TOP STORIES   |   CLIP CONTEST   |   ARCHIVES   |   LINKS   |   CLASSIFIEDS   |   ABOUT US

Daily News photographer, R2 director mugged in Brooklyn
By Todd Maisel, R2 Director
Members are urged to use extreme care in taking photos in areas with a lot of criminal activity. I spent half of May 19 at Brooklyn State Supreme Court where I testified at the Grand Jury against Darius Brown, 32, of Elton Street in Brooklyn. He is accused of attacking and robbing me while I was shooting a job on May 14 on Hendrix Street and Linden Blvd. I am determined to put this guy away.

The incident began when I responded to a cop in trouble chasing a man with a gun. Upon arrival, a suspect was sitting on the ground with about 30 75th Precinct officers

surrounding him. After being asked to move back from the scene I began shooting photos from across the street.

As I continued shooting, a man later identified as Brown, suddenly grabbed my camera, a D2xs with 70-200mm lens from my hands. We fought for the camera with me holding grasping the strap. Officers guarding the prisoner or sitting in their patrol cars, heard my screams for help.
But Brown pulled the camera away anyway and began to run with myself and an army of cops behind. After throwing the camera away after about a block (thankfully onto a grassy strip), cops tackled and arrested him.

I suffered strained muscles in my arm, shoulder and back and was examined by EMS and treated by my friends at Lutheran Medical Center the next day.

In 25 years, I’ve never heard anything like this. Incidentally, Brown was released on own recognizance only two days before by the courts after his arrest for possession of a stolen vehicle, stolen plate and burglar tools. He was arrested in January for beating a man for his cell phone. He has a past string of misdemeanor crimes, mostly vehicular related. This past week, I went before a grand jury and gave my account – no details allowed from inside that room – it’s secret.

Stay tuned for more about what happens to Mr. Brown.

Cameras allowed in Manhattan Courtroom for "Madam" hearing
by Marc Hermann
NEW YORK (May 22, 2008)

In a surprise decision, Justice A. Kirke Bartley granted an application for video and still coverage of a hearing at Manhattan Criminal Court.  Alleged madam, Kristin Davis, was to be brought before the court on May 16 for a hearing in which her attorney, Mark Jay Heller, would argue for his client's $2 million bail to be lowered or eliminated.  Davis, who allegedly ran the Wicked Models NYC escort agency, had been arrested in March, and was implicated as having an exclusive "black book" of clients.  Images of Davis in the media were limited to suggestive photos of her in various modeling poses, as well as a brief glimpse after her arrest, in which she wore a hood and ducked away from cameras.  Although the hearing did not promise to reveal any bombshell information, it provided an opportunity for Ms. Davis to be seen not as a pin-up or a handcuffed perp, but rather as a defendant entitled to a presumption of innocence.

Jonathan Dienst, reporter for WNBC-TV, submitted a written application to Judge Bartley on the morning of the hearing, requesting space for one TV and one still pool shooter.  When the case was called, Bartley addressed the application on the record, allowing the defense and prosecution opportunities to be heard on the issue.  Heller was in favor of allowing cameras in, saying that it is the public's right to witness the proceedings of the court.  Assistant District Attorney Artie McConnell countered that the courtrooms are open to members of the public, and that nothing is gained by allowing the visual broadcast of what occurs within.  Heller replied that, using McConnell's own logic, the very fact that the courts are open to all is reason enough to allow cameras to record the hearing.  Bartley said he saw no reason to deny the application, and the case was postponed until the photographers could retrieve their equipment and set up. WNBC cameraman Louis Valle and NY Daily News photographer Marc Hermann were told by court officers that they could bring their equipment directly upstairs.  The court officers in the lobby, who normally allow cameras to be carried but not used, were then informed that permission had been granted for the equipment to be brought past the vestibule and to the elevators.  After a brief delay, Valle and Hermann were permitted to set up their cameras on tripods in the empty jury box, perpendicular to and a short distance ahead of the defense table.  A microphone, with its logo flag removed, was permitted to be placed on the judge's bench, facing outward toward the well.  No flash nor on-camera lights were used, which presented a slight challenge in the moderately lit courtroom with the subject between the cameras and large windows, however digital technology allowed the photographers to produce images that were more than adequate. Footage from the WNBC camera was fed electronically to other networks, while the still images were distributed on-site to the New York Post via photographer William Farrington, and to other media outlets via e-mail from the Daily News photo desk.  The judge and the court officers were later personally thanked for the courtesy shown to members of the media.

Apart from an experimental period between 1987 and 1997, cameras are summarily banned from New York courtrooms under a statute dating back to the 1950's.  Often, applications are made to judges, who have authority to allow cameras in at their discretion.  In the outer boroughs, this is a more common occurrence, particularly in Brooklyn and Queens where several high-profile cases have been visually documented.  Manhattan, however, despite efforts to create a statewide standard under the Unified Court System, remains very stubborn when attempts are made to get cameras into court.  This instance marked the first time since the Paul Cortez trial early last year that photographers were permitted in a Manhattan courtroom. Photographers working at 100 Centre St. (the Daily News and New York Post routinely have a photographer on call there every day) are frequently thwarted in their attempts at photographing subjects by the Rube Goldberg nature of the building.  Two entrances on Centre St. and one on Baxter St., in addition to alternate egresses through the District Attorney's office on Hogan Pl. and the Department of Corrections on White St. make it easy to leave the building without being seen -- particularly for the well-connected.  As photographers are barred from photographing in the hallways and lobby, they must wait in plain sight of their subjects, and practically walk with them out the exit they have chosen.  A strict "no running" policy makes this difficult if a defendant with nothing to lose makes a feint towards one door, and then doubles back and speeds out another.

We can only hope that future allowances for cameras in the courtroom make all parties concerned realize that photographers can do their jobs professionally and unobtrusively, and that a photograph of a defendant, with head held high before the court, makes for a less judgmental picture than one made by photographers literally chasing after someone on the street.  The controlled atmosphere of the courtroom ensures the safety of both the defendant and the photographer, which is not guaranteed when on a crowded sidewalk. It is to be noted that three times since April, vehicular accidents have occurred in front of the Supreme Court building at 60 Centre Street.  One incident involved a car running up the sidewalk and onto the steps of the building, and two involved pedestrians struck in the street.  On each occasion, court officers were the first to respond, initiating patient care and implementing scene control.  All three incidents were covered by photographers, who were graciously permitted to do their jobs without the usual well-intentioned but terribly restrictive actions with which we have unfortunately been forced to deal lately.  In fact, members of the public were asked to step back and out of the area, while the photographers were permitted to remain unfettered.  Likewise, a point was made of thanking these officers at the conclusion of the incident for their courtesy. 

Editors note: Last year, efforts by NPPA to push legislation to change the law regarding cameras in the courts failed when the state legislature failed to act on the measure. The NPPA intends to continue efforts to obligate the courts to allow cameras into the courts.

Photo job opens at NYPD
The NYPD Photo Unit expects to have an opening for a photographer soon. Anyone with 3 years  experience (proof needed) as a photographer (lab work is okay - not  retail), living in NYC, w/ a driver's license, who might like to work  crazy hours (including Saturdays and Sundays and major holidays) in  exchange for steady employment with very nice benefits, they are  welcome to call me for more details. The starting salary is close to $34,000. One word of warning – if you have any criminal record, don’t expect to get this job. I had a criminal trespass conviction and could not get this job so don’t waste your time if you have anything similar.

Anyone interested may call 646-610-6588 or call the unit at: 646-610-6082.
Resumes may be mailed to my attention at: NYPD Photo Unit, 1 Police Plaza, Rm. A-79,  NY, NY 10038. My e-mail is: valerie.hodgson@nypd.org

Your comments count on NPPA name change.
Read what your fellow members are saying:
I, for one, approve of the NPPA name change.  It seems an appropriate acknowledgement of the changes it our profession.
Jim Peppler

Against!!!!!
Ray Stubblebine, NYPPA President

Who's idea was this anyway? The NPPA is well known, both in video and print circles, as well as outside. I think losing the heritage built by some pretty clever people back in the 40's would be a big loss and I don't know how that will affect my efforts to continue to support the organization,
both as a 30+ year member, but also in encouraging Apple to continue supporting the organization.
My two cents.
Joe Torelli

I would just like to put my two cents into the debate.  Resolution IV to re-name the NPPA might result in a decrease in membership.  I have been a member for many years, in part, because I believe that there is a brotherhood among press photographers.  The NPPA has always symbolized that bond for me.  Please vote against this resolution.
Mike Lander North Babylon, N. Y.

I'm 100% against it!
I say leave the name as it is.
Hugh

I am against changing the name of our organization. I agree with colleague Nancy Ford which she expressed in a letter sent to you.

Marilu Lopez Fretts

Keep NPPA!
Jay Capers
Staff Photographer
Democrat and Chronicle

Against changing the name big time!
RMoscatiSR@aol.com

I would lean more to National Society of Visual Journalists.  Your second suggestion seems too wordy and doesn't seem to flow well.  Good luck. I have no problem with any of the resolutions.  I think that the Society of Visual Journalists (SVJ) is quite catchy and more inclusive.
Claude D. Grant

I am against it. I like NPPA. We ( you anyway ) are PRESS Photographers. I don't know what a " visual journalist " is. If one picture is worth 1,000 words, we must be very verbose. The NYPD suggests Society for Creating Urban Memories. ( S.C.U.M.)
Hal Weiner Digital Photography
Member, National Press Photographers Association
Member, Episcopal Church & Visual Arts/NY

Change is good! I'm for it. Let's move with the times! Four more suggestions: Society of Digital Press Journalists, National Association of Digital Journalists, Visual Press Journalists of Association, Visual Media Press Association.
Christopher R. Gallant,  MFA
Director of Photography , Special Projects Unit
WGRZ-TV/WGRZ.COM 259 Delaware Ave.  Buffalo, NY 14202

As far as the name change for the NPPA is concerned - I am against it. The Society of Visual Journalists sounds like a high school club and not an organization of press professionals.
Kevin Heckman

Yes, think we have to with so much of our production going to mediums other than print.
Mike Waters

Don't change the name!!!!!
Brand recognition.   If the name is changed, it needs to be done carefully so that when you contact people and say, "I'm from the XYZPA," they don't say, "Who?"
Harry D’Orio, past R2 Director

Without more info I can only say that " a rose by any other name--------".
I'm not sure what kind of an impact a name change would make. I guess I'm not informed enough. Hope this helps and apologies if it doesn't. 
Joe Senzatimore

I believe very few people outside the industry are familiar with the NPPA, but if you asked the man-on-the-street what the National Press Photographers Association is he could probably give an acceptable general description.  He would probably use the term "working press" or something similar in his description.

Ask that same person what The Society of Visual Journalists, Inc. is and I suspect he would describe several different things.  "Society" does not readily imply an association of working people, but a social relationship of people with mutual interests.  "Visual journalists" could include those who create the printed word in newspapers and magazines.

"National Press Photographers Association" is very descriptive.  "The Society of Visual Journalists, Inc." has a nice ring to it, but what it is, to the layman, lacks specificity.
For what my opinion is worth, I say, when choosing between those two names, keep it as it is.
Ward Miller
Retired
Formally associated with Poughkeepsie Journal

I'm for the change to Society of Visual Journalists.
I've been using the phrase for several years when talking about the need for visual journalists to be part of the decision-making process at newspapers and on the web.  I find myself using the term around "non-visual journalists".  They get the point.
Jberryjberry@Syracuse.com

Personally I'm against the name change. Storytelling in a picture is the basis of all we do.
Some of us shoot one frame, others shoot 30 frames a second. I realize a bunch of people on b-roll think the NPPA is mostly stills, but I'm a video guy trying to shoot more stills!
If more video guys understand that still guys shoot a story in a single frame.. While we can spray... Their video will improve that much more. In fact, it would eliminate the "making creative shots just because I can." I've seen tons of stories with great shots and editing but it didn't add
anything to the story, it probably detracted! Change is the only constant and I'm resisting.  :)
Thanks for your time.
Phil Pang, Photojournalist, Citytv / CP24

So who can join the "old" NPPA in the future? any visual journalist?
Chipjump@aol.com

I have a problem with the rebranding resolutions. The NPPA is deep in  history and tradition and the name should not be changed. And I wish I could of seen who submitted the resolutions. BUT pleas don't vote yes for the rebranding resolution.
Ken Bizzigoti, chair clip chairman, past director R2

The NPPA has been at the forefront of all these battles to show that photographers are equal in
the journalism profession and I joined with them in the beginning of the NPPA and am a lifetime member.

I understand that times have changed and perhaps NPPA doesn't tell the whole story of who we are now, but I think the new title sounds like we are a bunch of wimps with a pretty name that none of those outside of the organization will recognize as to who we are and what we did. You would have to come up with a much clearer stronger name before I would give up the NPPA name.  I did know many of the original photographers and I think they were proud of the name NPPA.

My only suggestion for a new name to encompass who we are today would be to change the name photographers to cameramen.   And though I mean that word to include all the women who are in the field and doing great, I am sure the liberal women will not take to it.
Best of luck to you and your generation, Todd.
Ron Moscati

June Calendar Items
J&R events for June
Kenny Werner and Roseanna Vitro Will perform and sign autographs on 6-21 as part of our next WBGO remote. The remote starts at 2 and the performance begins at 4.

Still Trying to Achieve my Personal Goal To raise money and make
the big ride Mickey Osterriecher, attorney NPPA



I apologize in advance to those of you who have already contributed and for those of you who are receiving this email more than once.

I am writing again because of a glitch in the system that has not allowed pledges to be calculated properly. If you have already donated BUT HAVE NOT RECEIVED an acknowledgment or thank you please contact me at 716.983.7800.

If you have not yet pledged it’s never too early to do! This year's Ride will be in 40 days and once again I am riding to raise money in the fight against cancer. I will be riding 62.5 miles in two separate rides.

Because of your generosity, last year I ranked 20th in fundraising out of more than 4,000 participants, bringing in a little over $5,000.00. This year for whatever reason pledges have been far behind. While I know that the cost of everything is going up I hope that you will open your hearts and wallets for this cause. This year I am riding in honor of Linda Gordon, who herself has raised thousands of dollars while battling cancer for the past few years.

My father survived the forced labor camps of the Holocaust, only to succumb to malignant melanoma in 1980 at the age of 65. It is in honor of them and all of the people who will be diagnosed with cancer that I hope to raise money for this worthy cause.

It is faster and easier than ever to support this great cause - you can make your donation online by simply clicking on the link at the bottom of this message. If you would prefer, you can also send your tax-deductible contribution to the address listed below. Whatever you can give will help -- it all adds up! Thank you in advance for your support! I will keep you posted on my progress!

Thanks from Mickey H. Osterreicher

Make all checks payable to: (Please note Mickey Osterreicher in your check memo field) Ride for Roswell, P.O. Box 644, Buffalo, NY 14240

Exhibit in Bronx features Many local photojouralists
An exhibit entitled “The Press On the Wall,” will feature the works of numerous New York City photojournalists, especially members of our organization. The opening reception will be on Friday, June 6, 5-9 p.m. The exhibit will be held at the Haven Arts Gallery, 50 Bruckner Blvd., Bldg. A, Bronx, NY. For more information, go to www.havenarts.org

Some of those in the exhibit include Mary Altaffer, Susanna Bates, Tanya Briganti, Angel Chrevesti, Jason DeCrow, Angel Franco, Frank Fournier, Alfred Giancarlo, Robert Kalfus, Richard Levine, Mariela Lombard, James Messerschmidt, Matt McDermott, Linda Obuchoska, Katie Orlinsky, Frances Roberts, Librado Romero, Ardina Seward, Jeremy Sparig, and Robert Stolarik.

The exhibit is being curated by JC Rice. The exhibit will be open from June 2 to July 12

©2009 National Press Photographers Association - Region 2