Name (required):

  Expression ^{(Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)}

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:
>People do, in fact, still buy the newspaper despite >the allegedly poor photo quality. > >That help? > >Ok, here's another clue: How many people would buy a >newspaper with exceptional photographs but type that >was blurry or unreadable. > >(Exceptional in a journalistic sense, not a Sports >Illustrated swimsuit issue sense.) > >>I thought about it for several minutes and I think >>comparing unreadable type to poor poto reproduction is >>actually a really excellent point. If you have >>difficulty reading the type it takes away from the >>story just as poor reproduction takes away from the >>readability of the picture. >>In any case, the color does look way better recently. >> >>>Comparing unreadable type to poor photo reproduction >>>sounds like a really excellent point ... until you >>>stop and think about it for a minute. >>> >>>But, yeah, in a perfect world there would be perfect >>>photo reproduction in newspapers. >>> >>>>Photogs have always been on the bottom of the heap. >>>>Right next to secretaries and janitors. -"Hey Jimmy, >>>>while you're out shooting the Mayor at your 9 am, >>stop >>>>over at city hall and pick up Marsha and take her to >>>>her next assignment. She's getting her car fixed. >And >>>>on your way back pick me up a pack of smokes. Your >>>>next assignment isn't until 10 am, so you have >plenty >>>>of time." So, who gives a crap about how the >pictures >>>>reproduce? Just let the type become unreadable and >>see >>>>what happens. >>>> >>>>>What would you do if one of your stories was >>>>>unreadable because the type was so smeary every >day. >>>>>You don't have that problem so this issue may not >be >>>>>so important to you. Put yourself in the place of >us >>>>>photojournalists. Our pictures tell the story and >if >>>>>they are of lessor quality than necessary, that >>>>>detracts from their visual impact and therefore the >>>>>entire story. This issue is as important as a >poorly >>>>>written or one with screwed up facts. So just >>because >>>>>you are not reading about whether the Trib or the >PG >>>>>has the worst reporters, doesn't mean it is not >>>>>important to the photojournalists, digital >>>>>technicians, press operators and readers. >>>>> >>>>>>I swear I would pay money to make this thread go >>>>away. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>Wait -- someone actually gets the Trib >>>>>>>home-delivered??? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Only dots that connect here are the ones that >>>point >>>>>>>>out your reverse pathetic decoy attempt. Beyond >>>>that >>>>>>>>hoopla, why is it that the color has recently >>>>>>improved >>>>>>>>on my home delivered edition of the Pittsburgh >>>Trib >>>>>>>>after looking like a fogged lens for the past >few >>>>>>>>years? Did you guys get a new press? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>I don't need to be an investigative reporter to >>>>>>>figure >>>>>>>>>this out. Your (or should I say you're) >>>defensive >>>>>>>>>tone and all too familiar vocabulary connects >>all >>>>>>the >>>>>>>>>dots. And the pathetic decoy about the "person >>>>who >>>>>>>no >>>>>>>>>longer even works at the Trib." That's not >>>>fooling >>>>>>>>>anyone. We all know who you are and we all >know >>>>>you >>>>>>>>>no longer work at the Trib. If you loathe the >>>>Trib >>>>>>>so >>>>>>>>>much why do you care enough to read this >message >>>>>>>>>board, let alone post to it? That is what's >>>>really >>>>>>>>>amusing. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>"And why everyone else posts under a >>pseudonym?" >>>>>>>>>>Right, everyone but you, Mr. Offset. >>>>>>>>>>Defensive, confusion riddled B.S. is very >>>>>telling! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Wow, I wrote one of the press-related posts >>way >>>>>>>>back, >>>>>>>>>>>then someone else chimed in about the keyless >>>>>>>>>>>inking... I never worked on a keyless press. >I >>>>>>>think >>>>>>>>>>>it is amusing, though, that the responders >>>think >>>>>>>all >>>>>>>>>>>the posts defending the color of the Trib >were >>>>>>>>>written >>>>>>>>>>>by the same person, a person who no longer >>even >>>>>>>>works >>>>>>>>>>>at the Trib. And it's obvious that few here >>>know >>>>>>>>next >>>>>>>>>>>to nothing about press operations. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>I will definitely ramp up the skepticism when >>>it >>>>>>>>>comes >>>>>>>>>>>to looking at this board. I can see why >>>>>legitimate >>>>>>>>>>>journalists shy from posting, and why >everyone >>>>>>else >>>>>>>>>>>posts under a pseudonym. Lesson learned.

Note: This forum is moderated -- new posts are not visible until approved.

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.