p.3 #1 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
SmegHead wrote:
But everyone has to start somewhere and if the bottom of the market gets eaten up by Uncle Bob it's going to be harder and harder for NEW photographers to start in the business and become pro's that can pick and choose their clients.
This is exactly right.
I shoot my dog sport for profit, but after every trial, I get people coming up and asking me if they can have the shots for free.
When I tell them "No.", they usually get pretty pissy and say that "Well so-and-so is giving his away for free...".
Some people are quite content with Mr. So-and-so's slightly oof, poorly processed, flat pictures. Others are starting to see that my images are far better and I am now getting requests to do family portraits and other events (I've even had a couple of wedding requests which I have flatly refused since I have *zero* experience doing them).
The point is that as a photographer who is trying to break into the "paid for" market, the G'sWC make it very, very difficult since they are always willing to do it for free. The other side of that has been mentioned though; if you are good, people will come to you.
p.3 #2 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
SmegHead wrote:
A big thing that sets the pro's apart from the Bob's is post processing as well... but how far are we from a camera that will do an auto-crop to rule of thirds based on face detection, straighten, perform an auto levels/curves adjustment based on skin tone and lightest/darkest textured areas and throw a little unsharp mask on for good measure?
...and then everyone will have the same boring photos.
It is a bit like furniture. You can go to Ikea and buy a chair for $10. The same chair that your friends have and a quarter of the population.
Or you can go to Kartell and get one for a few thousand that is an art object and makes your house look better just putting it inside. And nobody else has one. Or at least nobody you know.
Same thing with wedding photographers and everything else in life.
p.3 #3 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
SmegHead wrote:
But if you're a new and only marginally better than Uncle Bob it's going to be much harder to get work and break in to the business.
If you're only marginally better than uncle Bob, I don't see why anyone should pay you lots of money to get something that's only marginally better than free.
p.3 #4 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
Slightly OT as this thread has evolved but ... I understand the frustration with "Uncle Bob's" in professional circles, but I don't accept the assertion that amateur wedding photography is always inferior. I've seen a few Uncle Bob shot wedding albums that blew me away - & a number of "professionally" shot ones that, while technically competent, were totally formulaic and clichéd. It's definitely not the gear that makes the difference.
p.3 #6 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
panos.v wrote:
...and then everyone will have the same boring photos.
Well... look at 90% of pro shot weddings... a LOT of clients WANT the same boring photo's. Bride and Groom... Mother and Bride... Father and Bride etc. Most of the pro's I worked with got most of their print orders for the same boring shots that get taken at every wedding and had a hard time selling the cool artsy ones. Yes.. a lot of people love the arsty ones but a large chunk of traditional clients want the same type of shots for their daughters wedding that got taken at their wedding 40 years ago. They'll order one of the cool shots for themselves.. but 20 copies of all the boring shots to give out. So if amateurs can take those same boring shots with a fully automated DSLR, there goes another chunk of the market.
p.3 #7 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
"is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?"
I would say so because even though I'm nobody's "Uncle Bob" (I'm an "enthusiast"), I did a weeding as a "backup" by request of the bride's family more than a year ago, and not only managed to do as well (if not better through more unusual/creative shots) as the paid "pro", but said pro was also glad that I had a 580EX at hand to save his beacon when his flash crapped-out.
It seems indeed that the pro at hand was only going through his regular weeding routine, but as I expected, the couple and family welcomed my non-pro creative shots. I basically shot it has a "story", with lots of moments (both funny and tender) from kids, family and guests in attendance.
p.3 #8 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
Lance Couture wrote:
I shoot my dog sport for profit, but after every trial, I get people coming up and asking me if they can have the shots for free.
This is becoming a problem in almost all photo fields. I do a lot of band photography ... and invariably they all ask if they can get copies of the shots for their website/posters/myspace... but as soon as I put a price tag on them I never hear from them again. I realize that local bands don't have nearly the budget that a wedding does, but even nearly giving them away they'd rather go for the free ones. I pay $10 bucks to get in the door to support their art but most don't want to pay even $50 for full usage rights to 20-30 post processed shots, that's pretty much giving them away. I'm not Annie Leibovitz but my shots are ten times better than what most of them are using now for promotion... This is the kind of thing that will discourage many photogs from trying to make the leap from amateur to pro...
p.3 #9 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
But you must admit, you've chosen one of the most impoverished client groups imaginable! You might want to rethink your business plan if you're serious about going pro.
p.3 #10 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
Yeah.. I know I don't shoot bands because I plan on getting rich off it, I'll stick with product photography and cross my fingers... I do it because I enjoy it, but it would be nice to make back a little off it to fund the habit. Like I said, I don't mind paying to see them play.. I could get the same respect back. But if people are willing to do it for free that won't happen. What would the musicians do if really good bands decided to hold free concerts every fri, sat and sun in the bar district?
p.3 #12 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
we are becoming a very visual based society and with this awareness and the ability to create excellent photos with simple to use cameras will marginalize pro photographers, period.
I know a number of people who have had no photographic training, but just in their need to actively post to their myspace and facebook (etc.) pages have developed real talent in shooting creative photos. One woman I know shoots images that I think are much more creative and *good* than commonly posted here using L-lenses... and she only uses a medium level P&S... she just has an eye and has developed an attention to detail in her photographically.
This is kind of like what happened to business graphic artists. Companies used to maintain large graphics departments to create presentations etc... now all business professionals are expected to create their own presentations in PowerPoint etc... and even if they aren't quite as good as what a graphic artist might have produced, in general, most people have been able develop the skills needed to do a good job on their own.
p.3 #13 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
I can buy a farrari and race it on the streets with others who don't know any better but if I was to enter it in the 24hours at LeMans, I would burn and die.
p.3 #14 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
mfurman wrote:
I am still not sure why. Could you please elaborate?
I am not sure I understand either, but I was told that the high dollar lenses are made and sold in such low numbers that selling the demo's could dilute the market by as much as 10%. Also, it could effectively reduce high end glass sales by a comparable number.
p.3 #16 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
globalkiwi wrote:
Slightly OT as this thread has evolved but ... I understand the frustration with "Uncle Bob's" in professional circles, but I don't accept the assertion that amateur wedding photography is always inferior. I've seen a few Uncle Bob shot wedding albums that blew me away - & a number of "professionally" shot ones that, while technically competent, were totally formulaic and clichéd. It's definitely not the gear that makes the difference.
+10,000
I have seen so many "pros" whose websites and portfolios are pure garbage. It should give hope to the aspiring photogs out there...
The wedding industry will continue to get more competitive, but until cameras or Uncle Bobs evolve into automatic art machines, there will always be a market for quality work.
p.3 #17 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
mh2000 wrote:
This is kind of like what happened to business graphic artists. Companies used to maintain large graphics departments to create presentations etc... now all business professionals are expected to create their own presentations in PowerPoint etc... and even if they aren't quite as good as what a graphic artist might have produced, in general, most people have been able develop the skills needed to do a good job on their own.
I remember when our lab was maintaining a huge pool of typists, all girls and they were all quite pretty, I might add. Now we are all hitting the keyboard ourselves.
p.3 #18 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
globalkiwi wrote:
Slightly OT as this thread has evolved but ... I understand the frustration with "Uncle Bob's" in professional circles, but I don't accept the assertion that amateur wedding photography is always inferior.
I think i would agree with this. The last wedding i went to (brother in law) was also attended by 3 "pro" photographers ( It looked like it was one pro and two assistants learning on the job). They swarmed around, got in the way (especially at the reception) and when i saw the pictures they took i was seriously underwhelmed. The studio shots were nice enough, but the wedding shots were fairly dull and all the stuff from the reception was rubbish. I know it was rubbish cos i'm a crap photographer and my snapshots with a 350D/50mm f1.8 were better.
Quite a few of my friends have taken a semi Uncle Bob route now and none have been disappointed. It seems to be usual that they get studio shots done professionally and then have a friend do the actual wedding and reception. One wedding the bride and groom just asked everyone to send them their pictures and then picked the best.
Harry T wrote:
I just came back from another trip to Rome, Italy and it was amazing to me to see how many novice people were willing to carry a Nikon or Canon Rebel type kit with kit lens and use it as a point and shoot. I just can't understand why people are willing to invest in the money and weight to use DSLR's as point and shoot?!
I have several friends like this. And not with just Rebel end kit - one has a 40D and two have D80's. None of them move away from fully auto settings and none of them print anything, so screen resolution is all they really need. In truth i think they all bought their cameras with the intention of taking up "photography" but then discovered that its not very easy and in reality costs quite a lot more than just the initial starter pack price. Most also didn't realise the time investment required in learning and using the software.
p.3 #19 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
SmegHead wrote:
This is becoming a problem in almost all photo fields. I do a lot of band photography ... and invariably they all ask if they can get copies of the shots for their website/posters/myspace... but as soon as I put a price tag on them I never hear from them again. I realize that local bands don't have nearly the budget that a wedding does, but even nearly giving them away they'd rather go for the free ones. I pay $10 bucks to get in the door to support their art but most don't want to pay even $50 for full usage rights to 20-30 post processed shots, that's pretty much giving them away. I'm not Annie Leibovitz but my shots are ten times better than what most of them are using now for promotion... This is the kind of thing that will discourage many photogs from trying to make the leap from amateur to pro... ...Show more →
If you are going to continue go after that customer base, I suggest you at least contact some of those bands ahead of time and get them to comp your admission. Those that won't do that will never pay for photos.
p.3 #20 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
Yeah.. I've got a short list of bands that will always comp me in to their shows.. which is really nice... and I can't say that it's been completely fruitless, I've gotten a lot of names and contacts and am starting to target the record labels behind the bands (mostly local labels). There's a few bands that have been really good to me and I've been good to them in return, I just hate it when bands EXPECT free photo's and don't see my photography as a product worth paying for while complaining that their not getting a good enough cut of the door
