Harvey,
Nothing wrong with blunt. And I cant argue with what you're saying. I think part of the problem causing the rant is we're giving these parents the help that allows them to do it. It isn't the parent with the pocket digicam that causes the problem. It's the parent with $2000 or more of DSLR equipment - the ones that have said equipment because they learned from the pros what equipment to use and in many cases how to properly use it. So what is our incentive to help people out when it ends up hurting us? Does that make sense?
I.E. when people in this thread have stated they dont care what the impact is to someone trying to earn money at event photography - something I do. Tell me exactly why it is I should provide them advice and tips to help them do just that? That's the heart of it for me at least.
In the end, I'll adapt as necessary to earn my money. But of particular interest to me is the on-line photography community. How many threads are there regarding "how should I do this?" or "please provide C&C on my sports photos". I've always tried to be very helpful to people by giving good honest advice. Some of these same people have basically said they dont care if a pro gets hurt using the advice I'm providing them. That to me is more the issue than the parent in my area. Or in the instance I relayed - it isn't so much the parent in question giving her photos away but using my advice to get better at doing it so it decreases my market even more.
One major difference i see these days is the acceptance of low quality pictures as good enough. It took me a long time to accept that people actually accept low quality pictures and do not really care that they are low quality.
First off I want to say a facinating thread, I am slowly working my way through all this reading. But the comment about low quality photos, just struck a personal chord with me cause I ended up falling into the same trap.
I take great hockey photos of DI college players but I have none of myself, so this weekend when there were photographers there I was siked. The photos they turned out were ok, they were in focus, but not really good. But I was despriate for a photo of my self playing hockey (and well they did strob the arena, so even thought the action was blah, the photos were well exposed).
So that being said, I wonder how many other people end up feeling this way once they get their CD in the mail or prints delivered. Or maybe consumers just dont know better, or even they just dont care. Just throwing that out there....look forward to reading the rest of the thread.
Harvey,
Nothing wrong with blunt. And I cant argue with what you're saying. I think part of the problem causing the rant is we're giving these parents the help that allows them to do it. It isn't the parent with the pocket digicam that causes the problem. It's the parent with $2000 or more of DSLR equipment - the ones that have said equipment because they learned from the pros what equipment to use and in many cases how to properly use it. So what is our incentive to help people out when it ends up hurting us? Does that make sense?
Sure, it makes sense. Maybe your incentive is what was already posted here: Money. Switch your focus from selling photos to teaching others how to capture good ones. I don't know. I'm still trying to sell photos.
Interesting thread...As a PWAC who is just learning, I can see both sides of the issue. Sure, I'd love to be able to produce professional-quality images that command professional-quality prices. And I have learned a whole lot from this forum, which seems to be driven by people helping people (a fantastic, rare concept in this day and age, sad to say. And it's what keeps me logging in daily). But my photos will not sell if I charge $10 for a 5x7.
So what's a professional-quality price for a 4x6? A 5x7? An 8x10? What price should I set to make a pro happy? Is my 4x6 amateur-quality shot worth $4? In a pro's view, where should I start?
Is it too bold to try to recoup some money spent at this stage?
Just asking,
Betsy
Canon 40D, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, 50mm f/1.4 USM, 85mm f/1.8 USM, 24-105mm f/4L IS, EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM, EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM , 580EX ll
Thank YOU for a warm and well-considered reply on a topic that can be highly emotional. And as to your compliments -- you have no idea how much those mean to me.
There is no getting around the fact that human existence boils down to the reconciliation of competing self-interests, and I suppose there's some Darwinism that could be applied even to this narrow topic - but you seem to be evolving faster than most.
Your rant was totally legit. You are a hero as far as I am concerned.
Wow - what a great thread - Randy - thanks for venting - as someone who does that too much sometimes I know how it helps.
I know the angst some are feeling and I can say that for a long time I have been a PWAC. I didn't start out that way - Years ago I was a kid with a camera who loved taking pictures and when I could afford it I shot with an SLR. Time, college and a career got in the way and I settled for a point and shoot until my daughters were born.
I gradually progressed back up the food chain and got a DSLR (although I am now looking at getting back into film again) and fell into the PWAC trap with my daughter's soccer. I was one who gave the photos away the first season (we had no professional photographer -hard to beleive in NJ) and only charged for the DVD of all the games at the end of the season.
Second season I started charging and went through the angst of what to charge my daughter's team and then the teams in my town versus the rest of the world teams that I shot. Rest of the world was fairly easy and now I get asked to do games for other teams that I do an event charge as well. I still have trouble with what to charge the teams in my town although they get a percentage of each photo shot - I believe that makes sense and helps in my charging a little more than cost - still struggling though...
Do I consider myself a professional - not yet - although I am eager to learn! I don't take just sports, I am a huge fan of landscapes and nature and I want to learn. So - I take hundreds of pictures and I look for courses that I can take to get better. I think this is one of the things that separates some from others.
The one part of this conversation that I always have issues with is when someone looks at my prices and yells/rants that I charge too little (has happened here before) and proceeds to tell me off. :gun2 People charge what they charge and I do believe cream rises to the top. When a professional is at a game and takes a great picture I order from them if it is a great picture and pay the price for that. As I improve hopefully I will be able to make a decent living and start my second career - I enjoy shooting - and that's what passion is about.
Do you offer tips to people when they ask - sure - although I am nowhere near as qualified as the many on this forum.
A topic that I worry about when I shoot is the number of professional outfits (not usually individual pros) who often post kids pictures without passwords and protected galleries. They assembly line the photos - they usually aren't great shots and the photos hang out there. One of the compliments I often get is that I offer the photos to the parents/team alone other then some of my demo shots on my front page. Many of these parents do not like their children's picture on the web in this day and age - I'll stay off the soapbox on this one.
My other big pet peeve - and it goes with parents paying for lousy photos- is the parent who tells me they will order but then jokingly says - "I kow how to take the watermark off your photos" and then orders no photos all season. Now I am hijacking the topic sorry.
Randy - great post - way to start the conversation and I have no worries that you will be able to change with the times and keep going. I have appreciated the tips and advice you do give.
Harvey,
Nothing wrong with blunt. And I cant argue with what you're saying. I think part of the problem causing the rant is we're giving these parents the help that allows them to do it. It isn't the parent with the pocket digicam that causes the problem. It's the parent with $2000 or more of DSLR equipment - the ones that have said equipment because they learned from the pros what equipment to use and in many cases how to properly use it. So what is our incentive to help people out when it ends up hurting us? Does that make sense?
I.E. when people in this thread have stated they dont care what the impact is to someone trying to earn money at event photography - something I do. Tell me exactly why it is I should provide them advice and tips to help them do just that? That's the heart of it for me at least.
In the end, I'll adapt as necessary to earn my money. But of particular interest to me is the on-line photography community. How many threads are there regarding "how should I do this?" or "please provide C&C on my sports photos". I've always tried to be very helpful to people by giving good honest advice. Some of these same people have basically said they dont care if a pro gets hurt using the advice I'm providing them. That to me is more the issue than the parent in my area. Or in the instance I relayed - it isn't so much the parent in question giving her photos away but using my advice to get better at doing it so it decreases my market even more.
Even though you blowtorched me recently on a closely-related thread, you have undoubtedly also been someone who has provided advice and C&C on my sports shooting, for which I am grateful and which has no doubt made me a better shooter. I think you have to assume that the motivation behind a question like "how do I get better" is, in fact, to try to get better in a photo-sharing world. If that arouses the suspicion that you are giving information away to the "enemy", then I suppose you should withhold the information.
FYI, I have probably 30 framed images on the walls of my office -- including, in hindsight, a couple of OOFs that I wouldn't even post today on my site(!) -- all of which I purchased from other photogs, one in particular who has become a friend and who helped me enormously when I made my decision to get into this. I would still buy images of my kids from anyone who can get better ones than I can, including the guy you are conceptually protecting in my situation.
We live in an amazing time in which almost any information is available with a couple of keystrokes. It's like water flowing downhill -- it finds its way. Even you removing yourself from the dialogue won't matter in the long (maybe even the short) run -- someone else will inevitably step in.
Can I be blunt? If you are trying to make a living by selling product for a professional-class fee in a market saturated with free product that is good enough to be in demand, it is you who needs to give things some thought. We're talking kids and silly games and coffee table snapshots here, not the Super Bowl and the Sports Illustrated cover. The idea that the kids' parents should think twice before sharing photos of their kids playing a game is laughable.
OK!!!!! I have a solution.
I am 55 years old and been a professional photographer for over 30 years.
In my years here on earth I have learned several skills. I can do plumbing, Carpentry, accounting, and I was a President of a company for several years.
Next time I am at a game that has PWAC. I will investigate what buisness they are in. Say they are a plumber. I will follow them to a job and offer the home owner to do the job just for cost of materials. I can offer to do payroll and accounting for free so that the PWAC that is an accountant will lose there job and have more time to practice there free photography.
If the shoe was on the other foot I wonder if they would stand up for my rights to take money out of their pocketts and food off their tables.
If one of these PWAC losses thier job because of out sourcing. I don't want to hear them complain. I want them to say. The company had every right to do that and I aplaude them. I doubt if that would happen.
Parents have every right to take pictures of their kids. It is when they start taking food off of my table that I get ticked off.
OK!!!!! I have a solution.
I am 55 years old and been a professional photographer for over 30 years.
In my years here on earth I have learned several skills. I can do plumbing, Carpentry, accounting, and I was a President of a company for several years.
Next time I am at a game that has PWAC. I will investigate what buisness they are in. Say they are a plumber. I will follow them to a job and offer the home owner to do the job just for cost of materials. I can offer to do payroll and accounting for free so that the PWAC that is an accountant will lose there job and have more time to practice there free photography.
If the shoe was on the other foot I wonder if they would stand up for my rights to take money out of their pocketts and food off their tables.
If one of these PWAC losses thier job because of out sourcing. I don't want to hear them complain. I want them to say. The company had every right to do that and I aplaude them. I doubt if that would happen.
Parents have every right to take pictures of their kids. It is when they start taking food off of my table that I get ticked off.
I say go for it. I suspect though that you might find a good number of potential clients that would rather pay more for a full time, licensed/accredited plumber/carpenter/accountant rather than pay less to a guy who happens to have used those skills in the past. (Nothing at all against you - if I were looking for someone to handle the accounting for my business, for example, they are going to have the letters CPA after their name.) Those people who are only interested in getting the lowest price rather than the proven quality of the work they are about to pay for are most likely people I wouldn't care too much to have as clients.
I guess the point is if your client base is routinely more interested in the price of the product (or lack thereof) rather than the quality of the product, maybe it's time to find a new client base. I think this is a point that Randy has made as well.
As I've said in my previous post, we don't have pros on our sidelines. The only one ever charging is me, when I'm not shooting for my team. I'm just not sure it makes sense for those like me to stop giving away photos to our teams because of the chance that a pro might someday show up and try to make a living shooting our league. And frankly, if a pro showed up tomorrow, I'm not sure if I would change anything. Now if we get in a league with a pro already there that would change things for me. Chances are I would either put a comparable price on my photos, or not offer them to the team at all.
One example is team pictures. I've done team pictures for several teams (and charged for it). I could easily take team pictures for my kid's team and tell the parents not to buy from the league provided photographer, but I don't. In fact, I've always purchased a package. If I end up doing a team picture or something similar, I don't tell the other parents until after picture day. I don't influence their decision to buy or not buy on picture day.
This brings me to the last point for the night - frankly, I think parents are tired of buying pictures. Our schools now do school pictures twice a year (of course, they earn more money this way). Every team we've been on has league sponsored team pictures. We have a drawer full of picture packages - football, soccer, basketball, flag football, baseball, softball - if I was not a PWAC and someone took a photo of one of my kids in a sport and wanted to charge $20 for an 8x10, chances are very good that I wouldn't buy it. I would guess that 95% of my Smugmug visitor usage is parents sitting with their kids flipping through the photos from the games and just enjoying looking at them. I know there are a lot of other parents around here that are tired of buying pictures as well.
One thing I started offering last year was posters - something that ends up on the kid's wall rather than in a drawer. I'm guessing most of my paid work this year will be taking pictures with a poster as the end product.
Wow. Contentious thread. Probably not a good choice for my first post, but, oh well.
I guess I'm a PWAC. I shoot with a 1DM2 and a 70-200 f/2.8. I let parents have the pictures for free whether they're my kids, our friends kids, or other kids on the team. I find it regrettable that someone is losing money because of what I'm doing, but that won't change my behavior one bit. Just because someone wants to earn money doing something that I enjoy doing for free, doesn't mean I feel compelled to charge.
People aren't guaranteed a living. In a market ecomony, we all have to figure out what goods and services we want to supply that others are willing to pay for. We havve to adjust to changes in the market. It sounds like the original poster is unhappily coming to grips with a changing market and trying constructively to deal with that. I respect that. It doesn't mean that I'm going to stop giving away pictures for free, but I respect his frustration and that he knows it's up to him to solve his problem.
I'm in the computer business, which is about as competitive as anything. There are a lot of similar things in my business. We have people giving free advice and helping people set up websites when they could leave that to the professionals. There are free photo hosting services that compete with SmugMug. Professionals and amateurs give away free software all the time.
Times change. Designing simple websites was once lucrative. Now it isn't. The tools have made it easy for just about anyone to get decent results and so a professional has to compete with the kid down the block. Web designers either went upmarket or moved on to something else.
Maybe sports photography was once a viable business and maybe now it isn't. I honestly don't know. The only thing I'm sure about is that I harbor no ill will towards the kid down the street because he's willing to help people with web pages because he enjoys it (or gets an ego boost or whatever). If someone hates me because I'm giving away a product that competes with theirs, that's their problem not mine.
I don't lose sleep over any of it. I shoot because I enjoy it. Other parents use my work because they feel that my crummy free pictures are a better value than the good $5 shots they could buy. That's their choice. I'm doing what I choose to do. The parents are doing what they chose to do. The pro shooters are doing what they chose to do. We all make our choices and live with the consequences. Maybe someday the parents will realize that patronizing crummy amateurs giving away free photos has cost them the services of professionals taking really good photos. If that happens, they can set up an exclusive contract with a pro and not let me shoot at all. If that's what they want, I'm OK with that.
Wow. Contentious thread. I don't lose sleep over any of it. I shoot because I enjoy it. Other parents use my work because they feel that my crummy free pictures are a better value than the good $5 shots they could buy. That's their choice. I'm doing what I choose to do.
Cropped quote:
Your post simply highlights some of my points of PWAC attitudes.
These actions are far reaching, not just in the youth sports venues. I also shoot rodeos. It happens there also, just not as much due to the access, meaning PWAC's don't want to risk their A$$ in the arena. But they still try from the stands.
I have contracts to exclusively shoot these events. If you've ever been self-employed, you might know what responsibilities come with contracts. You've got to be there no matter what. Hot, cold, rainy, muddy, missing your family events/issues, etc.
People like you couldn't give a rats ass about any of that. They, like you are doing what that want to do. They don't loose sleep over it. They aren't bothered that its someone else's problem that they are causing them to loose money, even though they have gone through all the steps to secure an exclusive shoot. That may mean up-front kick-back, sales percentage, bla,bla,bla.
People like you giving pics away is liken to smokers throwing cigarette butts down wherever. They don't care. They don't loose sleep over it. They don't care if someone gets mad about it. They just don't care that it's wrong. Their/your only concern is to please yourself. That says alot about you.
I think that's just it: People like you just don't care. Life's all about you.
Doing what you want to do in life is your business, but more than likely it affects others too. To be in your face about it pisses me off.
I'm sure your not going to loose sleep over it, but you've just plain pissed me off with your attitude. If that was your goal, you accomplished it.
The point is:
These guys have the equipment and the same field access that I have, they just didn’t have the knowledge to use it right. Unfortunately, I provided a lot of that knowledge for them, enough over the season for them to start producing half-way decent pictures.
Randy:
I've been sympathetic to your plight until I realized that your point (as stated above) seems to have changed since the beginning of this thread. Who is your rant aimed at...guys you help that take your money away, or other photographers who weren't helped by you who take your money away?
Canon 40D, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, 50mm f/1.4 USM, 85mm f/1.8 USM, 24-105mm f/4L IS, EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM, EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM , 580EX ll
I've been sympathetic to your plight until I realized that your point (as stated above) seems to have changed since the beginning of this thread. Who is your rant aimed at...guys you help that take your money away, or other photographers who weren't helped by you who take your money away?
They are interrelated issues, so I guess both. You ended both above with "take your money away".
Initial post for for the former, then the thread morphed into the latter.
I have read a lot on this thread that I don't agree with, but I've tried to take the stance that, even though anything I say here won't change the tide, it might at least give some insight to the hobbyist as to why this issue is so volatile to pros trying to make a living. A hobbyist has no idea of what it's like on the other side of the fence. As I previously stated, I was also trying to provide some of that info.
I normally can take this kind of response calmly, but the "in your face" defiance, well, set me off.
I've rightfully been warned by the mod, so I'll throttle my feelings on this issue.
Wow, my first thread and I've already gotten people angry. I'm sorry. That wasn't my intent. I'm certainly off to an inauspicious start.
I have contracts to exclusively shoot these events. If you've ever been self-employed, you might know what responsibilities come with contracts. You've got to be there no matter what. Hot, cold, rainy, muddy, missing your family events/issues, etc.
I've been self employed and I understand the responsibilities that both sides have in a contract. If I invested heavily in something where I had a contract that guaranteed exclusivity, I'd demand it. I can understand how you would be angry if the other party allowed others to undercut your price. I'd either quit working with them and/or sue them.
I have been to many events and many venues where I was not allowed to bring in my camera gear. It annoys me, but I understand the reasons. A situation where someone has contracted exclusive rights to shoot something is completely different than the typical kid's soccer game that I shoot.
People like you giving pics away is liken to smokers throwing cigarette butts down wherever. They don't care. They don't loose sleep over it. They don't care if someone gets mad about it. They just don't care that it's wrong. Their/your only concern is to please yourself. That says alot about you.
I guess I don't understand the analogy. People littering are damaging something that is owned in common by all of us. People giving away pictures aren't. People that litter do make me angry. People that share their computer work for free in competition with me don't make me angry. It's their right. I don't think that they are doing anything wrong. I don't think that giving away pictures (or free plumbing work or whatever service you might want to provide) is wrong.
It seems ironic that my habit of giving away my work for free is getting me branded as selfish and thinking only of myself. I have empathy for people losing their livelihoods because the world is changing. That doesn't mean that I'm going try to stop the world for them.
I prefer the approach of letting "customers" decide. If they think that your hard work, your risking your health, and your superior skill produce a product that they are willing to pay for, then they'll buy it. If they'd prefer my free pictures taken with less skill, at less risk to me, and with less work, then they'll take my free pictures. If they find that allowing free shooters crowds out the pro shooters and that they prefer having the pro shooters there, they'll set up real exclusive deals with the pros and ban me from giving my pictures away. Why shouldn't the customers have that choice? Why do the customers owe professional photographers a living doing what they want to do?
Who else can demand that people can't compete with them for free? Should we ban church choirs from stealing jobs from professional singers? What about those little league coaches, giving their time away at the harm of professional coaches? Should my wife be banned from volunteering at our school? The community could certainly afford to pay people to do her work.
Is photography you mon-fri day job?
or Is photography your I have some skills, and I have an expensive DSLR and know how to use it, so I am a pro shooter?
Randy, no offense, I respect what you are doing, I am just a curious onlooker.
I hope you will answer honestly and candidly.
Is photography you mon-fri day job?
or Is photography your I have some skills, and I have an expensive DSLR and know how to use it, so I am a pro shooter?
Randy, no offense, I respect what you are doing, I am just a curious onlooker.
I hope you will answer honestly and candidly.
I make 100% of my living shooting pictures. No side job.
So are you totally freelance?
Do you shoot for publication or media.?
You certainly can't just be shooting to sell photos to parents?
Mixture. I shoot rodeo's, bull riding, barrels, on spec. (have said contracts for most of these events) Prep sports for a national company. (work for hire if you will) Other HS T&I and some of their sports on spec. The odd photo gig here and there. (seniors, portraits, etc.) Shot three weddings, that's just not my interest. Due to some of the gigs I've shot, I've had several pics published in various pubs and newsprint. But no, I don't shoot for pubs or media.
As I've stated in this very thread, and its been a good while coming, my realization that I have to get into an avenue of photography that is far away from amateur photographers.
Making a living at photography is hard enough on its own merits, much less having to fight the free pictures issue.
I've not yet decided on that particular path, but I have been putting a lot of time and money building up my equipment and technique toward "people" photography. Although without a studio, I'm not sure that will get me far away from the amateur and related issues.
I also have an interest in architectural photography. Maybe I need to talk to Icebear.
I've been more than open and feel like I just filled out a resume, so tell me, really, why do you ask?
Mixture. I shoot rodeo's, bull riding, barrels, on spec. (have said contracts for most of these events) Prep sports for a national company. (work for hire if you will) Other HS T&I and some of their sports on spec. The odd photo gig here and there. (seniors, portraits, etc.) Shot three weddings, that's just not my interest. Due to some of the gigs I've shot, I've had several pics published in various pubs and newsprint. But no, I don't shoot for pubs or media.
As I've stated in this very thread, and its been a good while coming, my realization that I have to get into an avenue of photography that is far away from amateur photographers.
Making a living at photography is hard enough on its own merits, much less having to fight the free pictures issue.
I've not yet decided on that particular path, but I have been putting a lot of time and money building up my equipment and technique toward "people" photography. Although without a studio, I'm not sure that will get me far away from the amateur and related issues.
I also have an interest in architectural photography. Maybe I need to talk to Icebear.
I've been more than open and feel like I just filled out a resume, so tell me, really, why do you ask?
Randy,
I will send you a PM, we should take this to the sidelines.
Pro sports shooters can be angry at people who give prints away and at people who've gtten free advice but the real issue is that this paradigm has shifted - and no one is to blame.
It just is.
Are pro sports shooters still buying film to keep Kodak and the labs in business? After all, the labs did great work for them before.
And of course, no pros are doing their own printing.
i read a thread at FM similar to this one. this is coming from a respected pro sports shooter..... he said that a PWAC must ask permission from the league, school or event before they start shooting and giving their pictures for free or for a small fee to others. if there is a pro contracted to do the league, school or event, the PWAC will find out and in most cases be required to give a percentage of the sales back to the league, school or event. as the op stated, the pros have a contract. respect it!
the guy that learned cam techniques from the op and started taking photos at the same school and placed it for sale at SM (same place as op) now that's COLD....my $.02 :nono :smack
this is coming from a respected pro sports shooter..... he said that a PWAC must ask permission from the league, school or event before they start shooting and giving their pictures for free or for a small fee to others.
When the internet information flow works well, as it usually does here at Dgrin, it is a goldmine of valuable information. When it doesn't, which is often, it's like a gigantic game of Post Office where info gets twisted beyond recognition. Specifically with respect to your post, which "league, school or event"? A blanket statement like that is indefensible and, in relation to most of the schools and leagues with which I am involved, flat-out wrong or, best case, is unenforced and unenforceable.
PS -- You win in the category of "Best Avatar on this Thread"!
Ok I hope I dont step on anyones toes for this, pro or amateur. I in no way claim to be a pro. Trust me I am not. I was a dad that just started taking pics of my 3 boys teams out of my personal enjoyment. I still paid for the pictures supplied by the photographer. After a few seasons though...suddenly I was taking much better pics than her. Thats not arrogance, just a fact. She was an amateur who started doing the team photos. After several teams and parents voiced dissatisfaction I was asked to do several teams myself. I charge the same as her(and sometimes more) for products and offer several other products as well. This year I am being asked to do 6 baseball teams and perhaps the entire softball league. Does this mean I am a bastard for doing this? Or does this mean she isnt treating her business like a business. I am honestly torn here. I dont pretend to be a professional. But I am no longer totally amateur. I have checked she doesnt have a contract for the league either. Just someone who has done it alot. So where do I fit in the mix? As for giveaways. Since I started this, all of the teams of my kids, I take pictures of ALL the kids as I sit on the sidelines. Each season, I create and give all the parents a musical slideshow which they enjoy. I like doing it, its free and usually in thier team packets when thier pictures arrive. I also give it to parents who dont buy team photos. I dont give the parents the action shots of thier kids for printing, just the slideshow. I have thought about setting up things this year to offer the file downloads but havent. Anyway thats getting off topic. My point is. Some of these people just seem to think they can offer the same product year after year with no improvement and the parents keep paying. Should I feel guilty at some point if my stuff at same price is in more demand than hers? And I think there is also something we are leaving out. I am hearing the terms pro and amateur thrown out. Pro being full time, amateur being everything else. Isnt there a place for a part time photographer?
Pro sports shooters can be angry at people who give prints away and at people who've gtten free advice but the real issue is that this paradigm has shifted - and no one is to blame.
What I don't understand is the pros reluctance to admit the climate is changing. Its almost a unionist attitude where they try to cling to jobs that are simply disappearing.
Nobody has a right to a job. Nobody has a right to work in a paritcular industry. Nobody has a right to be free of competitors willing to work cheaper, or even for free.
Not all parents need professional-quality photos of Johnny or Janey on the playing field. Sometimes, often times, good enough is good enough.
I work in the hi-tech world. Its ground-zero for a changing world. I program computers and some people are even willing to do that for free. FREE I TELL YOU! (please note the sarcasm in my remark) How many professional photographers admit to using free photo editing tools? How dare they not support the livelihood of Adobe employees! Don't they know those free programmers are simply hobbyist using a day job to "support" their programming? Why in the world would anyone give away their programming skills? And shouldn't they support the "turf" of professional programmers (like me) so they (I) can continue to pay their (my) bills?
Is the sarcasm starting to sink in? Is my point being made clearly enough?
Sorry, but anyone who choses to make a living in an industry over-run by people willing and able to do the same thing for far less, or for free, really needs to re-think their career, or the products they offer. Supply and demand people. There is an over-abundance of available photographic images. THIS WILL MAKE THE VALUE OF AN IMAGE FALL. No way around that.
Sorry, but anyone who choses to make a living in an industry over-run by people willing and able to do the same thing for far less, or for free, really needs to re-think their career, or the products they offer. Supply and demand people. There is an over-abundance of available photographic images. THIS WILL MAKE THE VALUE OF AN IMAGE FALL. No way around that.
Bill - you're absolutely right about this part. But there are two parts to the issue.
Part 1: keeping the $$$ coming in: no doubt you need to be flexible and adapt - which means as the OP stated, switching to a different type of photography.
In this sense your analogy to IT is on target. I am also in IT so I get the analogy.
Part 2: Attempting to influence behavior. In this sense your analogy to IT really isn't on target. A parent giving away photos can reach a very large portion of a photographer's quarterly market. A guy giving free web development isn't going to interfere much with the market of a web designe making $95,000. That would be like saying Sports Illustrated and AP are using the free images from the guys with cameras. So it really isn't the same thing. This would be more akin to a guy has a magazine stand at a street corner. And you set up a stand next to him and give away free magazines on Mon & Tues. You don't hit all his sales but you put a hurt on him. So, the second phase of this is just trying to educate. For instance, 1 year a person is shooting photos of their kid's teams and other teams in the league. The pro goes away. Next year the kid moves to a different league and now no one gets photos. So that's the potential long term harm to the consumer. Now, if there is always a parent there producing good enough photos and giving them away then consumer still wins. But in the same scenario, what about other teams in the league? Does the parent shoot all 16 teams? No. But hit the pros sales hard enough and they abandon the league (because 3 of the teams have dads with cameras giving away photos). Which means a number of teams get nothing.
In a sense, this is like businesses who disagree with NAFTA. Sure on one hand you have to adapt to the fact NAFTA is there. But on the other hand you keep trying to get policy changes.
I do disagree with the one poster who seemed to categorize everyone into PRO (meaning all their income is from photography) and amature - and only the PROs (i.e. earning a full time income) should get a voice against the practice.
Sports photography is a second job for me. But it doesn't need to be my primary job for me to feel the practice of undercutting is damaging to people's income and to the consumer in the long run.
I also don't have to be earning my living off this to have the opinion I don't want to provide advice to people that helps them undercut someone else trying to run a business (whether as their primary source of income or as secondary).
So, absolutely you change your approach. But, just like I used to advice new sports shooters how to produce a quality product and advise people trying to earn money at it what my experiences have been, I also am trying to advise them on how this practice of giving away photos is bad for everyone in the long run.
That may not change anyone's behavior. Just like me advising them to not use a 17-85 Canon kit lens to shoot soccer might not change their behavior. Doesn't mean I don't believe the advice is solid just the same.
Comments
Nothing wrong with blunt. And I cant argue with what you're saying. I think part of the problem causing the rant is we're giving these parents the help that allows them to do it. It isn't the parent with the pocket digicam that causes the problem. It's the parent with $2000 or more of DSLR equipment - the ones that have said equipment because they learned from the pros what equipment to use and in many cases how to properly use it. So what is our incentive to help people out when it ends up hurting us? Does that make sense?
I.E. when people in this thread have stated they dont care what the impact is to someone trying to earn money at event photography - something I do. Tell me exactly why it is I should provide them advice and tips to help them do just that? That's the heart of it for me at least.
In the end, I'll adapt as necessary to earn my money. But of particular interest to me is the on-line photography community. How many threads are there regarding "how should I do this?" or "please provide C&C on my sports photos". I've always tried to be very helpful to people by giving good honest advice. Some of these same people have basically said they dont care if a pro gets hurt using the advice I'm providing them. That to me is more the issue than the parent in my area. Or in the instance I relayed - it isn't so much the parent in question giving her photos away but using my advice to get better at doing it so it decreases my market even more.
First off I want to say a facinating thread, I am slowly working my way through all this reading. But the comment about low quality photos, just struck a personal chord with me cause I ended up falling into the same trap.
I take great hockey photos of DI college players but I have none of myself, so this weekend when there were photographers there I was siked. The photos they turned out were ok, they were in focus, but not really good. But I was despriate for a photo of my self playing hockey (and well they did strob the arena, so even thought the action was blah, the photos were well exposed).
So that being said, I wonder how many other people end up feeling this way once they get their CD in the mail or prints delivered. Or maybe consumers just dont know better, or even they just dont care. Just throwing that out there....look forward to reading the rest of the thread.
Sure, it makes sense. Maybe your incentive is what was already posted here: Money. Switch your focus from selling photos to teaching others how to capture good ones. I don't know. I'm still trying to sell photos.
So what's a professional-quality price for a 4x6? A 5x7? An 8x10? What price should I set to make a pro happy? Is my 4x6 amateur-quality shot worth $4? In a pro's view, where should I start?
Is it too bold to try to recoup some money spent at this stage?
Just asking,
Betsy
There is no getting around the fact that human existence boils down to the reconciliation of competing self-interests, and I suppose there's some Darwinism that could be applied even to this narrow topic - but you seem to be evolving faster than most.
Your rant was totally legit. You are a hero as far as I am concerned.
__________________
www.browngreensports.com
http://browngreensports.smugmug.com
I know the angst some are feeling and I can say that for a long time I have been a PWAC. I didn't start out that way - Years ago I was a kid with a camera who loved taking pictures and when I could afford it I shot with an SLR. Time, college and a career got in the way and I settled for a point and shoot until my daughters were born.
I gradually progressed back up the food chain and got a DSLR (although I am now looking at getting back into film again) and fell into the PWAC trap with my daughter's soccer. I was one who gave the photos away the first season (we had no professional photographer -hard to beleive in NJ) and only charged for the DVD of all the games at the end of the season.
Second season I started charging and went through the angst of what to charge my daughter's team and then the teams in my town versus the rest of the world teams that I shot. Rest of the world was fairly easy and now I get asked to do games for other teams that I do an event charge as well. I still have trouble with what to charge the teams in my town although they get a percentage of each photo shot - I believe that makes sense and helps in my charging a little more than cost - still struggling though...
Do I consider myself a professional - not yet - although I am eager to learn! I don't take just sports, I am a huge fan of landscapes and nature and I want to learn. So - I take hundreds of pictures and I look for courses that I can take to get better. I think this is one of the things that separates some from others.
The one part of this conversation that I always have issues with is when someone looks at my prices and yells/rants that I charge too little (has happened here before) and proceeds to tell me off. :gun2 People charge what they charge and I do believe cream rises to the top. When a professional is at a game and takes a great picture I order from them if it is a great picture and pay the price for that. As I improve hopefully I will be able to make a decent living and start my second career - I enjoy shooting - and that's what passion is about.
Do you offer tips to people when they ask - sure - although I am nowhere near as qualified as the many on this forum.
A topic that I worry about when I shoot is the number of professional outfits (not usually individual pros) who often post kids pictures without passwords and protected galleries. They assembly line the photos - they usually aren't great shots and the photos hang out there. One of the compliments I often get is that I offer the photos to the parents/team alone other then some of my demo shots on my front page. Many of these parents do not like their children's picture on the web in this day and age - I'll stay off the soapbox on this one.
My other big pet peeve - and it goes with parents paying for lousy photos- is the parent who tells me they will order but then jokingly says - "I kow how to take the watermark off your photos" and then orders no photos all season. Now I am hijacking the topic sorry.
Randy - great post - way to start the conversation and I have no worries that you will be able to change with the times and keep going. I have appreciated the tips and advice you do give.
Brian
http://photos.katzclix.com
blog - http://blog.katzclix.com
FYI, I have probably 30 framed images on the walls of my office -- including, in hindsight, a couple of OOFs that I wouldn't even post today on my site(!) -- all of which I purchased from other photogs, one in particular who has become a friend and who helped me enormously when I made my decision to get into this. I would still buy images of my kids from anyone who can get better ones than I can, including the guy you are conceptually protecting in my situation.
We live in an amazing time in which almost any information is available with a couple of keystrokes. It's like water flowing downhill -- it finds its way. Even you removing yourself from the dialogue won't matter in the long (maybe even the short) run -- someone else will inevitably step in.
__________________
www.browngreensports.com
http://browngreensports.smugmug.com
OK!!!!! I have a solution.
I am 55 years old and been a professional photographer for over 30 years.
In my years here on earth I have learned several skills. I can do plumbing, Carpentry, accounting, and I was a President of a company for several years.
Next time I am at a game that has PWAC. I will investigate what buisness they are in. Say they are a plumber. I will follow them to a job and offer the home owner to do the job just for cost of materials. I can offer to do payroll and accounting for free so that the PWAC that is an accountant will lose there job and have more time to practice there free photography.
If the shoe was on the other foot I wonder if they would stand up for my rights to take money out of their pocketts and food off their tables.
If one of these PWAC losses thier job because of out sourcing. I don't want to hear them complain. I want them to say. The company had every right to do that and I aplaude them. I doubt if that would happen.
Parents have every right to take pictures of their kids. It is when they start taking food off of my table that I get ticked off.
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
I say go for it. I suspect though that you might find a good number of potential clients that would rather pay more for a full time, licensed/accredited plumber/carpenter/accountant rather than pay less to a guy who happens to have used those skills in the past. (Nothing at all against you - if I were looking for someone to handle the accounting for my business, for example, they are going to have the letters CPA after their name.) Those people who are only interested in getting the lowest price rather than the proven quality of the work they are about to pay for are most likely people I wouldn't care too much to have as clients.
I guess the point is if your client base is routinely more interested in the price of the product (or lack thereof) rather than the quality of the product, maybe it's time to find a new client base. I think this is a point that Randy has made as well.
As I've said in my previous post, we don't have pros on our sidelines. The only one ever charging is me, when I'm not shooting for my team. I'm just not sure it makes sense for those like me to stop giving away photos to our teams because of the chance that a pro might someday show up and try to make a living shooting our league. And frankly, if a pro showed up tomorrow, I'm not sure if I would change anything. Now if we get in a league with a pro already there that would change things for me. Chances are I would either put a comparable price on my photos, or not offer them to the team at all.
One example is team pictures. I've done team pictures for several teams (and charged for it). I could easily take team pictures for my kid's team and tell the parents not to buy from the league provided photographer, but I don't. In fact, I've always purchased a package. If I end up doing a team picture or something similar, I don't tell the other parents until after picture day. I don't influence their decision to buy or not buy on picture day.
This brings me to the last point for the night - frankly, I think parents are tired of buying pictures. Our schools now do school pictures twice a year (of course, they earn more money this way). Every team we've been on has league sponsored team pictures. We have a drawer full of picture packages - football, soccer, basketball, flag football, baseball, softball - if I was not a PWAC and someone took a photo of one of my kids in a sport and wanted to charge $20 for an 8x10, chances are very good that I wouldn't buy it. I would guess that 95% of my Smugmug visitor usage is parents sitting with their kids flipping through the photos from the games and just enjoying looking at them. I know there are a lot of other parents around here that are tired of buying pictures as well.
One thing I started offering last year was posters - something that ends up on the kid's wall rather than in a drawer. I'm guessing most of my paid work this year will be taking pictures with a poster as the end product.
I guess I'm a PWAC. I shoot with a 1DM2 and a 70-200 f/2.8. I let parents have the pictures for free whether they're my kids, our friends kids, or other kids on the team. I find it regrettable that someone is losing money because of what I'm doing, but that won't change my behavior one bit. Just because someone wants to earn money doing something that I enjoy doing for free, doesn't mean I feel compelled to charge.
People aren't guaranteed a living. In a market ecomony, we all have to figure out what goods and services we want to supply that others are willing to pay for. We havve to adjust to changes in the market. It sounds like the original poster is unhappily coming to grips with a changing market and trying constructively to deal with that. I respect that. It doesn't mean that I'm going to stop giving away pictures for free, but I respect his frustration and that he knows it's up to him to solve his problem.
I'm in the computer business, which is about as competitive as anything. There are a lot of similar things in my business. We have people giving free advice and helping people set up websites when they could leave that to the professionals. There are free photo hosting services that compete with SmugMug. Professionals and amateurs give away free software all the time.
Times change. Designing simple websites was once lucrative. Now it isn't. The tools have made it easy for just about anyone to get decent results and so a professional has to compete with the kid down the block. Web designers either went upmarket or moved on to something else.
Maybe sports photography was once a viable business and maybe now it isn't. I honestly don't know. The only thing I'm sure about is that I harbor no ill will towards the kid down the street because he's willing to help people with web pages because he enjoys it (or gets an ego boost or whatever). If someone hates me because I'm giving away a product that competes with theirs, that's their problem not mine.
I don't lose sleep over any of it. I shoot because I enjoy it. Other parents use my work because they feel that my crummy free pictures are a better value than the good $5 shots they could buy. That's their choice. I'm doing what I choose to do. The parents are doing what they chose to do. The pro shooters are doing what they chose to do. We all make our choices and live with the consequences. Maybe someday the parents will realize that patronizing crummy amateurs giving away free photos has cost them the services of professionals taking really good photos. If that happens, they can set up an exclusive contract with a pro and not let me shoot at all. If that's what they want, I'm OK with that.
Cropped quote:
Your post simply highlights some of my points of PWAC attitudes.
These actions are far reaching, not just in the youth sports venues. I also shoot rodeos. It happens there also, just not as much due to the access, meaning PWAC's don't want to risk their A$$ in the arena. But they still try from the stands.
I have contracts to exclusively shoot these events. If you've ever been self-employed, you might know what responsibilities come with contracts. You've got to be there no matter what. Hot, cold, rainy, muddy, missing your family events/issues, etc.
People like you couldn't give a rats ass about any of that. They, like you are doing what that want to do. They don't loose sleep over it. They aren't bothered that its someone else's problem that they are causing them to loose money, even though they have gone through all the steps to secure an exclusive shoot. That may mean up-front kick-back, sales percentage, bla,bla,bla.
People like you giving pics away is liken to smokers throwing cigarette butts down wherever. They don't care. They don't loose sleep over it. They don't care if someone gets mad about it. They just don't care that it's wrong. Their/your only concern is to please yourself. That says alot about you.
I think that's just it: People like you just don't care. Life's all about you.
Doing what you want to do in life is your business, but more than likely it affects others too. To be
I'm sure your not going to loose sleep over it, but you've just plain pissed me off with your attitude. If that was your goal, you accomplished it.
See my response above
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Randy:
I've been sympathetic to your plight until I realized that your point (as stated above) seems to have changed since the beginning of this thread. Who is your rant aimed at...guys you help that take your money away, or other photographers who weren't helped by you who take your money away?
They are interrelated issues, so I guess both. You ended both above with "take your money away".
Initial post for for the former, then the thread morphed into the latter.
I have read a lot on this thread that I don't agree with, but I've tried to take the stance that, even though anything I say here won't change the tide, it might at least give some insight to the hobbyist as to why this issue is so volatile to pros trying to make a living. A hobbyist has no idea of what it's like on the other side of the fence. As I previously stated, I was also trying to provide some of that info.
I normally can take this kind of response calmly, but the "in your face" defiance, well, set me off.
I've rightfully been warned by the mod, so I'll throttle my feelings on this issue.
Is photography you mon-fri day job?
or Is photography your I have some skills, and I have an expensive DSLR and know how to use it, so I am a pro shooter?
Randy, no offense, I respect what you are doing, I am just a curious onlooker.
I hope you will answer honestly and candidly.
I make 100% of my living shooting pictures. No side job.
So are you totally freelance?
Do you shoot for publication or media.?
You certainly can't just be shooting to sell photos to parents?
Mixture. I shoot rodeo's, bull riding, barrels, on spec. (have said contracts for most of these events) Prep sports for a national company. (work for hire if you will) Other HS T&I and some of their sports on spec. The odd photo gig here and there. (seniors, portraits, etc.) Shot three weddings, that's just not my interest. Due to some of the gigs I've shot, I've had several pics published in various pubs and newsprint. But no, I don't shoot for pubs or media.
As I've stated in this very thread, and its been a good while coming, my realization that I have to get into an avenue of photography that is far away from amateur photographers.
Making a living at photography is hard enough on its own merits, much less having to fight the free pictures issue.
I've not yet decided on that particular path, but I have been putting a lot of time and money building up my equipment and technique toward "people" photography. Although without a studio, I'm not sure that will get me far away from the amateur and related issues.
I also have an interest in architectural photography. Maybe I need to talk to Icebear.
I've been more than open and feel like I just filled out a resume, so tell me, really, why do you ask?
Randy,
I will send you a PM, we should take this to the sidelines.
Pro sports shooters can be angry at people who give prints away and at people who've gtten free advice but the real issue is that this paradigm has shifted - and no one is to blame.
It just is.
Are pro sports shooters still buying film to keep Kodak and the labs in business? After all, the labs did great work for them before.
And of course, no pros are doing their own printing.
the guy that learned cam techniques from the op and started taking photos at the same school and placed it for sale at SM (same place as op) now that's COLD....my $.02 :nono :smack
PS -- You win in the category of "Best Avatar on this Thread"!
__________________
www.browngreensports.com
http://browngreensports.smugmug.com
Nobody has a right to a job. Nobody has a right to work in a paritcular industry. Nobody has a right to be free of competitors willing to work cheaper, or even for free.
Not all parents need professional-quality photos of Johnny or Janey on the playing field. Sometimes, often times, good enough is good enough.
I work in the hi-tech world. Its ground-zero for a changing world. I program computers and some people are even willing to do that for free. FREE I TELL YOU! (please note the sarcasm in my remark) How many professional photographers admit to using free photo editing tools? How dare they not support the livelihood of Adobe employees! Don't they know those free programmers are simply hobbyist using a day job to "support" their programming? Why in the world would anyone give away their programming skills? And shouldn't they support the "turf" of professional programmers (like me) so they (I) can continue to pay their (my) bills?
Is the sarcasm starting to sink in? Is my point being made clearly enough?
Sorry, but anyone who choses to make a living in an industry over-run by people willing and able to do the same thing for far less, or for free, really needs to re-think their career, or the products they offer. Supply and demand people. There is an over-abundance of available photographic images. THIS WILL MAKE THE VALUE OF AN IMAGE FALL. No way around that.
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
Bill - you're absolutely right about this part. But there are two parts to the issue.
Part 1: keeping the $$$ coming in: no doubt you need to be flexible and adapt - which means as the OP stated, switching to a different type of photography.
In this sense your analogy to IT is on target. I am also in IT so I get the analogy.
Part 2: Attempting to influence behavior. In this sense your analogy to IT really isn't on target. A parent giving away photos can reach a very large portion of a photographer's quarterly market. A guy giving free web development isn't going to interfere much with the market of a web designe making $95,000. That would be like saying Sports Illustrated and AP are using the free images from the guys with cameras. So it really isn't the same thing. This would be more akin to a guy has a magazine stand at a street corner. And you set up a stand next to him and give away free magazines on Mon & Tues. You don't hit all his sales but you put a hurt on him. So, the second phase of this is just trying to educate. For instance, 1 year a person is shooting photos of their kid's teams and other teams in the league. The pro goes away. Next year the kid moves to a different league and now no one gets photos. So that's the potential long term harm to the consumer. Now, if there is always a parent there producing good enough photos and giving them away then consumer still wins. But in the same scenario, what about other teams in the league? Does the parent shoot all 16 teams? No. But hit the pros sales hard enough and they abandon the league (because 3 of the teams have dads with cameras giving away photos). Which means a number of teams get nothing.
In a sense, this is like businesses who disagree with NAFTA. Sure on one hand you have to adapt to the fact NAFTA is there. But on the other hand you keep trying to get policy changes.
I do disagree with the one poster who seemed to categorize everyone into PRO (meaning all their income is from photography) and amature - and only the PROs (i.e. earning a full time income) should get a voice against the practice.
Sports photography is a second job for me. But it doesn't need to be my primary job for me to feel the practice of undercutting is damaging to people's income and to the consumer in the long run.
I also don't have to be earning my living off this to have the opinion I don't want to provide advice to people that helps them undercut someone else trying to run a business (whether as their primary source of income or as secondary).
So, absolutely you change your approach. But, just like I used to advice new sports shooters how to produce a quality product and advise people trying to earn money at it what my experiences have been, I also am trying to advise them on how this practice of giving away photos is bad for everyone in the long run.
That may not change anyone's behavior. Just like me advising them to not use a 17-85 Canon kit lens to shoot soccer might not change their behavior. Doesn't mean I don't believe the advice is solid just the same.