Newspaper publication rules/laws

[digitaldude400d]

The small newspaper in Azle is going to use one of my pictures in a news story (about my church) and when I talked to the woman about the size and format that they wanted me to send I got a surprise.

I was told that the images could not be altered in any way, that it was against the law to do any photoshop editing.

Can anyone please tell me if this is true or not?

And for the record I DID searh the forums but came up empty.

[johnastovall]

It's not against the law but it against Photojournalist ethics.

Here are the NPPA Code of ethics.

AP Photojournalism guidelines

[Colyn]

Originally Posted by johnastovall

It's not against the law but it against Photojournalist ethics.

Here are the NPPA Code of ethics.

AP Photojournalism guidelines

I haven't seen ethics in journalism in years...

[TDSapp]

Originally Posted by digitaldude400d

The small newspaper in Azle is going to use one of my pictures in a news story (about my church) and when I talked to the woman about the size and format that they wanted me to send I got a surprise.

I was told that the images could not be altered in any way, that it was against the law to do any photoshop editing.

Can anyone please tell me if this is true or not?

And for the record I DID searh the forums but came up empty.

Depends on what you wanted to do. But I worked for a paper for over a year and a half until they fired all the photographers. We used Photoshop and Lightroom all the time to edit the photos. Nothing more than white ballance, color correction, shadows and highlights, noise filters, and cropping.

What we did not do is things like add a person to the photo, or cut something out of the photo that affected the story. But I think that was more of an ethical issue and not a legal one. Then again, if we printed something that was not real or edited then the paper could be sued by the parties involved.

Most people that send us photos gave us jpgs. We had to convert them to CMYK at 170 DPI before they could be used by the press.

--

So, with that, if you are just doing basic editing and not cutting things out of the photo or adding things then I would say do your editing, convert to jpeg, and email it to them.


Tim

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by Colyn

I haven't seen ethics in journalism in years...

I have, James Nachtwey first comes to mind. You are confusing your ideology with ethics. The ethics are real and the big services work to uphold them.

You might want to read this before you generalize so much.

Photojournalism, Sixth Edition: The Professionals' Approach


Or download this for free:
Photojournalism, Technology and Ethics: What’s Right and Wrong Today?

[digitaldude400d]

Thanks everyone. I was just curious and didnt think it set right but I guess she was following guidelines.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by digitaldude400d

Thanks everyone. I was just curious and didnt think it set right but I guess she was following guidelines.

She was not following guidelines if she said it was illegal. She should have told you that they had guidelines and what they were.

[lscottpht]

It's def. not against the law, but it is against all pj ethics. I have worked with major newspapers and mags, and you can do the basics, like wb, dodgine and burning, and such, but that's about it. Also, cropping can be done to some extent, but not when it changes what the photo is about. That doesn't mean that the editors won't crop. Magazines can be a little more leniant, depending on the mag.

[toverman]

Congrats on getting some photos published. I'm sure you're excited.

Every newspaper worth its salt wants its photos to reproduce well in the paper, and these days it might mean some light correcting for contrast, color balance and resolution. Photos are also often cropped. An obvious violation would be to add or remove elements/blemishes as one would do in commercial or portrait work. Before the digital age, knowledgeable photographers used filters when necessary to add contrast to a scene, during capture on their lenses and afterward on the enlarger. There was burning to add exposure to parts of the photo and dodging to lighten overly dark areas. Press operators used various methods to reproduce the image well that may have slightly altered the contrast or colors of the original.

I've worked at small, medium and large papers. On most small papers, most of the staff means well but knows just enough to be dangerous.

[janikphoto]

It has already been pointed out a bunch, but I will again point out: She used the wrong term. Probably being a simple receptionist, she said "illegal", instead of "against our corporate policy". They will most likely wind up cropping it and adjusting the contrast themselves, once it is ready to be placed on the page.

We were always allowed to crop, dodge, burn, color correct and do things that you would "normally" do in a traditional darkroom. Any sort of rubber stamping at all (besides the removal of sensor dust), and the image had to be labeled as a "photo illustration" and not a "photograph".

[sldi]

look on the bright side, if its illegal to crop your pic, then maybe you will get a full page spread of it.

[dbphotos]

Originally Posted by digitaldude400d

The small newspaper in Azle is going to use one of my pictures in a news story (about my church) and when I talked to the woman about the size and format that they wanted me to send I got a surprise.

I was told that the images could not be altered in any way, that it was against the law to do any photoshop editing.

Can anyone please tell me if this is true or not?

And for the record I DID searh the forums but came up empty.

It is not against the law and whoever told you that is, well, an idiot. They generally like 300 dpi with 10" at the longest side. Generally you can do minor adustments to levels, color, sharpness, etc. but I'd let them do what they want as far as cropping and editing.

[toverman]

Oops ... meant to post this as a new thread. How did this happen?