor at all. Notable exceptions are the likes of the MEN, YEP, Western Daily and the Standard (although that doesn't really count as a regional). Even the SLP has zeroed out its staff.
In a large number of cases the chief photographer has been forced back on to the road due to staff cuts and the image selection is done by back bench subs who have very little specialist knowledge of the use of photography - they just need to fill a blank on the page.

There are FB groups and a couple of forums out there where pic eds hang out, but those tend to be by invitation only.

There's no great secret to press photography, sports or otherwise. If you want to succeed and make a living from it, then you need to be prepared to work your butt off and learn the ways of the market- commissions, shifts and publications don't fall into your lap, you have to graft for them. That includes learning how the system works and what sells.
 
DemiLion said:
That includes learning how the system works and what sells.
Click to expand...

That's why I posed the question.

Maybe one day I'll see if I can go to one of the papers to see it in action.
 
I used to work for the Express/Star (in the print works), so maybe if I had a nice word they would let me come in one night.
 
Ii don't work for national dialies, but on our monthly national mags the editors take charge of pic choice. What I submit to each mag is in a sense selected by me (within the constraints if the brief) but ultimately, what makes its way into print is chosen by the mag staff.
 
bigrob said:
I used to work for the Express/Star (in the print works), so maybe if I had a nice word they would let me come in one night.
Click to expand...

If you've got contacts still there, then milk them for all they're worth. Try to get them to agree to a week's worth of 'job experience' (one night is not enough), you'll learn far more from that than anything else.
 
I haven't got time to go for a week but I'll see if I can go for one night and go from there.
 
Ideally you want to be there from about 10:00-11:00 or so, which is when pictures will start to roll in and after morning prayers.
 
dafphotographer said:
The papers are skint because we the public don't pay for our news anymore. Hence the agency subscription model presents best value to them. Of course they won't pay for an image when there's a near identical (and yes sometimes poorer) version of the same moment done by 10 other people, including the subscription agencies. I'm sure all self respecting pic ed's genuinely want to use the best possible images all the time, but sadly withering budgets just do not allow it.

But they will pay for something truly unique (the person who got the only frame of Suarez flipping the bird at Fulham fans last season did very well), and in my experience they will pay for something quick (i've had the back page with a muzzy crop because I was faster than everyone else to get it in late on a Tuesday night), as quite often editors are eager to fill a hole, sign off and go to print so they can go home.

The trick then when working for smaller agencies is to have a unique approach and work against the grain. Sit where everyone is not (even if it means you're against the run of play), be keen for interesting stock (older frames of Muamba were flying out after he collapsed), stay alert when others are packing up (Suarez example above), and always, always keep your head on a swivel, because you just never know.

Oh, and stay away from Prem unless you want to compete with 40 others.
Click to expand...

David's spot on about budgets & also getting something different!, The pic editors will sit up & take note especially if the words come down that a certain pic is wanted for breaking news!.
just last weekend I was @ Hudds V Sheff Weds where the Ref gave 2 yellows & didn't send off the player due to a cock up, (his admittance), on names going in the book!. I had the 2 yellow card shots & furious team manager pics (now't super), but both images where on the Daily Mail site before I got home on Saturday tea time (early kick off)! Then used across the nationals Sun/Mon.
I was up against Action Images at the game so, in reality, they should have gone with the freebie AI ones but didn't because my images told a better story!.
Though it's easy to say images are picked on a "freebie" basis in reality if it's a story worth telling the guys on the EPD's do make an effort!. KInd regards Graham.
 
For what its worth I'd also like to think pic ed's are at least a little conscientious about their suppliers, and by occasionally mixing it up they are able to incentivise a healthy supply of images through a variety of sources. We can't all work for Getty and PA, after all.
 
As far as I know Action Images have contracts with the mags and national newspapers(but the Mirror told me last month that they would publish my photos over AI if they were better) as do Press Association.But how does it work as regards Getty because I thought they were just an image supplier(go online and pic photos from their website) agency?:thinking:
 
dafphotographer said:
The papers are skint because we the public don't pay for our news anymore. Hence the agency subscription model presents best value to them. Of course they won't pay for an image when there's a near identical (and yes sometimes poorer) version of the same moment done by 10 other people, including the subscription agencies. I'm sure all self respecting pic ed's genuinely want to use the best possible images all the time, but sadly withering budgets just do not allow it.

But they will pay for something truly unique (the person who got the only frame of Suarez flipping the bird at Fulham fans last season did very well), and in my experience they will pay for something quick (i've had the back page with a muzzy crop because I was faster than everyone else to get it in late on a Tuesday night), as quite often editors are eager to fill a hole, sign off and go to print so they can go home.

The trick then when working for smaller agencies is to have a unique approach and work against the grain. Sit where everyone is not (even if it means you're against the run of play), be keen for interesting stock (older frames of Muamba were flying out after he collapsed), stay alert when others are packing up (Suarez example above), and always, always keep your head on a swivel, because you just never know.

Oh, and stay away from Prem unless you want to compete with 40 others.
Click to expand...

Best advice in this thread, said how it is.

Tbh i agree with the comment on the prem aswell, most of my publications are from the Championship, however, like said if you get something different/the papers need you can get lucky. I was lucky enough to get two uses of a stock shot of Arteta the last prem game i did..frankly only because he was the player with the most touches that weekend and it was in the stats part of the papers, but it was still worth it. Funnily enough it was my last picture i wired aswell - i could of easily gone home without doing it, so make sure you do so anything worthy!

kestral said:
As far as I know Action Images have contracts with the mags and national newspapers(but the Mirror told me last month that they would publish my photos over AI if they were better) as do Press Association.But how does it work as regards Getty because I thought they were just an image supplier(go online and pic photos from their website) agency?:thinking:
Click to expand...

They wire live aswell..
 
Last edited:
It's not a case of "better" tbh,
If you have an image depicting a certain angle on a story they want they will use it. If, however, if it is a "stock" cele/goal image etc in footy then 9/10 times a pic already paid for via licence ie AI/Getty etc will be used!. Most papers now have free dibs into archives/live uploads of picture agencies to who they subscribe but I'm sure there is truth in what David says in we are sometimes "thrown a bone" to keep everyone on there toes lol.
 
All interesting stuff.

So who can guess what they pay Getty/Action etc on a yearly basis?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top