My comments are not directed at anyone in particular. While my remarks are sliding a bit off point my intentions are only to ask "are we feeding into the "soccer mom frenzy". Def. new age photographer = soccer mom or uncle Bob with their new Rebel who will shoot your wedding for 50 bucks.
the truly clueless WILL get weeded out one way or another. The truly talented and/or committed WILL find a way to sustain an artistic vision and press forward.
I wish this were true... in the real world being good and being sucessful are not the same thing.
I wish this were true... in the real world being good and being sucessful are not the same thing.
Matt
Which opens a whole other can of worms.... How do we define "successful"? Doing good and satisfying work? Getting a fee above $XXXX? Living solely off photographic activites as a single (and sufficient) source of income? Being published? Shooting the cover of Vanity Fair? The list goes on and on...
I do get your point (same holds true as a singer, believe me, and I have had this conversation many, MANY times ), but it's also true that there IS more than one definitioin of "successful", and it is likely to be as varied as the individuals defining it
I suppose the degree of successful equates to profitabilty. Whether part time or full time makes no difference. It doesn't take long for one to realize if the amount of equipment costs outweigh the profit margin, the business dies. True, each individual has their own definition but the point Matt is making comes down to profiting enough to continue or scrap the idea. Producing quality images alone will not make a profit. Good marketing will. Having both will afford continued sucess regardless of how it is quantified.
Which opens a whole other can of worms.... How do we define "successful"? Doing good and satisfying work? Getting a fee above $XXXX? Living solely off photographic activites as a single (and sufficient) source of income? Being published? Shooting the cover of Vanity Fair? The list goes on and on...
I do get your point (same holds true as a singer, believe me, and I have had this conversation many, MANY times ), but it's also true that there IS more than one definitioin of "successful", and it is likely to be as varied as the individuals defining it
Well since this is a conversation about professional status and quality of images vs getting gigs and people not wanting to pay for the quality... lets just say the success of personal satisfaction is not what I meant! The success I am refering to is based around income and/or recognition.
I'm not saying this is wrong btw, or bitchin' about how the world works. Just don't think for a minute that coming and going in this business is about the quality of work. There is a LOT more to it! Such as marketing, years in the business/resume, referral business, networking, your ability to deal with clients effectively, your personality, your sales skills, your people skills, post processing, you timeliness, and hundreds of other factors including simply being in the right place at the right time!!! If all it took was being a really good photographer and if the less talented working photographers were weeded out then there would be a MASSIVE changing of the guard. That is what I meant.
I agree that the main criteria's should be the quality of ones work and the quality of the overall service provided, but there are many other factors that seem to take precedence in the minds of many consumers. The lowball price is of course the impetus for this thread, and the one we all see on a day to day basis.
As a side note about the issue of "fluffing" the newbies and providing honest critiques, let me make this suggestion. This is not directed at any one person btw... When YOU the newbie, sees an image that you like. YOU post in the thread detailing why you like it. Another key to professionalism is being able to critique your own work and this starts with identifying what you like in images that you feel are superior to your work. Then once you identify what the x-factor is, you can start replicating it in your own work.
I suppose the degree of successful equates to profitabilty. Whether part time or full time makes no difference. It doesn't take long for one to realize if the amount of equipment costs outweigh the profit margin, the business dies. True, each individual has their own definition but the point Matt is making comes down to profiting enough to continue or scrap the idea. Producing quality images alone will not make a profit. Good marketing will. Having both will afford continued sucess regardless of how it is quantified.
thanks Swartzy... we were typing at the same time but this is my point...
Ok, we've heard the accountant's perspective...I'll chime in with the economist's...(I've had many a discussion like this with my econ grad student husband).
With most every service out there, there are different prices people are willing to pay for them. Now, you don't always get what you pay for (sometimes you get more, sometimes less), but generally the more you pay, the nicer the service. That goes for restaurants to hotels to yes, photographers. Compare a Day's Inn to the Hilton. Now, also keep in mind that you can't buy more hours to sleep by paying more money (only 24 hours in a day folks), but you can pay more money to get a more comfortable night's sleep.
Likewise, you aren't buying multiple wedding days...you've only got one day, one shot at it. If you are a bride planning a 30k wedding, you're not going to hire someone for $250 to shoot it.
Conversely, if you're planning a 5k wedding, you can't afford a 4k photographer. There will always be people who have the money to spend 30k+ on a wedding...and there will always be people who only have 5K.
That's why I really don't worry about $250 photographers...they're not in my same market--we're not even competitors. Do you think Neiman Marcus worries about Walmart's reach? No way!
So, just focus on creating an outstanding product that speaks to your market. Forget about the small fish...they're not taking your brides!
Wow - I was just about to post this same sentiment but you did it better!
I think it is valuable to draw a distinction between being a professional in photography, professional in personality, and professional in business. I originally went to school for broadcasting, a trade school. It emphasized professional conduct and enthusiasm above all else. I consider myself a professional because all of my income is derived from photography, some may consider me a "weekend warrior" because I don't have a bricks and mortar studio or even an office, but this is because my full time responsibility is as a parent, a choice I made to benefit my family. I assure you that this does NOT mean I take my job lightly. I think the true measure of a professional is how one conducts oneself regardless of what they are getting paid. I treat every wedding with the same weight whether it has my name on it or I am photographing as a sub-contractor or as a second photographer, because when it comes down to it, you are only as good as the last job you shot, and the last client you impressed whether they are YOUR client or not. I came into the profession as an assistant and apprentice of a true master photographer, and I may never achieve his level of skill, but I was able to work with him and still draw on him as a resource because of my level of professionalism. Some people are unbelievably skilled photographers who lack the professional people skills to be viable in social photography. If I lack professionalism in an area, it is as a business person. Marketing, networking, franchising, sales, and branding are issues which neither interest me nor come easy to me. Eventually I'd like to hire someone who DOES enjoy these more banal tasks of operating a business so I can do what I am good at, taking pictures and making people look and feel good.
This just seems to be a rant to me. Sure, there will be some poor photographers who have just picked up a DSLR, there are also plenty of poor photographers who have been making a living from it for 20+ years.
If you are good you will still raise to the top of the pack because people will be able to see the difference in your work compared to the other guys. If you're good, but still not getting the work, maybe you need to look at your marketing or how you come across to clients. There are plenty of people doing well, more competition just means you need to compete harder, no point in complaining about it.
I have to second this opinion. If you are good at photography, as well as dealing with people, and marketing, then you shouldn't fear the $400 shooters. The difference in photo quality between a pro and a wannabee really is pretty obvious. ..and that's just the photo portion of the business.
Canon 5D MK IV | 24-70 2.8L USM | 50mm F1.4 USM | 70-200mm F2.8L | AB 800 light | 430EXII speedlight (x2) | Lowel iLight | Cybersync remotes | bag of trail mix | My Weddings Website • Blog •
It's also the factor that some people that have only been told their work is amazing are going to get butt hurt when someone professional says... eh you should work on x, y, z.
I saw this on one of those "got talent" shows - two young couples went to sing a Brady bunch / Partridge Family song, and got booed off the stage.
They were completely dumbfounded, because that had never happened to them before.
It's sad when people find out the hard way and in a public venue like that.
Save $5 off your first year's SmugMug image hosting with coupon code hccesQbqNBJbc
While many of the points made as to what makes a "professional" are true, i prefer to define it a lot simpler. A professional is someone that can deliver a job as promised at the rate charged under any circumstances. You can be at the bottom rung of the professional photography ladder but as long as you deliver as promised, you've met the clients needs. You can work one day a month or every weekend as longs as your clients know what your promising and that is what they get. There are people in all walks of life that are good or bad at what they do, the choice to hire either is up to the person doing the hireing. Hireing a friend with a camera is a choice and you usually get what you pay for. For those of you just starting out I truely wish you nothing but the best. All I ask is that you be as honest as possible with your future clients and yourself. I've done this as a full time profession for almost 30 years now and while I realize I may not be the best available, my clients know exactly what to expect from me and I have never in my entire career had one single disappointed or disgruntled client. My ability to perform makes me a professional photographer, not how much money I have made.
Matt and Swartzy, I don't disagree - I was playing at least a little bit of devil's advocate there (believe me, having been a freelance artist for many years I DO understand at a very real level) You both make excellent points, particularly that it's not ONLY about talent/skill, but how to market it.
I think the true measure of a professional is how one conducts oneself regardless of what they are getting paid. I treat every wedding with the same weight whether it has my name on it or I am photographing as a sub-contractor or as a second photographer, because when it comes down to it, you are only as good as the last job you shot, and the last client you impressed whether they are YOUR client or not.
A professional is someone that can deliver a job as promised at the rate charged under any circumstances. You can be at the bottom rung of the professional photography ladder but as long as you deliver as promised, you've met the clients needs. You can work one day a month or every weekend as longs as your clients know what your promising and that is what they get.
These are two of the best statements I've ever read regarding professionalism and what it means to artists.
I think false praise can be very damaging to someone must starting out to get a realistic evaluation of their true ability. But then each person viewing photos on here has a different standard.
For some only the very best as in world class is good enough, for other pretty good is good enough. Depends on your aspirations I guess.
As far as all the wannabees, it takes a huge jump in experience, study, practice and equipment to make the jump from a wannabe to someone who can take truly good photos in ANY situation.
I see it everytime I go to the park. 20 to 30 photographers that have no business taking money for their photography and 2 or 3 who actually know what they are doing. It is easy to tell one from the other in just a minute of watching them, set up their clients and the interaction.
Clients who are educated enough to know good photography from bad will always hire a photographer that can produce the real deal as far as excellent photos and will pay the money for the service. Lets just hope that continues....
Yeah we all started somewhere but practice on your friends and family for free until you have achieved a level of quality that really enables you to charge money for your work. Or second shoot with someone else who knows what they are doing to so the quality or lack thereof of your photos will not affect the quality of the photos being provided to the client.
You missed the point Tim. It's not how I feel or convey or sell "MY" work or value...and trust me, I've been in sales and marketing/self employment for 30+ years. What statement I am making is a "reality check". Just because someone thinks they can fly doesn't mean they can. Nor can anyone compete in any market that is saturated, providing low prices and adequate work. Many clients have no clue what a superior product (and because it's the Internet I may have to explain what this means) is..that's why they need educated. Therefore the types of potential client shifts and as Josh recognized, the low end is no longer in the scope of the serious professional...and another reason, those who are in the middle are vying for the same work. The higher end market will always exist.
I was simply pointing out the obvious. IF 1 out of 10 people have a DSLR, they in turn know at least 10 people who "have been wanting to have photos of their family"...and instead of finding a Pro....who gets it.....FOR FREE?????
Couldn't have said it better...
The DSLR...the new point and shoot that makes everyone a potential wedding photograher...
Remember, no one may want you to take pictures, but they all want to see them. Educate yourself like you'll live forever and live like you'll die tomorrow.
I'd really like to remove the equipment factor from this discussion but it is impossible, so I will riff on a fantasy I have occasionally had about attending a wedding as a guest. When I'm invited to a wedding as a guest, I don't bring a DSLR. I bring a Canon t-90 loaded with slide film, an 85 f1.8 and a 28 f2.8 and a Minolta Autocord loaded with B&W I can push. I don't bring any flashes. I usually give the slides to the bride and groom in a retro push thru stack viewer as a wedding gift (sometimes years later). But I'd LIKE to think that if the couple's pro photographer flaked I could take bangin wedding photos with ALMOST any camera in the room. I remember working a wedding at the Ritz Carlton in DC back in the day (like 2002) where there was a guest with a Leica m6 around his neck. He stayed out of our way, and besides commenting that we were doing a good job, didn't barrage us with questions or talk of equipment. I know however that if something happened, if WE flaked, he could make great, timeless images with that Leica, and 50mm Summicron.
Can I ask... what do people do that don't have a lot of money or who live in very rural areas without many options? I live in a town of 8,000 and the next biggest town is 2 1/2 hours away. Needless to say, there are no really good options for a photographer here, not to mention that most people around here have very limited budgets. I have not done a wedding myself yet, but I have been a second shooter a few times at weddings in other areas of the state to get practice. I agree that you really need to know what you are doing, weddings are on of the most important days of people's lives. But... sometimes people don't have many options.
Plus, really good photographers have nothing to worry about. Why feel threatened? People with the most money to spend get the best service, it's just the way it is.
I'd really like to remove the equipment factor from this discussion but it is impossible, so I will riff on a fantasy I have occasionally had about attending a wedding as a guest. When I'm invited to a wedding as a guest, I don't bring a DSLR. I bring a Canon t-90 loaded with slide film, an 85 f1.8 and a 28 f2.8 and a Minolta Autocord loaded with B&W I can push. I don't bring any flashes. I usually give the slides to the bride and groom in a retro push thru stack viewer as a wedding gift (sometimes years later). But I'd LIKE to think that if the couple's pro photographer flaked I could take bangin wedding photos with ALMOST any camera in the room. I remember working a wedding at the Ritz Carlton in DC back in the day (like 2002) where there was a guest with a Leica m6 around his neck. He stayed out of our way, and besides commenting that we were doing a good job, didn't barrage us with questions or talk of equipment. I know however that if something happened, if WE flaked, he could make great, timeless images with that Leica, and 50mm Summicron.
Which just further goes to demonstrate your own professionalism and top-flight skill set. Srsly, Blur - you're a class act
Comments
I wish this were true... in the real world being good and being sucessful are not the same thing.
Matt
Bodies: Canon 5d mkII, 5d, 40d
Lenses: 24-70 f2.8L, 70-200 f4.0L, 135 f2L, 85 f1.8, 50 1.8, 100 f2.8 macro, Tamron 28-105 f2.8
Flash: 2x 580 exII, Canon ST-E2, 2x Pocket Wizard flexTT5, and some lower end studio strobes
Which opens a whole other can of worms.... How do we define "successful"? Doing good and satisfying work? Getting a fee above $XXXX? Living solely off photographic activites as a single (and sufficient) source of income? Being published? Shooting the cover of Vanity Fair? The list goes on and on...
I do get your point (same holds true as a singer, believe me, and I have had this conversation many, MANY times
NAPP Member | Canon Shooter
Weddings/Portraits and anything else that catches my eye.
www.daveswartz.com
Model Mayhem site http://www.modelmayhem.com/686552
I'm not saying this is wrong btw, or bitchin' about how the world works. Just don't think for a minute that coming and going in this business is about the quality of work. There is a LOT more to it! Such as marketing, years in the business/resume, referral business, networking, your ability to deal with clients effectively, your personality, your sales skills, your people skills, post processing, you timeliness, and hundreds of other factors including simply being in the right place at the right time!!! If all it took was being a really good photographer and if the less talented working photographers were weeded out then there would be a MASSIVE changing of the guard. That is what I meant.
I agree that the main criteria's should be the quality of ones work and the quality of the overall service provided, but there are many other factors that seem to take precedence in the minds of many consumers. The lowball price is of course the impetus for this thread, and the one we all see on a day to day basis.
As a side note about the issue of "fluffing" the newbies and providing honest critiques, let me make this suggestion. This is not directed at any one person btw... When YOU the newbie, sees an image that you like. YOU post in the thread detailing why you like it. Another key to professionalism is being able to critique your own work and this starts with identifying what you like in images that you feel are superior to your work. Then once you identify what the x-factor is, you can start replicating it in your own work.
Matt
Bodies: Canon 5d mkII, 5d, 40d
Lenses: 24-70 f2.8L, 70-200 f4.0L, 135 f2L, 85 f1.8, 50 1.8, 100 f2.8 macro, Tamron 28-105 f2.8
Flash: 2x 580 exII, Canon ST-E2, 2x Pocket Wizard flexTT5, and some lower end studio strobes
thanks Swartzy... we were typing at the same time but this is my point...
Bodies: Canon 5d mkII, 5d, 40d
Lenses: 24-70 f2.8L, 70-200 f4.0L, 135 f2L, 85 f1.8, 50 1.8, 100 f2.8 macro, Tamron 28-105 f2.8
Flash: 2x 580 exII, Canon ST-E2, 2x Pocket Wizard flexTT5, and some lower end studio strobes
Wow - I was just about to post this same sentiment but you did it better!
Namaste.
http://www.havencreekstudio.com
http://www.tidewaterproductions.com
http://www.iseshamptonroads.com
I have to second this opinion. If you are good at photography, as well as dealing with people, and marketing, then you shouldn't fear the $400 shooters. The difference in photo quality between a pro and a wannabee really is pretty obvious. ..and that's just the photo portion of the business.
My Weddings Website • Blog •
They were completely dumbfounded, because that had never happened to them before.
It's sad when people find out the hard way and in a public venue like that.
These are two of the best statements I've ever read regarding professionalism and what it means to artists.
For some only the very best as in world class is good enough, for other pretty good is good enough. Depends on your aspirations I guess.
As far as all the wannabees, it takes a huge jump in experience, study, practice and equipment to make the jump from a wannabe to someone who can take truly good photos in ANY situation.
I see it everytime I go to the park. 20 to 30 photographers that have no business taking money for their photography and 2 or 3 who actually know what they are doing. It is easy to tell one from the other in just a minute of watching them, set up their clients and the interaction.
Clients who are educated enough to know good photography from bad will always hire a photographer that can produce the real deal as far as excellent photos and will pay the money for the service. Lets just hope that continues....
Yeah we all started somewhere but practice on your friends and family for free until you have achieved a level of quality that really enables you to charge money for your work. Or second shoot with someone else who knows what they are doing to so the quality or lack thereof of your photos will not affect the quality of the photos being provided to the client.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21695902@N06/
http://500px.com/Shockey
alloutdoor.smugmug.com
http://aoboudoirboise.smugmug.com/
The DSLR...the new point and shoot that makes everyone a potential wedding photograher...
Educate yourself like you'll live forever and live like you'll die tomorrow.
Ed
I'd really like to remove the equipment factor from this discussion but it is impossible, so I will riff on a fantasy I have occasionally had about attending a wedding as a guest. When I'm invited to a wedding as a guest, I don't bring a DSLR. I bring a Canon t-90 loaded with slide film, an 85 f1.8 and a 28 f2.8 and a Minolta Autocord loaded with B&W I can push. I don't bring any flashes. I usually give the slides to the bride and groom in a retro push thru stack viewer as a wedding gift (sometimes years later). But I'd LIKE to think that if the couple's pro photographer flaked I could take bangin wedding photos with ALMOST any camera in the room. I remember working a wedding at the Ritz Carlton in DC back in the day (like 2002) where there was a guest with a Leica m6 around his neck. He stayed out of our way, and besides commenting that we were doing a good job, didn't barrage us with questions or talk of equipment. I know however that if something happened, if WE flaked, he could make great, timeless images with that Leica, and 50mm Summicron.
Plus, really good photographers have nothing to worry about. Why feel threatened? People with the most money to spend get the best service, it's just the way it is.
46 North Photography
Megan McHatten
www.46north.com
Which just further goes to demonstrate your own professionalism and top-flight skill set. Srsly, Blur - you're a class act