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 Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
Thread started 28 Sep 2011 (Wednesday) 17:32
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Just to drive home the point about the cheapening of our industry....

 
S.Horton
worship my useful and insightful comments
Avatar
18,051 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 117
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Royersford, PA
     
Feb 23, 2012 05:23 |  #151

It is a vocation.

I'm just trying to convey that groups invent things like licensing to protect profit at least as often as they invent rules to 'protect' something like public health.

Another way is basically a guild or union. Even musicians have a way to get paid. ASCAP.


Sam - TF Says Ishmael
http://midnightblue.sm​ugmug.com (external link) 
Want your title changed?Dream On! (external link)

:cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Bear ­ Dale
"I get 'em pregnant"
Avatar
4,866 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 743
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Australia
     
Feb 23, 2012 05:28 |  #152

Vocation, as good a description as any.

Sam, i know that you have been pushing the licensing barrow for quite some time now. I just honestly believe were more likely to see jumbo jets being pulled through the sky by pigs with wings before what you propose ever comes to fruition.


Cheers,
Bear Dale

Some of my photos featured on Flickr Bear Dale (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
S.Horton
worship my useful and insightful comments
Avatar
18,051 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 117
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Royersford, PA
     
Feb 23, 2012 05:34 |  #153

Fair enough. Beer on me.

I think you're right because if your professional associations had the power to make more money, they would have done it already.


Sam - TF Says Ishmael
http://midnightblue.sm​ugmug.com (external link) 
Want your title changed?Dream On! (external link)

:cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nathancarter
Cream of the Crop
5,474 posts
Gallery: 32 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 601
Joined Dec 2010
     
Feb 23, 2012 15:56 |  #154

airfrogusmc wrote in post #13235751 (external link)
Then I'm really not sure what your point was. Film is not more difficult or harder to master then digital because they both involve learning to see and thats what is the thing that is valuable. Its the ability to see photographically and then the skills to capture that vision but the technical skills are relatively easy compared to the seeing aspect which is really what people pay for. Not the way the image was produced but the visual content which came from the ability of the artist/photographer to see, the final image.


His point was that the perception of the uneducated masses is different. The public perception is that in the days of film photography, the photographer had to physically buy the film, then process it in the darkroom with all sorts of chemicals and stuff, or send it off to a lab. Then when all the processing was done, you had the prints and the negatives. However, (public perception again) with digital all you have to do is aim the camera and mash your fat monkey finger on the button. If it's blurry or doesn't look good, just mash the button again until DOES look good. There's no film to buy, no negatives to develop, no special room full of scary chemicals. It's just a digital file.. it's not a tangible item, so it should be cheap or free. I don't know how you think you can charge so much for a bunch of digital files that didn't cost you anything to make.

Perception is truth? Or so I've been told.

If your client is knowledgeable in the ways of imaging and photography, they know there's much more to it than that, and will pay an appropriate price for your skill, talent, and equipment. However, as we've seen in this thread, even the top decision makers aren't always educated about the skill and time required for top-quality digital photography. "We'll just have Janet do it, she just bought a DSLR last week."


http://www.avidchick.c​om (external link) for business stuff
http://www.facebook.co​m/VictorVoyeur (external link) for fun stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bear ­ Dale
"I get 'em pregnant"
Avatar
4,866 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 743
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Australia
     
Feb 23, 2012 16:38 |  #155

S.Horton wrote in post #13949625 (external link)
Fair enough. Beer on me.

Theres no wrong or right, I totally see where your coming from, but truly just don't see it ever happening.

I'd enjoy having a beer with you, thats for sure.


Cheers,
Bear Dale

Some of my photos featured on Flickr Bear Dale (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,577 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 6435
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Feb 23, 2012 16:59 |  #156

nathancarter wrote in post #13953437 (external link)
His point was that the perception of the uneducated masses is different. The public perception is that in the days of film photography, the photographer had to physically buy the film, then process it in the darkroom with all sorts of chemicals and stuff, or send it off to a lab. Then when all the processing was done, you had the prints and the negatives. However, (public perception again) with digital all you have to do is aim the camera and mash your fat monkey finger on the button. If it's blurry or doesn't look good, just mash the button again until DOES look good. There's no film to buy, no negatives to develop, no special room full of scary chemicals. It's just a digital file.. it's not a tangible item, so it should be cheap or free. I don't know how you think you can charge so much for a bunch of digital files that didn't cost you anything to make.

Perception is truth? Or so I've been told.

If your client is knowledgeable in the ways of imaging and photography, they know there's much more to it than that, and will pay an appropriate price for your skill, talent, and equipment. However, as we've seen in this thread, even the top decision makers aren't always educated about the skill and time required for top-quality digital photography. "We'll just have Janet do it, she just bought a DSLR last week."

Thats why you need to position yourself with clients that know and are willing to pay.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tarzanman
Senior Member
548 posts
Joined Feb 2009
     
Feb 23, 2012 17:33 as a reply to  @ airfrogusmc's post |  #157

You guys really do make too much of your vocation. Photography is currently no more difficult than interior decorating.

Yes, any Jane Doe can color coordinate a room, but only someone who has been around the block a few times and kept up on trends will have a deeper understanding and deliver a better looking den/bedroom with less trial and error.

Every Tom, Jane, and Ezekiel does not need an interior decorator to make their apt/condo/house look nice and liveable.

Similarly, every newspaper/magazine/eng​aged couple does not need a "pro" to make all of their photos miniature works of art. Doubly so since the tools of the amateur practitioner are pretty decent nowadays.

Yes, some people will pay for the privilege, but many simply do not care.

Nuff said.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,577 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 6435
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Feb 23, 2012 20:48 |  #158

Tarzanman wrote in post #13954096 (external link)
You guys really do make too much of your vocation. Photography is currently no more difficult than interior decorating.

Yes, any Jane Doe can color coordinate a room, but only someone who has been around the block a few times and kept up on trends will have a deeper understanding and deliver a better looking den/bedroom with less trial and error.

Every Tom, Jane, and Ezekiel does not need an interior decorator to make their apt/condo/house look nice and liveable.

Similarly, every newspaper/magazine/eng​aged couple does not need a "pro" to make all of their photos miniature works of art. Doubly so since the tools of the amateur practitioner are pretty decent nowadays.

Yes, some people will pay for the privilege, but many simply do not care.

Nuff said.

:lol::lol:

The photographers that can see and use light will always be in demand and there will always be clients out there willing to pay for those skills. There are many that don't care but I don't know about you but I don't want those folks as my clients and I wont have them as my clients. Nuff said.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GadgetRick
Goldmember
1,081 posts
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Jacksonville, FL
     
Feb 25, 2012 07:44 |  #159

Tarzanman wrote in post #13954096 (external link)
You guys really do make too much of your vocation. Photography is currently no more difficult than interior decorating.

Yes, any Jane Doe can color coordinate a room, but only someone who has been around the block a few times and kept up on trends will have a deeper understanding and deliver a better looking den/bedroom with less trial and error.

Every Tom, Jane, and Ezekiel does not need an interior decorator to make their apt/condo/house look nice and liveable.

Similarly, every newspaper/magazine/eng​aged couple does not need a "pro" to make all of their photos miniature works of art. Doubly so since the tools of the amateur practitioner are pretty decent nowadays.

Yes, some people will pay for the privilege, but many simply do not care.

Nuff said.

Exactly. As I've said, photography is a luxury item. Nobody needs professional photos of their kids. Nobody needs professional photos of a birthday party. Nobody needs professional photos of their wedding. But there are people will will pay for these services. Our job is to find those who will. Those who will not pay are not important to me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jmweb
Senior Member
Avatar
523 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Jan 2011
Location: PEI
     
Feb 25, 2012 13:23 |  #160

Professional venue using cheap photos is the same as a photographer using a cheap website.

You live by the economy, good or bad, you die by the economy, good or bad.


John Morris Photo - PEI, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick photographer (external link)
The most powerful work: editorial. JohnMorrisPhoto.ca (external link)
Gear: Canon 1dx, Canon 7dx Mark II, Canon 5d S, Canon 5d SR..

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

18,361 views & 0 likes for this thread
Just to drive home the point about the cheapening of our industry....
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
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 emmanwarren
831 guests, 223 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.