Help me choose my future "pro gear"

[melchiorpavone]

Pros deliver that quality they deliver under the pressure of time and with critical profitability constraints. The work they publish is not a measure of their skills, it is a measure of the quality they can deliver while generating a profit.

I am not sure how you can claim that you have better skills.

Cheers,
Bernard

Surely you jest.

[BernardLanguillier]

Surely you jest.

Sorry, I didn't get the meaning of what you wrote.

Cheers,
Bernard

[melchiorpavone]

Sorry, I didn't get the meaning of what you wrote.

Cheers,
Bernard

It means that skill and being a pro are not related. It is not difficult to produce professional-caliber work, or even to exceed it, depending on the kind of photography in question. That does not make you a "pro", however. As I said, I do not wish to deal with clients. Not nobody, not no how.

http://youtu.be/TufvnJfmHuU

Nor would being able to call myself a "pro" give me any greater satisfaction or feeling of self-worth. I know exactly what I can do and cannot do with a camera. A lot of "pro" work has nothing to do with compositional skills or timing, which is where I excel.

[Manoli]

A lot of "pro" work has nothing to do with compositional skills or timing, where my personal skills excel.

Helped no doubt by an abundance of self-effacing modesty.

I get the distinct impression that you believe your recent arrival on LuLa is akin to The Second Coming.  Far be it for me to doubt you, but given the difficulties you've encountered in such a short space of time, could you kindly elaborate and indicate exactly how and where such skills may be evidenced ?

[melchiorpavone]

Helped no doubt by an abundance of self-effacing modesty.

I get the distinct impression that you believe your recent arrival on LuLa is akin to The Second Coming.  Far be it for me to doubt you, but given the difficulties you've encountered in such a short space of time, could you kindly elaborate and indicate exactly how and where such skills may be evidenced ?

I was merely pointing out that I lack the most important skill for a pro: the ability to get and keep clients. I want nothing to do with professional photography. I have no interest in serving clients or marketing myself. About 25 years ago, I did briefly work in commercial/industrial photography (for a company that served a major appliance mfr), and it was not enjoyable. I had to move heavy appliances and lighting equipment (though I did have some help). It was not for me!

On one occasion I was almost killed by the light stand. There was a very large light box and flash-head attached to a boom with a counter-weight. Like this, only bigger:

http://www.coutant.org/micbooms/628.jpg

The head tended to slip off, so I applied some paper tape to make the collar fit tighter to the arm. Well, the owner, without my knowledge, removed the tape and while I was working the light box and head slipped off and of course the counter-weight caused the stand to become unbalanced, and the boom came crashing down, the lead counterweight narrowly missing me. The counter-weight did damage the appliance; I was very lucky. I was furious, of course, and did not work there much longer. The owner and his family were idiots. The owner's son was a real gem. The facility was a big warehouse, and during the summer it would get very hot. The owner's son placed an air conditioner near the middle of the room. I swear this happened!

I know several professional photographers who could not wait to retire and get away from dealing with clients.

See Post 201 in this thread:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=58856.200

That was taken with a manual-focus 560mm lens. I am pretty good with that lens; I have owned it for 35 years....

[MrSmith]

Banging your head on a boom weight is a right of passage, strobex (old fashioned English flash system) used hexagonal metal weights that went round the boom I cut my forehand when walking into one and resulting in a 3 pointed star that bled profusely.
Managed to avoid dropping a stage weight on my toes though 

[melchiorpavone]

Banging your head on a boom weight is a right of passage, strobex (old fashioned English flash system) used hexagonal metal weights that went round the boom I cut my forehand when walking into one and resulting in a 3 pointed star that bled profusely.
Managed to avoid dropping a stage weight on my toes though  

No, it was not that I was "banging my head", it toppled over and fell! Those people were idiots!

[melchiorpavone]

Helped no doubt by an abundance of self-effacing modesty.

I get the distinct impression that you believe your recent arrival on LuLa is akin to The Second Coming.  Far be it for me to doubt you, but given the difficulties you've encountered in such a short space of time, could you kindly elaborate and indicate exactly how and where such skills may be evidenced ?

Tell me what you think of this photographer (not me, of course):

http://www.lambertphotographs.com/

[Jim Pascoe]

Which is why I am not a pro, even though I have better skills than many, if not most, pros: I have no interest in dealing with clients. All the pros I have ever known complain ceaselessly about dealing with clients. I knew early on that this was not what I wanted to deal with.

Well I did take you to task earlier in this thread because of your blanket statement about pro's and what gear they "should" use.  I had assumed you were speaking from a position of experience - but I now see I was mistaken.  I can see that you have all the knowledge and an excess of the skill required to be a professional, and yet you chose not to be one - that is your choice and I respect it.  You probably had a career that actually paid good money.  But please don't tell others who have the actual experience that they are wrong and you are right.

By all means give your advice to other photographers but not to aspiring professionals.  I will not even get into the ridiculous arguments about amateur/professional/quality of work etc, etc.
But to the OP in this thread I would say ONLY take advice about professional photography from other professional photographers. 

And on the subject of complaining ceaselessly about clients - I suggest you pick some new pro friends - sounds like yours are way past their peak.  Complaining about clients can be fun but it's about as constructive as any business complaining about it's customers.  Without the client the photographer is not a professional.

Jim

[melchiorpavone]

Well I did take you to task earlier in this thread because of your blanket statement about pro's and what gear they "should" use.  I had assumed you were speaking from a position of experience - but I now see I was mistaken.  I can see that you have all the knowledge and an excess of the skill required to be a professional, and yet you chose not to be one - that is your choice and I respect it.  You probably had a career that actually paid good money.  But please don't tell others who have the actual experience that they are wrong and you are right.

By all means give your advice to other photographers but not to aspiring professionals.  I will not even get into the ridiculous arguments about amateur/professional/quality of work etc, etc.
But to the OP in this thread I would say ONLY take advice about professional photography from other professional photographers.  

And on the subject of complaining ceaselessly about clients - I suggest you pick some new pro friends - sounds like yours are way past their peak.  Complaining about clients can be fun but it's about as constructive as any business complaining about it's customers.  Without the client the photographer is not a professional.

Jim

I really don't have that many photographer friends these days (photographers tend to be loners and independent). But just about every one I ever knew complained about dealing with clients. I used to work in photo retailing too.

To clarify: I have worked professionally, with several organizations and in several capacities, but never independently. I usually had better equipment than the "pros". LOL.

Most pros have a "limited" practice and have only the equipment they need for their specialties.

I currently have two Leicaflex SL2 bodies and eight lenses from 21mm to 560mm. I have been doing photography for 50 years.

[ErikKaffehr]

You know,

There are few companies that make great stuff, like Canon, Nikon and Sigma. Sony makes sensors to match...

Best regards
Erik

I really don't have that many photographer friends these days (photographers tend to be loners and independent). But just about every one I ever knew complained about dealing with clients. I used to work in photo retailing too.

To clarify: I have worked professionally, with several organizations and in several capacities, but never independently. I usually had better equipment than the "pros". LOL.

Most pros have a "limited" practice and have only the equipment they need for their specialties.

I currently have two Leicaflex SL2 bodies and eight lenses from 21mm to 560mm. I have been doing photography for 50 years.

[melchiorpavone]

You know,

There are few companies that make great stuff, like Canon, Nikon and Sigma. Sony makes sensors to match...

Best regards
Erik

Sorry, I don't understand your post. What has that to do with my last post?

[MrSmith]

Sorry, I don't understand your post. What has that to do with my last post?

I own a Stradivarius, doesn't mean I play violin to a professional standard.

[melchiorpavone]

I own a Stradivarius, doesn't mean I play violin to a professional standard.

Again, I don't understand. I said I was better than most pros in doing certain kinds of photography. That is not a remarkable claim. Most pros are merely adequate, but are good at getting clients. I am not, and have no interest in working with clients.

Clients know they have the upper hand and play one photographer against the other to get the lowest prices. This is because everybody and his brother wants to be a "pro", even though for the last 45 years there has been less than enough work available to keep pros employed. It's all because of Blow Up by Antonioni.

http://youtu.be/2Xz1utzILj4

What do you think of this guy's work? (Picked at random)

http://www.columbusohiophotographer.com/

[ErikKaffehr]

Sorry, I don't understand your post. What has that to do with my last post?

Hi,

I refer to this:

To clarify: I have worked professionally, with several organizations and in several capacities, but never independently. I usually had better equipment than the "pros". LOL.

Most pros have a "limited" practice and have only the equipment they need for their specialties.

I currently have two Leicaflex SL2 bodies and eight lenses from 21mm to 560mm. I have been doing photography for 50 years.

Most 'pros' today use either Canon or Nikon. Both of those make some very fine lenses. Saying that you have better equipment is a bit of blanket statement, even if most Leica R lenses are very good.

With a digital camera it is about lens and sensor. It could be argued that Nikon has better sensors in some areas than Canon. Or you could say that Nikon has capabilities than Canon lacks.

If you shoot film, there will be an additional step, namely scanning, or if you work in a wet process enlarging, which adds enlarging optics and positive/negative paper, both of which have an MTF.

Sigma makes a few lenses that are absolutely great, like the 35/1.4, 55/1.4A and the 120-300/2.8.

It is possible that your equipment and workflow is superior to what 'pros' use, but proving that needs some work.

Best regards
Erik

[melchiorpavone]

Hi,

I refer to this:
Most 'pros' today use either Canon or Nikon. Both of those make some very fine lenses. Saying that you have better equipment is a bit of blanket statement, even if most Leica R lenses are very good.

With a digital camera it is about lens and sensor. It could be argued that Nikon has better sensors in some areas than Canon. Or you could say that Nikon has capabilities than Canon lacks.

If you shoot film, there will be an additional step, namely scanning, or if you work in a wet process enlarging, which adds enlarging optics and positive/negative paper, both of which have an MTF.

Sigma makes a few lenses that are absolutely great, like the 35/1.4, 55/1.4A and the 120-300/2.8.

It is possible that your equipment and workflow is superior to what 'pros' use, but proving that needs some work.

Best regards
Erik

When I was working in commercial studios (this was in the 1980s), they had Nikons for 35mm work (I also used a 4x5 view camera). If you have ever used a Nikon of that vintage (F2 or F3) and a Leicaflex SL2, you would know what I mean. Also, Nikon (stupidly) showed 100% of the image in the viewfinder, even though slide mounts cut into the image a little. This is the stupidest thing I ever heard of. (Leicaflex shows 93% or so of the negative area, which is the usable part of the image in printing and projection). I got yelled at because I framed the shots too tight (shots of refrigerators). These people were idiots, both Nikon and the studio I worked for. (They could have at least warned me to frame looser, to allow for the idiot Nikon viewfinder framing.) Also, the handling of the Nikons was inferior to the Leicaflex. Not even close.

[robdickinson]

Dont underestimate the draw of Canon and nikons professional services for pro's

The other companies often do not have anywhere near as good a service in this area, fewer centres etc.

If you are a CPS member you can usually get things fixed in days , loan gear, and technical help almost anywhere in the world.

This leads to back to the gear question, there is usually a base entry qualification on gear which you need to match. It may be that Sigma or Zeiss lens is great (the client wont notice) but if it stops you from working due to 6 week turn around on repairs etc...

[melchiorpavone]

Dont underestimate the draw of Canon and nikons professional services for pro's

The other companies often do not have anywhere near as good a service in this area, fewer centres etc.

If you are a CPS member you can usually get things fixed in days , loan gear, and technical help almost anywhere in the world.

This leads to back to the gear question, there is usually a base entry qualification on gear which you need to match. It may be that Sigma or Zeiss lens is great (the client wont notice) but if it stops you from working due to 6 week turn around on repairs etc...

That is a good point, but surely any pro worth his salt will have a number of bodies and lenses, enough to qualify. I'm not a pro, but have 2 bodies and 8 lenses.

Dentists and cardiologists have the wherewithal to own all the gear they want.

[robdickinson]

Any pro should have enough gear to qualify, but not if they buy off brand lenses all day...

it may be the D610 doesnt qualify, or whatever. Just worth considering.

[melchiorpavone]

Any pro should have enough gear to qualify, but not if they buy off brand lenses all day...

it may be the D610 doesnt qualify, or whatever. Just worth considering.

Yep. I don't get it at all. Those lenses are high-markup items. Dealers like them because they can actually make money selling them. Major name brand gear (Canon, Nikon, etc.) is sold at cost or a very small mark-up. Dealer cost on Sigma, Tamron, etc. is much less than retail.