Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From my experience in various press venues, I'd say that magazine >photographers shoot RAW, newspaper photographers shoot jpeg.
Probably depends on the newspaper. When there was all that fuss about digitally altered images in the Charlotte Observer a couple of years ago Patrick Schneider, the photographer whose images were involved, revealed that the Observer has always, even before the controversy, *required* their photographers to shoot RAW. All their photographers' RAW files are archived for future reference in case of questions about their authenticity. Since this incident I expect more papers require RAW now. They'd probably be foolish not to in the current legal environment. Some links to the original controversy: http://www.newmediamusings.com/blog/2003/08/charlotte_obser.html http://poynteronline.org/content/content_view.asp?id=47867 http://www.zonezero.com/editorial/octubre03/october.html http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1415685 -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
