Robert Hanashiro

SPORTS SHOOTER v. 94
04 September 2006

LEADING OFF. In Dreams.
By Robert Hanashiro, Sports Shooter

Ever since I took a peek at the USC football schedule a month back, I've had this reoccurring dream.

Or maybe it's a nightmare Š

In my dream, I'm on the sidelines of a football game at Mineral King Bowl in Visalia, CA on a Friday in late October, circa 1980. It's nighttime and it's dark. I've got a pocketful of Tri-X and a camera with a 180mm 2.8 telephoto lens. But instead of the Redwood and Lemoore High players on the field it's Š USC and Washington!

I've got the 180 2.8 on my camera because it's WAAAAY too dark to use my 300mm f/4.5 (or my only "super-tele" at the time a 500mm f/8 mirror lens), I'm shooting the Tri-X bumped two stops and I'm at 1/250, wide open.

But why the heck in my dream are the Trojans and Huskies on that patchy, muddy field playing in the semi-darkness? What is the meaning? Why does it play in my sleep over and over and over?

I guess if I were to visit "The Sopranos" Dr. Melfi, she'd say that my dream is a manifestation of my deepest fears. Or that I hated my mother or maybe my kindergarten teacher Š

Well, I don't hate my mother, that's for sure (sorry mom!) Š and I can't even remember the name of my kindergarten teacher (though I bet my sister Sharon can!). So my dream --- my nightmare --- is probably my deepest fear coming to the surface.

I've said it in this space many times, as I get older I am becoming more nostalgic and seeking out things that are comfortable and familiar. Things like tradition.

And tradition to me has always been football played during the day. (And for that matter, World Series games played under the sun Š or at least that begin before 9pm!) When I see what has been done to college football schedules, which I suspect is rooted in television ratings and promotion, it gives me nightmares.

Sure I understand the reason why schools are willing to sell out and change years of tradition and schedule games for 5pm or 6pm or even 7:15pm kick-offs (and that's west coast time). I am not so naive that I don't know that the controlling element in sports --- all sports not just college --- is $$$$. Lots of $$$$$$$!

What else would explain Thursday night college and NFL football? Or San Jose State playing a morning home game before an empty stadium (or more empty than usual)?

Sure it makes watching football convenient Š at home. On TV. But what about the fans, those poor schmoes who actually spend money for tickets, parking and over-priced soft drinks and hotdogs? Or more selfishly, what about the photographer who still remembers the days of sitting in the west end zone of the LA Coliseum with SI's Peter Read Miller shooting with a 600mm f/4 and a pocketful of Fujichrome 100 ... in money light?

Well if you're the TV networks and by default the schools and conferences, they're saying the big "fongu" to guys like me. And essentially to the fans.

To borrow another "Sopranos" reference: Day football games "Are dead to me!"

True, I sometimes am nostalgic for that prep game in the cold at Mineral King Bowl. I certainly enjoyed the challenge of squeezing the most speed out of Tri-X.

(At the good, old Times-Delta we went through various phases: Acufine. Hot Acufine with a 15-minute water bath. Then Acufine with a hydrogen peroxide vapor bath. To finally my final recipe: HC-110 replenisher 1:5 @ 92 degrees for 8 minutes, agitation once every two minutes.)

But big-time college football should be played during the day ... fongu the $$$$.

However with more and more outlets for televising sports, the need for prime time programming, spaced throughout the viewing week, means more "creative scheduling".

Next year when the college football schedules hit the web who knows what I'll see. Maybe Fresno State will be playing Southern Idaho Teachers College on Tuesday night with a 10:45 kick-off so the new College Sports Night Owl Network can capture those important Honolulu ratings.

Now that is a nightmare.

* * *

Sports Shooter v. 94 kicks off the football season with previews and tips from Dan Powers, Bruce Ely and Patrick Murphy-Racey. Thomas Witte recounts his road to publishing a book on the Cincinnati Bengals during the Marvin Lewis era.

Photography has been rocked in the past month with several high-profile incidents of digital manipulation. We have essays on the controversy from Gerik Parmele of the Columbia Tribune, Mick Cochran from USA TODAY, Dennis Dunleavy of Southern Oregon University and Bryan Moss co-director of the White Cloud workshops.

Dean Rutz chronicles his near fatal accident covering a prep baseball player and his road back to work at the Seattle Times. Darren Carroll writes how jelly donuts could lead to the end of carry-on bags.

Rick Rickman returns to the newsletter with another "Let's Talk Business" and his Brooks Institute of Photography colleague Paul Myers writes his first piece for Sports Shooter, an essay the "betrayal" one feels when someone else uses your camera.

We have a fabulous issue to mark summer fading into fall Š so sit back, relax, adjust the contrast on your monitor, turn up the volume on Jack Knife and the Sharps' latest CD "Rumble" and enjoy Sports Shooter v.94.

* * *

DIGITAL MANIPULATION: "We as individual photographers need to do the hard thing and step back and check ourselves."
By Gerik Parmele, Columbia Tribune

When I started my photojournalism career, an uncouth but loveable Latvian befriended me. He had started in newspaper photography using 4x5 cameras. Before he died, I saw him make photos with a digital SLR.

In the darkrooms and over coffee Harald would regale me with stories -- true or untrue - of things newspaper photographers would do that in today's climate would get one fired.

He told me about fake, stuffed robins used to "capture" the first red-breasted robin of spring for its perennial feature photo; the child's shoe at the ready to toss into an accident scene; keeping different colored sweatshirts at hand in the trunk of his car to give to subjects and make better color in a frame. These are stories we've all head -- they've made the rounds.

He talked about darkroom manipulations as well, like using an X-acto knife to scratch spectral highlights into the eyes of a portrait subject. When printing under an enlarger, he'd take a piece of tightly balled cotton; place it on the unexposed photo paper where a baseball should be. Just before the end of the exposure, a gentle puff of air would give it that natural movement.

We've come a long way since those days, to a time when our professional ethics as a whole has never been stronger. And yet here we find our profession under the ethical microscope.

These most recent incidents hurt us all, just like the days after Princess Diana died and we all had to suffer being called "Paparazzi" now and again; in an industry this small and tight-nit it's easy to see how the actions of a few impact the group as a whole.

In times like these it is easy to point fingers and jaw on messages boards. However, the photojournalism industry and we as individual photographers need to do the hard thing and step back and check ourselves.

Have you written your own personal ethics statement? Have you read your employers? If your employer doesn't have one, have you suggested it? Have you done your part to ensure our collective credibility?

I wrote one for my newspaper shortly after being hired a year ago:
- When on the job Columbia Daily Tribune photojournalists will represent themselves to the public as news gathers and avoid behavior that will confuse the purpose of capturing news images.

- Tribune pictures must always represent what is truthful and factual.

- We do not stage, re-enact or recreate news events for photos. Personality portraits and studio illustrations should not create an artificial sense of spontaneity. Photo illustrations, computer enhancements, colorized and composite photographs should be labeled as such, out of regard for the public's trust.

- We do not digitally alter or manipulate the content of a news photograph in any way; it is acknowledged that creative toning can enhance the story-telling qualities of a photograph to benefit the reader's experience. However, adjustments made that substantially alter the original scene are not acceptable. Backgrounds should not be digitally blurred or eliminated.

- When working with captured images photographers should strive to restore the authentic nature of the original scene by making acceptable adjustments in PhotoShop. This includes cropping, dodging and burning, normal toning and color adjustments.

- The Columbia Daily Tribune also recognizes the National Press Photographers Association's Code of Ethics. Staff photojournalists are asked to follow those as well.

After our check-up, what I think we need -- now more than ever -- is transparency and openness. Because web logs are so popular I think it natural for us to use them to our benefit just as they have been used to point our mistakes.

Using the web log format to discuss what we do and why we do it would be a way to give an inside glimpse of what the majority of photojournalists strive for every day. This could be a place where our readers could gain a new level of understanding about photojournalism, instead of reading about it on some unknown web site with other dubious agendas.

Just as Harald educated me on how far our ethics had come, we must now do our best to educate others and our readers to get past this setback caused by these recent incidents.

(Gerik Parmele is the photo editor of the Columbia (MO.) Tribune. You can see examples of his work on his SportsShooter.com member page: http://www.sportsshooter.com/members.html?id=1456

* * *

DIGITAL MANIPULATION: "It's not the software that's to blame."
By Mick Cochran, USA TODAY

It's been a tough month for photojournalism. Faked images by professional photographers being paraded in front of television viewers and newspaper, magazine, and Internet blog readers.

What photojournalism doesn't need is professional photographers on one end of the scale who don't take their job seriously enough to make truthful images, or, at the other end of the scale, might their images for political reasons.

On the technical side, these most recent examples of image manipulation were really no more than amateur attempts. Given the will to change the content of an image via digital manipulation, these faked photographs from Lebanon and Alaska were simply botched efforts. In both cases the photographers' bosses have told me that the photographers were working in conditions where they couldn't see the results of their efforts and in both cases the photographers said they were just doing minor corrections to eliminate dust spots on the images.

But who cares? On one hand, it's the effort and intent to deceive that is in question, not a photographer's ability to hide what's been done. And on the other hand, also in question is the probability of a faked image being disseminated by photographers and syndicated services without questions being raised about image authenticity.

We're not really talking about a lack of craftsmanship. True, there was once a time when a photographer not only worked hard to record a fleeting moment of news, but also labored over the end result, a glossy print. Like painting, composing music or building a house, there is the idea, the content, and the labor of bringing all that together into a final physical thing.

Photojournalism has always been an art and a craft. The art is in a photographer's mental processes being translated into a visual image that is truthful and that can be understood by others. The craftsmanship is in the making of the image all the way through to the final print. But a video screen full of pixels has replaced the photographic print as end result. And enlargers, developers and in some cases a photographer's own hands hovering under an enlarger, holding back light, allowing more through to darken or lighten areas of the final print, have all been replaced by powerful computer software tools. And those tools enable photographers, editors, virtually anyone to take apart those images virtually at the "atomic" level, to reconstruct the visual sub-particles of their "reality" into a new, but fictional reality.

Just as the image is gone once it leaves the computer screen, craftsmanship will also disappear unless we leave time for the image to settle on the screen, be scrutinized for imperfections, and be made as accurate as it can be (not being reality). In the charged world of news photography, the time to do that is slipping away, both in the field and in the editing bureau.

When lame attempts such as those by the Reuters and Associated Press photographers this month hit the wire reports at newspapers, photo editors and photographers sat back in amazement that the images were in the wire report at all. They could have fooled no one. And I think we all began wondering how difficult it will be to flag that kind of fraud here on the receiving end. We are already scrutinizing thousands of images daily.

We check for validity, both in the image and in the words (captions) that accompany the image. Not only that, we scrutinize the events surrounding images, particularly in politically charged situations. We ask how photographers get access behind terrorist lines. We pay attention to whether the subjects of photographs are posing for photographers and we are constantly calling photo desks all over the world to verify information and to flesh out what are often bare-bones captions, sometimes just to get the identity of a person in the photograph. We're natural skeptics. But we can be fooled.

So, beyond their lessons in technical incompetence, what are we going to learn from these images? For one, we know that laptops and technology aren't to blame. Sure, software companies could provide methods of tracking changes to an image, even if they're saved as copies. And we could disable tools so the temptation goes away.

But it's not the software that's to blame.

Journalists are to blame. The rush to publish is to blame. And I suppose cost cutting and eliminating editing staff is another. But whatever the reasons, we stand to lose something more important than positions, or profits or a deadline race on the Internet.

Years ago, I inherited two newsroom "artists," on a newspaper staff. Their sole job was to airbrush glossies and log them onto a sheet of paper to indicate that the images had been sent to "engraving."

No, it wasn't the 50s! It was the 80s.

Every picture was airbrushed to some extent. Tradition dictated that hair highlights were accentuated, non-distinct edges outlined, and in some cases, in years past, people eliminated.

We immediately wrote a policy to end airbrushing completely, a move that was met with some resistance (mostly related to reproduction issues).

It was an easy thing to stop because I came from a completely different culture where those things just weren't done. But we have to remember the professional portrait studios of years ago (and of today!) wherein soft focus and total airbrushing of negatives erased every skin blemish. The public has accepted, demanded that kind of manipulation for generations and I suspect most people make little distinction between portrait photographers and photojournalists.

So image manipulation is not new to the viewing public. The debate that has been ongoing for decades in photojournalism is where and how far can the truth be stretched? Can we eliminate the acne in a teenager's yearbook photo? How about the cellulite in a model's legs? Can we eliminate compositional or technical flaws? Dust spots? A strobe's reflection in a studio illustration?

There are those who say we should evolve with the times. And in some respect there is hope in that. With cell phone cameras feeding blogs, maybe that's the way back to the pure un-retouched image. But, even then, questions will remain. And whether an image is faked will continue to be on the minds of today's highly sophisticated viewers. Everyone knows what is digitally possible.

What'll we do, let our integrity go the same way? Worse, will we let frivolous professionals take us back decades to a period when we were thought of as dolts, shutterbugs, and shallow hangers-on to the real business of journalism? It's a time when professional, ethical and responsible photographers make it known that this idiocy just can't continue. We've all ridiculed the abuse of Photoshop tools. Sometimes we laugh. Sometimes we speak up in protest. But obviously we don't speak loudly enough.

Most newspapers have codes of ethics and best practices statements. But many photographers and editors need a better understanding of the distinctions that we're trying to make between unaltered images and those images that are manipulated and can fool the public. As one photographer who sent me a copy of the faked smoke above Beirut said in his one-sentence e-mail, "Photoshop 101!" It really is that basic a concept. Photojournalism must be trusted.

Otherwise, professional photojournalism could become like public images on the Internet, their veracity always in question. Will they be images that are "more like postcards than journalism," as Mark Glaser, editor of the PBS weblog MediaShift (http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/) said on National public radio last week (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5716724)?

Also, we need to be even more frank with the public about what we photojournalists believe.

Edward Weston (1886-1958) was an absolutist when it came to exposure, composition and printing. He was a master photographer and printmaker. He would tolerate no manipulation. In his daybooks, he wrote:

"Photography is, or can be, a most intellectual pursuit. In painting or sculpture or what not, the sensitive human hand aids the brain in affirming beauty. The camera has no such assistance, unless of course, the process after exposure has been interfered with, and hence ruined, by manipulation, manual dexterity."

His strict adherence to his philosophy was often met with resistance by his portrait clientele.

So he posted a sign outside his studio that read, "E.W. Photographer - un-retouched portraits."

In the end, the question is can we hang that shingle on our mastheads and homepages?

(Mick Cochran is USA TODAY's director of photography.)

* * *

DIGITAL MANIPULATION: "I believe the hiring of freelancers, in this case, may be partially responsible for the mess we now find ourselves in as professionals."
By Dennis Dunleavy, Southern Oregon University

In the weeks following revelations of digitally altered news photographs from the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict, a great deal of criticism has been aimed at the practice of photojournalism.

Those who believe that photojournalism has failed in its mission to fairly and accurately report world events in this instance may feel justified, but is the profession doomed? Can public trust and credibility ever be restored, or was it ever there to begin with?

For the purposes of argument I would like to suggest that discussions involving the credibility and believability of photojournalism must be expanded beyond the blogospheric banter of manipulating images in Photoshop.

For many scholars, as well as professionals, this conversation remains important, but there is also a need to include other factors negatively influencing public attitudes toward the media in general and toward photojournalism specifically.

Photojournalists, in my opinion, must help educate the public to understand an array of complexities comprising visual reportage including, photo manipulation, subject/photographer interaction, as well as the socio-economic pressures facing the media today.

For decades, photojournalism has been challenged by the way in which technologies impinge on professional practices and conduct. Beyond technological considerations, however, there are a host of other ideological and sociological factors confronting professionals today. Not only should we be concerned with altering images, but we also must consider how easily photojournalists seem to be exploited by political and business interests.

In an on-going survey, conducted for my Weblog, respondents (n=421) reveal a variety of attitudes toward photojournalism. http://www.surveymonkey.com/Report.asp?U=244442677868

Although not representative of any particular group, the survey calls attention to several concerns that have not completely surfaced in the current debate. Despite the focus on post-production alterations---adding and removing objects, darkening skies, etc., there are other issues involved in the creation of news content that deserve greater reflection as well as public attention.

For example, early in the debate, I wrote about how Western news services have become overly dependent on non-western-trained photojournalists for images.

Needless to say, this idea did not win much sympathy with professionals who believed that I should just stick to focusing on digital manipulation and not go deeper into the structural issues plaguing the media today.

For the sake of this argument, I would like to persist a bit further with this issue since I believe the hiring of freelancers, in this case, may be partially responsible for the mess we now find ourselves in as professionals.

Not all professional photographers share the same ideals and values.

Specifically, the practice of hiring of freelancers who have access to Hezbollah controlled areas in the conflict were not held up to the same level of ethical or professional scrutiny as their Western competitors. In the race to acquire images with the most impact, wire services put themselves into a difficult, but often very cost-effective, position of paying freelancers who may have political connections and biases.

The practice of hiring "in-country" freelancers for images that big news organizations find difficult to obtain for an array of reasons has been going on since the Vietnam War.

However, with the immediacy of the digital camera and the ability to transmit pictures instantly, conventional methods of editing and oversight have been set aside. At least this is what we are told was the case in at least two photo-manipulation cases. The practice of hiring freelancers in war zones makes sense to big cost-conscious news sources. Without being overly callous here, in-country freelancers are also seem incredibly disposable when compared to the life of a Western journalist. This is not necessarily a criticism of the individuals who risk their lives daily to provide the West with fresh reportage, but more of an indictment of commonplace business practices used by an industry obsessed with getting images, video, sound, and information on the cheap.

While we should condemn photojournalists, in the case of the Lebanese conflict, who mislead the public through poorly executed Photoshop skills; we must also look beyond individual behavior so that we can understand the social, political, economic structures embedded within corporate news organizations that are enabling this sort of behavior. Of course, it is much easier to condemn an individual for an indiscretion than it is to seek to change an entire industry.

About the Survey

Some of the more interesting findings on the survey to date suggest that a majority of respondents (83 percent) believe they have seen digitally altered pictures in the news within the past five years. More than 95 percent of people surveyed believe that adding or removing objects from a picture is a form of manipulating reality. At the same time, only 55 percent feel that changing the color of the sky to make a picture appear more realistic is a manipulation.

Interestingly, nearly 78 percent of respondents confided that a lot more photographers than most people believe have manipulated images in terms of altering content or changing the tone of the picture to make it more dramatic. This revelation, for me, suggests that the people who took the survey have may have become more cynical with the profession then in the past. This same group (88 percent) also revealed that they think news pictures can and do influence foreign policy decisions.

When asked if the general public doesn't care if a photographer alters an image to make it more dramatic, more than 70 percent disagreed. Respondents think the public does care if pictures are altered.

One of the more surprising results coming out of this study relates to whether people think photo-ops arranged for the media are a form of manipulation. In this small survey, 41 percent (n=131) agree, while another 27 percent (n=81) strongly agree. This means that neatly 70 percent of respondents feel that pictures that are managed and staged for the media are forms of manipulation.

Being a person that attempts to connect the dots whenever possible, it seems pretty clear to me now that definitions concerning forms of photographic manipulation need to be expanded upon and clarified by news organizations, professional groups, and the public as well.

Without considering the complexities involved in the visual practice of photojournalism that include but are not limited to pre-visualization, image capture, and post-production processes, public confidence in the profession may be impossible to regain in the near future.

(Dennis Dunleavy is an assistant professor at Southern Oregon University. You can read his rants, musings and other writings at: http://ddunleavy.typepad.com/the_big_picture/.)

* * *

DIGITAL MANIPULATION: "If you alter a photograph, you will likely get caught and pay a possibly severe penalty for doing so."
By Bryan Moss

Ethics. My grandmother put it simply: "Being good makes you happy." Altering photographs, in her language, is not being good.

But you could debate ethics for hours. Days. Two of my esteemed colleagues have been arguing whether it was right for Patrick Schneider to have changed the color of the sky in one of his photographs. Each has compelling arguments. Who among us has not moved a coke can that was in the way, or brushed aside a tree limb to see better or just stood in a place we didn't want the subjects to go to. Is it different to remove the coke can digitally? I think it is. I think it's different to alter an existing photograph.

But it doesn't matter what I think. The bottom line is that Schneider got fired for what he did. So have others whose manipulation was discovered. The ethics debate has been replaced by ethics practicality. If you alter a photograph, you will likely get caught and pay a possibly severe penalty for doing so.

We can argue the appropriateness of the harsh penalties and we can argue just what "alter" means. Is it dodging and burning? Using Auto Levels in Photoshop? Changing the white balance? Those debates will be ongoing, and no clear answer will prevail. In the meantime, people who substantially alter photographs are being fired. That's simple enough. Don't do it. It's not right, but it's also not smart.

Most radical changes, even crops, are inflicted on pictures that have flaws. Our pictures are not supposed to have flaws. But if they do, we just have to live with them.

I resist the temptation here to go into a long discussion about just how much dodging and burning and color correction is allowable. I think we all know when we're doing the wrong thing, though.

Be good.

(Bryan Moss has been on staff at some of the country's leading newspapers including the Louisville Courier Journals and the San Jose Mercury News. He currently is the co-director of the White Cloud workshops with Mary Jo Moss: http://www.whitecloudworkshop.com/. Adds Bryan: "For more alleged wisdom from me, buy a copy of my new book PhotoSynthesis, details at: http://www.lifeinamerica.us/photosynthesis/. Among the topics it covers is how to get into the Zone when you're shooting.")

* * *

COVERING FOOTBALL: Tips from covering Tennessee football
By Patrick Murphy-Racey

First, we had a tough season last year at 5-6, so things are a little different than prior years. In the SEC when things go poorly, you can expect an assistant to be fired. Last year, we had three fired. Expectations are very high for our offensive coordinator and QB, so all eyes are on them right now, as are mine.

I hang out with the strength and conditioning coaches as well as the trainers when I'm over at the complex. These people offer much insight to those they trust. Keeping a team healthy is a big job, so I stay close to them, especially on the road. This is where I pick up stories and moments.

As for gear, this is the time of year to be pressing the refresh button on all your batteries. I watched a bunch of shooters simply watch the game in the second longest game ever over in AR a few years ago. Lightning and rain delays and I think four overtimes is a memory that keeps me minding my batteries.

I'll spend a good half-day cleaning CMOS chips, blowing air inside the mirror box, and cleaning the rear filters and front elements of all my long glass. Check and download any new firmware updates for your bodies.

Editing football is a perfect way to frag your hard drives. Now that files are so big, editing a single game is like shooting a machine gun into your hard drive. Now is a good time to look over all of last year's games carefully, edit tightly, and then defrag and burn DVD's. I actually use a separate hard drive to edit on, and then move everything onto the drive where I want to store the games. Your computer might need software updates, so stop clicking "no" when it asks you if you want to search for updates.

I have a good relationship with two high schools in my county where I can show up and shoot. I'm 41, and getting older by the minute, so I practice, practice, practice. The team's expectations are always sky high for my performance, and I just can't walk out of summer and into my first game and expect to deliver.

At the high school games, I shoot only the 600 f/4L and 200mm f/2.8L. I shoot super tight and try to manual focus as much as possible. It's easier for me to loose focus on the 200mm focal length and since that's my on goal lens, I work it pretty hard. There is nothing worse than seeing your over-the-pile-into-the-end-zone shot with razor sharp focus on the fans.

Last and most important, I pray. I thank God for not having a real job and for getting paid to get closest when 108,000 behind me bought tickets.

(Patrick Murphy-Racey is a freelance photographer based near Knoxville, TN. You can see examples of his work at his SportsShooter.com member page: http://www.sportsshooter.com/members.html?id=2126 and his personal website: http://pmrphoto.com.)

* * *

COVERING FOOTBALL: Prep football more than a sport.
By Bruce Ely, The Portland Oregonian

I'm now about 8 years into my career as a photojournalist and have photographed at the high school, college and NFL level. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy the atmosphere and energy of the college/pro games, but I would argue that the best photojournalism will always come from high school football.

Your chances of getting published in ESPN The Magazine or Sports Illustrated aren't going to be very good. You won't get to rub elbows with famous photographers or athletes. And you probably won't get a free meal.

What you will get is access. And in today's world of photojournalism, access is often the hardest commodity to come by. I'll tell you where you can get some...

Your local high school football stadiums.

Every Friday night in the fall, these stadiums are full of stories waiting to be told. Football is more than a sport, it's a culture. What better combination is there for a photographer than culture and access?

With the proper equipment and some basic photography skills, most people can walk away from a football game with publishable pictures. What can we do to separate ourselves from the guy with a nice camera? We can do our homework. Talk with the locals. Get to know the stories behind the game. Call the coaches. Talk with fans.

One of the easiest things you can do right now is to pick a team in your community. Approach them about following their season. Most teams would love the attention. Get to know them. Find the stories that they have to tell. If you are with the team for an extended period of time, doors will open. If you earn it, the team will trust you and let you into their world. This is the world that the average photographer never sees. They will tell you about the little things that make their team interesting -- and will most likely make a telling photograph.

You'll never get there with your head stuck behind a long lens on the sidelines every Friday night. Don't get me wrong - there is a place for a great action shot - but don't they all start to look the same? I think some of the most memorable pictures I have seen in sports come from before/after the game and off the field.

Now, I probably wouldn't do this for the state championship game, but try taking just one lens to a game. Leave the long glass at home (or in the trunk just in case you really NEED it.) This will force you to get in close (physically) and look at the same scene you have been looking at in a new way. I like to take my 80-200mm and 17-35mm (mostly at about 28mm) and just roam the crowd and sidelines during the game. I walk right past the pack of photographers with the lenses stuck on a monopod. It's hard not paying attention to the action. We're so used to it -- that is where we have always been expected to be for a game.

This approach won't fly at some newspapers. They need the action shot they know and have always had on their cover. Give it to them. Shoot action until deadline, which is often around halftime and then put the long lens away and try a new approach. Take your picture back to the office the next day and show it around. If it is good - they will like it. Maybe you can convince them that there is a "different" way of telling the story of football in your town. It's always better to have something in hand you can show them as opposed to just telling them about this great idea you have.

These are a couple of the things I have tried to do over the past few years to try to improve my craft and keep myself from getting bored. Hope it helps someone else out there.

(Bruce Ely is a staff photographer with the Portland Oregonian. To see some samples of his work, check his SportsShooter.com member page: http://www.sportsshooter.com/members.html?id=812.)

* * *

COVERING FOOTBALL: Lambeau to the Riviera Maya.
By Dan Powers, The Appleton Post - Crescent

Well, it's that time of year again. The reason I know is that we can officially talk about football in our house! As many of you know, covering an NFL team can be trying at times because you work so many weekends...in a row. I'm lucky because my wife Lisa is a big fan and likes to watch the games with her father Gary. She is very understanding and realizes that not only do I have to cover the Green Bay Packers (been doing it since 1995), but I need to prepare for the season in the weeks prior to the first game. So here we go...

After thinking about it I realized that every year the first thing I do prior to the start of the season is book a vacation somewhere on the beach in Mexico or the Caribbean. No kidding. Because the holidays and family time revolve around the Packers schedule, vacation is the one thing I can control and count on. So that is number one in my book and in case you're interested...it's the Riviera Maya this year.

Typically I begin my specific season preparations by booking all of my flights, hotels and rental cars. The Packers supply us with a list of hotels they are staying at so I have to wait for them on that. I like to book as early as possible so I don't have to think about it come preseason...I'm usually all set some time in June.

After my travel arrangements are finalized, I put together our requests for credentials. We send two shooters, a runner and a photo editor to each home game. (Our sister paper The Green Bay Press Gazette does the same and we work together.)

For the road games it varies depending on whether it's a night game or day game. So my credential request changes each game. I work side by side with a photographer from the Green Bay Press Gazette on away games, but he takes care of his own credentials.

In July, I go over all of my gear to make sure everything is working. I ALWAYS send in my cameras to Canon and have them overhauled and cleaned. Other than that, I make sure there are no problems with any of our long glass and dust off the old Lowe Pro Road Runner AW. I also make contact with the team if I want to shoot from above at a game, or if I have any other requests we need to go along with a story. Perhaps a portrait of a particular player. Didn't do that this season though.

As far as covering the team goes, I pay close attention to the draft. That way I get a feel for the team's priorities. Because our sister paper Green Bay Press Gazette covers all of the mini camps and training camps, I typically don't bother with it. What I do is read everything I can and pay close attention to the local and national TV coverage of the team. That way I get familiar with the team and how it's developing. This helps me in my shooting of the pre-season home games. (We don't cover away preseason.)

This strategy gives me enough information so that I can try to anticipate what the team does on the field come game day. I also pay attention to the opponent each week for the same reasons. You can never be too prepared.

Last year there was much talk about Brett Favre retiring and I'm sure the same will happen this year. It was a zoo to say the least. Each game we all made sure we shot a lot more photos of him from each game. In fact, during the last game of the season against Seattle, the ONLY thing I shot was Favre. The reason we did this is because we planned on running a special section about his career. I was even asked to write an article of my most memorable game during his career. I chose the game in Oakland. Because he didn't retire, we will do the same this season.

So it should be crazy come Dec. 21 for what may be his last game at Lambeau. And who knows, maybe we'll do ever more than a special section.

After all of that...I'll be ready for Mexico! Adios...Dan.

(Dan Powers is a staff photographer with the Appleton (WI) Post-Crescent. You can view his work at his SportsShooter.com member page: http://www.sportsshooter.com/members.html?id=101 and the newspaper's website can be found at this link: http://www.postcrescent.com/.)

* * *

Road To NFL Playoffs Maps Photo Book Deal.
By Thomas Witte

Well, at least one good thing came out of it all.

I'm referring to the Rip Van Winklesque Cincinnati Bengals playoff drought. I've been covering the Bengals in some capacity since I was 15 and through it all knew that one of these days not only would the team be worth something but the photos would be as well. Time and patience rivaled only by Red Sox fans would pay off.

In the late winter of 2004 I got a voicemail from Orange Frazer Press, a publishing company another county over. They had been keeping tabs on some freelance portraiture I'd been doing for the Cincinnati Enquirer and invited me to lead a project of theirs. During one of our initial editing sessions I was looking at their library while freebasing coffee and noticed something. "Hey John; how come you don't have any books on the Bengals? Or football even?" OFP publishes a wide range of small run books. They weigh heavy on coffee table books but have a substantial amount of books on the Cincinnati Reds and baseball. Football? Not a one.

Leaning back in his chair to poke his head through the doorway he replied, "Have you seen any reason to for the past decade?" Point taken.

However, that little comment of mine unintentionally planted a seed.

The 2005 season would germinate that seed. They were 7-2 going in to the bye week, they were scoring at will, leading the league in interceptions and for the first time since I was in grade school - they weren't being made fun of on Sports Center. (One thing that always drove me nuts during the 90's was that every time I'd see a special on TV for any of the other teams, they were always showing highlights while playing against the Bengals.) Outside of a major meltdown it looked like they would be making the playoffs at least as a wildcard.

Around week 11 of the season while doing a chainsaw maneuver on a rack of ribs at Damon's, John asked out of the blue, "So how many photographs do you think you have on the Bengals?"

"Beats me. 100,000?"

"Riiiight. Soooo. Enough for your own book then."

I was flattered and apprehensive at the same time. My first thought was "wow a book." My second thought was; "Holy s*** a book?"

While it was John's idea, he still had final say on if they would publish it and he had his reservations. His first wasn't what I expected. Football fans and baseball fans are two entirely different species, specifically when it comes to collecting memorabilia and whatnot. Would there be a market for a book on the Bengals? I didn't buy in to John's concerns at first but then started to think about it. I know of several people - even casual fans - who have extensive collections of baseball memorabilia that could fill a wing of the Hall of Fame. Football fans on the other hand? I couldn't think of anyone I knew outside of my Uncle Richard in Green Bay that has anything more than a few jerseys and balls. Do football fans not collect things because they don't care to, or because there isn't anything out there for them to collect? It was a bit of a chicken-before-the-egg paradox for both of us.

And of course, I had concerns of my own. Their idea was for it to be on the first three years of the Marvin Lewis era keying in on the concept of the teams rebuilding process. Since most of my work is for commercial and editorial stock, I was worried about the image variety, so I opened up the hard drives to start compiling photos. It turns out I was just a hair off in my estimate. The grand total of logged photos dating back to 1990 was 191,727. Thankfully we only needed photos from 2003 through the end of 2005... You know, the years when I was completely digital and shooting everything that moved. For those three years it was a paltry 97,000 that needed to be whittled down to about 200. Piece of cake right? Not necessarily.

Since I shoot so much stock, I had thousands of redundancies because I'm always trying to get a better image of each player. Players facing left, right, in the air, on the ground, happy, dejected, helmet on, helmet off, night game, day game, rainy game, snowy game. You get the point.

I had about 5000 photos of Chad Johnson alone when we only needed about five or six. This poses a bit of a problem as you can imagine. John had originally asked for me to just send them a few DVD's to edit from. I know, I laughed too. It would be easier to give them a hard drive but I didn't feel comfortable with that. Not because I didn't want to hand over a drive or anything, but because they didn't have the intimate knowledge of the archive that I did on top of the fact that editing 97,000 photos is nothing to sneeze at. Imagine someone handing you 5000 photos of one person and being asked to find the five best? That would take hours depending on your computer or a few seconds depending on your interest.

Because of my familiarity of the archive and the fact that I'm a control freak, I requested to be the editor on the book under one condition: that they bought me a Quad G5 and 30-inch display to help speed up the process.

I did the edit in stages. Using the color labels in iView I went through and picked out 10 players at a time and toggled through the photos assigning their concordant color. At the end I moved those labeled photos into a player folder and went back through again with 10 new color assignments. In the first edit I went from 97,000 to 1100.

Next I went back through the player folders and looked at the full-res version axing the ones that were out of focus, not able to hold together as a double truck or were out of bounds in regards to color/exposure. That got it down to 900 photos covering 80 different people or things.

One last edit on my part to get it down to about 300 and I was ready to hand them over to John. This is when I really needed to be involved. I gave them the "ins" as well as the last two rounds of "outs" just in case. John would occasionally pull a photo from the out pile and want to include it, but I'd interject with something like, "we can't use that one, he dropped that pass." Or, "he actually ended up getting sacked on that play for a loss." I don't know why, but for just about every photo in the entire archive I was able to remember the play.

To most people, maybe it wouldn't matter if the player fumbled, but to me, in the spirit of doing a book highlighting the team, this didn't seem like a methically (my word for morally and ethically) correct image to publish. In some cases John swayed my decision and in some cases it was appropriate. A photo of Corey Dillon fumbling was different from Rudi Johnson coughing it up because Dillon had gone from golden boy to scapegoat, following in line with the point of the book - rebuilding the team.

When we got it down to about 220 they let me pick out which ones I wanted to run as double trucks and a handful of images I liked for the cover. Aside from that, the bulk of my work was complete. My obligations were to edit, provide the multiple image licenses, prove I was the copyright holder and promote the book which I gladly do since I'm paid royalties. When Brad Mangin asked me to write about the process of the book, I essentially was contractually obligated too.

Obviously, none of this would have came to fruition had I signed over the rights to my photos. The financial gains are unknown since its all contingent on royalties but there are two bright spots regarding that. The first; some folks I know who work at a local Barnes & Noble informed me that their store has preordered 35 copies. For best sellers, they typically order 15-20. So our concerns about the book having interest have been put to rest. The second was that I worked a progressive royalty schedule into the contract where my kick back will go up substantially with each subsequent edition - the first edition being 5000 copies. So far a large chunk of that has been preordered so I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

What was the point of that last paragraph? To brag? Actually it was to prove two points. The first was that a decision I made 15 years ago is financially affecting me now. Even as a teenager I didn't like the idea of giving away my copyright. This was mentioned in a thread recently about your decisions now coming back to haunt you later in life. The second point was having witty business sense. (Pun intended).

At the moment the book The Road Back: The Cincinnati Bengals Under Coach Marvin Lewis is being distributed to retailers... Just like my career covering the Bengals, time and patience will tell.

The Road Back: The Cincinnati Bengals Under Coach Marvin Lewis is available for online preorder at: http://www.orangefrazer.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=OFPI&Product_Code=1933197145. Or directly through Thomas at orders@gophotography.net for a discounted rate for SportsShooter.com members.

(Thomas E. Witte has been a full time freelance photographer based in the Greater Cincinnati area and Midwest for the past ten years. His clients range from Sports Illustrated to Business Week to Getty Images. )

* * *

ON THE ROAD. Jelly Donuts and the Road To No Carry-On Bags.
By Darren Carroll

You can't bring a jelly donut onto an airp*** anymore.

Okay. Let me repeat that, and I'm going to put it in all capital letters, because I want you to re-read it, word-by-word, and let it sink in.

YOU CANNOT BRING A JELLY DONUT ONTO AN AIRP*** ANYMORE.

Nor, for that matter, can you bring toothpaste, most kinds of deodorant, hair gel, shaving cream, or a bottle of water--whether or not you've purchased these items after you've gone through security at the airport. It' silly. It's sad. And it's true. And, I'll admit, if I didn't have to deal with it at airports a couple of times a week, the whole thing would be pretty damned funny.

What does this mean for us as photographers? Right now, not much, if you don't mind a little more inconvenience and, if you check your gear, a bit more risk. Be prepared to check bags, to have things stolen, and be prepared to spend a lot more time at the airport--waiting to check your bags, and waiting to retrieve them, if they show up on time, or at all. And if they don't, be prepared to stand in another line with a dozen other weary travelers in the same boat you're in. The ban on liquids has resulted in an increase in checked baggage that is overwhelming the TSA screening machines and operators; the piles of luggage in front of screening stations at all the airports I've been to in the past three weeks have been staggering, both in their size and in the fact that there's nobody keeping an eye on them to prevent theft or tampering prior to their entering the screening machines. And the airlines were caught completely off-guard, as well, by the increase in checked baggage brought on by this asinine policy, and they've been slow to react. Get used to it. If you think, in the age of $70 a barrel oil, that the airlines are going to hire more baggage handlers to take up the slack, think again.

If the brain trust at the Transportation Security Administration is left unchecked, this may not be the end, either. Try this on for size: If your average TSA screener were smart (the jury's still out on that) and knew what they were looking at (no contest--unless it's a pair of nail clippers, they don't), packs and sheets of Polaroid could be banned as well. After all, what do you think is underneath that little thing that says, "Do not press here" on it? You guessed it. And unlike the gel in such (TSA-banned) weapons of mass destruction as Purell Hand Sanitizer and Dr. Scholl's insoles, the gel in Polaroid developer could actually, possibly--gasp!--irritate your skin. Moreover, such a policy could, and would, be instituted in typical TSA fashion--which is to say randomly, inconsistently, and with neither warning nor recourse. "I'm sorry, sir. You'll have to place those boxes of film in your checked baggage. Be sure to leave it with the folks at the CTX screening station"--you know, that big white machine that destroys undeveloped film...

And that's not as bad as it could get: Hard on the heels of the liquid ban, Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) showed that the TSA isn't the only arm of the federal government prone to knee-jerk reactions, telling the AP that the most recent liquid plot "eliminates the days of carry-on baggage." Don't laugh. Mark my words, if something isn't done, it's going to happen. I know it makes no sense, I know it would completely overload the system, and I know that it would completely destroy business air travel as we (and the airlines) know it. But the next time the TSA gets scared shitless by some guy who's managed to sneak a half-dozen Boston Creme donuts onto a 767 in his rollaboard, the next bag you're going to be checking is the one with your laptop and $25,000 worth of camera gear in it. And you won't be able to insure it. Or, for that matter, lock it.

I was sitting in a hotel in Baton Rouge, Louisiana on Day One of the Great Liquid and Gel Ban, scheduled to fly home from New Orleans that afternoon. Naturally, my toothpaste and other toiletries were packed in my carry-on roller. When I got to the Southwest Cargo loading dock, guess what went on the pallet with the strobes and the cameras and the light stands? Problem solved. Ever since then, the toiIetry kit goes in the Lightware, right next to the 35mm case, and gets shipped on ahead. I know I've harped on this before, but it's never been a better idea than now: Get used to shipping everything. Gear. Film. Hair gel. Everything. Now. Figure out how you're going to do it. Get yourself an account with FedEx or UPS. Set up a verified known-shipper account with an airline. Learn to pack in advance, so you can ship things a day early. Don't wait until the next scare; be prepared for the day when the TSA randomly and without warning decides that carry-on luggage is verboten.

So this is how far we've fallen, straight into an air-travel theater of the absurd. We've been frightened into dehydration, odiferousness, and a case of airp***-induced bed-head by a giant bureaucracy run amok, accountable, it would seem, to no one and intent on scaring the bejeezus out of all of us until we fall, lock-step, into the completely irrational sense of security that since we can no longer bring our Aquafina on board an airp***, air travel is that much safer. Just last Friday, the New York Times reported on a working mother returning from a business trip who was forced by TSA screeners at LaGuardia to dump the breast milk she'd been pumping and saving for use when she got home to her newborn.

Meanwhile, less than 20% of cargo riding underneath the aircraft you've just gotten on, bereft of your plasmatic personal primping products, has been security screened. Screeners at the security checkpoint now must waste valuable time looking for that bottle of deodorant in your carry-on bag when they should be looking for things that might be, well, dangerous. And don't get me started on how easy it is to get into the secure area of an airport if one works for a caterer or cleaning company. The bottom line is, this new policy does absolutely nothing to improve security--but it certainly gives that illusion. In news stories about the new measures, you inevitably hear someone say, "I feel safer." And that's exactly the point. It falsely reassures people who fly once a year that their government is looking out for them and, in the process, does what every tax-dollar-dependent government bureaucracy does best: serves to justify its own existence with the taxpayers.

There is only one way to have a chance at stopping this nonsense: Write to those who control the purse strings. Seriously. Even if you don't fly all that much but especially if you do, tell your representative in Congress that you're all for aviation safety, but that you're also for accountability in government, and that you're for an aviation security system that is sensible and above all, effective. Because what we have now--both the system and the agency that administers it--is anything but.

Yes, I know it's a long shot, and that we're all justifiably jaded about the effectiveness of playing our part in a representative democracy. But sadly, it's the best we can do. And doing something is better than doing nothing, especially when doing nothing has gotten us, if not to the point of no return, then certainly to the point of no jelly donuts.

(Austin-based freelancer Darren Carroll travels on assignment every now and then. By the way, if you don't know who your representative is, you can find out at www.house.gov. Additionally, rather than sending a letter snail mail or e-mail, rumor has it that sending a fax is the best way to ensure that your letter will be seen.)

* * *

Back To Work.
By Dean Rutz, The Seattle Times

This is not the place I wanted to be.

Back to work just a few days, and the pool camera for the funeral of Joselito Barber, a Seattle Police officer killed while on duty in the collision of his cruiser and another vehicle just a few days prior.

Me, in a cemetery. The ironies were not lost on me.

Walking to the gravesite I passed a memorial for World War II dead. The monument had inscribed in it a drawing based on Joe Rosenthal's famous photo - and Rosenthal had just died the night before.

And then there was before me the grieving family and the casket of a young man who died from massive trauma. I felt a profound sadness watching the parents and girlfriend beside the casket.

Could have been me, I thought.

I haven't been too maudlin too many times since my accident April 20 of this year. But this was definitely one of those times.

It is, of course, a miracle that I'm here to write a single word about my experience the past few months. I had a sense that might be true when Bert first asked me to write about being hit in the head by a baseball and suffering a massive trauma as a result of it. But I wrote about that very early on in the experience, and each week that followed it seemed to bring another revelation.

The biggest one was that I was one lucky sonofabitch.

I liken it to a switch. One moment I was talking to Ferndale High School athlete Jake Locker. And just like that came the crush of the baseball against my head.

One moment I was listening. The next my entire being was consumed by the incredible rush of painful sensation. Light went to dark in the flick of a switch.

It was loud. When the ball that fractured my skull hit me the sound and the pain were equal, and they consumed me. I have never experienced anything like it before, and hope never to again. It closed my eyes. I was standing, but it might just as well have been an out of body experience. I knew everything that was happening to me, but the agony I felt was so numbing, and the shock so overwhelming, that my body didn't know what to do. I don't know how long that went on. But as awareness set in, so too did the urgency for me to do something. I could only grasp that I needed to get to the ground. I knew I wouldn't be vertical very much longer.

My body knew it too. And I collapsed to the ground, partially wrapped in the arms of a baseball scout.

They tell me I convulsed on the ground for about a minute. I don't remember that.

But I remember being on the ground, and seeing all the people standing above me. And I was embarrassed for being in that situation.

I wasn't anywhere I wasn't supposed to be. I was off the field of play at the high school game between Ferndale and Anacortes, there to do a story on Locker, the University of Washington's quarterback of the future. I was well off the field and behind a fence, standing with Locker and his father and maybe a half dozen other people when the ball flew in and struck me in the right temple. It was terrible luck that I was struck in the weakest place in my skull.

To this day people ask me if I've heard from Locker, or from the kid from Anacortes High School who threw the ball that hit me.

No I haven't, but that shouldn't surprise anyone.

I was lying on the ground and awake. I was stunned, but alert enough to be making bad jokes. An ambulance was called, but I could still tell the reporter where my car was parked, where my gear was, and hand him my keys. It appeared to everybody that I would be just fine.

The reporter, John Boyle, called the picture desk back in Seattle to tell them I'd been hit by a baseball, but that I was okay. I was awake, talking, and headed to the hospital as a precaution. A bit of bad luck the editors thought as they huddled. But there was no sense of urgency.

Not yet anyway. That would of course change. Barry Fitzsimmons, just days into his new job as director of photography, was about to experience his first crisis.

Me.

No one on the baseball field had any idea of what was to come - least of all me. But things changed moments after I was loaded into the ambulance.

It's difficult to describe the sensation I first felt being hit by the baseball. Your entire body locks up and is consumed by paralysis and pain. Nothing existed other than that for several moments.

It's similarly difficult to describe the sensation that came over me in the ambulance. At this point medically a hematoma had formed in my brain. I didn't know it of course, but I knew something was terribly wrong. I suddenly began losing my sight, and I was feeling something was about to overtake me.

I told the paramedics "we need to go." And then my body began trembling uncontrollably.

I thought I must be in shock. But the trembling and cold I felt was so foreign that I tried to roll to my left side, strapped to the gurney, and grasp the hand of the paramedic with massive hands named Jerry. I reached for him because I didn't know what else to do. I was fading.

And then I was gone. I lost consciousness and would not regain it for five hours.

Though not conscious, I was fighting with the paramedics Jerry would tell me two days later. As the ambulance sped down Interstate 5 on the 15-minute ride from Ferndale to Bellingham, I was seizing. The most violent of those seizures lasted three minutes. I fought with Jerry so much that he felt he had no choice but to fill me with enough sedative "to drop a horse."

Whether that stopped my breathing, or whether it was the trauma and seizure, I don't really know. But I did in fact stop breathing. And now the paramedics had a new problem.

"There wasn't any oxygen getting to your brain," Jerry would say later. A decision was made to pull over on the freeway and intubate me. That single decision both saved my life and saved my person from likely debilitating brain damage.

Stable but swelling on the right side of my face, doctors at St. Joseph's Hospital quickly performed a CT scan to see how bad the damage was. It was about that time that longtime friend and Seattle Times columnist Ron Judd showed up at the hospital. Ron lives in Bellingham and was asked by the picture desk to check up on me.

The doctors were arguing, Ron said later. The radiologist was certain the artery in my brain had been severed in which case I was dead unless surgery was immediately performed.

The neurosurgeon disagreed. Dye was injected into my veins and I was sent back to have another CT scan done.

The hospital called the picture desk that at the time only knew that I'd suffered a nasty knock on the head.

The hospital told Barry I was no longer able to make medical decisions for myself, and that a next of kin needed to be contacted immediately.

Imagine that for your first week on the job!

Barry said he went running out of his office and downstairs to human resources to find my parents' contact information. Word quickly spread through the newsroom that something had gone wrong.

"You should have seen the shock and concern that fell over the newsroom," copy editor Laura Gordon would later email me. I've heard from so many people that they immediately began praying that I would survive.

Things got worse for Barry when HR realized the information I'd given them regarding my parents was outdated. They had since moved and there was no forwarding information available. Managing Editor David Boardman huddled his investigative reporting team together and instructed them to find my parents. It didn't take them long.

About that time, Times staff photographer Rod Mar had found my girlfriend, Karen Ducey, a staff photographer for The Seattle Post-Intelligencer. She was on a ferry headed out of the city. Rod calmly explained my situation, but said she needed to start heading north to Bellingham quickly. He and online editor Kari Shaw were preparing to do the same.

I remember waking up just about the time that Karen arrived at St. Joe's. I remember opening my eyes and seeing my neurosurgeon left, and Ron Judd to the right. But I couldn't stay conscious, and I faded away.

I recall now my name being called, and the sound of beeping. I tried to open my eyes again, but I was so weak I couldn't stay awake, and I fell unconscious again.

This happened two or three times before awareness set in, and I recognized my name being called. And that the sounds I heard were alarms on the machines I was hooked up to.

Awareness gave way to understanding. The alarms were because each time I faded away I wasn't breathing anymore. I became aware I was in trouble. And I became aware that now was the time to wake up and fight.

The room was crowded. And I was strapped to the hospital bed, unable to move. The tube in my throat was crushing my windpipe, and the fluid that was collecting there I couldn't swallow. I began to panic. The neurosurgeon, Dr. Michael Lawrence, asked if I wanted the tube removed. I nodded yes.

Ron left the room at that moment to speak with Karen privately in the hallway. "You don't want to see this," he told her.
The doctor told me to take a big breath and push the tube out. But the fluid prevented me from getting a deep breath, and I began vomiting into my tubes. I was vomiting faster than they could suction it out, and I could no longer breath through my mouth. Panic set in again, and I began to breath through my nose.

Dr. Lawrence was quite at ease however. "Somebody's been eating Chinese," he said as he suctioned out my throat.

Well, as a matter of fact, I had. A weird observation I thought, but it took my mind off my predicament for a moment.

I inhaled hard one last time, and the full tube came out of my throat for good.

Ron and Karen came back into the room. Rod and Kari came a short while later.

I had only been conscious a short time, but I didn't know how long I'd been out. I'd assumed not long. I thought I was probably just fine.

A profound sadness came over me as I lay there looking into the eyes of my friends, and seeing fear there.

I was obviously not okay. And I could not bear to see the people I love suffer like that.

It was the same sadness I felt months later covering that policeman's funeral. His grieving family and friends reminded me of how I felt lying helplessly in that bed.

Still, they all put up a brave front. But I could tell.

A few hours later Rod would send a very personal thought to my pager. Reading it moved me to tears because I realized people were saying things they needed to say - just in case I didn't make it through the night.

I still think about those things. And they still move me.

Four days later I was released from St. Joe's. My neurosurgeon was very upbeat. No driving for two weeks he said.

Two weeks? Seriously?

Two days released from the hospital it became apparent to everyone that nothing would be resolved in two weeks.

I could barely walk. I was in bed up to 16 hours each day, but couldn't sleep because each time I laid down I felt the pain of those fractures.

Also, a terrible dizziness set in; a violent vertigo in which my entire world could - in an instant - turn upside down. I would be sitting on the couch speaking with someone when suddenly they would begin to spin, and I would lose all sense of horizon. That often led to a lack of control over my body and I would fall over.

I was admitted to the emergency room of Seattle's Harborview Medical Center, one the west coast's best trauma hospitals, where another round of CT scans was performed. I was assigned to the intern team of Dr. Richard Ellenbogen, himself a renowned trauma specialist. They performed hours of tests and an additional CT scan.

They described a fracture above my right ear that looked more like a spider web. "Imagine a glass ball, and tapping it with a hammer" the attending said. "The way the glass cracks from that point of impact is essentially what your fracture looks like." It extended upward from the ear, curved down and below the ear, and toward the base of the skull.

Worse, a fracture was found in the orbital roof of my right eye.

"There's not much we can do for you there," another specialist said. "It's misshapen. But we think your eyesight will become good again once the swelling goes down."

The fracture had punctured my brain, and bone pushed 5 millimeters in causing significant blood loss.

The assessment of how long I would be out of work was now about to grow considerably from the one I'd been given in Bellingham.

Six months to one year.

The new assessment still came with a caveat from the doctors. It could take anywhere from six months to one year for me to feel like myself again.

But there was also a chance that I would never adequately improve to ever photograph again.

I wrote the picture editors at the Times and told them that, even with that prognosis, I intended to be on the sidelines for the first game of the college football in September; fully five months beyond the accident.

Even so, I considered taking another path.

What if I couldn't ever return to photography again? What would I want to do?

I told Managing Editor David Boardman that I wanted to begin retraining immediately in web development. If I couldn't go back to photography, I wanted to move in to SeattleTimes.com and do multimedia and design at the very least for the length of my convalescence.

The Times was initially fully supportive of my ambition but, for reasons quite apart from my injury, distanced themselves from it over time.

Undaunted, friends helped me acquire a copy of Studio 8 for Mac. I signed up for online courses in Dreamweaver and, as I had time, began tinkering with web design.

My goal was always to return to photography. I never wavered from saying I'd be ready for the fall season, even as the Times surmised I couldn't possibly recovery that quickly and assigned the front end of the fall football season without me in it. I understood why, but I wasn't happy about it. An important part of recovery is setting goals. And yes, I might be setting goals I couldn't possibly attain or, for that matter, could be detrimental to my well being. I understood that too.

But doggone it, if you don't set goals, if you don't work to achieve them, if you don't consider alternative futures - and if the company doesn't overtly support them - then just what is the motivation to get better?

It was going to be hard beating the odds. But if I was going to do it, there needed to be a reward at the end of it.

It's not surprising the Times and I didn't agree on what was best for me. And it wasn't the injury talking either. I didn't get to be a pain in the ass overnight. It took 18 years here for me to achieve that rep.

I was released from Harborview feeling that we were on the right course. I was referred to the University of Washington Medical Center Neurology Clinic for an evaluation now of what was going on behind the fracture. Just why was I so dizzy?

My insurance company had by now assigned a case manager to oversee my care. Fortunately for me, I got a great one. Mary Sussex had, among other things, done head trauma for the Seattle Seahawks. She was aggressive about my care, and her actions undoubtedly sped my recovery.

The doctors at the University had a theory.

My dizziness, they surmised, was caused by bone fragments that had broken free by the impact of the ball and were attacking nerve endings in my inner ear.

This can be sometimes corrected through a simple procedure referred to as an "Epley Maneuver."

Essentially, the doctor puts you on your head and, through a series of four aggressive maneuvers, attempts to steer the fragments back to their proper place.

Imagine a snow globe and turn it slowly, and watch the crystals fall to another location of the globe. That was what the doctors wanted to do to me.

Unfortunately for me, there was far too much swelling and blood for those crystals to find zero gravity.

Almost from the first time the doctor attempted the maneuver my body went into shock. Inverting my head caused my entire world to spin out of control, and my body with it. "Focus on the wall," the doctor said. But I couldn't see the wall. I couldn't see anything. And I had no sense of where my balance lay. I began to fall off the table at which point Rod Mar, who had taken me to the hospital, jumped up to grab me. The doctor gestured to him that he had me in his arms, and Rod watched as I flailed and hyperventilated for minutes until I could focus my eyes and regain my breath.

The doctors at the university determined I was no longer a candidate for the Epley, and said I was going to be off my feet for months. In fact, they decided not to even make a follow-up appointment for another two months. And they also declared that I would be banned from driving for at least six month, which is the law in Washington following any seizure.

"Two months?" I asked. I wanted to be more aggressive about my treatment than that, but they declined. Two months between visits? No MRI, no EEG, no treatment of any kind? They wanted to just wait and see how I progressed.

My nurse case manager challenged the doctors.

"What criteria are you using to base your treatment of Mr. Rutz?" she asked. "I've been researching his condition and can't find any data to support this."

There wasn't any, the doctors said. Quite simply, no one had ever studied trauma-induced seizures before.

We didn't know until some time later that was because, generally, people don't survive that kind of trauma.

As we exited the doctor's office, Mary said, "we're out of here." And she set out to find a new neurologist who would be more willing to aggressively treat me as I had asked.

Within a few days I was in the office of Dr. James Gordon, whom I came to like very quickly.

He knew my work, and he liked sports. And he quizzed me about players and batting averages and statistics.

"You realize that was all a test," he later conceded. "I wanted to test your cognitive thinking."

Gordon said he respected the University doctors greatly. But if I was willing to be more aggressive, then so was he.

An EEG study and MRI were both scheduled immediately. Days after leaving the University Karen, Mary Sussex and myself were back in Gordon's office.

Curiously too, Gordon was the only doctor to actually let me see my x-rays. He was the only doctor to show me film and point out all the damage.

Gordon sat looking at the films, hand under his chin.

"So, tell me about your surgery at St. Joe's," he said.

I didn't have any I told him.

"Huh." That was all he said, but it sure sounded knowing to me.

Why do you ask, I said.

"Well, the injury you have, the explanation of what you remember, it's all conducive with a particular type of hematoma. You get hit, you pass out, you wake up, you're lucid and alertŠ"

"Šand you die within an hour if surgery isn't immediately performed."

I didn't even hear that last part.

Karen, Mary and I all looked at each other, speechless. "You die within an hour" was the 100-pound gorilla in the room with us. It took a minute or two for me to regain my composure.

Gordon pointed to the MRI.

"Here's the break; this point pushes into the brain." He rotated the 3-dimensional film on his computer to show my eye socket. "See the breaks here and here?" A part of my eye became essentially a lever, broken on two ends and slightly tilted.

"And all these white spots on the film. These are where blood has pooled in your brain." There were at least a half dozen sizeable pockets of blood. "You may still be bleeding," he said.

The damage was catastrophic.

And a cyst was discovered on the opposite side of my brain. It would never have been found had the MRI not been done.

Yet here I was, talking without slurring my words. Walking, albeit with a cane.

Yes, I was one lucky sonofabitch.

I don't even ask why anymore. It doesn't really matter. I'm simply grateful that I am lucky. And loved.

Over the months that followed, so many people stepped up to help me that I can't even begin to name names. But Karen and I kept a diary of the hundreds upon hundreds of cards, letters, emails and gifts that poured into our home. It was humbling on a massive scale. Forget Christmas. The fireplace was covered with many more times the cards and well wishes.

Karen began referring to the fireplace as "the shrine."

People ask me what I've learned. "Do you feel like you need to live each day like it's your last?" is a frequent question.

No, that wasn't really the message in all of this.

First of all, who can live every day like it's their last? Who can live up to that kind of pressure?

No, the lesson I learned was the power of generosity.

I cannot begin to tell how much the flow of kind words, prayers, cards, and gifts sustained me over the four months that followed. Every day something new was on my doorstep. A bouncing ball from Smiley Pool of the Dallas Morning News, a pint of gelato from Jay Gorodetzer at the Philadelphia Inquirer, a basket of food from the Eugene Register-Guard, a batting helmet from Seattle Mariners Manager Mike Hargrove.

Every day for weeks someone at the Seattle Times would bring food for Karen and me, or walk our three dogs. Elaine Thompson from the Associated Press, who was a frequent visitor, would suddenly be in our yard mowing. The managing editor of the Times would show up almost unannounced with a pizza.

How can I thank Karen for everything she's done? She's the unsung hero of this column. There isn't sufficient space to account for her good works. And Rod? Sports Shooter regulars know he's a good guy. But you don't know the half of it.

It was off the chart.

I have never been on the receiving end of such generosity; such love and genuine kindness. It is sometimes difficult for me to process because I cannot see anything in my life to justify the outpouring.

"People need to do it more than you need to get it," Rod would say. "So just sit there and shut up."

Maybe that's it. We all want to do something to help, however small and seemingly insignificant it might be.
But it's not insignificant. Having been on this side of your collective generosity I cannot begin to tell you all how much it means. But it means everything.

The six months to one-year estimate I got on recovery? Forget it. I'm back to work just about four months after being hurt.

There was a sudden break in my dizziness a few weeks ago. The fog lifted, and my strength began to return. It mystified the doctors. It mystified me too.

Is that the result of all your kind wishes and prayers? How could it not be?

Bert says I should use this space to say thank you. I really wish I could, but there are so many of you.

Please know though that I am grateful to every one of you who took the time to wish me well. I know who you are, and I will never forget you. And I can never adequately repay you.

But I hope someday to pay it forward.

Because if there's one thing I've learned, it's that the power of generosity is beyond medicine and physical therapy. It's immeasurable, really. I never used to put a lot of stock in get-well cards. Too impersonal I used to think.

But being on the receiving end I can tell you I read - and savored - ever one.

Every email, every phone call, every surprise. They made my day, and that's saying something when you're looking at months and months of recovery. (By the way, if anybody wants to know what was on "Oprah" all summer long, just ask me.)

No, you can't live every moment like it's your last. But if you're kind and generous and loving, then, if it really is your last moment, well, I can't think of a better way to go out.

(Dean Rutz is once again working as a staff photographer at the Seattle Times.)

* * *

LET'S TALK BUSINESS: Finding Your Way
By Rick Rickman

I've been lying low for sometime now trying to gauge if people in our business were getting any smarter about how they do business. Quite honestly, I've gotten really tired of seeing and hearing people making the same mistakes over and over again. The availability of good information about how do set up a good business has become very substantial and is readily available for those who are interested. Sometimes I think that we have cleared the hump. Other times I think we continue to make the same mistakes over and over because the people who are entering this profession are just basically stupid.

I held that believe for a while until I started to do some teaching at the Brooks Institute of Photography. Since that beginning I know that the majority of the people wanting to become photographers aren't at all stupid. What I have found however is the vast majority are inherently lazy. Even though good information on good business practices is readily available people just don't want to do the research to find it.

Most photographers, like many who are members of SportsShooter.com would rather just send out a quick email to ask a question about how to price for a job or how to charge for a CD of pictures. To add to the difficulty, many of the photographers who write to ask questions do think about the importance of the question to have asked it enough in advance to use the information they are given.

I was flabbergasted a few day ago when I read that one photographer was actually going to charge a client $10.00 for a processed and completely worked up image for use on a website. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but no self-respecting, professional, photographer who wants to stay in business sells 5 x 7 prints for $ 10.00. How is it possible to believe that it's a good idea to sell images for any kind of publishing use for $ 10.00.

Just by prowling the archives of SportsShooter.com, it is entirely possible to find almost any ballpark-pricing scenario that exists out there. There have been discussions for the past several years that go to the heart of doing good business and pricing appropriately. There are other websites out there that have pricing schematics that will help find many situations. EditorialPhotographers.com has a wealth of information available. NPPA.com has lots of information as well.

One thing that has to be realized is that even with boatloads of information available it is still incumbent on the individual to find that information and use it. Being lazy and pleading ignorance is absolutely no excuse for continuing to ruin the profession that has the potential to make you and others a good living. I've also decided that being silent is no way to make things better. So, it's incumbent on all of us to speak up when people are screwing up and to help others in every way we can to make better business decisions if there is going to be any future left to this profession.

Let's all try really hard to find our way out of the redundancy of making the same mistakes over and over again and actually get set on a path that allows people to do great pictures and get paid appropriately or their creative efforts.

(Rick Rickman is on the faculty of Brooks Institute of Photography.)

* * *

Preaching to the Choir: When Your Camera Betrays You.
By Paul Myers, Brooks Institute of Photography

It all seems so innocent at the time. You are writing captions back at the office or relaxing with friends at the beach, out walking the dog in your neighborhood or eating your pizza at halftime.

Click.

Somebody else uses your camera.

Might be your best friend, your co-worker or your two-year-old niece. It does not matter. The fact remains that somebody else uses your camera and takes a pretty cool picture. In fact, it is the only beautiful photograph in your entire take on that day. Nice light, great framing, interesting interaction, clean backgrounds, slightly-tilted horizon, multiple layers, exposing for the highlights, something you would see somewhere like, you know, Sportsshooter.com or something.

Don't you just hate that?

I mean, they pick up your camera and make a photograph that you would have never thought of or felt to make, ever. Worst part of it all is that the photograph is of a subject you know inside and out, someone or some venue you have been photographing for hours, days, months, years... and the camera, it betrays you and your "vision" and exposes the frame in a totally different way from the rest of your take. It exposes you for the photographer you are.

Yes, the camera betrays you and shows you the possibilities that you already dismissed before showing up on the scene and assumes the "way of seeing" of another person. This betrayal by that same camera you paid three grand for lies in this self-realization as well as in the unmasking of your underlying belief that somehow the camera is partially responsible for your amazing photographs, no matter how many times you tell yourself photography is not about the camera: that the seven frames per second are worth the time editing; that auto focus changed your life; that TTL is your best friend; that 35mm full frame is the only way to really show daily life; that the constant upgrades are worth the debt.

These betraying images made with your camera differ from yours in spite of all the technology in your camera that ought to level the field. At the same time they are completely devoid of your idiosyncrasies in the form of posture, slight anticipation of the moment, focal decision, distance from subject, ISO, f/stop, shutter speed, angle, breathing techniques all of which are nowhere to be found. These little decisions and the countless others that combined form your approach to photography are nothing more than the totality of your way of seeing. Furthermore, as it turns out, they have nothing to do with the camera itself. Betrayed, once again you realize that the camera is not a magical tool particular to your approach in helping you "see" and you are held completely responsible for the pictures you take. Ouch, that stings.

Its funny that we only have access to noticing how personal photography is when our friend sitting next to us ever so casually, even nonchalantly, picks up our camera, shrugs, snaps a couple of pictures, sets the beast back down on the table and mutters something to the effect, "Eeh, there wasn't anything to see, anyway."

Later, editing, you cannot take your eyes off the alien images, every one of the little buggers screaming out in the sequence as unique and amazing. In this moment, strain to remember that you notice this difference only because you did not take that picture and because it is different does not make it more effective or more beautiful or more historical. These pictures have nothing to do with you and, as outsiders, point a finger at everything you are and are not as a photographer. Yes, these aliens mixed in with your images, though taken from such a strangely similar yet oh so distant comprehension of the basics of the machine and how one interacts with it, together, in the moment of photographic exposure, point to exactly how you see as an individual photojournalist. And just for being different you might so easily mistake them as being "better" than your images. Hmmm, are you placing too much weight in understanding your growth as a photographer onto how much your images change over time, for good or bad? Either way, rejoice in this revealing event when another takes a picture with your camera as it a true opportunity for you to learn about your way of seeing.

If, heaven forbid, you care about developing a style this is a prime moment to scrutinize your photographic approach. Take a long look at how these images differ from your entire take. Of course this is risky because it is a chance for you to learn about your approach and the opportunities that are available for you to improve or further your understanding of visual storytelling. It is in this instance of difference between your images and another's, right in your own take, that the mystique of the camera is revealed: that it has none and that these photographs you make are particular to you and your posture, your way of depressing the shutter, your particular height and hand eye coordination... Photojournalist: rejoice in knowing that from all these idiosyncrasies spring forth your gifts to us, your peers and your audience.

(Paul Myers is a faculty member of the Visual Journalism Program at Brooks Institute of Photography in Ventura, CA. Prior to his arrival at Brooks, Myers worked for a variety of publications including newspapers in Freeport, IL and Marysville, CA.)

* * *

September Specials From Penn Camera. By Jeff Snyder.

Can you believe that the opening kickoff to the 2006-07 NFL season is just 4 days away? Wow, the Super Bowl in Miami is already sounding good for February '07 !

Here's some updates for the new month:

Nikon D200's are finally in stock...Nikon has announced the new D80 Body, 18-35 f3.5-5.6 G/AFS Zoom and 70-300 f4.5-5.6 G/AFS lenses. From what we've heard, and seen, the new products will be very exciting! Imagine being able to crop in camera, or convert to Black and White in camera...sound cool? We're building a list for the new D80 now, call me or email me to get in early. The D80 Body will be less than $1000...

Plenty of Canon EOS1D-IIN cameras here and ready for your fall action! Canon has announced the new Rebel XTi, a 10.1 megapixel body. The XTi will be HOT over the next few months...The XTi will be available as body only at approximately $799, or with their 18-55 at about $899.

SanDisk's new Extreme IV cards are in stock in 2GB, 4GB or 8GB configurations. The new SanDisk Extreme FireWire readers are here too! Always contact me 1st for your memory needs...

Concerned about not locking your shipping cases? We now have the Pelican TSA approved locks in stock. Pelican's new TSA-accepted padlocks work two ways: a combination lock for the owner, and a separate TSA coded keyhole for access by airport baggage screeners. Now you can check your Pelican Case through with confidence. You can now purchase this lock that allows the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) inspectors to open the lock without destroying it. The locks are marked with a special symbol that alerts the TSA inspectors. They can then use a special key to open the lock and relock it when they are finished. A great deal at $14.99

Hoodman's new Right Angle finder (H-RAV) is here! The H-RAV fits all Canon, Nikon, and Fuji Digital SLR Cameras. No need to crawl on your belly to line up an off the deck shot. H-RAV features include a built in diopter with a 1x and a 2.5x capability, full 360-degree rotation and 4 mounting attachments to provide universal mounting. Compact, protective storage case
included. Great for those low-angle shoots....
We also now have the complete line-up of Hoodman Memory cards, rated at 150X..Call/email me for special SportsShooter.com pricing!

LaCie's new "Rugged" portable drives should be in stock any day now, available in 80gb & 120gb sizes. The exclusive creation of world-renown designer Neil Poulton, this portable storage solution offers the supreme speed of FireWire 800 along with FireWire 400 and Hi-Speed USB 2.0 interfaces for true universal connectivity. Conveniently bus-powered and plug & play, it's ideal for backup, video storage and large data volume exchange on the go. Simply plug it into just about any computer anywhere for backup, video storage and large data volume exchange. Its unique scratch-protected aluminum shell and shock-resistant rubber bumper make the LaCie Rugged Hard Drive especially resistant to harsh elements for extra protection along the road of your adventures.

Super Deals on Epson's P2000 & P4000 portable storage devices are on now...Contact me for all the details.

As always if anyone has any questions at all, please do not hesitate to contact me via email or phone...we're here to help you get your job done with the right gear.

(Jeff Snyder can be contacted at Penn Camera at: 1-800-347-5770 or FAX 301-210-7370; Email: jsnyder@penncamera.com; AOL Instant Messenger: JeffPennCamera. On the web: http://www.penncamera.com.)

* * *

Late Summer Specials From Roberts Distributors. By Jody Grober.

Not much doing in sleepy IndianapolisŠand I'm still no over my Bristol recoveryŠon to the news:

Canon has announced two new lenses, the 50/1.2 due out in October and the 70-200/4.0 IS due out in November. Latest word on the awesome new Pro9000 printers is October, I can't wait these will rockŠ

I have had some great response on the new Edirol R-09 24 bit Digital Recorder that solves one of the major problems with many high-end recorders by using AA batteries.
Check out the specsŠ http://www.rolandus.com/products/productdetails.aspx?ObjectId=757&ParentId=114
SS price will be $399.97.

Think Tank Photo is telling us the Airport Security should be arriving in 2-3 weeks and thanks so much for all of your patience.

We have received a small shipment of the SanDisk 4GbExtreme IV cards with the Extreme IV reader, which will allow you to take advantage of its super-fast, download to your computer. Ask us for your Sports Shooter priceŠ

Super special memory deal for your point and shoots, friends and family cameras or anywhere else where you don't need the fastest card on earthŠStarting September 1st, your choice, Kingston 1Gb CF or Kingston 1Gb SD for $19.97 per card plus an $8.00 mail-in rebate.

That's all from here, so be safe and have fun.

(Roberts Distributors is located in Indianapolis, IN. Jonathan "Jody" Grober can be emailed at: jgrober@robertsimaging.com. To place an order, call: 1-800-726-5544. You can check out Roberts' online product catalog at: (http://www.robertsimaging.com)

* * *

Samy's Camera Means Multi-Media Headquarters. By Louis Feldman.

The Sports Shooter Newsletter and SportsShooter.com message board has been filled lately with things about multi-media, audio galleries, video convergence and the web ...

Remember that Samy's Camera is your one-stop location for everything you'll need to outfit yourself or your staff to enter the new storytelling era or multimedia. From the professional-level Canon XL H1 hi-def video camera (http://www.samys.com/product.php?ItemNo=CANO0967B001) to the budget-priced Panasonic PV-GS300 3CCD compact digital video "palmcorder " (http://www.samys.com/product.php?ItemNo=PANSPVGS300) ... we have everything you will need to take that next step in visual journalism. Samy's also has all of the "extras" you'll need ... spare batteries, tripods, fluid heads, stabilizer systems, wireless microphones and continuous lighting. Give one of our video specialists a call to discuss your needs and how we can fit them into your budget.

And speaking of video ... location editing is easier than ever with a new, super-speedy laptop from Apple. The new MacBook Pro with the Intel duo core processor is THE state-of-the-art portable computing must-have for the new multi-media visual journalist. The MacBook Pro features either a 1.8 GHz or 2.0 GHZ Intel Duo Core processor, 667 MHz bus, TI Mobility Radeon X1600 video card, built-in AirPort Extreme wireless networking, Bluetooth 2.0+EDR, ExpressCard/34 slot, dual-link DVI video out, Gigabit Ethernet, USB 2.0, FireWire 400, and optical digital and analog audio in/out. Call one of our Apple specialists to talk about your computer needs and availability. Samy's is a fully authorized Apple reseller and service center. (http://www.samys.com/browse.php?CATEGORY=Computer+Laptop)

Samy's Camera also carries the full line of external hard drives from LaCie to store your digital files ... from the new small, portable, rugged LaCie Rugged All-Terrain Hard Drive 80GB to the sleek and stylish drives designed by Porsche to the Bigger Disk Extreme 2TB drives we have them all IN STOCK! (http://www.samys.com/browse.php?CATEGORY=Memory+Hard+Drive)

How fast is fast? SanDisk's new Extreme IV compact flash cards boasts read/write speed of up to 40MB/sec. The Extreme IV cards feature SanDisks' innovative ESP ("Enhanced Super-Parallel Processing") technology for the fastest speeds and highest performance. SanDisk also introduces their new SanDisk Extreme FireWire reader. Combined with the new Extreme compact flash cards, images can transfer from the SanDisk Extreme IV cards to a computer, at up to 40MB/sec, for significantly improved workflow efficiency. Call us for current pricing for Sports Shooter readers! (http://www.samys.com/search.php?MANUFACTURER=SanDisk&SEARCH_TEXT=&FIRST_RECORD_NUMBER=1)

Epson has rebates of their cool portable storage device, the P2000 and P4000. If you're on the road or out in the field and need a quick and convenience way to move files from your memory cards, the P2000/P4000 is a self-contained hard drive with a built in card reader. The P2000/P4000 is also a great way to review your shoot without having to haul around a laptop computer. (http://www.samys.com/search.php?MANUFACTURER=Epson&SEARCH_TEXT=storage&FIRST_RECORD_NUMBER=1)

Canon's super-hot EOS 5D is the photojournalist's dream come true. Whether a "second body" to your EOS Mark II N or your primary camera, the 5D's full frame 12.8-megapixel offers the quality and speed you've come to expect from Canon.
5D features include:
12.8 MP full frame CMOS sensor
3 fps / 60 JPEG image burst
9-point AF with 6 Assist AF points
Large 2.5" LCD
Records RAW/JPEG images
Digital Photo Professional software
Compact magnesium alloy body (http://www.samys.com/product.php?ItemNo=CANO0296B002)

Remember that Samy's Camera is an authorized Think Tank Photo dealer. Travel these days is not what is used to be, with increased security, shrinking overhead bin space, smaller checked baggage allowances ... not to mention the hassle! The working photographers' bags of choice is Think Tank Photo's Airport Security roller and Airport Addicted backpack. These bags feature tough, stylish designs with enough room for the gear you need to work in a footprint that allows it to fit in the airliner's overhead storage bin. Smart - cool working photographers use Think Tank! (http://www.samys.com/search.php?MANUFACTURER=Think+Tank&SEARCH_TEXT=&FIRST_RECORD_NUMBER=1)

And lastly ... Samy's is a proud sponsor of the upcoming Sports Shooter Academy in November. If you haven't applied yet, better do so soon (http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/1594)! Hope to see a lot of you in the OC for SSA III!

(Contact Samy's Camera in Los Angeles by calling (323) 938-2420 and ask for an industrial sales representative. Also check out Samy's Specials on SportsShooter.com or Samy's web site at: http://www.samys.com.)

* * *

Acknowledgements
As always, thanks to Special Advisors & Contributors: Deanna & Emma Hanashiro, Brad Mangin, Rick Rickman, Rod Mar, Vincent Laforet, Trent Nelson, Jason Burfield, Grover Sanschagrin, Joe Gosen, The Photodude, Reed Hoffmann, Anne Ryan, Darren Carroll and Bob Deutsch.

Thanks this month to: Mick Cochran, Gerik Parmele, Bryan Moss, Dennis Dunleavy, Dean Rutz, Bruce Ely, Patrick Murphy-Racey, Dan Powers, Thomas Witte and Paul Myers.

I welcome any comments, corrections, suggestions and contributions. Please e-mail me at bert@sportsshooter.com.

The Sports Shooter Archives as well as tons of cool resources and information can be accessed through the Internet at http://www.SportsShooter.com.

Use of the content of the Sports Shooter Newsletter is prohibited without the expressed written permission of The Big Kahuna and the author of the article.

Opinions, rants, raves, insults and praise whether intend or not, are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Sports Shooter and public sensibilities.

--

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
THE SEQUEL: SPORTS SHOOTER ACADEMY III
The next COOLEST photography event of the year

Nov. 1 - 5, '06
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Back to newsletter list

Date:

From:

Subject:

Sports Shooter v.94