Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Frank Doorhof on August 22, 2009, 10:38:38 am
-
http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/content_displ...287db53da8897e0 (http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/content_display/photo-news/photojournalism/e3i91e05ffd5e045bf13287db53da8897e0)
I think it's sad to see this kind of people going down.
But it shows maybe the changing structure of photography the last few years in contrast to the thread about being paid for your work ?
After Annie L. I think this is a trend that will costs us many great photographers, on the other hand talent will never be wasted they will probably just start again.
-
http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/content_displ...287db53da8897e0 (http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/content_display/photo-news/photojournalism/e3i91e05ffd5e045bf13287db53da8897e0)
I think it's sad to see this kind of people going down.
But it shows maybe the changing structure of photography the last few years in contrast to the thread about being paid for your work ?
After Annie L. I think this is a trend that will costs us many great photographers, on the other hand talent will never be wasted they will probably just start again.
Wasn't he shooting with some custom made contraption? He always was rather arrogant & dismissive toward others, so doesn't surprise me one bit that everyone jacked up their prices to work under him. Annie L. also had entourage of assistants that adds up. If you pay that kinda money for cameras, whose life is just couple of yrs, than you really can't pay for all that customised gears from Profotos,..... I think writing is on the wall.
-
If my memory serves me correctly I think Annie's problems were non-photography related, something about real estate. Klinko on the other hand I'm not even remotely surprised.
-
http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/content_displ...287db53da8897e0 (http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/content_display/photo-news/photojournalism/e3i91e05ffd5e045bf13287db53da8897e0)
I think it's sad to see this kind of people going down.
Frank,
With all due respect, feel sorry for the people who haven't been paid.
Also in this instance there is always more to the story than can be summed up in a PDN press release.
BC
-
Yup, there are many of those type of shooters living beyond their means....
There are a lot of shooters going under, we just read about these because of their high profiles.
I know I have lost a lot of clients that have cut back on days and budgets.
I am streamlining and combined my home and studio. Own the bare essential equipment needed. Put rental budgets together for clients when we need to get bigger spaces and more equipment.
Best of luck to you all out there.
-
annie's situation described in detail here (http://nymag.com/fashion/09/fall/58346/)
about klinko&indrani....as the release says...they have had big problems for years....he is the master of self promotion and they have shot several high profile celebs, but it was obvious that there was a lot of smoke and mirrors....i can't remember a single ad campaign...or even editorials....the only ads they shot were for sinar:)....
annie was known to be difficult and extremely demanding but a professional and perfectionist....and her images have had a huge impact on our culture for the last 40 years....
klinko?
no comparison...very sad in one case, could not care less in the other....
-
euh, not really, can't remember of any ad shot by him for Sinar, but I could be wrong.
Best regards,
Thierry
....the only ads they shot were for sinar:)....
-
Frank,
With all due respect, feel sorry for the people who haven't been paid.
too true - if you've ever been on the accounts receivable side of a bankruptcy it's terrible - 10 to 15 cents on the USD - x $25k USD - you start to get the picture. this happened to me last year and it was a terrible...
-
too true - if you've ever been on the accounts receivable side of a bankruptcy it's terrible - 10 to 15 cents on the USD - x $25k USD - you start to get the picture. this happened to me last year and it was a terrible...
I ofcourse mean the whole happening, not only one part of it.
The problem is that the talent will probably just start new and leave behind a trail of destruction.
Still I liked his work and think it's always a shame when someone can't make it.
-
I ofcourse mean the whole happening, not only one part of it.
The problem is that the talent will probably just start new and leave behind a trail of destruction.
Still I liked his work and think it's always a shame when someone can't make it.
You need to know a lot more about this story before you shed any tears, because honestly your very naive in this regard.
BC
-
euh, not really, can't remember of any ad shot by him for Sinar, but I could be wrong.
Best regards,
Thierry
sorry....i guess it was the only place i ever saw their work....
the problem really is that is seems like there are a lot of people getting screwed in this....people in the industry who do not deserve it....
and i wonder if the bravo show is still on and how much they will actually make on that....and how much of that will actually go to paying their old debt....seems like this filing is coming at the right time.....
-
I ofcourse mean the whole happening, not only one part of it.
The problem is that the talent will probably just start new and leave behind a trail of destruction.
Still I liked his work and think it's always a shame when someone can't make it.
Frank,
Have no pity. They aren't real people.
-
isn't he using these parody jokes of cameras, embarrassing concoctions, threw at them whatever was glitzy and ergonomic? the inspector gadget of the photography world. 10 million! there must be a lot of creative people left pissed off in NY.
very boring work in my opinion.
-
isn't he using these parody jokes of cameras, embarrassing concoctions, threw at them whatever was glitzy and ergonomic? the inspector gadget of the photography world. 10 million! there must be a lot of creative people left pissed off in NY.
very boring work in my opinion.
They had some nice work, but they were what is wrong with fashion on a human level, at least on the high end. On the low end its every one wanting to be "urban". Its funny seeing these suburban white girls fronting like they are Santogold or MIA. Makes you feel strange when the 26 year old photo-editor is from Chantilly, VA and acts like she's from Bushwyck. Damn that Ben Watts for being so good and starting this trend!
The good guys keep on keepin' on: Frank Ochenfels 3 still rules, just shoots great stuff, makes money, raises kids, makes pictures, makes those notebooks.
-
I agree with what someone said on another board about this bankruptcy:
"it is easy to be unsympathetic /jealous/hateful" of other photographers.
While I may not have personally liked Klinko's penchant for custom camera mounts, etc., I am a little disgusted by the need for other "pro" photographers to kick someone when they are down. Sure there was apparently excessive expenditure with K+A, Annie, etc. but the discussion here reminds me of a playground when the bully finally gets his ass kicked and all the other kids cheer.
This is lame guys. A lame reaction to another story of the souring economy, and another photographer's business biting the dust.
(all I.M.O. of course.)
I hope none of you goes out of business and comes on the forum afterward to find half the members here spitting on your grave.
-
+1.
Well put, Lisa. Thank you.
-
Wooha, take it easy there Lisa. I don't think anyone in here even cares enough to "spit on anyone's grave" as you put it. I do however think that the way people respect and feel for Annie and not Klinko is pretty telling of their work and especially the persona they choose to portray to the public. In Klinko's case neither have impressed me personally, that's all. But like I said in the beginning, I don't think anyone here cares enough to wish him bad things, me included.
-
I agree with what someone said on another board about this bankruptcy:
"it is easy to be unsympatheti
Ok hold up for a moment.
The only thing Annie and Klinko have in common is they both use cameras both have publicized money problems.
Annie is an Icon that made her way through the ranks by producing imagery that is immortal.
IMO Klinko is a different story, but what anyone thinks of his work is up to them, some of it I like, though nobody wishes failure on anyone. Not today.
Uh uh, no way, too much bad ju-ju.
And nobody should be jealous. Not if you know the story.
My only point is there is much more to this than just a short press release and if there is any sympathy it should be first be conveyed to the creditors, who are small business people and freelancers that need the money to survive.
I read these comments of how sad and you don't know sad until you've seen those assistants living in a shoebox, eating free chicken wings at the local Brooklyn bar, hoping that $250 check comes in so they can get back to one square meal.
BC
-
I read these comments of how sad and you don't know sad until you've seen those assistants living in a shoebox, eating free chicken wings at the local Brooklyn bar, hoping that $250 check comes in so they can get back to one square meal.
BC
As someone about to head to NYC looking for assisting work, that statement scares the sh*t out of me.....
-
As someone about to head to NYC looking for assisting work, that statement scares the sh*t out of me.....
If you want to earn, be a digital tech. Go work for Splashlight. They will abuse you and take advantage of you, make you feel bad about yourself, the long long commute from deep Brooklyn and the 600 square feet you share with 5 people, the free wings, the cheap cheap beer . . but you get exposure to how it all works, access to studios and the equipment room, you learn how to tech, which can be lucerative in the medium term.
New York is probably the best place to be to learn the business, its grueling, and the competition is intense. You will be forced to be at the top of your game, because the three guys in your building are shooting as well, and looking to take your job. The keys: don't be a dick. Keep it cool; Don't be stressed (on the surface anyway). Be polite. Pay attention on set, predict problems and solve them before they arise.
But keep this in mind: the happiest photogs I know shoot general commercial and editorial in second tier markets, shoot a ton of stuff for themselves, are wealthy - healthy and wise.
-
Chicken wings, bars and a shoebox isn't so bad, it's kind of what you want when your young. Speaking of assistants, anyone have recommendations for a good assistant in NY, I've never really found anyone I'm that happy with. PM me if you like but I'm sure any assistant would love to have his details on this board.
-
Woof, I have someone for you. She assists me a lot, and she also works consistently with a bunch of the big guns at management and artists (http://www.managementartists.com/).
-
Keep in mind that regardless of the persons affected, that this is a reminder that we're not alone in our struggles with the present economy and not to let our guard down.
Many of us will have to downsize, tighten belts and learn to diversify and take on other tasks. It's tough being both a provider and a client, (where we hire outside to help with extra work, etc.). I still get phone calls from third parties and I have nothing to offer outside my own duties. Some of them I no longer hear from and most likely are gone or given up. It's very easy to picture myself in their shoes.
The best thing and only thing we have control over is how we feel about ourselves and how to react to these realities of life. At the very least, I have two good hands and the desire to work. If I wind up having to flip burgers to feed my kids, it doesn't mean I give up doing what I will continue to do regardless, and that's shooting pictures and video. Maybe that's why none of the presidents on the bills I've seen are smiling. A symbolic message that money doesn't buy one happiness.
-
Thanks Lisa, I just emailed you about it.
-
Sinar Bron Imaging (US) would use his shots in our Broncolor ads.
euh, not really, can't remember of any ad shot by him for Sinar, but I could be wrong.
Best regards,
Thierry
-
Ah, here I am looking at my various business stats, and its not a terribly pleasant sight. Long slow downward graphs over the last three years tell a story that transcends the sudden cliff of the credit crunch and reveals a frightening underlying trend.
Then I read a thread like this and find that a bit of schadenfreude can give a silver lining to that cloud.
-
Ever wonder it could be a marketing strategy to spice up their upcoming show Double Exposure...
-
-
Wasn't he shooting with some custom made contraption?
What does this have to do with anything?
If you look at the camera it is a RZ or a fuji(actually swaps it out, I have seen pics of both) With a linhof camera grip(currently on ebay for $49) and a piece of suede holding a lupe on the ground glass(cost with sewing $25?) and a piece of metal to attach the grip to and drill the bottom with a tripod hole. Total cost today of body, 3 lenses and modifications? Less than 1 1DSmkIII.
-
What does this have to do with anything?
If you look at the camera it is a RZ or a fuji(actually swaps it out, I have seen pics of both) With a linhof camera grip(currently on ebay for $49) and a piece of suede holding a lupe on the ground glass(cost with sewing $25?) and a piece of metal to attach the grip to and drill the bottom with a tripod hole. Total cost today of body, 3 lenses and modifications? Less than 1 1DSmkIII.
I use to have an assistant, "Trish The Dish", that had everything she bought or earned broken down to the cost of a 6 pack of beer.
Her assistant fee was 24 six packs, overtime was 4 six packs, filling up her Toyota was 5 six packs.
So maybe we can do this with cameras.
The cost of a used RZ body is about 400 bucks, so if Klinko buys a new 1ds Mark III that's 15, if he buys a new p65+ then it's 100.
I wonder how many RZ's his creative fee is/was?
Anyway, this could be the new math, or even the standard world currency. Used RZ's.
BC
-
What does this have to do with anything?
If you look at the camera it is a RZ or a fuji(actually swaps it out, I have seen pics of both) With a linhof camera grip(currently on ebay for $49) and a piece of suede holding a lupe on the ground glass(cost with sewing $25?) and a piece of metal to attach the grip to and drill the bottom with a tripod hole. Total cost today of body, 3 lenses and modifications? Less than 1 1DSmkIII.
My point was he always acted like a Diva. When everybody who is more talented than he is, shoots w/conventional camera setups. Just a show off and so no wonder his financial troubles don't surprise me one bit. Last yr there was big discussion on L-L @ his custom camera & good points were raised then, which seems to have come true.
-
I use to have an assistant, "Trish The Dish", that had everything she bought or earned broken down to the cost of a 6 pack of beer.
Her assistant fee was 24 six packs, overtime was 4 six packs, filling up her Toyota was 5 six packs.
So maybe we can do this with cameras.
The cost of a used RZ body is about 400 bucks, so if Klinko buys a new 1ds Mark III that's 15, if he buys a new p65+ then it's 100.
I wonder how many RZ's his creative fee is/was?
Anyway, this could be the new math, or even the standard world currency. Used RZ's.
BC
I hope she was assisting you on a beer commercial.
-
Don't you understand Rogan? This is the toxic environment these days: If your colleagues (competitors) deem you to be a show off, then you probably deserve to go out of business. :-O
p.s. I submit that for every high profile show-off who goes bankrupt there are many thousands of small guys you never heard of also going belly up - none of whom have custom camera grips, or an ego the size of Klinko's.
-
Don't you understand Rogan? This is the toxic environment these days: If your colleagues (competitors) deem you to be a show off, then you probably deserve to go out of business. :-O
p.s. I submit that for every high profile show-off who goes bankrupt there are many thousands of small guys you never heard of also going belly up - none of whom have custom camera grips, or an ego the size of Klinko's.
You are brilliant Lisa R. Toxic is right. Whatever works is great as far as I am concerned. I saw a guy shooting on the streets in NY and I'm sure he's next. He was using a non canon camera strap on a 5d! And that guy at the strobist? He uses home made things all the time!
As to the no name going bankrupt without a klinko custom grip, I bet a good deal of them do have some custom gear. Isn't tinkering and not accepting things the way they are natural to a photographer?
-
Does anyone want to buy a custom grip, I'm selling mine now, just in case....
-
Does anyone want to buy a custom grip, I'm selling mine now, just in case....
I will buy it but only if you have two. I need a back up for everything I own.
Andre
-
I will buy it but only if you have two. I need a back up for everything I own.
Andre
Buy all you can Andre - I am!
Fads come and go. Sure, **right now** they will make you go bancrupt. In 3 yeras, 5 max, they will make you a star! Covers of Vogue, millions lying down at your feet, worshiping you - and they will be priceless!
Then you have a choice: Keep them all to yourself and be a star for a few short years, or sell them all and retire to leisure for the rest of your life. Hint: remember the Hunt brothers when they cornered the silver market? (I honestly don't remember what happened, but I know it made film very expensive when I was in college. Oh yeah, film ..... I'll collect that too )
Cheers,
Michael
-
Latest on Annie at Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/06/photographer-annie-leibov_n_278275.html)
Decent sumary of her position, with a looming Tuesday deadline for the $24 million and her options.
I saw Annie get ripped apart in 2 other threads on another site. At least here she was treated with some respect.
I have been thinking about this a bit. I remember when reading "The Right Stuff", how every time a pilot tanked a plane, the other pilots **always** blamed the one who crashed! It was never an unavoidable accident, pure mechanical failure, etc.
I saw the same thing when I was bicycle racing. People always blamed the rider who crashed - he/she was unstable, had epilipsy, etc. I think it is a psychological self-protection mechanism of sorts.
If you just blame bad luck, or a bad plane/bike frame that breaks, etc. - well, what is to say that it isn't going to happen to you, next, today, right now ....
If you blame the person, and identify their faults, you can maintain an air of superiority and "ego advantage" - I am better than them, I don't do that, so it won't happen to me.
Thanks Lisa for sticking up for folks!
Cheers,
Michael
-
Great book & good movie, 'The right stuff'. I think you are right partially but I believe much of the flaming is caused by envy. Kicking when someone is down. Whatever her financial fate will be, she still has made a bunch of great images. She was also able to gather this much money with her photography in the first place. She was able to make some fantastic images and this nobody can take away from her. I feel sorry for her that she had to sell the rights on future work, this would practically mean she would never make images for herself. I wonder how that will turn out??
-
t it isn't going to happen to you, next, today, right now .... \
Alot of photographers opens up Vanity Fare or Vogue looks at the cover or a spread and says "I couldaa done that". Sure because it's already road mapped and been done, so that's not that difficult.
The trick is not taking the photograph, the trick is having the juice it takes to get into the room to take the photograph and they juice may come from talent, knowing how to hire the right crew, buying the right dinner or having a relative that works at a publisher.
It doesn't matter because the Vogue/Vanity Fare photographer is in the room and shooting the job.
I don't think anyone in their right mind rejoices at the problems of AL, at least if they are a working photographer.
If Annie is at the top, then it's the trickle down theory. If she does bad, everyone down below does bad and considering the economy, nobody should feel warm and fuzzy when another photographer has problems.
What do you want to hear, Annie shoots for $500 or shoots for $100,000,000. I'll go for the $100,000,000 routine because it raises our profession and believe it or not raises everyone's rates.
As far as the personal attacks, we've all heard them and though some may have validity, it is still second hand information and in my experience the assistant or crew member that screams about
one photographer treating them poorly is usually the assistant that proceeds to break every piece of equipment they touch, so all of this can be taken with a grain of salt and I can promise you if you do this business with freelance crew, own your own equipment and do a yearly inventory, you'll be shocked at the amount of lost or broken equipment.
So it's kind of hard to keep your cool when somebody drops a new powerbook off a table, on an editorial shoot with a $500 per page rate.
How is a photographer suppose to react when an assistant ships $2,500 worth of camera supports and doesn't attach a FEDEX label? Thanks, and let me pay you that double overtime? Though is you call the assistant a dumbass, he will tell everyone he knows what a prick you were to work with.
The Klinky thing is different, mostly because of the body of work he produced and a lot of the self generated PR that seemed purposefully placed.
The one and only thing that Annie and Klinky have in common (other than money issues) is their works now relies heavily on post production.
Not that it doesn't take talent or an eye to get the basic image, but one or two soft lights does not make patterns and shadows like the final images suggest and there are no digital cameras I know of that get close to the color pallets they both present.
I love it when I hear the praise or complaints that a dalsa chip looks more film like than a Kodak sensor, or ccd is more film like than cmos, when in reality none of them look remotely close in final reproduction like they looked on screen during the shoot.
At least not any work of importance, because everything that the public sees now goes through many multiple rounds of post production.
I personally like Annie's earlier film work because even though most was staged, it had more reality to it. You honestly believed that whoopie was in that warm milk where today it probably would be cg and whoopie would be squeezed and retouched to look like a 18 year old.
Staged or not, you knew it was John and Yoko in that bed and today it would be four pressers, two seamstress, 2 makeup artists, a week of propping and 3 personal managers on set to approve the final image.
In fact I think professional photographers have shot themselves in the foot, relying so heavily on post production, to produce an image, because so many images have gone from photography to paintings and drawing something is usually a lot cheaper than shooting it, but once you draw it, a photograph looses a lot of it's validity.
Photography on most levels has just become over managed and I blame most of that on digital, because the upside is you know you have the shot before the day is done, the downside is everyone wants to see the shot in micro detail and offer up an opinion at every stage from polaroid, to shoot, to final retouch.
We start this with casting, wardrobe, locations and props and the committee think doesn't stop until the final head swap, eye change, smile moved, wrinkle smoothed image is taken down to the level of one of those Japanese CG models with the big round eyes and it takes a strong personality to keep the comments to a minimum and get to something special.
(Maybe the "challenged" lcd previews that medium format cameras produce could actually be marketed as a plus. You can show the client the image, but they don't know what the hell their looking at.)
I read that stuff in those articles that said AL did "lavish" shoots moving Kristin Dunst as Marie Antoinette, and a crew to Paris for a shoot at the Versailles.
Where the hell are you suppose to shoot Marie Antoinette? At the Sav-On parking lot in New Jersey?
Until you've stepped out on set with 200 e-mails, 12 conference calls jammed into your head about what you can't do, vs. what you can do, it's difficult to understand the pressure a photographer is under and yes, sometimes that pressure leads to a few sharp comments when the photographer sees an assistant standing there holding his wang in one hand, talking to his girlfriend on his iphone with the other while your screaming give me the 85 1.2 because the sun is falling and he runs over and hands you a 35 1.4, the sun drops, end of story.
A few years ago one assistant said to me he knew he will be a great success as a photographer because he always "sees" better photographs than the photographer he is assisting. I replied, ok, maybe that's true, maybe not, but let's be realistic, the only pressure you have on this project is to try and not break my camera.
So my suggestion is to take all of these comments with a very tiny grain of salt and never believe anything you read or hear about money (good or bad) until you see someone's bank statement.
BC
-
[quote name='Dustbak' date='Sep 7 2009, 03:43 PM' post='308826']
She was able to make some fantastic images and this nobody can take away from her.
Actually, these they can and probably will; life's a bitch. But I hope she makes it through.
Rob C
-
Alot of photographers opens up Vanity Fare or Vogue looks at the cover or a spread and says "I couldaa done that". Sure because it's already road mapped and been done, so that's not that difficult.
The trick is not taking the photograph, the trick is having the juice it takes to get into the room to take the photograph and they juice may come from talent, knowing how to hire the right crew, buying the right dinner or having a relative that works at a publisher.
It doesn't matter because the Vogue/Vanity Fare photographer is in the room and shooting the job.
I don't think anyone in their right mind rejoices at the problems of AL, at least if they are a working photographer.
If Annie is at the top, then it's the trickle down theory. If she does bad, everyone down below does bad and considering the economy, nobody should feel warm and fuzzy when another photographer has problems.
What do you want to hear, Annie shoots for $500 or shoots for $100,000,000. I'll go for the $100,000,000 routine because it raises our profession and believe it or not raises everyone's rates.
As far as the personal attacks, we've all heard them and though some may have validity, it is still second hand information and in my experience the assistant or crew member that screams about
one photographer treating them poorly is usually the assistant that proceeds to break every piece of equipment they touch, so all of this can be taken with a grain of salt and I can promise you if you do this business with freelance crew, own your own equipment and do a yearly inventory, you'll be shocked at the amount of lost or broken equipment.
So it's kind of hard to keep your cool when somebody drops a new powerbook off a table, on an editorial shoot with a $500 per page rate.
How is a photographer suppose to react when an assistant ships $2,500 worth of camera supports and doesn't attach a FEDEX label? Thanks, and let me pay you that double overtime? Though is you call the assistant a dumbass, he will tell everyone he knows what a prick you were to work with.
The Klinky thing is different, mostly because of the body of work he produced and a lot of the self generated PR that seemed purposefully placed.
The one and only thing that Annie and Klinky have in common (other than money issues) is their works now relies heavily on post production.
Not that it doesn't take talent or an eye to get the basic image, but one or two soft lights does not make patterns and shadows like the final images suggest and there are no digital cameras I know of that get close to the color pallets they both present.
I love it when I hear the praise or complaints that a dalsa chip looks more film like than a Kodak sensor, or ccd is more film like than cmos, when in reality none of them look remotely close in final reproduction like they looked on screen during the shoot.
At least not any work of importance, because everything that the public sees now goes through many multiple rounds of post production.
I personally like Annie's earlier film work because even though most was staged, it had more reality to it. You honestly believed that whoopie was in that warm milk where today it probably would be cg and whoopie would be squeezed and retouched to look like a 18 year old.
Staged or not, you knew it was John and Yoko in that bed and today it would be four pressers, two seamstress, 2 makeup artists, a week of propping and 3 personal managers on set to approve the final image.
In fact I think professional photographers have shot themselves in the foot, relying so heavily on post production, to produce an image, because so many images have gone from photography to paintings and drawing something is usually a lot cheaper than shooting it, but once you draw it, a photograph looses a lot of it's validity.
Photography on most levels has just become over managed and I blame most of that on digital, because the upside is you know you have the shot before the day is done, the downside is everyone wants to see the shot in micro detail and offer up an opinion at every stage from polaroid, to shoot, to final retouch.
We start this with casting, wardrobe, locations and props and the committee think doesn't stop until the final head swap, eye change, smile moved, wrinkle smoothed image is taken down to the level of one of those Japanese CG models with the big round eyes and it takes a strong personality to keep the comments to a minimum and get to something special.
(Maybe the "challenged" lcd previews that medium format cameras produce could actually be marketed as a plus. You can show the client the image, but they don't know what the hell their looking at.)
I read that stuff in those articles that said AL did "lavish" shoots moving Kristin Dunst as Marie Antoinette, and a crew to Paris for a shoot at the Versailles.
Where the hell are you suppose to shoot Marie Antoinette? At the Sav-On parking lot in New Jersey?
Until you've stepped out on set with 200 e-mails, 12 conference calls jammed into your head about what you can't do, vs. what you can do, it's difficult to understand the pressure a photographer is under and yes, sometimes that pressure leads to a few sharp comments when the photographer sees an assistant standing there holding his wang in one hand, talking to his girlfriend on his iphone with the other while your screaming give me the 85 1.2 because the sun is falling and he runs over and hands you a 35 1.4, the sun drops, end of story.
A few years ago one assistant said to me he knew he will be a great success as a photographer because he always "sees" better photographs than the photographer he is assisting. I replied, ok, maybe that's true, maybe not, but let's be realistic, the only pressure you have on this project is to try and not break my camera.
So my suggestion is to take all of these comments with a very tiny grain of salt and never believe anything you read or hear about money (good or bad) until you see someone's bank statement.
BC
Great post Mr Cooter. I couldn't agree more
-
Great post Mr Cooter. I couldn't agree more
+1
-
+1
Add another!
+2
Rob C
-
Great post Mr Cooter. I couldn't agree more
We were doing a presentation in Melbourne to wedding & portrait photographers. One fellow AIPP member said to me" I worked as a photographer 20 years ago in Melbourne for a top wedding/portrait studio and the thing I learned the most was not to go broke." This photographer today runs a very successful studio in Melbourne & is an award winning photographer as well. We did our presentation, listened to other presenters & judged but this comment has not left me.
Denis
-
Lisa should go to PDN and read the comments from people who actually worked for them to see how mild the comments on this forum are. I think photographers get a bad rap for being difficult because of people like Klinko. He is just another sad case of pride going before a fall. I do not think jerks should get a break just because they can take some good pictures.
-
Lisa should go to PDN and read the comments from people who actually worked for them to see how mild the comments on this forum are.
Sure, you might write off a percentage of the comments here and on PDN as kicking someone when they are down, but you don't generate the pervasive animosity found in the comments on PDN by former employees just by being in the wrong place at the right time. Wow. Those two have some serious bad karma to bring out that type of vitriol. Even the two semi-defenders on that list had bad things to say about them. As someone who was seriously stiffed by a production company this year that knowingly ran up debts with me that they knew they couldn't repay, I can understand where many if these people are coming from. The fact that these two seem to have piled huge egos on top of harmful actions surely put a bull's eye on their backs.
-
Cant say I'm overly shocked really. The first jobs to go in tough times are the big budget, high profile gigs. Mine have all dried up too and which is what brings me to post here. I dont know Klinko or Indrani nor have I known anyone who actually worked for them BUT... a lot of talented people do and when times turn around ( which they will ) and the big gigs start rolling in again Im sure Klinko and Indrani will be hungry and well rested after being sidelined for however long this mess takes for them to sort out and they will be on many peoples list to work with again. Its my guess they will rise again rejuvenated and fresh ( and hopefully watch the bottom line this time ) or this skid will drive them ( perhaps just one ) into a pit of despair and misfortune so deep and dark that the light will never shine the same again and they end up as has beens which happens very easily to any business or person in high profiles who fall hard.
Regardless of my own guess on their next moves its sad to see some of the icons of our industry falling down. It sets a type of "standard" if you will that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. For instance lets say that during these hard times maybe Klinko did some work that benefited not only his business but something good and truly beneficial for his clients instead of going under. Whether he deserved this or not it might have garnered more respect on the whole for our art and craft than the examples being made of him ( and even Annie sadly ) in the media that they ( which pretty much means "we" as in all of us pro shooters ) are a bunch of control freak money grubbing over indulgent self absorbed ars'holes who deserve to get shafted.
So considering that. The next big name in photography which may be any one of you should hopefully learn from the mistakes of the previous shooters such as Klinko and remember to exude some class and honor along the way. Doing so might be just enough to get you through the hard times we all face now and then. He who cannot recall history is condemned to repeat it.
I still think the guy was over the top personally but to each his own
-
Well said! And it is appreciated that you took the time to write it!!
Alot of photographers opens up Vanity Fare or Vogue looks at the cover or a spread and says "I couldaa done that". Sure because it's already road mapped and been done, so that's not that difficult.
The trick is not taking the photograph, the trick is having the juice it takes to get into the room to take the photograph and they juice may come from talent, knowing how to hire the right crew, buying the right dinner or having a relative that works at a publisher.
It doesn't matter because the Vogue/Vanity Fare photographer is in the room and shooting the job.
I don't think anyone in their right mind rejoices at the problems of AL, at least if they are a working photographer.
If Annie is at the top, then it's the trickle down theory. If she does bad, everyone down below does bad and considering the economy, nobody should feel warm and fuzzy when another photographer has problems.
What do you want to hear, Annie shoots for $500 or shoots for $100,000,000. I'll go for the $100,000,000 routine because it raises our profession and believe it or not raises everyone's rates.
As far as the personal attacks, we've all heard them and though some may have validity, it is still second hand information and in my experience the assistant or crew member that screams about
one photographer treating them poorly is usually the assistant that proceeds to break every piece of equipment they touch, so all of this can be taken with a grain of salt and I can promise you if you do this business with freelance crew, own your own equipment and do a yearly inventory, you'll be shocked at the amount of lost or broken equipment.
So it's kind of hard to keep your cool when somebody drops a new powerbook off a table, on an editorial shoot with a $500 per page rate.
How is a photographer suppose to react when an assistant ships $2,500 worth of camera supports and doesn't attach a FEDEX label? Thanks, and let me pay you that double overtime? Though is you call the assistant a dumbass, he will tell everyone he knows what a prick you were to work with.
The Klinky thing is different, mostly because of the body of work he produced and a lot of the self generated PR that seemed purposefully placed.
The one and only thing that Annie and Klinky have in common (other than money issues) is their works now relies heavily on post production.
Not that it doesn't take talent or an eye to get the basic image, but one or two soft lights does not make patterns and shadows like the final images suggest and there are no digital cameras I know of that get close to the color pallets they both present.
I love it when I hear the praise or complaints that a dalsa chip looks more film like than a Kodak sensor, or ccd is more film like than cmos, when in reality none of them look remotely close in final reproduction like they looked on screen during the shoot.
At least not any work of importance, because everything that the public sees now goes through many multiple rounds of post production.
I personally like Annie's earlier film work because even though most was staged, it had more reality to it. You honestly believed that whoopie was in that warm milk where today it probably would be cg and whoopie would be squeezed and retouched to look like a 18 year old.
Staged or not, you knew it was John and Yoko in that bed and today it would be four pressers, two seamstress, 2 makeup artists, a week of propping and 3 personal managers on set to approve the final image.
In fact I think professional photographers have shot themselves in the foot, relying so heavily on post production, to produce an image, because so many images have gone from photography to paintings and drawing something is usually a lot cheaper than shooting it, but once you draw it, a photograph looses a lot of it's validity.
Photography on most levels has just become over managed and I blame most of that on digital, because the upside is you know you have the shot before the day is done, the downside is everyone wants to see the shot in micro detail and offer up an opinion at every stage from polaroid, to shoot, to final retouch.
We start this with casting, wardrobe, locations and props and the committee think doesn't stop until the final head swap, eye change, smile moved, wrinkle smoothed image is taken down to the level of one of those Japanese CG models with the big round eyes and it takes a strong personality to keep the comments to a minimum and get to something special.
(Maybe the "challenged" lcd previews that medium format cameras produce could actually be marketed as a plus. You can show the client the image, but they don't know what the hell their looking at.)
I read that stuff in those articles that said AL did "lavish" shoots moving Kristin Dunst as Marie Antoinette, and a crew to Paris for a shoot at the Versailles.
Where the hell are you suppose to shoot Marie Antoinette? At the Sav-On parking lot in New Jersey?
Until you've stepped out on set with 200 e-mails, 12 conference calls jammed into your head about what you can't do, vs. what you can do, it's difficult to understand the pressure a photographer is under and yes, sometimes that pressure leads to a few sharp comments when the photographer sees an assistant standing there holding his wang in one hand, talking to his girlfriend on his iphone with the other while your screaming give me the 85 1.2 because the sun is falling and he runs over and hands you a 35 1.4, the sun drops, end of story.
A few years ago one assistant said to me he knew he will be a great success as a photographer because he always "sees" better photographs than the photographer he is assisting. I replied, ok, maybe that's true, maybe not, but let's be realistic, the only pressure you have on this project is to try and not break my camera.
So my suggestion is to take all of these comments with a very tiny grain of salt and never believe anything you read or hear about money (good or bad) until you see someone's bank statement.
BC
-
anyone cares to post a link to the PDN thread, I can't find it.
-
Stefan,
I just got hold of it.
http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/content_displ...09c2377097362a1 (http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/content_display/esearch/e3i91e05ffd5e045bf1c09c2377097362a1)
Boy some people hate this guy!
Read the remarks,
-
thanks willem!
wow, what goes around comes around....
-
Like your "alias", Stefan!
Best regards,
Thierry
what goes around comes around....