Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => The Coffee Corner => Topic started by: Christoph C. Feldhaim on March 06, 2014, 06:20:58 am
-
After reading the thread
"What happened to the photography industry in 2013?" (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=87840.0)
I thought I'd spawn a new thread - this one:
So - what happened to YOUR photography?
Were there any significant changes or developments?
What matters to you?
I myself can say that an addition in gear - getting a Fuji X (E2) system significantly changed my pace of output, which leaves me with a dizzy feeling.
My serious cameras beforehand were film only - a Mamiya Press and later the Mamiya 7 II - which is still in use in a hybrid workflow.
I cannot yet fully judge where this addition of a serious digital system will lead me to, but that was the most significant change for me concerning my photography in 2013.
Another very significant change for me was to emphasize and accept postprocessing much more than I did earlier.
What about you?
Cheers
~Chris
-
The crystallization of the idea that photography was just going to be an addition to the main source of income rather than trying to make it a major plank of my efforts in trying to derive a living. It was really quite liberating in a way.
-
In 2013 I started working for a daily newspaper. It's crazy, everything is a rush to get multiple shoots done, tagged and uploaded before deadline every day. I've learnt a huge amount from having to do 3-6 shoots per day in varied situations from protests to court, sports, funerals, portraits. It's an amazing learning environment but could very easily burn you out.
I also effectively stole my wife's 5DII to use as a second body and then found myself using that a lot more than my 1DIII so I have just sold that. So to be anti-trend i'm camera shopping... I also got an EOS M for about 2/3 of the normal retail price during a promotion and it's proving very useful.
-
In 2013 I started working for a daily newspaper. It's crazy, everything is a rush to get multiple shoots done, tagged and uploaded before deadline every day. I've learnt a huge amount from having to do 3-6 shoots per day in varied situations from protests to court, sports, funerals, portraits. It's an amazing learning environment but could very easily burn you out.
I also effectively stole my wife's 5DII to use as a second body and then found myself using that a lot more than my 1DIII so I have just sold that. So to be anti-trend i'm camera shopping... I also got an EOS M for about 2/3 of the normal retail price during a promotion and it's proving very useful.
Whilst we might envy those who craft beautiful shots in the studio or on site with the time and resources to achieve prescribed results it must not be forgotten that getting a decent shot in the hurly burly of life outside of a controlled environment is a skill in itself. It's where I'm happiest and I wish you all the best in your new job.
BTW, I learned more about digital photography working for a school photography company than anywhere else. Sounds silly? Probably, but the trick was getting the lighting to match in each and every shot.
-
For various reasons I had fewer opportunities in 2013 to do my favorite thing -- street photography, so I began re-learning artificial lighting. I'd pretty much mastered it in the sixties, but then I switched to available light exclusively. Now, getting back into it I'm discovering the incredible improvements that have taken place in the last 40 or 50 years. i-TTL is an incredible blessing, and combined with the power of digital it's a whole new world. I'm not interested in studio lights and I'm finding that with today's speedlights it's not necessary to go to big Elinchroms to get big results. Photography is fascinating stuff, and there's no end to it, heart-rending whines on LuLa to the contrary notwithstanding.
-
Photography is fascinating stuff, and there's no end to it, ...
That I'll agree with.
-
Isaac, it delights me to know we actually agree on something.
-
For various reasons I had fewer opportunities in 2013 to do my favorite thing -- street photography, so I began re-learning artificial lighting. I'd pretty much mastered it in the sixties, but then I switched to available light exclusively. Now, getting back into it I'm discovering the incredible improvements that have taken place in the last 40 or 50 years. i-TTL is an incredible blessing, and combined with the power of digital it's a whole new world. I'm not interested in studio lights and I'm finding that with today's speedlights it's not necessary to go to big Elinchroms to get big results. Photography is fascinating stuff, and there's no end to it, heart-rending whines on LuLa to the contrary notwithstanding.
You have to differentiate between true amateur photography and dedicated professional photography. They are far from sharing a comparable history of success and failure rates; they are even further from sharing a common raison d'être.
Affecting particularly the lower levels of professional, the shamateur was ever there, and as he has often declared, why should he care the damage he does? It's not his living and family that pays the price of his 'fun'. Open season, innit?
Rob C
-
Rob, I agree with you that a couple decades ago shamateurs tended to cut into work that the lower levels of professionals might do. I don't think they do any longer because most lower level professionals have disappeared. But at the same time I have to say that if you can't compete and make a living in your chosen line of work, you're in the wrong line of work.
The problem isn't so much the shamateurs themselves; it's the world full of people who don't know any better than to let Uncle Henry shoot the wedding because he's got that neat SLR and he won't charge us. I ran into the same thing occasionally in the early days of microcomputers. I particularly remember a woman with a consignment shop who desperately needed a way to keep track of things. I made her a quite reasonable quote but she decided to go with a friend who was learning to program in basic and told her he could solve her problems. It was about six months later that she went out of business.
-
What happened to my photography was pretty momentous...for me personally, that is: after spinal surgery, exactly one year ago yesterday, I was able to do it again! The surgery relieved pressure on the nerve root leading to my right shoulder, arm & hand. Numbness and pain begone. Within a week I was snapping away like a madman, in a near-euphoric state, even while wearing a neck brace. Since then I've unloaded some older cameras, bought some new ones, grown fond of a new system (m43) and adopted a more freewheeling approach to pic-taking that I find really enjoyable. :)
-Dave-
-
Dave,
Sad to hear about past but great to hear about the future! Enjoy!
Best regards
Erik
What happened to my photography was pretty momentous...for me personally, that is: after spinal surgery, exactly one year ago yesterday, I was able to do it again! The surgery relieved pressure on the nerve root leading to my right shoulder, arm & hand. Numbness and pain begone. Within a week I was snapping away like a madman, in a near-euphoric state, even while wearing a neck brace. Since then I've unloaded some older cameras, bought some new ones, grown fond of a new system (m43) and adopted a more freewheeling approach to pic-taking that I find really enjoyable. :)
-Dave-
-
Traded in my Galaxy S1 for a Galaxy S4! From 5MP to 13 MP. Other equipment still the same, although I ran more 120 film through my old double lens reflex than I have in a while. LR5.x came out, along with all that brought with it... Still learning, still sharing.
Mike.
-
1. Rob, I agree with you that a couple decades ago shamateurs tended to cut into work that the lower levels of professionals might do. I don't think they do any longer because most lower level professionals have disappeared.
2. But at the same time I have to say that if you can't compete and make a living in your chosen line of work, you're in the wrong line of work.
Please excuse the splitting of your paragraph as above - it's just to make the reply more clear.
1. I can't argue that point because I'm now out of it, but not because of amateur competition - few amateurs regularly produced bespoke calendar print runs of above thirty to forty thousand units.
The 'lower level pros' were not necessarily worse practitioners; mostly I'd suggest they were living in areas where the clients at the levels that produce (and can pay for) top work simply didn't exist. And for the Brits, not everyone has the fortune to be born in London or has the resources to move there; in my case, a very comfortable home in Glasgow wouldn't have bought more than a garage in fashionable (liveable) parts of London. It couldn't happen.
Weddings: I did some for a few of the first months I was out on my own, then I walked the Damascene church-steps walk, images of a smiling Bailey in my head, and said enough! fashion, which is why I own cameras, or back to the factory unit. I'm glad I got tough with myself - changed my life. Big wedding companies also hired shamateurs to shoot on Saturdays... the BJP often ran classified ads to that effect.
2. That's really a part of the problem I tried to address in (1) above: things that the local 'social photography' snapper could find to do, and often did very well, such as wedding, portraits and christenings etc. were take over in large part by the traditional uncle with a hobby.
Digital only made that bad situation worse, and I believe the subsequent conditioning of expectations, when the person who might originally have been a client, made his own snaps, and because of the intimacy with the subject could no longer see those images objectively at all, least of all make a call on quality. Hell, we face that challenge ourselves at all levels of expertise each time we make an edit.
In other words, I think my original idea in an earlier post about the industry having largely polarized is correct: the top of the pyramid is an ever sharper point, whereas the base is wider but less interesting or rewarding than it used to be, more crumbs than broken biscuits. For that to happen, I suppose we need the outline of the Eiffel Tower, always an elegant format.
;-)
Rob C
-
Well my journey is a bit longer.
When I turned 50, I sold everything and hit the road to build a strong portfolio.
I have been going for 2 years now and am just starting to do marketing.
The journey has taken me from the Canadian Arctic, to central and South America and to Berlin.
I am presently living in Sintra, Portugal shooting castles and palaces.
The hard work is starting to pay off.
-
Well my journey is a bit longer.
When I turned 50, I sold everything and hit the road to build a strong portfolio.
I have been going for 2 years now and am just starting to do marketing.
The journey has taken me from the Canadian Arctic, to central and South America and to Berlin.
I am presently living in Sintra, Portugal shooting castles and palaces.
The hard work is starting to pay off.
I remember Sintra; fairy-tale castle, raining like hell and a British Vogue shoot to pull off... there was a knight in armour standing somewhere on a hill in the rain, too. Poor sod, I know just how he felt, and in the end, I guess we both went rusty.
One thing: I suppose nobody will steal me for scrap.
Welcome to the funny farm.
;-)
Rob C
-
I suppose I ought to put my hand up and confess to starting life as a shamateur, and just for the added shame I'll go so far as to admitting membership of a camera club but hey, isn't that where George Tice came from?
George Tice is one of the best known fine-art photographers in the nation and has authored 18 books. He has been making photographs for over 50 years. His prints are in many museums including the Museum of Modern Art, the Art Institute of Chicago and the Metropolitan Museum, where he had a one-man show in 1972. The Afterimage Gallery has handled his work over 30 years.
http://www.afterimagegallery.com/tice.htm
I'd also like to point out that many of the part time photographers I worked with in the wedding business did it because of the passion they held for the craft, it was not just a nice little earner but an opportunity to test their skill and there were some very good people doing it. Were all of them any less capable than full time pro's? On the whole no, it's just that they had a day job that paid better in most cases. I'm well known to several here for defending the amateur photographer and I will continue to do so for there was plenty of wedding work back before digital, too much for the pro's to cope with and indeed many of them would farm out work to part timers they could trust as no one, not even the most professional of profesionals, has yet mastered the art of being in two churches at the same time.
-
I suppose I ought to put my hand up and confess to starting life as a shamateur, and just for the added shame I'll go so far as to admitting membership of a camera club but hey, isn't that where George Tice came from?
George Tice is one of the best known fine-art photographers in the nation and has authored 18 books. He has been making photographs for over 50 years. His prints are in many museums including the Museum of Modern Art, the Art Institute of Chicago and the Metropolitan Museum, where he had a one-man show in 1972. The Afterimage Gallery has handled his work over 30 years.
http://www.afterimagegallery.com/tice.htm
I'd also like to point out that many of the part time photographers I worked with in the wedding business did it because of the passion they held for the craft, it was not just a nice little earner but an opportunity to test their skill and there were some very good people doing it. Were all of them any less capable than full time pro's? On the whole no, it's just that they had a day job that paid better in most cases. I'm well known to several here for defending the amateur photographer and I will continue to do so for there was plenty of wedding work back before digital, too much for the pro's to cope with and indeed many of them would farm out work to part timers they could trust as no one, not even the most professional of profesionals, has yet mastered the art of being in two churches at the same time.
And for some of us, there's the problem: why would we want to be in either in those kinds of circumstances?
Rob C
-
And for some of us, there's the problem: why would we want to be in either in those kinds of circumstances?
Rob C
Rob - this is your third post in this thread and you haven't even answered the original question ... ;)
Cheers
~Chris
-
How can I possibly answer for the OP? It's his question and problem, not mine!
Rob C
-
How can I possibly answer for the OP? It's his question and problem, not mine!
Rob C
Allright - my fault - I'll try to do it more simple:
What happened to YOUR (Mr. Rob Campbells) photography in 2013?
;)
Cheers
~Chris
-
I can attest that in 2013 Mr Rob Campbell latched onto a simple motif which in turn allowed him to find his mojo once more. It has been a sensationally rewarding pleasure to have seen this saga unfold.
And that, whilst languishing here in a swamp of visual detritus, stagnation and self-delusion.
The OP was yet another typical exercise in self-centred navel gazing of little benefit or relevance.
W
-
And for some of us, there's the problem: why would we want to be in either in those kinds of circumstances?
There you go, all these shamateurs were doing the work that many pro's didn't want to. ;)
-
I can attest that in 2013 Mr Rob Campbell latched onto a simple motif which in turn allowed him to find his mojo once more. It has been a sensationally rewarding pleasure to have seen this saga unfold.
And that, whilst languishing here in a swamp of visual detritus, stagnation and self-delusion.
The OP was yet another typical exercise in self-centred navel gazing of little benefit or relevance.
W
Wow! That was relevant and very beneficial...
And totally necessary too ... hmmm?
-
I remember Sintra; fairy-tale castle, raining like hell and a British Vogue shoot to pull off... there was a knight in armour standing somewhere on a hill in the rain, too. Poor sod, I know just how he felt, and in the end, I guess we both went rusty.
Small world! What year were you there, Rob ?
M
-
Small world! What year were you there, Rob ?
M
I haven't got any of my fashion negatives or prints left, and my Rowi negative wallets would have been numbered and dated, but trying to place it in relation to other work, it must have been some time in the winter of '75. I do remember it was damned cold, and that the first half of the shoot was based in Lisbon, after which we transferred down to the Algarve, where it was also damned cold.
I have often regretted doing that destruction number - but on the other hand, 'yesterday is dead and gone and tomorrow's out of sight...'
Rob C
-
And for some of us, there's the problem: why would we want to be in either in those kinds of circumstances?
There you go, all these shamateurs were doing the work that many pro's didn't want to. ;)
That would have been okay, except that for many poor pros it was all the work that existed.
Rob C
-
I can attest that in 2013 Mr Rob Campbell latched onto a simple motif which in turn allowed him to find his mojo once more. It has been a sensationally rewarding pleasure to have seen this saga unfold.
And that, whilst languishing here in a swamp of visual detritus, stagnation and self-delusion.
The OP was yet another typical exercise in self-centred navel gazing of little benefit or relevance.
W
That kinda say it all; thanks!
;-)
Rob C
-
Allright - my fault - I'll try to do it more simple:
What happened to YOUR (Mr. Rob Campbells) photography in 2013?
;)
Cheers
~Chris
To give a straight answer: I've been taking photographs, one way or another, since around 1946. From that perspective, 2013 is no different other than a lot of experience has come along and a lot of different genres too. Some working years were very good and some rotten; the post-work era has been boring, on the whole, not because of photography per se but because of the lack of commissioned work, without which photography has had little relevance to living. At least, during the retired years whilst I still had a wife.
Since she died, photography has battled to be a filler of voids. It does that to an extent, probably saved my sanity, but as for being a driving force, them days is gone, man, gone. What I'd like to shoot, never wanted to top shooting, is now well out of my reality; what I face is the inevitable truth of the Donovan Syndrome.
So what about 2013? Not much; just another dull year like so many.
Finding a substitute photographic theme helps focus direction, but it doesn't prevent the realization of the pointlessness of it all coming to mind. I don't suppose I ever felt I'd lost my ability to make an exposure, but I do know that when there's no commercial imperative...
There isn't much pleasure in just pointing and going click. Any fool can, and does do that. Once you know how to do it, make a photograph as something distinct from a snap, you lose the challenge of that part of the thing and get to the stage where you need something worth the expended energy and unpleasantness of computer-gazing. At least, I do.
Rob C
-
...
Once you know how to do it, make a photograph as something distinct from a snap, you lose the challenge of that part of the thing and get to the stage where you need something worth the expended energy and unpleasantness of computer-gazing. At least, I do.
Rob C
There are many situations, things and people in this world worth being photographed by such a fine and experienced photographer like you are, Rob.
Things that could actually need a good graphical representation performed by a skilled eye and visual mind.
I strongly hope Mrs.Coke will lead you to where you should go as a photographer.
Cheers
~Chris
-
I like Garry Winogrand's approach: "My only interest in photography is to see what something looks like as a photograph."
-
That would have been okay, except that for many poor pros it was all the work that existed.
Rob C
To be brutally honest Rob then perhaps they should have got themselves a day job as well, nobody is owed a living simply because they call themselves a photographer. Every trade likes to build itself a castle and then pull up the drawbridge (and in many that is quite necessary) but life goes on, the world changes and we are told that us wretched workers have to be flexible and there is no such thing as a job for life, as the miners found out. Shouldn't that apply across the board?
Sorry, but we've been over all the arguments in the past and if anything I'm even more inclined to consider the profession of photography as open to anyone who can prove themselves competent, and it is the market that will ultimately decide upon that.
-
Well, in 2014 this amateur is in the process of learning LF photography and relearning film (in the ancient of days, I shot and processed B+W). It is pretty amazing that you can get the basic camera and lens and a few holders for under $250.00. I will either hate it or love it? Right now I am mostly baffled by the choices of movements, exposure/developing, etc.
-
To be brutally honest Rob then perhaps they should have got themselves a day job as well, nobody is owed a living simply because they call themselves a photographer. Every trade likes to build themselves a castle and then pull up the drawbridge (and in many that is quite necessary) but life goes on, the world changes and we are told that us wretched workers have to be flexible and there is no such thing as a job for life, as the miners found out. Shouldn't that apply across the board?
Sorry, but we've been over all the arguments in the past and if anything I'm even more inclined to consider the profession of photography as open to anyone who can prove themselves competent, and it is the market that will ultimately decide upon that.
And there the fatal flaw: no profession is that easy to subvert... I suppose, if anything, it really demonstrates that the vast majority of snappers calling themselves professionals never are, never were.
This has been borne out repeatedly in the past; nobody replaced the Baileys of this world, nor the industrial, architectural and advertising specialists, either.
Rob C
-
And there the fatal flaw: no profession is that easy to subvert... I suppose, if anything, it really demonstrates that the vast majority of snappers calling themselves professionals never are, never were.
This has been borne out repeatedly in the past; nobody replaced the Baileys of this world, nor the industrial, architectural and advertising specialists, either.
Rob C
Which neatly brings us back to the definition of 'professional', and that is where we all differ, thankfully. ;)
-
Which neatly brings us back to the definition of 'professional', and that is where we all differ, thankfully. ;)
[/quote
The definition is clear and unambiguous: a professional photographer is one who has earned his stripes holding a job working for somebody else in the professional, and/or has learned the required skills, and then maintains a job in the profession, either as a fellow photographer within a studio or in his own right as a functioning business. Being an assistant is not being a professional photographer; it's being an assistant. Being a professional requires that one is able to take responsibility, carry the required insurances, comply with the legal, employment and taxation regimes in place in one's area; in essence, it requires being fully occupied in the profession of producing photographic images as a means of survival and business growth; it isn't a weekend, paying hobby
The problems of definition are smokescreens developed by those who never were professionals but were indeed enamoured of the idea of being professionals, and consequently latched onto the most remote connections to the business and used those to declare themselves fully-fledged professionals. They are easy to spot: they talk a load of photographic crap and earn their keep, or starve, by doing something other than photography.
But I agree: this is old, fruitless territory that leads to no good place. I'm off the train.
Rob C
-
But I agree: this is old, fruitless territory that leads to no good place. I'm off the train.
The reason these arguments are interminable is that photography isn't a profession in the same sense as law or medicine - or even a trade in the same sense as bricklaying. There is no qualification that is required in order to lawfully sell one's services. There may be "professional" associations, but they are simply glorified clubs. Membership may be of assistance in marketing, but the lack of membership isn't an impediment to activity. Rob has a definition about which he feels strongly, but it is simply his definition - it is a good starting point for discussions, but has no other weight out there in the world. It structures his judgements around language and behaviour, and one may respect it, but there is no binding reason why anyone should accept it or why it has more weight than anyone else's definition. Calling oneself a lawyer or doctor, or a bricklayer, is a different matter (subject to differences in jurisdictions).
-
In California -- "Barbers, cosmetologists, electrologists, estheticians, manicurists, barber and cosmetologists instructors, and apprentices of the aforementioned, must be licensed."
-
That's a political problem, Isaac, largely confined to the land of the fruits and the nuts.
-
The reason these arguments are interminable is that photography isn't a profession in the same sense as law or medicine - or even a trade in the same sense as bricklaying. There is no qualification that is required in order to lawfully sell one's services. There may be "professional" associations, but they are simply glorified clubs. Membership may be of assistance in marketing, but the lack of membership isn't an impediment to activity. Rob has a definition about which he feels strongly, but it is simply his definition - it is a good starting point for discussions, but has no other weight out there in the world. It structures his judgements around language and behaviour, and one may respect it, but there is no binding reason why anyone should accept it or why it has more weight than anyone else's definition. Calling oneself a lawyer or doctor, or a bricklayer, is a different matter (subject to differences in jurisdictions).
Indeed.
-
That's a political problem, Isaac, largely confined to the land of the fruits and the nuts.
That does not seem to be correct, for example -- The Kansas Board of Barbering (http://kbob.kansas.gov/about/Pages/default.aspx).
-
As I intimated, I'm off this train. However, were I not, I'd say that definitions apart (and no definitions leads to chaos), licensing is something I have always advocated, not simply because it would, by testing, removed the worst charlatans, but in so doing it would offer the minimum protection to the public that it needs, no, should expect from the local city fathers.
In my own case, I lost nothing to shamateurs; they simply didn't/couldn't come near my client base - it was difficult enough for me to get there as a known, full-time pro - but I did go through the experience of my own wedding being shot by a doddery old bloke who had been the go-to guy in the minds of the good folks of the town and, consequently, of the in-laws-to-be who booked him. I think we bought a single print; camera-shake isn't pretty, and a pretty bride isn't improved by it.
The train is now in the distance, and as suggested, I'll pursue sweeter fruits than further train-spotting.
Rob C
-
As I intimated, I'm off this train. However, were I not, I'd say that definitions apart (and no definitions leads to chaos), licensing is something I have always advocated, not simply because it would, by testing, removed the worst charlatans, but in so doing it would offer the minimum protection to the public that it needs, no, should expect from the local city fathers.
In my own case, I lost nothing to shamateurs; they simply didn't/couldn't come near my client base - it was difficult enough for me to get there as a known, full-time pro - but I did go through the experience of my own wedding being shot by a doddery old bloke who had been the go-to guy in the minds of the good folks of the town and, consequently, of the in-laws-to-be who booked him. I think we bought a single print; camera-shake isn't pretty, and a pretty bride isn't improved by it.
The train is now in the distance, and as suggested, I'll pursue sweeter fruits than further train-spotting.
Rob C
Rob, I worked for a wedding photo company, the one owned by Kodak in fact. To be allowed out on your own you first had to attend two training weekends and then accompany a senior photographer on three occasions and be marked on your work. If you didn't pass then you were out of it, doddery old men, and those who were not up to a good standard were not used, simple as. Kodak were not in the habit of employing shysters. Oh, and you had to own two MF cameras and be able shoot a wedding in about 120-150 shots of which 80 had to be good enough to show the bride. No dress rehearsals, no calling the models back for another go or asking them to hang around while you adjusted the lighting etc. It was a tough environment which is why a lot of pro's wouldn't do it.
-
That does not seem to be correct, for example -- The Kansas Board of Barbering (http://kbob.kansas.gov/about/Pages/default.aspx).
I said "largely," Isaac. Unfortunately there are rent-seekers all over the place, but the land of the fruits and the nuts has a large portion of that population.
-
That's a political problem, Isaac, largely confined to the land of the fruits and the nuts.
Not true at all. The state requiring the most low paying jobs to have licenses is Louisiana (71). Followed by Arizona (64). Red, it seems, is the new blue. :P :P :P
-
Yeah, forgot about Louisiana. They've always been heavily populated with politicians and rent-seekers.