A sports shooter link that angers me

PacAce I know exactly what your saying about the new guys working for peanuts and that happens in every industry, always has and probably always will. However there are not many industries where someone is willing to do the job for free. You have guys who will shoot for a local on spec and take $15-$25 for a shot the paper uses. Thing is they get some experience and a portfolio built up and then they try to move up the ladder to a paper that pays them a salary, day rate or give them compensation they can make a living on.

This was happening with film too, it just didn't seem to be as much as with digital. With film you still had to spend several hundred bucks to get a decent camera to shoot sports but, you also had film cost to deal with. Some employers would trade a roll of used film for a new one. In some cases you had to shoot a ton of film and send in 2-3 images for consideration. Nobody compensated you for the film you used but didn't get any of those images used. My first year shooting sports, 1994, I used 10-15 rolls of film during the Brickyard and the following year I shot maybe 25 rolls during the month of May for the 500. I was with UPI then and they didn't provide any film. When I moved to AP in 97, if you turned in a roll, they developed it and gave a new roll in return. If you wanted prints you still had to get those done on your own. So the cost was significantly higher shooting film. I don't remember anyone shooting with any Elan series cameras in my turn. Maybe someone did but I can't remember if there were or not.
The last year of shooting film at the Indy 500 I shot one roll during the month, and on race day I used one roll and shot the Kannan crash, which did make the wire. AP sent me back a roll to replace that one and it is still in my freezer. You had to have at least 2 rolls of film on you at all times. SO that month my film cost was about $15 and $13 for development and prints of the two rolls I shot. I got smart and realised I couldn't afford to shoot 20 rolls of film each month. Besides I have a big box of nothing but racing photos and 3 binders full of neg sleeves.

Explain to me how the photography market as changed in the last two years? There have been new advances in technology of the equipment but the action of shooting is still the same as it was 15 years ago when digital was just a pipe dream.

Well now you are showing just how much you really know about the photography industry, not much. Take UPI for example, they have 20 credentialed photographers at Indy. If they use your shot you get credit, no pay, just a name on the photo credit. The only one who gets paid is the manager and that is for his administrative work.
Midwest Racing News, you wanna shoot for them? Guess what they pay you if they use your photo? Nothing.
Speed Sport News, they use your shot and guess how much they pay? Nothing.
And guess what, call them and ask if they need shooters, they will put you on a list because they have a waiting line to shoot for them, for a photo credit.
So tell me just how many programmers you know work on a project for someone and don't receive any compensation? I guess maybe you don't know as much about the photography industry as you thought you did huh?

What do you think Bob Gross and his partner would say about someone who will shoot a wedding for a free meal and a piece of cake? How long do you think they would still be shooting weddings for money?


Let me ask you this, how many national or international interest events have you shot in the last 5 years?

You mean <gasp> that people get paid money for shooting a wedding?

I always thought the cake was kind of overrated.

---Bob Gross---

This happens all the time. Uncle Bob's got a camera, and promises to put a few pictures in a book. All fine and dandy, but to get the 'experienced' wedding photographer and get shots that aren't cropped poorly, or under exposed, you pay the money...

With the advent of digital, a people are shooting more pictures. This is unavoidable. It's a changing world. Soon digital cameras will be ubiquitous. Almost everyone will have them. But will it spell the demise of professional photographers? Not likely. Desktop publishing did not dethrone any major authors, but it did allow some budding authors to get into the fray easier...

I just wanted to point out that yes, there are lots of programmers that work for free.

If you search on the internet for FREEWARE or SHAREWARE, you will find quite a few people doing their work for free. Never mind people that develop Linux applications and the like.

How does Adobe stay in buisness when there are free apps that you can edit images with?

Oh, also, many many websites were developed for free, just for the recognition of working on a "Star's" website.

i.e., A few years ago, I was given the "opportunity" to work on an Pro wrestler, and an NHL player's site for free. I told them, "Thanks, but no thanks."

Don't take it the wrong way, I wanted to add another "techie's" perspective.

-RinkRat

Not to mention Open Source and maybe the best example - this forum software we are all using is completely free and hundreds of people around the world work on adding functionality and improving existing.

All of you guys have good points. But none of them matter. Canon will not make cameras because of pros; Canon will not make cameras because of what amateurs want. Canon will make cameras to bring proffit. If the "prosumer" world will bring more revenue to Canon than a $5k super-pro DSLR, then that's where Canon is heading.

A lot of pros over there on sports shooter and Fred Mirada's forum are pissed off with the "amateurs" on the sidelines. Well there is no other way to start... only from the sidelines. They're so affraid that people will take away their income. There is only one solution to that: Distinguish youself !

Jeff,

Your points are well taken but I think we are aguing about different sides of the fence. When I was talking about people going out and buying pro or prosumer cameras and then being a threat to the working photographers, I was thinking more about your average mom and pop going out and taking pictures and then giving them away to newspapers and magazines. After all, isn't that what the person in Timmy's original posting quote was complaining about. I really didn't have these photographers who are in the non-payroll of newspapers and magazines in mind.

As for the those photographers who DO work for free just for the satisfaction of seeing their name in the credits, well, I wouldn't know about that since I'm not in the business (and never claimed to be) like you are. I'm just your average "pop" who likes to take pictures for the simple pleasure it brings me and nothing more.

This discussion by the way really has little to do with any specific craft, talent or skill.. it is universal in it's nature.

Be it photography, Porgramming, or sculpting the issue is pervasive and consistant.

The issue and solution are in fact twofold.

1. The education of the client/consumer

2. The skill of the artisan

The larger concern is issue 1. The clients understanding of quality.

What Indy jeff fears most (even though he may not have said it quite this way.. if he'll allow me) is a client base that does NOT perceive the difference in skill, and thus quality of work provided by the seasoned pro Vs. the rank amateur.

The fear is that by flooding the market with affordable mediocrity,.. the client base will loose sight of why they pay for higher quality.

This is happening all around us every day in every aspect of American Society at least.. (I assume it is likewise elsewhere)

An esoteric case in point. My Father was a Stone Cutter by trade.. (that chisel I refer to..) He was also a foremest leterrer (no.. we don't ike the term caligrapher ... if your going to put it in stone it behooves you to understand the art of the letter)

In this day and age the level of understanding of this trade, skill, and talent is miniscule. I'll wager that not a single person who reads this thread would know the difference between a peice of junk polished marble monument and real work of skill in carving letters beyond a gut response (which may be accurate, but not likely educated)

Thus... buildings are erected, monuments layed daily by the thousands with crap plaues cast in chinzy bronze,. lettering that could be done by a monky (or worse,. a machine) and it si because so few know or understand or care that there is a better product.

But there is allways someone who does no matter how far and few.

Again in this extreme example... we see that the likes of Harvard University, The National Gallery, The Kennedy Memorial and the very recent WWII memorial in Washingtn.. these jobs don't go to the hacks that everyone else is satisfied with.. they go to the true letteres and stone carvers.

The situation is pervasive.. the same lack of unsderstanding on the part of the consumer/client breeds the frustrations we encounter daily when trying to get the most for our dollars. Whether it be at a restaurant or tech support or Best Buy. The consumer has accepted the pervading lack of skill and talent as the norm.. and thus we get saddled with poor products because the "good stuf" can't compete for our dollars. Gone are the indepedantly owned Video rental stores because WE were satisfied with paying late fees at Blockbuster,.. gone are the real hardware/lumber yards because we don't care if the wood is crap or the service is non existant at the Home Depot,.

What we can do? Three things;

As a craftsmen;
1. Educate your clientel. As a photographer,, strive to communicate what it is that you do that others are not understanding. This is tough,. and many times it will fail,. but it will pay off many times as well.

2. This of course is meaningless if we as providers fall into the same trap by cutting corners to undercut someones costs. Indy spke of this "Don't shoot for free" etc... on a broader scale it is the same thing as simply insisting on doing the best, highest quality work we can provide. And then inisiting on ample compensation.

As a consumer;
3. We have to stop settling for the same dreck that the amauteur with the Rebel leaning over the guardrail is offering in our own daily lives. Stop paying for AOL, stop buying PCs from Compaq,. and don't get them at Best Buy,.. if a restaurant food is yucky.. stop eating there. Insist on quality in your life as well as your work. And reward those that provide quality.

There is a technical term for all this. Its called commoditization.

It happens when the advances in technology, production, distribution etc eliminate much of the unique aspects one product/service may have over another.

Its been happening since the industrial revolution, and before.

Its inevitable, and nothing you can do to prevent it. Boycotting Best Buy will just deprive you of another option of buying stuff cheap with a good warranty.

That's different from insisting on the best price / value propositions. That in and of itself is what forces the commoditization of particular products and services.

Probably most profound is felt in software and technology. That's why you have folks coding for free. Differentiation as a desperate measure means you give stuff away for free in hopes of proving unique value so that you can charge more eventually...

Here is something for you web geeks . Agree or disagree - There is just no more money in pure web site design. What could once be sold for $50,000 now goes for $5,000.

However, there is real demand for people who know how to build web-based applications. Business processes on the web are flourishing. Making them work well and fast is a challenge, and customers know it.

Developers solving the web-based applications problem are charging top dollar and working overtime. And they are able to throw in creative design as icing on the cake.

Design has been commoditized.

Photography is on the way. But - its not the same. There is way too much individuality and opportunity to set yourself apart from the next guy for real talent. And definitely enough to differentiate yourself from an amateur with a rebel and kit lens. But I can definitely see stock work for instance as something that is already commoditized.

**

Back to post quote which started this whole thing, where the nikonian complains that a better camera means the "pro" is losing to the soccer mom. That has got to be what's wrong with America (yes I'm going a bit off track). That is why people sue McDonalds for hot coffee. That is why we have so much welfare abuse. That is why kids are on drugs. Because people refuse to take responsibility for their own actions (or inactions).

Idiots. I heard the same argument when the 10D came out over on Galbraith's site. What a load of crap. Has this happened? I'm sure it has to the losers who can't differentiate themselves enough from the soccer mom with a digital rebel.

8)

ilya,

Would have to disagree that web development was a direct result of commoditization (yay, new word for me). From my perspective, it was more akin to supply & demand, with a bunch of ignorance & greed sprinkled in. Irrational exuberance? Maybe.

In the the early "dot-bomb" days, everyone & their brother wanted a website. They weren't quite sure why, but they just had to have one. No business case, no budget. "We need to be on that interweb NOW!". There weren't enough of us geeks available, nobody knew how much work was involved, and how they would make money with a site. So, we could almost charge whatever we wanted. (and we did.)

As people learned what that work was really worth, and what it took to design/maintain a site, things started to change. At this point, is where I believe commoditization came into play.

Soccer moms, Janitors, High School dropouts, CFOs, and just about everyone else thought they should become a web developer. Web Dev classes were mobbed with people, "HTML for Dummies" books were flying off the shelves. With this flood of "Talent", it became obvious it was time to sell software to the "Developers" to make their jobs even easier.

Pure software development, which is different from web design, seems to be commoditization exactly as you have defined it.

-----

I agree with you 100%, with respect to "taking responsibility". Most people want to blame everyone else for their plight. "Waaah, THEY are taking our development jobs overseas". "It's THEIR fault for making better cameras, that I can't sell pictures.". "It's not my fault I'm drowning in debt, THEY sent me the applications."

I don't know that design has been commoditized. It would seem CDS is a bit more on the mark.

1. The education of the client/consumer
2. The skill of the artisan

The client/consumer are accepting less for their money, and the artisan only wants to learn enough to "get by".

Just like every boob with a "Dummies" book thought they were a web developer, more & more people with DSLRs think they are Ansel Adams.

Would a CEO know the difference between pictures for thier product catalog done by a "PRO", or thier cousin Marty? Maybe. Would they rather pay $15,000 for the photos, or $1,000 to buy cousin Marty a used DRebel and some Home Depot lights? hmmm...

Sorry for babbling, I find this topic pretty interesting.

-RinkRat

First off my complaints, if you will, are not with the mom and pop shooter on the sidelines. It is with the guy who gets a credential and shoots sporting events for publication and expects no pay for it. The access is his pay. That is what is killing the industry, and by industry I mean shooting sports.

Yes the real pro sets him/herself apart from the amature by capturing images the amature can only hope to get lucky with.


An example of my threat from mom and pop.....last month I was shooting a girls softball tourney. A guy with a decent digital comes up and asks if it is ok for him to shoot some of his daughter during the game. I kind of chuckled and said "Of course, have at it." He asked if he could stand beside me as I was in the optimum position for photographing right handed batters. "Sure, no problem." Actually when his daughter came to bat, I suggested we trade places and he take the closest position.
During the game he asked me questions, "what ISO do you shoot at? What shutter speed are you at? What do you focus on the face, the body, the plate? I answered all his question, no matter how dumb they were. At one time I asked dumb questions but how are you going to learn if you don't ask. Well all this took place on the first day. The second day he was there and again had his camera. He came up and we talked some more. He had gone to my website and saw what I shot and compared it to what he did at the same time. In his words, "After seeing my stuff last night I went to your website. How do you do that? ME: "What" HIM: "Get the action that way, most of the stuff I got was out of focus, especally the fielding shots."
I explained to him that you have to become part of the game in your mind. If your shooting fielding shots you have to anticipate where the batter will hit to, left or right side of the pitcher. Focus in on the SS or the 2nd baseman. Watch what the batter does. Does a foul ball go left, right, straight back that will tell how their swing is, late early or right on time. Next you have to be ready. One thing I pointed out to him was when he was shooting he had his camera down at chest level. You have to have your camera at eye level. By the time he gets his camera up I am already focused on the player fielding the ball. Since you can't see where the ball is thru the view finder when your watching the player, notice when she is bending down. Chances are she will start bending down when she is about to field the ball.
I also explained to him that it takes practice. If he saves his shots from this year and compares them to what he shoots when she is 14, she is now 8, he will see a definate improvement over the years becasue he has practiced and gotten better.
He did purchase prints from my website too, about $40 worth if I remember correctly. The month of July I shot 3 girls softball tourneys, I can't even begin to tell you how many games but I would say it was upwards of 60 games. At each game there was someone else with their camera shooting their kid, not one of them was a threat to me. If they asked me any questions or asked fpr tips, I gave them an answer.

Now off to my PM's I am almost afraid to see what somebody is going to say to me in private on this subject LOL

One more thing, if anyone comes up to me and asks for tips on shooting I would gladly give them any answers to any questions. I rely on my ability with a camera. If there is someone better than me, well then they are better. I am not the best photograher in the world, nor will I ever be. I do my best and that is as good as I get. Yes and sometimes I get lucky and do better than I thought I could.
I do not feel threatened by someone shooting for free but, I do consider it as a threat to the industry. The ability to make money in the sports field has diminished year by year and it will only get worse. I don't have any good answer, just that people shouldn't shoot for free.

Darn double posts!!!

... or double post. (just kidding)

You may be a bit mistaken about my point. Commoditization at the most basic level means eradication of uniqueness in a product or service. In this instance, web development became a (common) commodity in that design became so widely produced, aided by common code chunks that folks use, aided by vast libraries of reusa-code, that to design a website commanded next to nothing in the marketplace. It has nothing to do with greed or irrationality, just simple economics.

***

Indy got it right. If you got the stuff, you wont' be paranoid about amateurs infringing on your turf with any camera. The only thing I'd say is while giving stuff away is bad, its going to happen. Keep in mind that the worst thing a company or person can do is devalue its brand - or their name. It DOES NOT devalue the industry or profession.


The only thing one needs to do about something like that is nothing. And in some cases, raise your own prices further as a differentiator.

(disclaimer - where this doesn't work is when a Wal-Mart comes to town, but that's not remotely what we're talking about here).