Re: Reuters Bans RAW

Having pondered this issue for a few days, here's my latest take on it: Reuters doesn't really care much if their photographers shoot raw or JPEG. Moreover, they're not even going to check... until there's an accusation of manipulation. That way, if there ever *is* an accusation they won't need to

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

On 11/20/2015 12:51 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: Having pondered this issue for a few days, here's my latest take on it: Reuters doesn't really care much if their photographers shoot raw or JPEG. Moreover, they're not even going to check... until there's an accusation of manipulation. That way, if

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015, at 09:27 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: > Mark Roberts wrote: > > I just thought of an even easier way. Set the camera to shoot > Raw+JPEG. Process the raw file any way you want and export it; open > the native JPEG and the processed file in Photoshop; paste the > processed image

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

On 19/11/15, ann sanfedele, discombobulated, unleashed: >UM , Mark -- I was making a little jokey - not like you to miss 'em >have some more coffee :-) trust me I knew exactly what you meant! Blahdy new yawkas -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

ann sanfedele wrote: >On 11/18/2015 3:21 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: >> "Steve Cottrell" wrote: >> >>> Interesting! >>> >>> >> photos/> >> This strikes me as a decision that was made by upper management >>

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 2:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: > B Film the standard for Newspaper work until sometime in the 80's was the > raw of it's day. IIRC, some publishers, including I believe Nat Geo, would take only transparencies. Doesn't every publisher have the

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

On 11/19/2015 9:57 AM, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 2:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: B Film the standard for Newspaper work until sometime in the 80's was the raw of it's day. IIRC, some publishers, including I believe Nat Geo, would take only

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

Brian Walters wrote: >On Thu, Nov 19, 2015, at 09:27 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: >> Mark Roberts wrote: >> >> I just thought of an even easier way. Set the camera to shoot >> Raw+JPEG. Process the raw file any way you want and export it; open >> the native JPEG and the processed file in Photoshop;

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

On 11/19/2015 2:31 AM, P.J. Alling wrote: B Film the standard for Newspaper work until sometime in the 80's was the raw of it's day. Here's the thing, either you trust your trained witnesses, (reporters and photographers), or you fire them and get someone you can trust. MARK! It wouldn't

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

UM , Mark -- I was making a little jokey - not like you to miss 'em have some more coffee :-) trust me I knew exactly what you meant! ann On 11/19/2015 8:18 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: ann sanfedele wrote: On 11/18/2015 3:21 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: :-) This strikes me as a decision that was

Reuters Bans RAW

Interesting! -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Production -- _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

Once again proving to me that Reuters is like all current news organizations run on auto pilot by idiots. On 11/18/2015 2:47 PM, Steve Cottrell wrote: Interesting! -- I don't want to achieve immortality

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

I am surprised but this may only show my ignorance about the subject. I think I can agree with their reasoning. Bulent - http://patoloji.gen.tr http://celasun.wordpress.com/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bc_the_path/

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

"Steve Cottrell" wrote: >Interesting! > >photos/> This strikes me as a decision that was made by upper management people, if you know what I mean. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

P.J. Alling wrote: Once again proving to me that Reuters is like all current news organizations run on auto pilot by idiots. It does provide a certain amount of verisimilitude to the files. It would probably take someone who know what they were doing the better part of a day to write a

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

Larry Colen wrote: > > >P.J. Alling wrote: >> Once again proving to me that Reuters is like all current news >> organizations run on auto pilot by idiots. > >It does provide a certain amount of verisimilitude to the files. It >would probably take someone who know what they were doing the better

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

Mark Roberts wrote: >Larry Colen wrote: > >>P.J. Alling wrote: >>> Once again proving to me that Reuters is like all current news >>> organizations run on auto pilot by idiots. >> >>It does provide a certain amount of verisimilitude to the files. It >>would probably take someone who know what

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

I'm telling Reuters on you, Mark. On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: > Mark Roberts wrote: > >>Larry Colen wrote: >> >>>P.J. Alling wrote: Once again proving to me that Reuters is like all current news organizations run on auto pilot by

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

This just in: Reuters will only accept 4x5 film negatives. On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Darren Addy wrote: > I'm telling Reuters on you, Mark. > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Mark Roberts > wrote: >> Mark Roberts wrote: >> >>>Larry

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

Illuminated by flash powder. Sent from my iPad Mike > On Nov 18, 2015, at 5:37 PM, Darren Addy wrote: > > This just in: Reuters will only accept 4x5 film negatives. > >> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Darren Addy wrote: >> I'm telling Reuters

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

Gee no I don't, please explain a On 11/18/2015 3:21 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: "Steve Cottrell" wrote: Interesting! This strikes me as a decision that was made by upper management people, if

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

I've never shot anything other than a jpeg in my life. Nice to know I've still got a chance with Reuters. Cheers, frank On November 18, 2015 11:42:40 PM EST, ann sanfedele wrote: >Gee no I don't, please explain >a > >On 11/18/2015 3:21 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: >> "Steve

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

funny, I thought you shot film a while back :-) On 11/18/2015 11:50 PM, knarf wrote: I've never shot anything other than a jpeg in my life. Nice to know I've still got a chance with Reuters. Cheers, frank On November 18, 2015 11:42:40 PM EST, ann sanfedele wrote: Gee no

Re: Reuters Bans RAW

B Film the standard for Newspaper work until sometime in the 80's was the raw of it's day. Here's the thing, either you trust your trained witnesses, (reporters and photographers), or you fire them and get someone you can trust. It wouldn't be so bad if the fakes were clever and hard to spot,