p.4 #1 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
I actually don't mind giving free shots to bands I shoot if they're only for their personal viewing, I think what gets me is that I've been asked for my photo's to be put on album covers, posters, press kits etc... things that make money for the band, and some still balk at paying because they'd rather just use their friends red-eye snap shots rather than pay.
lol.. I don't want to come across bitter or jaded... I really enjoy band photography and will keep doing it pay or no... just a pet peeve
p.4 #2 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
what is the difference between this and 35mm slr popularity? there are still higher resolution cameras with larger sensors just like with film that many pros will use but lots of pros will still use cheaper gear that is the same as an amateur and will produce much better results with the same equipment. yes, we are all taking more pictures so the chance of getting a good one here and there go up but pros will still produce consistent high quality images rather than just a couple from hundreds. nothing changes.
p.4 #3 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
Why should it give anyone hope? It just shows that people who hire photographers don't really know what good photography is.
I know when I've shot weddings etc., the clients never are wowwed by the really great photos, more like the boring ones that look like everyone elses...
Beauchamp wrote:
+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.4 #4 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
~elevator operators. at the turn of the last century, due to the technology, elevator operating was apparently a dark art that required trained personnel. we don't need professional elevator operators any more, and i'm not sure that's a bad thing.
if they ever come out with a robot that can replace an internal medicine specialist or surgeon (the latter is coming), i'll get trained in something else and chalk it up to progress.
p.4 #5 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
I think that dSLR's being everywhere and in everyone's hands is only a small pain in the ass.
What we have now, is someone with a "big camera" and an on camera flash, doing team portraits, seniors, and weddings on the cheap. Now granted, the person paying for the 20 dollar team photos, or 300 dollar weddings, probably can't afford the higher dollar products anyway, but still does a disservice. I understand everyone has to start somewhere, so that's not that the point.
However, that said people with the "big camera" must be a professional or know something, because it's "big". So they may feel that they can have uncle bob photograph their wedding, instead of Hassas or one of the guys here...the results will show. Whilst I'm sure there are some great uncle bobs, you get the idea. More oft than not, they are going to get what they pay for. Still that said, Uncle Bob's photos are going to look like Uncle Bob's, and a pro's are going to look like a "pros". Even professional techniques, used in a not so professional way (lighting with ratios off, off camera flash for a portrait) will look better than the "non pro techniques".
Simply put, the professional photographer still has a place, and until the camera can do everything creatively that a photographer can do we "should" be okay.
p.4 #6 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
abam wrote:
~elevator operators. at the turn of the last century, due to the technology, elevator operating was apparently a dark art that required trained personnel. we don't need professional elevator operators any more, and i'm not sure that's a bad thing.
They still have elevator operators in much of Latin America (certainly Brazil) & I really like it. If nothing else it stimulates conversation & conviviality during the brief ride - & certainly humanizes the experience.
p.4 #7 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
Here's another thought.
Getting high quality DSLR and lenses maybe getting easier but it's nothing if not accompanied by the easy and free access to learning material, namingly the Internet, this forum is a prime example.
When the pros mingling with the uncle bobs here and other forums... well, the uncle bobs can only get better no? So if the pros feel threatened, they shouldn't give feedback or help people online.
p.4 #8 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
RobertLynn wrote:
I think that dSLR's being everywhere and in everyone's hands is only a small pain in the ass.
What we have now, is someone with a "big camera" and an on camera flash, doing team portraits, seniors, and weddings on the cheap. Now granted, the person paying for the 20 dollar team photos, or 300 dollar weddings, probably can't afford the higher dollar products anyway, but still does a disservice. I understand everyone has to start somewhere, so that's not that the point.
I don't agree that this is necessarily a PITA - for several reasons:
a) Everyone does have to start somewhere! My guess is that many, many "pros" began this way - we should close the door to aspiring professionals?
b) Why can't people get what they pay for? Isn't it better for people to have access to lower cost images of the important moments in their lives than not at all?
c) I reject the assumption (in much of this thread) that "professional" photography is inherently of better quality than that done by an amateur. In my experience that's not necessarily true.
d) Competition is competition. Every American company producing consumer products & services has in recent times experienced the tightened realities of competition. They've responded by increasing quality, cutting costs, innovating (or some combo of all three) - or suffered the consequences. Commercial photography is - & should be - no different. Insisting on the sanctity of "the professional" doesn't strike me as a very realistic response to competition!
p.4 #9 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
n0b0 wrote:
Put it this way, why steal $1,000 from 100 people when you can steal $10 from 1,000,000 people? In DSLR market, the 1D series body and the L lenses may sell for more $$ but I bet you Canon makes most of its money from the Rebel/xxD bodies and the non L lenses.
That's true and the money for their R&D comes from P&S and entry level DSLR sales. The more they sell at the low end the better it is for the high end. The pro market while small is incredibly important for the image of the company. Their prowess as a camera maker is seen through their high end products. It's no different with other manufacturers.
p.4 #10 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
I speculate that Canon makes more revenue from the Consumer lines, but makes more profit from the Pro lines.
The markups on the Pro cameras is incredible, whereas due to the market saturation and competition in the low end, manufacturers are hard pressed to make a decent margin on those. As such I think the Pro products generate greater profits, but the consumer type items generate more total revenue
p.4 #11 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
Dawei Ye wrote:
I speculate that Canon makes more revenue from the Consumer lines, but makes more profit from the Pro lines.
The markups on the Pro cameras is incredible, whereas due to the market saturation and competition in the low end, manufacturers are hard pressed to make a decent margin on those. As such I think the Pro products generate greater profits, but the consumer type items generate more total revenue
The sales of the pro range measure in the thousands, so even at their inflated prices, they account for a small drop in the ocean as far as profits are concerned. Sure P&S haven't huge markups, but they sell in the millions and lower end DSLRs in the hundreds of thousands, with a good markup, so that's where the money is made.
p.4 #14 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
Every time photography gets easier and cheaper, the same discussion begins. Go back more than a hundred years when George Eastman invented the rollfilm camera--the incredible breakthrough that did away with photographers having to make their own glass plates.
For the first time, there could be the "casual amateur," who didn't have to develop expertise in photography...he could just pick up a camera, point, click, send the box to Kodak and get back a handfull of prints and a newly loaded camera.
Did professional photographers disappear? No...but certain areas of professional photography did disappear because it was easier for people to do more of it themselves.
In the 70s there was another big change as "miniature" cameras--that is, 35mm--and new candid styles of wedding photography became the fashion. That was really when the Uncle Bobs started showing up. Sure, Uncle Bob had an AE-1 and I had an F-1, but as we know, the lenses were the same and the film was the same.
In those times as now, the primary difference was that Uncle Bob, not being paid, might produce acceptable results or he might not, and if he didn't...oh, well, Bob's still your uncle. I, on the other hand, gave some assurance and guarantee of acceptable results, and if I didn't there was at least some satisfaction in suing me.
Today, we have to face the fact that again some areas are simply disappearing as areas for professionals to make a profit. Those areas depend to some extent on market income levels.
It's not just a matter of changing marketing "models," some markets are simply going away. If all a professional can offer a bride is a set of straightforward wedding candids, that market is simply going away. It's no more worth paying a photographer for a set of straightforward wedding candids than it is for me to pay a plumber to unclog my sink drain.
So photographers have to do more and do it differently. Let Uncle Bob do the candids, but offer art, like a spectacular slide show or a press-printed album of a high-end photographic story: "Vanity Fair Goes to a Wedding" style. Things Uncle Bob can't pull off on his best days.
I see a lot of wedding photographers who are still doing nothing more than straightforward grabshots. They are doomed.
I don't have to hire a plumber to unclog my sink, but now plumbers also do radon abatement. I can't do my own radon abatement yet.
p.4 #15 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
The sales of the pro range measure in the thousands, so even at their inflated prices, they account for a small drop in the ocean as far as profits are concerned. Sure P&S haven't huge markups, but they sell in the millions and lower end DSLRs in the hundreds of thousands, with a good markup, so that's where the money is made.
This is true. Profits from pro cameras are small percentage. However, the professional cameras market the consumer cameras. Rather, I should say that professionals using professional Canon cameras entice amateaurs to buy consumer Canons. Professionals using professional Nikon cameras sell amateurs on consumer Nikon cameras.
This is why Nikon and Canon are consistently on the top even in the consumer market. Their consumer cameras certainly aren't any better. It's the fact that they are the professional choice that sells them.
p.4 #16 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
RDKirk wrote:
Every time photography gets easier and cheaper, the same discussion begins. Go back more than a hundred years when George Eastman invented the rollfilm camera--the incredible breakthrough that did away with photographers having to make their own glass plates.
For the first time, there could be the "casual amateur," who didn't have to develop expertise in photography...he could just pick up a camera, point, click, send the box to Kodak and get back a handfull of prints and a newly loaded camera.
Did professional photographers disappear? No...but certain areas of professional photography did disappear because it was easier for people to do more of it themselves.
You understand the general changes that have occurred in photography, but you underestimate the scale of those changes.
In 2008, it was estimated that 82 million digital cameras were sold...AND THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE CELL PHONES. The estimate is that 1.28 billion cell phones were sold that year...approximately half of them containing a camera. That makes about 682 million cameras overall in that one year...approximately one camera for every 10 people on the planet.
The impact of rollfilm, Kodak's disposable cameras, and Polaroid instimatics on the overall photography market was trivial compared to that of cell phones and digital technology. When you look at the numbers it is absolutely staggering what has happened in the past 15 years.
This is not just another advance in photography. The combination of cell phone popularity, digital photography, and the cheap combination of the two has produced a change that is unlike any we have seen before.
p.4 #17 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
In my previous post I moaned a bit about the impact digital has had on my business, but I also think it has made it much harder for any average photographer to make a living. The cream will always rise to the top and talent is talent in whatever medium.
To make it really big now and make proper money I think you have to be extra talented as there are just so many mediocre pro photographers now. In some ways digital has shaved the profession to a sharp point.
p.4 #18 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
I'd just like to point out one thing though. My mobile phone has a built-in camera but to be honest, I couldn't care less. It's just something that came with the phone. I suspect it'll be like that for a lot of people too.
p.4 #19 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
n0b0 wrote:
I'd just like to point out one thing though. My mobile phone has a built-in camera but to be honest, I couldn't care less. It's just something that came with the phone. I suspect it'll be like that for a lot of people too.
Same here. There's a big difference between the abundance of cameras and the abundance of quality cameras. My cellphone camera is garbage. I take a picture with it, and it's only in focus 30% of the time. Then when I click "save", it saves what the lens was pointing at at that moment, not the original image. This is on a current generation cellphone, still sold today.
Apples and oranges.
I guess you could call me an "Uncle Bob" too. If my occasional happy accident shot is putting a professional's entire portfolio and business at risk, it's time to adapt.
p.4 #20 · is popularity of dslr a bad things to pros?
n0b0 wrote:
I think it's not the pose shots that you need to worry about, but the candid shots. Well the photographer at my sister wedding did at least.
He just kept getting in the way, walking into the frame when I wanted to take some candid shots, happened throughout the reception. Damn I felt like smashing my camera on his face. Plenty of other people using P&S at the reception but for some reason he only harassed me and my lowly 450D.
So if the pros feel threatened, they shouldn't give feedback or help people online.