Celebrity photographers don’t get a lot of love – either from the stars whose fame they inflate or the public whose obsessions they feed. That situation is not likely to change in light of the new film, “Paparazzi,” which opens today.

Produced by Mel Gibson, “Paparazzi” pits a newbie actor against a team of no-holds-barred celebrity photographers. Chase scenes and fights, accidents and murders all crop up – but the weapon of choice is the camera. As the trailer intones: “36 ounces of cold steel. 24 shots per load. 1,000 meter range. It has the power to tear a man apart. And it never misses its target.”

All of which is supposed to make you feel sympathetic for the movie star, played by Cole Hauser. But the sight of seeing these bottom feeders hunted down by someone at the top of the food chain may just have the opposite effect. Ask paparazzi – sorry, celebrity photojournalists – and they’ll tell you they’re the ones who are unfairly treated.

Celebrity photographers have been around since Victorian times; paparazzi are a relatively more recent innovation. In the 1950s, the publicity machine in New York and Los Angeles still relied heavily on the newspaper columnists (think “Sweet Smell of Success” and glossy magazines like Life and Look). Celebrity was a commodity still largely cornered by the big movie studios, where publicity was tightly controlled.

The concept of paparazzi (like the name) came over from Italy. Paparazzo was the name of the parasite photographer played by Walter Santesso in Federico Fellini’s classic 1960 film “La Dolce Vita” – a type of the new breed of freelance gossipmongers that the director had seen spring up in the glamorous Rome of the age.

Ever present, a nuisance, but a necessary part of the machinery in a celebrity-crazed culture, paparazzi have a way of bringing any subject into the gutter – but it’s hard to overestimate their ability to deliver fame overnight. In a society where image is a form of currency and new gossip rags pop up overnight, paparazzi play a crucial role in differentiating the celebrity from the nobody.

Public street or not, public person or not, famous faces have gone to great lengths to prevent photographers from following their every move. Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis famously filed a restraining order against Ron Galella – the same photographer who was hit by Marlon Brando and beat up by Richard Burton’s bodyguards. Other celebs have just resorted to flipping off the photographers, but it takes more than a finger to deter these hearty souls.

“Anyone whose influence depends on the public needs to be in the public eye,” said former president of the Los Angeles chapter of the American Society of Media Photographers, Rick Barnes. “Paparazzi cannot get along without the celebrities. And the celebrities cannot get along without the paparazzi.”

It was the death of Princess Diana, however, that began to make paparazzi seem a genuine menace. Since then, photographers of all stripes have felt the glare of public judgment. And yes, it’s stronger than flashbulbs.

Globe Agency photographer John Barrett, a 25-year veteran of the industry, felt the heat immediately afterward: “I had to get a photograph of people signing the [funeral] books at the British Consulate. It was a legitimate news story. And people were looking at the photographers like ‘You murdering bastards.'”

“The media blared that it was the paparazzi that killed Diana,” said Jim Roshan, president of the International Association of Professional Event Photographers. “And all of a sudden everybody is anti-photojournalist.”

“Paparazzi and photojournalists were all lumped into the same basket,” said editor of News Photographer magazine Donald Winslow, who has shot for Reuters and several newspapers throughout his career.

At the heart of the problem is the lack of distinction between photojournalists (or celebrity photographers) and paparazzi. News photographers can either be on staff at a publication or will freelance for several outlets – such as newspapers, magazines, or wire services. And their work is typically tied to a news story and a specific assignment.

“They’re working with the set of ethical standards that apply to journalists,” said Mr. Winslow.

“There are newspaper shooters who make decent wage and work 40-hour weeks,” said New York photographer Dennis Van Tine. “They tend to have families.”

If a professional photojournalist happens to see a celebrity walking through the park, he might decide to be enterprising, take a shot, and hope to sell it. But if that celebrity is hanging out by his pool at home while the photographer is perched on a hillside several feet above – that’s a paparazzi.

“They are not playing by the same set of rules as, say, a photojournalist who works for the Associated Press,” said Mr. Winslow.

Paparazzi photos are not typically designed to accompany news stories – they are the story. The photographer is shooting for a celebrity’s candid, unguarded moments, which will most likely be exclusively captured by the photographer. The recent shot of a down-and-out Britney Spears apparently drinking alcohol outside a convenience store fell into this category.

To more mainstream photographers, paparazzi seem to be a different breed – and it takes a certain kind of personality to do the job. “It’s like a gambling addiction,” said Mr. Van Tine. “The big hit is always just around the corner. And you always hear about their wins, never the losses.”

But those wins are what keep the pages of celebrity magazines filled each week. Mr. Barrett scored big with shots of Sharon Stone on her honeymoon, and he knows the value of keeping his cool when lurking around or when waiting for an easy shot, like a celebrity coming out of a restaurant.

“You have to be aggressive but able to cool yourself,” he said. “You’re not going to get the photos if you bring too much attention to yourself. My best photos are when they didn’t see me.”

One of Mr. Barrett’s worst experiences on the job was an encounter with Mr. T, who was on the dance floor at the Palladium club on 14th street. There were several photographers shooting and Mr. T told them to stop. When they didn’t, the star started slugging a Daily News photographer, and Mr. Barrett snapped photos of the action. “He came over and started pounding on us,” Mr. Barrett recalls.

Mr. Van Tine, too, has gotten roughed up on the job. While hanging around the filming of “Ransom” on the Upper West Side, the photographer spotted Ron Howard and asked to take a photo.

“He looked at me and smiled,” said Mr. Van Tine, who was happy to have the sellable shot. He hoped for the same result when Mel Gibson himself came along, but instead found himself thrown into a plate-glass window by a security guard.

“They’re all for First Amendment freedom as long as they have more freedom than you do,” said Mr. Van Tine, noting that the filming was on a public street.

No celebrity has ever taken an anti-paparazzi crusade as far as Mr. Hauser’s character does in the movie. But that’s not the most unrealistic thing about the movie, according to Mr. Van Tine. Who would believe a simple movie star could outsmart such famously stealthy fellows?

“True paparazzi will never even be seen,’ said Mr. Van Tine, who likens them to aquatic creatures. “They might come to a red carpet event. They’ll come to the bay for a little while, then go back out to sea.”