Have a question
for the design
doctor? Got
a squabble
you need to
settle? Send
in a question
Short answer: Get
a camera.
I'm not being
smartass or glib here. Honestly. But you just cannot put out a
well-designed newspaper without shooting your own photos. You
don't even have to have a photographer; anybody can shoot
decent photos with the new generation of digital cameras, which
cost as little as $200. And if your publisher can't cough up
$200 for a camera, he's too cheap to deserve a good paper.
Sorry. But that's
like asking "How can we have a good rock band without a
drummer?" Well -- it's possible, maybe, if you have great
guitarists and keyboards to compensate. But it's doubtful. You
could use great typography and great writing to compensate for
a lack of photos, yes -- which, to some degree, describes The
Wall Street Journal. But the Journal is a specialized
publication about the cold, impersonal world of finance. YOUR
paper, on the other hand, needs to capture the warmth and
personality of life in your town. Which is what photos do.
Ninety-nine
percent of all newspapers -- professional and student -- take
their own photos. The other one percent are dull and
uninviting, and there's no way around it. Handout photos of
teams, award ceremonies and ribbon-cuttings are the lowest form
of photojournalism; their lifeless sameness sucks the
personality right out of your newspaper.
Sorry. But you
asked. Buy a camera. Or use your own. It's the only way to give
your readers the quality newspaper they expect.
