Sportsshooter.com

I don't agree, Kenny, I've found the site to be extremely useful in terms of sheer knowledge in a variety of situations. It helps to be North American to use the site, but foreign membership can be pretty valuable.

Firstly, I hope I do not come across as having an inflated ego. If so, let me know, and this 'outlander' will be outta here!

I originally joined SS.com because, yep, I saw it as a challenge to have my portfolio accepted... but I also wanted to see whether I could turn the £14 ($25) annual subscription into a good investment.

The two regular clients I have gained via SS.com have already paid for that subscription for many years to come. They both contacted me via my member page. Therefore, I now see my presence on SS.com as a 'professional subscription' of sorts.

Not to say that I didn't also take a sense of pride in gaining membership in the first place... I'd be lying if I said I didn't. Some might say that the overall standards have slipped over the last 12 months or so... you can only take a look at the recent member updates on the home page and form your own opinions on that point.

There is certainly a greater sense of community here at POTN and I really appreciate and enjoy that. The boards at SS.com can be fairly 'dry'. There is an awful lot of useful information to be found there... but it's not half as much fun as here

Well. That's my take on it. Each to their own really. There are many worse ways to invest £14 a year!

---- Gavin

Well put, Gavin! I must admit I find the SS.com messageboard far too serious, but is very useful. This place is perfect for kicking back and just having fun!

marcatkins wrote:
Hi guys,

I know a few of you here are members of sportsshooter.com. After reading the terms etc over on their site it would appear to me that its a pretty tough thing to get accepted by them as a member.

Im curious to know how long it took some of you guys to 'get accepted' by sportshooter. Its definatley something to aspire to and would love to achive one day........a loooonnng way in the future

Marc,

Sorry that my previous post didn't answer your specific question. Apologies for that.

Personally I kept an eye on the new member portfolios for a few weeks so I could be reasonably confident that my attempt to gain membership would be successful. I also requested some feedback on my proposed submission from some colleagues. In the end the process only took a couple of days from application to acceptance.

It's somewhat different now as the main method for application is via a sponsor. If you've not already seen it, have a read of this for some more info: http://www.sportsshoot​er.com/news/1279 for more info.

Good luck with whatever you decide to to.

---- Gavin

Marc,

SportsShooter has gone through several revisions. When they first started they were open to just about everyone. Then you had to build a portfolio and get it accepted which is where I joined. Now you have to have the sponsorship of a "senior member" and then have your portfolio "approved". I have sponsored 3 members so far.

When I joined it took 3x to revise my portfolio to get accepted. The first time they didn't like the angle of my shots. The second time, with different shots, the crop wasn't tight enough. The third was accepted.

It is nice to be a member just for the contacts. I get 2-3 jobs a year from my listing there. That's not a lot but worth the $25.00 membership. The info on the message board is usually very good and it is a good resource for solving problems.

I do agree that some of the porfolios there are not what they should be though. Several members have shots of their kids on a waterslide or pictures of their vacations. While they are good pictures they just don't have anything to do with sports.

Michael

Man, is that the truth. I just checked out the three new members from the front page and out of all three portfolios (30 pics) there were maybe 7 "actual" sports shots and maybe 3 more that might be called sports. The rest were kids birthday party, homeless people, etc.

KAC

They dont have to be sports related photos in the portfolio. I think it even says that in the admission rules. They are looking for quality photogrpahy work in general, so if you have really good photos of something else, that is all that is required.

Also, once you are in, many folks upload photos that are not necessarily the 'best' photos. They will often upload photos from their kids birthday for a bit or from some other event they shot last weekend, etc.

But there is nothing that says you must submit an admission portfolio that is all sports photos.

Funny name then.
I guess I don't understand the logic of joining a sports photography oriented website and posting pics of your kid's birthday party.

Great shots in YOUR portfolio, btw!

KAC

Wondering if I might get input on my selected photos for submission to sportsshooter.com from you guys, particularly from those who shoot sports photos professionally. I've created a gallery of what I consider my better sports shots formatted to the sportsshooter specs size-wise at:

http://www.kacweb.com …Sports/Selected​Shots&tn=1

Other sports shots one level up in the gallery.

Thanks for any input, comments, advice.
KAC

kenyc wrote:
Funny name then.
I guess I don't understand the logic of joining a sports photography oriented website and posting pics of your kid's birthday party.

Great shots in YOUR portfolio, btw!

KAC

Well, its still mainly a sports related website and that is always going to be the main focus on it. But at the same time they dont want to discourage other forms of photogrpahy as many sports photographers do not survive on sports alone. Many are also just PJs that shoot all kinds of assignments with sports being only one of them. So they like to encourage those that shoot other things (in addition to sports) to be able to display those kinds of images and share them as people can always stand to learn about something different.

I agree, putting birthday shots up or somthing like that seems silly, but often those are only there for a brief time as they just use the space as a gallery that they can direct friends or relatives to as well.

Thank you for the comments on my gallery. I have to update it soon I have quite a few other things I can put up and its most beneficial if you can keep it up to date.

Kenny,

Here are my thoughts on the photos you posted. Several of them are good and could be within a submission portfolio, 1, 2, 5, and 10 are ones that I think have the potential as they are.

Several others have composition that is more than capable of being submitted, but there are some kind of detail that keeps them from being a real keeper. Most often what I see is a distracting background. I know these are hard to deal with when shooting less than pro sports, but it still needs to be dealt with.

Your biggest friend here is your aperture control and being able to use very wide apertures to blow out the background with blur. Several of the photos that I didnt mention above could have been much better if they had been shot with a wide aperture that would have blurred the background. 8, 6, 4, and 3 all could really benefit from blurring the background.

Even the keepers from above could have benefitted from less dof, though the backgrounds were clean enough as to not be too distracting.

Seven, I wouldnt keep as it doesnt really show anything. Just a girl lying in the dirt. I'm sure she must have just caught the ball or something, but I dont see any ball, I dont see any runner, I dont see anything else in the photo that would tell me a story of what is actually happening in that shot.

Nine is similar. I know some like these kinds of shots, so I'm not going to say keep it out, but I'm left wondering what is going on. They are all looking at something and the umpire is pointing at something, but what. What is the point of the photo, what is the story being told? For me, I just dont understand, it doesnt speak to me in any way or tell me whats happening.

So personally I would like to see a little bit of an improvement in all of them, but the first ones are usable imo. The second group needs some improvement, though they do show a good eye for the composition, use your settings a little better and you would have winners. the last couple I, personally, would ditch.

Here is a good article to read that will help you in shooting for what they are looking for. http://www.sportsshoot​er.com/news_story.html​?id=1127

Good luck.

Kenny,

I don't belong to shortsshooters, and have no immediate plans on trying to either. On the other hand, I am trying to build my portfolio with some quality stuff so that I can continue to work my way up the food chain. Your shots are techically very good... what the problem is the subject matter is only relivant to you. Let me approach this differently. When my son played HS football, I used to shoot his games because I was\am his dad. Then when he stopped, I tried some more to get some really good - ney - I should say spectacular shots. Then one day by accident I went and shot a womens la crosse match at one of the local universities. All of a sudden, I got all kinds of compliments from people who saw those shots. Did I all of a sudden get better.... nope. The subject matter was just better and more identifiable. Since then I have been shooting at and for local universities and it has been real rewarding. I am learning all kinds of new sports, getting access where I never thought I could, and to cap it off, a coach for the visiting teams is asking to buy some of my work of his team... and they had their own photographers there. It's all about the subject matter.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with your shots. But you would be surprised at the reaction you would get if you had those exact same shots but of identifiable people or teams. Don't be affraid to ask.... that is if you want to build a professional portfolio. Plus you get the added bonus of sports played at a higher level which makes getting great shots all that much easier. Then the Sportsshooter stuff will be real easy. My two cents worth... getting off of my soap box. cheers!

Croasdail, I absolutely agree with what you are saying, These are 16/18U competitive fastpitch shots for the most part and I know there is not a big market for that, but neither are they only relevant to me, otherwise they'd all be shots of my daughter. There is a huge market for kids sports shots, not so much in the media, but to the kids and their parents and many photographers make a good living at it from what I understand. Still, I'm not taking these shots for that reason, but just to learn and get better at it. In any case that hopefully shouldn't matter in determing whether or not they are good shots. It's not that different than asking for input on a landscape or nature shot of an unfamiliar squirrel or duck. Right?

I know what you're saying about the recognition factor if there was a shot of John Elway or Tiger Woods in there it would get the ol' celebrity boost. Even at the college level though I wouldn't think the recognition factor would come into play much, but if you say so.

I'm not sure what you mean by "don't be afraid to ask" unless you mean asking to shoot pictures at college-level sports? And certainly I'm not, just depends on if that's the direction I want to take this. I'm looking at sportsshooter.com as one way of possibly moving that direction and seeing if that's where I want to go with the photography. I certainly wouldn't focus all my energies in a single direction in any case.

Thanks,
KAC

I have to disagree with Croasdail to a certain extent.

Nothing is further from the truth.

Anyone that is looking at a portfolio to judge your photographic skills couldn't care less who/what is the subject of the photo. It could be a little league kid or Barry Bonds, the photographic skills will show through either way, good or bad.

Do not feel like you need professional subjects to get into sportshooter, or to get ANY job for that matter. Put together a solid and technically stunning portfolio and those looking at it will see it for what it is.

Only fans care about who is in the photos.

In your case Croasdail, you found a nitch in clientele that want to pay you to work. That is great. Its not that your photos are better, its that you found something that someone was willing to pay for.

It had nothing to do with your subjects making you a better photographer, it was about the subject matter and finding someone willing to pay for it.

In Kenny's case that is not what he is after. He is interested in becoming a better photographer and it doesnt matter what the subject is, all the rules of photography still apply. Its about applying those rules to the subject you have. I guarantee you that there are folks in SportsShooter that got in with nothing more than little league subjects while there are those with pro subjects that were likely denied.

In my post above I did not look at who was in the photos, I didnt care, I looked at how the photos were taken. While they are decent, they are not up to the standards of a great photo due to the technical issues that I mentioned in the post. Some are better than others and none are bad, but some are not up to the standards of a professional quality photo. Thinking about what I mentioned will get you there.

Keep working with what you have to work with and you will do well. There are a lot of photographers at SportsShooter than have never shot anything higher than youth sports.

Its about the entire photo, not what is in the photo.

vwpilot: I do agree to a point, but for the most part Croasdail is also correct. It just depends on the sport. For instance I shoot MotoX, Superbike, and Dragracing. These are all on a club level basis with a few Pro level racer making appearances. There is certainly a difference in photo possiblities between the regulars and the pros. The pros are much more aggressive, more skilled, go faster, and just simply provide the action that the regulars don't. Simply "The Pros put on the Show". The regulars just don't have the skill level to make the moves the Pros do.