Steve Smith
Joe
- Messages
- 9,284
- Edit My Images
- No
Photography itself is not art. It is a medium which can be used to produce art. It can also be used to illustrate and document more utilitarian, non art things.
Steve.
and help to keep the site free for all
Everyone wants to be a photographer
- Thread starter John Young
- Start date
Photography itself is not art. It is a medium which can be used to produce art. It can also be used to illustrate and document more utilitarian, non art things.
Steve.
Steve Smith
Joe
- Messages
- 9,284
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 25,621
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
TBH, being a photographer is easier then being a software programmer
People with a great eye for composure and have a history of Art can pick up a camera and produce brilliant results because at the end of the day, photography is an art form and if you already have the skill as an artist, you will become a decent photographer
Do you see what you wrote?
That IF is a little important, and it appears you disregarded it in your opening statement.
IF you have no eye for composition, and no previous artistic background then presumably photography is not easy!
So for those people being a software engineer would be easier?
For a software engineer your logic control appears to be completely off!
IF my Aintie had a willy she'd be my Uncle.
- Messages
- 2,839
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
TBH, being a photographer is easier then being a software programmer
People with a great eye for composure and have a history of Art can pick up a camera and produce brilliant results because at the end of the day, photography is an art form and if you already have the skill as an artist, you will become a decent photographer
To someone who has the right technical mind software programming is easy and a lot easier to them than photography if they don't have a good eye for composure/art.
I guess you are thinking that running a successful photography business is just about having a good eye and a history of art which is where you are going very wrong.
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Not really, because that required as much skill in the darkroom as you needed making the exposure. It was a highly dexterous, skilful activity that required a great deal of practice and knowledge.
Post processing these days = moving some sliders around in Lightroom. This is why there's so much utter crap post processing on display in these forums.... because it's easy, and people don't know when to stop.
Software like Silver FX and Color FX et al just encourage "users" to arse about without any real knowledge and more often than not, choose from a list of presets. Go and ask people how they got their black and white image and the majority will have just used Silver FX... or just desaturated it. They'll probably have no understanding of colour theory or the monochromatic tonal relationships within their image... they'll arse around with sliders until they have something they like the look of.
It's normal these days for over processed images, with massive amounts of detail extraction (Clarity), tone mapping (HDR), and the inevitable radio-active halo around everything, and over saturated colours to elicit "Ooooh.. nice post processing" comments from people who have absolutely no idea what they are doing, or looking at.
Quality has gone out of the window for the great unwashed, and all they want is something that looks good on screen.
There's a prevailing attitude that knowledge is not really necessary any more... and there's a generation of people who are happy to look at everything on screen, never print, and therefore have very low standards as a result. Shoot, Instagram, post on facebook: That's the workflow of choice for most non photographers... of course they'll be impressed with the utter ****** most amateurs produce... and they'll probably pay for it too. It's something they can't do with Instagram.
...and don't get me started on the Hipsters who shoot "Lomography".
There.... I feel better now. I had no power from 6pm to 4am this morning... so I'm taking it out on the photographic proletariat. Need more coffee
Last edited:
Steve Smith
Joe
- Messages
- 9,284
- Edit My Images
- No
^^^ What Mr Pookeyhead said!
Steve.
Steve.
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Exactly... know how to use the tools. So if you want to separate various colours into distinct tones in a black and white print, knowing colour theory will allow you to actually do that... or you can arse about until you get a result that looks OK. Are you advocating that people arse about until they get a result?
I'm willing to bet quite a lot that Schumacher actually does know quite a lot about the cars he drove, yes.... seeing as he, and all the test drivers played a key role in their design, development and testing.
There are manual controls in Silver FX.... and to use them effectively you need to know how colours are translated into black and white if colour filters are used. I bet most just pick a preset though... or pick a preset then twiddle things with no great idea of what they want from the image.
Much the same can be said about any aspect of photogaphy: You can arse about with auto exposure, and sooner or later you'll get a nice result. You gonna advocate that too? Part of the skill in processing an image is the pre-visualisation of the final image, and knowing exactly how to get it and, whether you like it or not, successful post processing often requires that you know exactly what you want when shooting, so you get a RAW file that is perfect for the processes you have in mind - that means you need to know how to get that result in processing often before you press the shutter.
Doing anything else just breeds an attitude that everything can be done in post process for most people. Maybe not you personally... but most will just assume that so long as they get a decent capture, they can create what they want post process surely... as there's so much software to manipulate images.... surely something can help me get what I want.
- Messages
- 9,307
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yes they do take themselves very seriously !
- Messages
- 2,839
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
He had to know alot abot the car actually. That is how he got it to work exactly as he needed, being able to feedback what is wrong with it and what would make it better.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,691
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
No
He needed to understand, rebound compression, steering, acceleration, braking and engine maps, etc
Doesn't mean he has a degree in mechanical engineering or is capable of writing engine mapping software.
It means he understood how to work with what he had and how to release its potential to its fullest.
His engineers interpreted his requirements into complex mathematical equations to adjust his setup.
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
But we're not suggesting a photographer needs to know how to code their own image editing software either.
- Messages
- 837
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It's a common misconception. As soon as you're charging you owe it to yourself to do the sums properly.
If you don't properly account for the costs of doing business, then you are effectively subsidising someone else's lifestyle.
If you are of the mindset that you've already got the gear, and you'd be putting petrol in the car anyway, and you can do without insurance, or registering to pay tax. It's just 'pocket money'. What are you really doing? You're setting a price that 'the market' can't possibly compete with.
But that's only half the story - because your day job (and your dependants) have already paid for your business costs, someone else's family gets to save money on their luxury goods. Is that fair to you and yours? You buy a new camera which in real life is competing with a weekend away? So your family pay so that you can give someone else a bargain price on their photography.
And when you give up, because the hassle isn't worth the reward - you've lowered the market price, and the only people who can trade at the same price, have to cut the same corners:shake:.
You owe it to yourself and the industry to calculate your costs properly - If you're happy with £10 an hour, that's no-one else's business, but if you kid yourself you're earning £50 when you haven't accounted for your business properly - everyone loses.
Oh I agree, was just following up on what someone above had said. Having previously worked in the entertainment industry, where it was a struggle to get a paid gig when there were multiple hobbiests doing it for beer & free entry - I'm never undercutting the market again, it would be mega hypocritical.
I don't think I'd want to be a pro - I've done the whole hobby -> job thing, and it seems like a good way to ruin a hobby
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
You have to actually enjoy sitting infront of a pc looking at code all day to be decent at it and not many do so.
it is not as "attractive" as a photography job.
If you ask a random person which they would prefer to be/learn, they would choose photography every single time.
Point is, so long as you have an eye you can become a decent pro photographer.
This Thread basically shuts off anyone who wishes to become a pro. As if fellow pro togs are afraid of competition or a market with lots of people becoming pro's.
Thats the general feeling i am seeing here.
Also, who cares about runing a business etc? no that is not what the OP was on about. Beingb a pro doesnt mean you have to be good at the business side of things.
There are plenty of pro togs who work for xyz agency
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,839
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I didn't say photography wasn't more attractive and of course most people would prefer the idea of being a photographer.
However, you are still clearly missing the point that it takes more than a good eye to become a decent pro photographer. Do you really think that is all that is required?
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Epic fail comment.
First - to get an agent interested, you've got to deliver something other than standard wedding, or social portraiture... agents only really represent really good high end commercial, editorial, advertising or fashion photographers... above the line stuff.
If you shoot weddings or social portraiture, mainstream commercial or industrial, the VAST majority of working professionals will not be represented by an agent, and they REALLY need to know how to run a business, ot their business will probably fail.
You don't need any qualifications, the barriers to entry are minimal and 'photoshop' are probably the three that come to my mind. The low quality output on facebook etc that people gush over probably makes a lot think 'I could do that'. Plus I'd suspect an average photographer with business acumen will be more successful than a talented photographer with little grasp of business.
- Messages
- 3,163
- Edit My Images
- Yes
"Epic fail"? :| David, you've been hanging 'round with the 'net crowd too long - you're far too old for that kind of language now.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,839
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
pwned
- Messages
- 3,163
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This describes my approach perfectly. I've been floundering with post processing for ages and although through fiddling I've developed a basic understanding of how to get reasonable results, it's a nightmare when trying to get a consistent look across a set of images.
I badly need to learn the theory behind this side of things, can you recommend a good book/video/article?
- Messages
- 3,163
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,179
- Name
- Rich Robson
- Edit My Images
- No
Haha, moving/reading the crowd and knowing what tunes to play, along with the actual mixing of records seamlessly for upto 3 hours at a time was probably the more skilful bit. The hole in the vinyl was the easy bit !!!
- Messages
- 2,179
- Name
- Rich Robson
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 3,661
- Name
- Richard King
- Edit My Images
- No
I fear you are wrong
On the whole, the market is segmented. In the main the best at marketing are the ones that get the work
The very best of the best float to the top
The bottom feeders are employed by people who dont care or dont know
Then.. the bulk of talented photographers, who are not the best of the best, or the best at marketing, are fighting it out in the middle, torn between cheap, and fairly priced
Steve Smith
Joe
- Messages
- 9,284
- Edit My Images
- No
I sometimes work as a live sound engineer. A few years ago, one of the local radio DJs was playing records in between bands and made a derogatory remark about the next band on - a blues band. Something about it only being three chords. The band's singer responded with "yes, it must be really difficult to find the hole in the middle of the record".
Steve.
- Messages
- 12,020
- Name
- Jeremy Moore
- Edit My Images
- No
That's it.
When the wannabee's realise it then they will quietly drop their dreams and go back to the day job.
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Last edited:
- Messages
- 16,884
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
The Jam - Going Underground.
Top tuuuuune.
That's all I have to say really, nobody listens to me ...
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
You're not wrong there sir!
[edit]
...I mean about the song... not no one listening to you.. LOL
[edit]
...I mean about the song... not no one listening to you.. LOL
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
i see.
So there is no way in just being hired by an agent or a company like any old 9/5 job(not strickly 9-5 but u know what i mean).
anyways do as u wish, i have created my own business myself and it has its benefits. not for photography but i could use it for that purpose too
- Messages
- 25,621
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
But they're soon replaced by the next bunch of dreamers.
I have a bookmarks folder from a couple of years ago with the websites of all the local competition.
It contains loads of dead links now. But a similar exercise done today brings up just as many 'photographers'.
Those of us close to the industry know exactly how it works in real life, because we have to research it. It's baffling to be told by casual observers that the issues aren't important.
- Messages
- 2,839
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
So are you still sticking to your stance that all it takes to become a pro photographer is a good eye or have you accepted there is (much) more to it than that?
- Messages
- 1,687
- Name
- .... Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I love arsing about.
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
No I am asking if its possible to become a pro without owning an running your own business but instead working for someone else
- Messages
- 3,163
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Most definitely although full-time staff photographers seem to be a very small minority on this forum (are there any? Apart from Daryl who I think used to be a staffer before going alone, I can't think of any).
But yes, it's definitely possible to make a living from photography without having any business skills.
- Messages
- 2,531
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I assume you're subtly making the distinction between a user and a photographer here rather than writing the aforementioned programs off?
- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
The reality is, there are very few employment positions for photographers. There are some that spring to mind... some papers still have staffers.. police and medical... stuff like that.. They are few and far between, and so heavily sought after by graduates etc, that you'll be up against it.
There's are event photography companies that will employ people, and wedding photographers often employ second shooters, and of course... there's always the perennial favourite, assisting.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 25,621
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
Most (not all) employed photographers have qualifications, ie the route into the industry is from University.
Pick up the trade mags for job adverts.
Most pro photographers are either freelance, self employed or part of a small business though. IIRC over 90% of professional photographers work for a company with less than 5 employees, but don't ask me where I heard that it could be a figment of my imagination.
I am however 100% certain that your chances of being hired as a pro are about zero if your only skill/knowledge/experience is 'having a good eye for composition', 'composure' might be an asset in SOCO.
Pick up the trade mags for job adverts.
Most pro photographers are either freelance, self employed or part of a small business though. IIRC over 90% of professional photographers work for a company with less than 5 employees, but don't ask me where I heard that it could be a figment of my imagination.
I am however 100% certain that your chances of being hired as a pro are about zero if your only skill/knowledge/experience is 'having a good eye for composition', 'composure' might be an asset in SOCO.
- Messages
- 3,163
- Edit My Images
- Yes