Women are taking over the world .. and for good reason. They do many things better than men, including understanding & communicating with people. Which in the wedding photography business is a great natural talent to have.
Those same understanding & communication traits are excellent tools for a politician .. yet another area that women have invaded and will someday completely dominate. And at that point we can probably look forward to world peace. And good photography
susi wrote:
You have to actually BE a woman, not just just 'talk to them' or 'work with them' to have a full understanding of why parts of this thread can be perceived as quite offensive. I just wanted to make that point, but have no interest in arguing it.
It must be the emotional side of them that causes the offensive feelings.
Mike Mahoney wrote:
Women are taking over the world .. and for good reason. They do many things better than men, including understanding & communicating with people. Which in the wedding photography business is a great natural talent to have.
Those same understanding & communication traits are excellent tools for a politician .. yet another area that women have invaded and will someday completely dominate. And at that point we can probably look forward to world peace. And good photography
Get used to it guys.
World peace Really ? Whatever you're drinking give me some because that must be some good sh*t !
susi wrote:
Many professional women photographers happen to be Moms, and many Pro male photographers are Dad's , but why are women assumed to be amateurs if they are parents? I shoot sports for the newspaper and Maxpreps and have had coaches and Ref's at other schools assume I am a 'soccer mom' and ask me to leave the field. I even had one ref ask me if I had borrowed my husbands camera! I live in a rural mountain area, so maybe this attitude is more prevalent here, but it's ridiculous. There was an amateur male photographer here with no credentials or permission to be shooting the games, but he was left alone because he had huge Canon glass. It took an entire football season before the coach finally asked who he was and why he was there (He was shooting for himself and uploading to smugmug) and he was finally told to leave..This guy also did not abide by any rules, was sitting on the bench with players, shooting in the mid zone etc. Anyway, just wish this double standard would go away, it is due time. All professionals want to be respected no matter the gender....Show more →
Must have been his "huge Canon glass" that did it. I only have a small Canon glass....
Mike Mahoney wrote:
Women are taking over the world .. and for good reason. They do many things better than men, including understanding & communicating with people. Which in the wedding photography business is a great natural talent to have.
Those same understanding & communication traits are excellent tools for a politician .. yet another area that women have invaded and will someday completely dominate. And at that point we can probably look forward to world peace. And good photography
Tony Hoffer wrote:
I don't think that gender matters much in making a living, but I do think it plays a role in how you do it...
Sure there are women that play up their femininity to book jobs. Masculinity can be used in the same way and I'll happily tell you that I use that to help us. To say that women photographers only book jobs because their work looks girly (but is technically weak) is extremely short sighted. The same thing would be true the other way. I could list countless male photographers who are technically excellent but just can't capture the hearts of their potential clients.
If you look at something like the WPPI instructors (which one would assume is the creme de la creme), I would guess that it's around a 50/50 split amongst male and female photographers. Women are different than men. Women have strengths and weaknesses. So do men. Getting angry that someone has success in spite of their perceived weaknesses is incredibly naive.
Also, I'll add that I don't think that being a male is a detriment at all in this profession. There are SO many stupid patterns of wedding marketing out there that just make me mad (venues using "scripty, girly" fonts, gazebos, ect...) Assuming that brides are the only people that matter is as silly as shooting in selective color. Grooms have just as much hiring power as them and I don't think I've ever seen a couple where the groom didn't have at least one thing that he took hold of and wanted to handle himself. Marketing to grooms can be an incredibly powerful thing. So to assume that only women can be successful by appealing to other women is a big mistake in my opinion. ...Show more →
susi wrote:
Many professional women photographers happen to be Moms, and many Pro male photographers are Dad's , but why are women assumed to be amateurs if they are parents? I shoot sports for the newspaper and Maxpreps and have had coaches and Ref's at other schools assume I am a 'soccer mom' and ask me to leave the field. I even had one ref ask me if I had borrowed my husbands camera! I live in a rural mountain area, so maybe this attitude is more prevalent here, but it's ridiculous. There was an amateur male photographer here with no credentials or permission to be shooting the games, but he was left alone because he had huge Canon glass. It took an entire football season before the coach finally asked who he was and why he was there (He was shooting for himself and uploading to smugmug) and he was finally told to leave..This guy also did not abide by any rules, was sitting on the bench with players, shooting in the mid zone etc. Anyway, just wish this double standard would go away, it is due time. All professionals want to be respected no matter the gender....Show more →
As a dad I totally agree with your initial point. I've never heard anyone ridicule me for being a dadtographer and I HAVE personally heard female photographer friends who are moms being ridiculed, usually behind their back, for that very reason. Now of course as a member of a mommies group (well my wife is but I'm friends with lots of the moms and my wife sucks at responding to emails so they often include me in stuff) I have to say that I do know where the momtographer stereotype comes from and I would say that I also understand why many (male?) photographers don't see it the same way when it comes to guys.
And I'm going to tie-in to the second point you made in a moment.
So here's my perception of a difference I've noticed IN GENERAL with some "new photographers" that showed up at our local photographer get-togethers... it seems to me that women are more likely to go buy that kit rebel (actually I think it's more often a Nikon) and call themselves a photographer. Again... based on my own observation it seems that on average men are more likely to go drop 5K on a 5D2 and L glass.
Now don't get me wrong... both are totally clueless and both really shouldn't think of themselves as professionals but it is what it is. The stereotype actually continues if you really want to follow it along... but let's just stick to where we are at this point.
So yeah while of course there ARE noob dudes with Kit lens Nikons and there are noob chicks with 10K of pro gear, the stereotype really does hold true and on average you'll probably find the chicks more likely to have the cheaper gear and the guys with the more expensive stuff.
Which gets us to the second part of your post.
I'm not from your area of the country, so I can't say for sure... but I'll tell you this... GEAR gets respect. Even respect you don't deserve.
Maybe you're there, uber-skilled, shooting with a Canon 7D and a 135L because for the sport event you're covering you've done your homework and decided that the 135 gets you the best AF performance and the wider DOF of the crop sensor is either a benefit or if it's a drawback you figure the F2 aperture compensates for that.
And maybe the dude is there with a 1 series body and a white lens... and he has no clue why he picked either... and you're kicking his ass in the photogaphy quality department day in day out.
The people on the sidelines see a confident guy (what you call "breaking all the rules" can be easily mistaken for confidence... or maybe it IS confidence) with the gear they see the PROs using on the superbowl and they make their own assumptions.
it's not right but it's how we operate... it's all about short-circuiting decisions and it's easier to decide that someone is pro because they have a larger camera and an unusual looking lens than to actually make the effort to find out what the work is like.
True story... when I was shooting canon I would take the 70-200 with me on e-sessions or family sessions even if I didn't think I'd use it for the session. Once the session was done, and also while going from one location to another I would mount the great white. At the end of the session if we went out to eat I'd leave the (always gripped... even if I hadn't used the grip for the session) body with the lens on our table. People would come by, ask if I was a photographer, the couple would say "yeah, he's awesome, we just had an amazing time" and the person who approached me would routinely ask for my card. Not saying many of those converted into sales (though a few did) but this happened with significant frequency when I left a gripped body with great white on it, and it NEVER happened, and NEVER happens when I'm out say with my family and the body on the table is an ungripped body with a tiny 35 F2 lens on it.
Hopefully they're discriminating against your gear... not your Chromosomes
I was shooting with a 1dmk1V and the 70-200 f/ 2.8...and a lanyard with credentials.. My usual gear that I take. The male photographer was using the same camera ,but had the 400 f/2.8. I don't think it was confidence that was allowing him to shoot in the restricted areas , I really think he just didn't know the rules .. I think it was his gear and his gender that had the officials assuming he was with the media. But thanks for your viewpoints as I am sure some are valid observations.
susi wrote:
I was shooting with a 1dmk1V and the 70-200 f/ 2.8...and a lanyard with credentials.. My usual gear that I take. The male photographer was using the same camera ,but had the 400 f/2.8.
His lens was almost TWICE as long as yours. and yes I do mean the physical size.
Frankly if I saw someone haul that kind of monster to the side of a field I would presume that they ARE the hired pro. I mean who the heck drops 12K on a lens and carries that monster around for free?
So now that I've "chilled." I just wanted to come back and say that I do realize that 99% percent of the comments from the first 3 pages weren't meant to be offensive. There were even a few wonderful comments about women, including one from the first page. My point is though, lisy, that I'm sure susi could easily state a hundred more examples of times she was hurtfully assumed incapable, intentionally or not, for being a woman. And people don't realize it. I realize that it's a hot button subject, just like religion or politics, and if there was only one or two offensive comments I would have let it go, but there was just too many piling on. Just the other week I was having a conversation with my sister about gay rights and she had NO IDEA how much they still battle. She thought because she didn't have a problem with gay marriage, that no one did. I did a gay wedding last year, and they told me they had quite a few vendors refuse to work with them. It's 2012! It's ridiculous. It's really about time things start really changing, but nothing is going to change if no one steps in and says, "hey, this is offensive. I am a woman, I love complicated and technical stuff, I know how to use my camera, and my flash, and I know plenty of other women in my field that are the same way, and I rock at my job"
lisy78 wrote:
True story... when I was shooting canon I would take the 70-200 with me on e-sessions or family sessions even if I didn't think I'd use it for the session. Once the session was done, and also while going from one location to another I would mount the great white. At the end of the session if we went out to eat I'd leave the (always gripped... even if I hadn't used the grip for the session) body with the lens on our table. People would come by, ask if I was a photographer, the couple would say "yeah, he's awesome, we just had an amazing time" and the person who approached me would routinely ask for my card. ...Show more →
that's the truth....Alessandro and i went out for beers after a wedding one time, and he insisted on bringing everything in, and setting his 70-200 and 5d on the table with us...i figured b/c the 70-200 ITSELF wouldn't fit in the trunk of his Miata, but sure enough, he had a lady comment, and ended up handing out his card...
Pardon me for saying this guys - but this has to be one of the sillier and most pointless threads I had stumbled upon in a while . We are all different and we all market a bit differently, we all have strengths and weaknesses... Sex has very little to do with that same as sexual orientation... Personally the only field of photography where I think women have ( absolutely deserved ) marketing advantage is babies and small children.... Anything else is more about how good you are as a person first and as a photographer second....
NathanHamler wrote:
that's the truth....Alessandro and i went out for beers after a wedding one time, and he insisted on bringing everything in, and setting his 70-200 and 5d on the table with us...i figured b/c the 70-200 ITSELF wouldn't fit in the trunk of his Miata, but sure enough, he had a lady comment, and ended up handing out his card...
... I forgot I had an FM witness!!!! True story. What Nathan kindly left out is that nobody in their right mind would have wanted that particular client... ... scary multi-botox multi-facelift lady that probably wanted photos of herself in the buff based on what she said.
lisy78 wrote: ... I forgot I had an FM witness!!!! True story. What Nathan kindly left out is that nobody in their right mind would have wanted that particular client... ... scary multi-botox multi-facelift lady that probably wanted photos of herself in the buff based on what she said.
HAHAH i was going to say that, but figured i'd restrain myself! haha I was going to say something to the effect of "Even Alessandro isn't good enough at photoshop to deliver what she needed!" hahah
lisy78 wrote:
His lens was almost TWICE as long as yours. and yes I do mean the physical size.
Frankly if I saw someone haul that kind of monster to the side of a field I would presume that they ARE the hired pro. I mean who the heck drops 12K on a lens and carries that monster around for free?
A guy who thinks size matters and has plenty of moola (I chatted with him , he was a retired electrical engineer for the amry)
AlexF wrote:
Pardon me for saying this guys - but this has to be one of the sillier and most pointless threads I had stumbled upon in a while . We are all different and we all market a bit differently, we all have strengths and weaknesses... Sex has very little to do with that same as sexual orientation... Personally the only field of photography where I think women have ( absolutely deserved ) marketing advantage is babies and small children.... Anything else is more about how good you are as a person first and as a photographer second....
Well this thread was NOT about strengths, weaknesses, advantages, who's better blah blah blah.
It was merely an observation on how females have now become a huge majority in the wedding photography industry. Anything else was hijack material.
Really ? Whatever you're drinking give me some because that must be some good sh*t !
and yes I do mean the physical size.