Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 22 Jan 2012 (Sunday) 09:10
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Are Amateurs destroying Photography

 
BaghdadFred
Senior Member
871 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Baghdad Iraq
     
Feb 23, 2012 08:43 |  #646

RandyMN wrote in post #13932271 (external link)
Content Producer? I know "Content Management" is a big deal today, but content would be defined as a lot of shared resources. Writings, poetry, music, books, documents, records.

Because content can be so much easier shared does not take away the professionalism from writers, movie producers, musicians or photographers.

What it really means is every day people are much more free to add content for sharing with others. It is true that some content is better quality and more professional, but the way you describe it is like our local news stations asking viewers to send in their photo's to be used on the air and no longer relying on freelancers for compensation. That still does not diminish their need for professionals to handle the real work!

In my opinion you just watered down the entire industry by blaming 'content'.

My current job title is "Content Manager" I find it somewhat unique. Creating photographs is just one aspect of my job. It also includes training, shared resources, documentation, design, SharePoint etc.

You might be quite shocked what I make per year doing this.


Fred - Photographing everyday Military life in Iraq (external link) | SmugMug (external link)
7D | C 100-400L | Σ 70-200 2.8 OS | Σ 30 1.4 | C 10-22 | Σ 8-16 | C 17-55 2.8 IS | C 28-135 IS | 580EX II | Σ 1.4x

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Bosscat
Goldmember
1,892 posts
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Ontario Canada
     
Feb 23, 2012 18:41 |  #647

Still going.........not suprising though

I bet this one is still alive come March 1st


Your camera is alot smarter than the "M" Zealots would have you believe

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RACINGHART03
Senior Member
Avatar
908 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Feb 2012
     
Feb 24, 2012 11:02 |  #648

For what its worth I feel a photographer should be rated on his "professionalism" (if working with people) and more importantly his work. Lets face it...there are people who have the ability to learn faster than others and put more into learning the art than others. I expect those people to progress to the point of shooting proffesional looking shots more frequently than the ones who are just out to make a buck. I am sure the best of photographers have bad days here and there. They are only human just like the person standing next to them. I am an auto tech by "profession". If I quit tomorrow and take a job managing a diner..is the work on do on a friends car no longer "professional"? I think more than people in general are hurting the photography business is..I think technology is doing it trifold. Now I NEVER have used film before...but I am VERY good with technology and digital images (also self taught by running a small graphics/sign business) and can make an "amatuer" mistake and underexpose and a few clicks of a screen layer..and poof..my image looks professional. I give real credit to the guys who work with film..without digital..I prob wouldnt have gotten into shooting at all! I think in the realm of "professional photography" clients pay for the RESULT...which is the pictures you give them and it boils down to how THEY feel about the result.


500PX (external link)FLICKR (external link)
Canon 5DMKIII Gripped X 2, 35MM 1.4/ 50MM 1.2/ 85MM 1.2/ 135MM 2.0/ 16-35 F2.8LII/ 24-70 F2.8L/ 70-200 F2.8L IS/ 300mm IS 4.0L/100MM 2.8L Macro/ 1.4II range extender/ 600ex-RT X4 /Ste3/ MR14X II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
peeaanuut
Goldmember
Avatar
3,554 posts
Gallery: 31 photos
Likes: 695
Joined Feb 2011
     
Feb 24, 2012 11:05 as a reply to  @ RACINGHART03's post |  #649

just out of curiosity, you wouldn't drive an 03 MSP would you?


and great post btw.


Stuff
http://joetakesphotos.​com/ (external link) : | : https://www.facebook.c​om/JKlingPhotos (external link) : | : https://twitter.com/jk​lingphotos (external link)
airbutchie - Joe was definitely right about adding contrast...
:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RACINGHART03
Senior Member
Avatar
908 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Feb 2012
     
Feb 24, 2012 11:08 |  #650

peeaanuut wrote in post #13958758 (external link)
just out of curiosity, you wouldn't drive an 03 MSP would you?


and great post btw.

Guessing that was at me since I had the 03 in my name lol. No. I had a 2003 Acura Tls with Racinghart rims on it back in 03 when I made that name and email up. I now drive a 2011 MDX Advance. I am a head tech for Acura


500PX (external link)FLICKR (external link)
Canon 5DMKIII Gripped X 2, 35MM 1.4/ 50MM 1.2/ 85MM 1.2/ 135MM 2.0/ 16-35 F2.8LII/ 24-70 F2.8L/ 70-200 F2.8L IS/ 300mm IS 4.0L/100MM 2.8L Macro/ 1.4II range extender/ 600ex-RT X4 /Ste3/ MR14X II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
peeaanuut
Goldmember
Avatar
3,554 posts
Gallery: 31 photos
Likes: 695
Joined Feb 2011
     
Feb 24, 2012 12:10 |  #651

Oh right on. Just jumped out at me cause the 03 MSPs came with Racing Harts. Head tech eh? Dealer tech or tech line?


Stuff
http://joetakesphotos.​com/ (external link) : | : https://www.facebook.c​om/JKlingPhotos (external link) : | : https://twitter.com/jk​lingphotos (external link)
airbutchie - Joe was definitely right about adding contrast...
:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RACINGHART03
Senior Member
Avatar
908 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Feb 2012
     
Feb 24, 2012 12:58 as a reply to  @ peeaanuut's post |  #652

Head tech at dealer in NJ. Been a master tech since 2009. Our tech line is out of Cali. Just got into photography about two months ago. Keeps me outta trouble!


500PX (external link)FLICKR (external link)
Canon 5DMKIII Gripped X 2, 35MM 1.4/ 50MM 1.2/ 85MM 1.2/ 135MM 2.0/ 16-35 F2.8LII/ 24-70 F2.8L/ 70-200 F2.8L IS/ 300mm IS 4.0L/100MM 2.8L Macro/ 1.4II range extender/ 600ex-RT X4 /Ste3/ MR14X II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
peeaanuut
Goldmember
Avatar
3,554 posts
Gallery: 31 photos
Likes: 695
Joined Feb 2011
     
Feb 24, 2012 13:01 |  #653

nice. My dad was a model engineer for a while working with techline but has moved on to warranty management.

I dont think amateurs are destroying photography, but if we keep going off topic we will be destroying the thread.


Stuff
http://joetakesphotos.​com/ (external link) : | : https://www.facebook.c​om/JKlingPhotos (external link) : | : https://twitter.com/jk​lingphotos (external link)
airbutchie - Joe was definitely right about adding contrast...
:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RACINGHART03
Senior Member
Avatar
908 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Feb 2012
     
Feb 24, 2012 13:31 |  #654

Oh thats good stuff. I think in summation I could say that there are "amateurs" that have a talent for photography..and "pros" that shouldnt be taking peoples money.


500PX (external link)FLICKR (external link)
Canon 5DMKIII Gripped X 2, 35MM 1.4/ 50MM 1.2/ 85MM 1.2/ 135MM 2.0/ 16-35 F2.8LII/ 24-70 F2.8L/ 70-200 F2.8L IS/ 300mm IS 4.0L/100MM 2.8L Macro/ 1.4II range extender/ 600ex-RT X4 /Ste3/ MR14X II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Clean ­ Gene
Goldmember
1,014 posts
Joined Nov 2010
     
Feb 27, 2012 01:52 |  #655

dtufino wrote in post #13747535 (external link)
It seems everyone has a DSLR with a KIT lens and consider themselves a "Professional Photographer" but ask them what's the difference between aperture and Shutter speeds they have no clue....

Recently, some of my clients have said that my rates are high compared to other Professional Photographer, when in fact my prices are super Low end for portraiture work.... i tell them they get what they pay for....

The question is... is photography dying in the professional sense? The only place i see photography live is in Sports Photography... Amateurs don't knwo how to shoot sports... yet.... lol

I'm not going to read all 40-something pages of this thread, but I'd wager that amateurs are ultimately going to HELP photography.

Why? Because the more amateurs there are who can pretend to be "photographers" and compete for business, the more competition there's going to be. At some point, the REAL photographers are going to have to really step their game up in order to compete with the amateurs, and that competition will ultimately result in better work.

Here's the thing...being a highly successful photographer is sort of a glamour job. Like being a Hollywood movie star or a cocaine kingpin or a NFL superstar. Lots of people try, most fail. Just as how your average street level drug dealer dreams of eventually climbing the ranks and becoming Scarface, the "new age" of photography has resulted in a ****load of "photographers" being able to do photography without being any good at it. Do they "steal" business from "legitimate" photographers? Sure. In the short term. But as someone else said, you get what you pay for. The accessibility of photography to the general public is only going to ensure that there is more competition. that sets the bar higher, forcing the "serious" photographer to step up his game.

Are potential clients trying to lowball you because there's an amateur who's willing to work for less? Well then, step up your game and produce really killer pictures that justify your price. Show them that you're a professional with your work. Let your work show them why why you should get more.If your work really stands out, if it's that much better than what an "amateur" can do, then you'll stand out.

Competition is good, and this isn't the first time that photography has become accessible to the general public.The accessibility of photography has not killed photography during the 20th century, and that's not going to kill photography not. It might kill certain photographERS, but that's just simple market competition. Survival of the fittest. Once every idiot can dabble at this stuff, the pros will really have to step up their game and produce work that justifies what they're getting paid.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wuzzittoya
Goldmember
Avatar
2,551 posts
Joined Aug 2011
Location: rural Missouri
     
Feb 27, 2012 07:05 |  #656

Clean Gene wrote in post #13974105 (external link)
I'm not going to read all 40-something pages of this thread, but I'd wager that amateurs are ultimately going to HELP photography.

Why? Because the more amateurs there are who can pretend to be "photographers" and compete for business, the more competition there's going to be. At some point, the REAL photographers are going to have to really step their game up in order to compete with the amateurs, and that competition will ultimately result in better work.

Here's the thing...being a highly successful photographer is sort of a glamour job. Like being a Hollywood movie star or a cocaine kingpin or a NFL superstar. Lots of people try, most fail. Just as how your average street level drug dealer dreams of eventually climbing the ranks and becoming Scarface, the "new age" of photography has resulted in a ****load of "photographers" being able to do photography without being any good at it. Do they "steal" business from "legitimate" photographers? Sure. In the short term. But as someone else said, you get what you pay for. The accessibility of photography to the general public is only going to ensure that there is more competition. that sets the bar higher, forcing the "serious" photographer to step up his game.

Are potential clients trying to lowball you because there's an amateur who's willing to work for less? Well then, step up your game and produce really killer pictures that justify your price. Show them that you're a professional with your work. Let your work show them why why you should get more.If your work really stands out, if it's that much better than what an "amateur" can do, then you'll stand out.

Competition is good, and this isn't the first time that photography has become accessible to the general public.The accessibility of photography has not killed photography during the 20th century, and that's not going to kill photography not. It might kill certain photographERS, but that's just simple market competition. Survival of the fittest. Once every idiot can dabble at this stuff, the pros will really have to step up their game and produce work that justifies what they're getting paid.

That is all lovely on its face, but the people low-balling you (as described in the pages that weren't read) frequently are actually shopping on that budget and it is unlikely you'll get the sale (unless they're just using the different price points to dicker, at which point there is actually a good possibility that education will help close the sale).

My husband refused to pay for a wedding photographer. A friend who was friends with a novice professional photographer bought me her services for the day. Well, there are maybe five keepers out of it and she sent me all the pictures, even the ones that were out of focus, the ones where she moved, etc. There was nothing but on camera flash... etc.

However, hubby's budget for photography was $0. Have no idea what my best friend's budget was... but it was probably at most a few hundred. To me, as someone who couldn't budget hubby and received it as a gift, it was better than what I would have had otherwise.

I guess the good thing about the people who are trying to start out in photography (which I kind of fall into, by the way), is that if they are willing to price everyone out of business (I'm not), they will at least keep providing services for the poor people getting married, having children, etc.


I like to push buttons on thingies that take pictures. Sometimes I like to push other buttons, too.
I only bite on the second Tuesday of every week, usually only mean people - they kinda taste like chicken...
You can call me Wuzzi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mrwalker
Senior Member
Avatar
274 posts
Joined Jan 2012
     
Feb 27, 2012 11:11 |  #657

Unsubscribing and promising never to see this thread again in 10, 9, 8, 7...


Amateur, but not Destroying Photography...
Current: T2i/ 550D || EF 85mm 1.8 USM || 430EX II || Powershot SD880 IS || Manfrotto 190 from the last century || Ubuntu 10.04.4, RawTherapee and GIMP
Old: Nikon FM10 (Manual Film SLR) || Nikon E 50mm f1.8 AI || Nikkor 135mm f2.8 AI

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
London ­ Headshots
Member
63 posts
Joined Jan 2012
     
Feb 27, 2012 13:59 |  #658

Definitely destroying the integrity of the art for mid-level professionals.

I shoot headshots and commercial work for advertising agencies. My headshot business has suffered as a result of DSLR owners "specialising in natural light". My commercial work hasn't suffered a blip though. Agencies just won't take a risk.


London Headshots (external link)
Like my Facebook Page (external link)
Headshot Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 542
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Feb 27, 2012 15:08 |  #659

Hey, I got married in '71, so no camera phones, digital P&S cameras, etc. And, the idea of having a paid photographer was out of the question, not to mention a high-level "pro". I had a cousin that showed up with a little film camera. I think we got two prints out of it, oh well.

Later on, we had a friend who was not a wedding photographer but who did have a practice and was published to some degree. We did get a "keeper" from that era -- one he got of my then-wife and the two kids we had (later three):

IMAGE: http://www.pbase.com/tonylong/image/88297223/original.jpg

Maybe not the greatest shot, but hey he was a friend and there is something about the photo...

And one other something -- our oldest, the boy, died in a car accident about 20 years ago...

And hey, he took that shot for free, and back then a paid photographer was still out of our range.

Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wuzzittoya
Goldmember
Avatar
2,551 posts
Joined Aug 2011
Location: rural Missouri
     
Feb 27, 2012 15:54 |  #660

tonylong wrote in post #13977627 (external link)
Hey, I got married in '71, so no camera phones, digital P&S cameras, etc. And, the idea of having a paid photographer was out of the question, not to mention a high-level "pro". I had a cousin that showed up with a little film camera. I think we got two prints out of it, oh well.

Later on, we had a friend who was not a wedding photographer but who did have a practice and was published to some degree. We did get a "keeper" from that era -- one he got of my then-wife and the two kids we had (later three):

QUOTED IMAGE

Maybe not the greatest shot, but hey he was a friend and there is something about the photo...

And hey, he took that shot for free, and back then a paid photographer was still out of our range.


There are a lot of "somethings" about the photo, from the mother attentively bent towards the one child, the "peek" through the foreground of the other. The blown higlights in the background are another way to be sure there is nothing busy competing with the three of them. It isn't perfect, maybe, but it is incredibly charming.

I'm so sorry that you lost a child (no matter what age). I think that the biggest, hardest thing, about the death of our children is the death of the promise that goes with them - the life coming, the life we expected. It is such a hard loss. :(


I like to push buttons on thingies that take pictures. Sometimes I like to push other buttons, too.
I only bite on the second Tuesday of every week, usually only mean people - they kinda taste like chicken...
You can call me Wuzzi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

130,106 views & 0 likes for this thread
Are Amateurs destroying Photography
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Kévin
2002 guests, 317 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.