future of freelancers?

trihokie

I have been a freelance photographer for a Central Florida newspaper for several years now. My editor recently told me about all of the video training that he is being put through. Yes, video training for a print newspaper. They are starting a push for Quick Time and Windows Media film clips on the newspaper's web site. I was wondering if any of you had any thoughts of the future of freelance photographers. Will we be shooting more video and less stills? Or, with the advancements in technology, will we be pulling 8 megapixel images from our video for use in printed media? Should I buy a new Canon 1d or a Canon XL-2? Does anyone have a crystal ball?

Andy

trihokie wrote:

Does anyone have a crystal ball?

Great topic, triokie

Personally, I *love* to read the newspaper. I thoroughly enjoy the quality photojournalism I see. Will newspapers, and still-photojournalism go away? I don't think so, not in our lifetime. But it's certainly a great time to improve our skills, doing everything and anything possible so that our images and work get chosen over the next photographer's

trihokie

I agree with you Andy, I don't see printed media going away in our lifetime. But, just look at how fast technology has advanced in the past few years. I can remember the days when I connected to the internet through a 28.8 modem over the phone lines. Now, with cable, downloads are much faster and what will things be like in a few more years .
Last friday I took some shots at an elite track meet where two of the best runners in the state of Florida went head to head in the 3200 meters. My shots were posted on the flrunners web site along with a Window Media streaming video of the entire race. The two media forms gave two very different perspectives on the race. But, I am just wondering if in another 5 or 10 years, video cameras will be able to capture full 8 or 12 megapixel images at 30 frames per second. If that comes to be then will video replace still cameras, at least in sports photography?
Wow, makes ya go hmmmmm...

Khaos

The future will be flexible screens that will allow the "newspaper" to be downloaded. Imagine USA Today as subscription that gets uploaded to the flexible screen. Instead of filpping pages, you touch and change screens. They can get it near the same size and keep the same look to keep people comfortable with the change.

You have a one time cost for the screen\reader and then pay for subscriptions to whatever paper or magazine you want. The connection will be web based and wireless.

The technology is already availble. I expect it to take of first in Asia Pacific countries like South Korea.

It may sound wacky, but it will happen. The futrue is convenient deliverable content. Cell phones are doing it now, but flexible internet connected screens will be next.

flyingpylon

They can take my newsPAPER when they pry it from my cold, dead hands...

Seriously, the best part about newspapers to me is holding the printed page in my hands and enjoying my surroundings without some electronic device to contend with. Let's face it, the quality of the writing and photography isn't even that good in many newspapers anymore. Most of it is just recycled "McNews".

I don't know about the future of freelance photography, but I have noticed that the newspapers in my area, including the major daily, all routinely run ads saying "send us your photos!" so you can see where that is ultimately headed...

Bodley

As the younger generation comes of age the hand held typed (books, newspapers) media will be in trouble. The younger generation will be more comfortable reading on the computer or handheld device b/c that's what they grew up with. Still shots will have impact but media clip's will rule since it's easier.

There was a thread a while back about pulling stills out of video. The technology will be there (I guess it is now) but generally still's and video are shot from different perspectives. So shooting both or retrieving both at the same time with quality results will be difficult.

Scott Buel

flyingpylon wrote:

They can take my newsPAPER when they pry it from my cold, dead hands...

That's what I said about my copy of the White Album on 8 track!

bham

Hey tv didn't kill radio, but it has definitely affected it (Some radio shows are now also broadcast on tv, and vice versa). I think the same will be true to newspapers. Technology will affect them but I don't think it will eliminate the paper copies. It is just that now newspapers are really behind if they don't have both a paper and online version. Hey pictures still tell alot. I think they can tell alot about one moment in time, where as video can tell a short story. Both have their appropriate uses. Just my .02

mercphoto

I don't think online can save newspapers. The problem with online is that few people want to actually pay for anything online. Few people pay for online subscriptions. So how does the newspaper compensate for the cost of producing news? Typically that has been done through classified ads sales as the big cash cow, secondly through inserts and other advertising. Both those revenue streams are disappearing.

Don't forget, Yahoo and Google are primarily bundlers of news, not creators of news. Big difference in the cost of running that type of business.

The big problem I see with news isn't that people want it online rather than on newsprint. The problem I see is an entire generation of young people who have zero patience. News is important. It needs to be verified, vetted, researched, edited. That takes time. If the public doesn't have the patience to wait I don't see how news will do anything other than decline in quality.

wxwax

As I understand it, the highest resolution in HDTV is "1080i" (1920 x 1080.) So there's no commercial need for video cameras that will produce an image with more information. Therefore, none will be made.

So your 1DmkII will always deliver a higher quality image than an HD video camera.

Anyone care to correct me?

wxwax

Oh, and don't buy the XL2. It's already obsolete.

flyingpylon

wxwax wrote:

As I understand it, the highest resolution in HDTV is "1080i" (1920 x 1080.) So there's no commercial need for video cameras that will produce an image with more information. Therefore, none will be made.

So your 1DmkII will always deliver a higher quality image than an HD video camera.

Anyone care to correct me?

I don't care to correct you, but the salesman who sold me a Gateway 386/33 in 1990 saying it was "all the computer I'd ever need in my lifetime" would like to have a word...