Wow... the 580EXII is pretty powerful... heres proof!

sfaust wrote in post #5931243
I don't know of any photographer from my film days that didn't use a Polaroid for exposure checks. It was part of the process. Granted, we used light meters to get us dialed in, but then used the Polaroids to fine tune the exposure, lighting, composition, etc. And even then, there was the 3 sheet brackets for nuances since you never know what a AD or client would prefer. But yea, Polaroids were definitely part for the exposure process.

For the pose, makeup, hair, set details, etc, we used our eye balls! (or an stylist). But its amazing what is overlooked when you are staring at the set in person, but then pick up on it in Polaroids or final films.

My experience with Polaroids was that there was a bit too much variability in density simply due to processing time and temperature variances from location to location. So the photo's content, not density, was judged from these variable prints.

sfaust wrote in post #5931243
How does one get away with that in this day and age?? I'm constantly being asked for my website from clients, prospective clients, etc, as a way to pre-qualify me prior to bringing in my book. I'd love to do away with it as its a considerable expense (~$2K year), but it would affect my income quite a bit.

I do not maintain a studio nor derive my main source of income from photography to clients seeking my services, so there is no need for me to try to generate business. What I do now is via word of mouth reference only.
Things would certainly be very different if I was seeking a growth of client base and drumming up business for myself, as I was doing in the Dark Ages before digital photography! I wish the web site concept existed back then, I wouldn't have needed to stand at an exhibit at a wedding show so much! But I have moved on, and the world now offers advantages that I don't need to use any longer.

sfaust wrote in post #5931243
How does one get away with that in this day and age?? I'm constantly being asked for my website from clients, prospective clients, etc, as a way to pre-qualify me prior to bringing in my book. I'd love to do away with it as its a considerable expense (~$2K year), but it would affect my income quite a bit.

Seriously, I would assume just about every photographer who is on the Internet would have at least a free account somewhere to display their work. Just from my model mayhem account alone I get tons of business every month. Not to mention the networking opportunities that comes with it.

If you guys enjoy photographing models, I suggest you hop on and create an account there. There forums are a lot of fun

M Powered wrote in post #5931512
Seriously, I would assume just about every photographer who is on the Internet would have at least a free account somewhere to display their work. Just from my model mayhem account alone I get tons of business every month. Not to mention the networking opportunities that comes with it.

If you guys enjoy photographing models, I suggest you hop on and create an account there. There forums are a lot of fun

And if it is truly costing you money, that is deductible in the computation of taxable income derived from the business!

Wilt wrote in post #5931424
My experience with Polaroids was that there was a bit too much variability in density simply due to processing time and temperature variances from location to location. So the photo's content, not density, was judged from these variable prints.

We had a chart that we calibrated such that it took processing time and temperature into consideration. It resolved the exposure inaccuracies, and also included a color shift reference so we could evaluate that to some extent as well. They can be very accurate if you took the time to setup a calibrated methodology. We also keep them and referenced the to final 4x5 sheets, which also helped up keep the 'process' calibrated.

M Powered wrote in post #5931512
If you guys enjoy photographing models, I suggest you hop on and create an account there. There forums are a lot of fun

I do, but not as a business venture. I maintain an account on Flickr, OMP, MM, etc, so that interested models can find me, but I don't solicit any business there, and as such I don't even update half of them any more. I mostly shoot models to create examples for my lighting workshops, try new techniques, or just as a break from normal commercial photography.

sfaust wrote in post #5931243
(~$2K year), but it would affect my income quite a bit.

Dear God, how much traffic are you getting? It seems to me that you should be able to get decent hosting for at most a quarter of that a year, if you're not running something insanely bandwidth-intensive. Are you paying a web-developer for continued maintenance or something?

bieber wrote in post #5931742
Dear God, how much traffic are you getting? It seems to me that you should be able to get decent hosting for at most a quarter of that a year, if you're not running something insanely bandwidth-intensive. Are you paying a web-developer for continued maintenance or something?

My hosting, including bandwidth, is about $150 per year. My website development costs were only $450 this year. But it's not just the web site development cost, bandwidth, or hosting. Its all my expenses related to the website, which does include those as well.

If you also add in the marketing costs to drive people to my site, it's more like $6K per year directly related to the website. But factor that that against how much new revenue it brings in with new clients, and the repeat revenue of those clients over time. If you do that, the return on investment is well worth every penny spent, and then some. Pretty much on par with other good marketing vehicles.