Johnny Bravo
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #15 · For Photographers, the Image of a Shrinking Path | |
JWilsonphoto wrote:
Very good points everyone. I've been a commercial shooter for over thirty years and while I'd like to say that the digital revolution hasn't affected the commercial market, I'd be floating down that river in Egypt. Digital has brought several key things within reach of "so-so" wanna-be pro shooters. The first, and we've heard it a million times is the "I can just shoot and delete, rotate dials and preview until I get something "decent". This ability greatly lessens the amount of expertise involved in capturing something "decent". The second big factor is that the weekend/part time wanna-be really has zero skin in the game if the shots don't turn out. The number of photographic hopefuls that would venture into the water back in the days of film were much more limited because they couldn't shoot/preview/delete, and they were burning up hundreds of dollars in film and processing costs that they were going to eat if nothing came out. Now Joe the accountant/aspiring pro gets to plunk down $800 for a Rebel and a lens and claim "I are a professional".
You might think that these entry level aspiring shooters don't affect the bottom line of more seasoned pros, but I think that's underestimating their impact. My day rate is well north of two grand and I'm very well established in some pretty lofty circles, but these newbies still cost me thousands of dollars a month. Will they run me out of business? Nope. Do I get frantic calls to come and reshoot something after it's been botched by someone who grabbed at the gold ring and missed by a mile? Yup. That being said, there has to be a lot of work out there that gets done by these folks, and it's deemed "good enough" given the cost.
Photographers, and I'm aiming squarely at Pro shooters, not every amateur with a Rebel, ruined the stock market long ago. The big stock agencies came to a handful of photographers and offered them five or ten thousand dollars for a gazillion, royalty free images. Those photographers jumped at the opportunity to make a chunk of cash up front, trading away the ability to make much more, incrementally over a longer period. Great stock a decade ago sold for between $250 and $5,000 depending upon the use. Now Getty and Corbis pay very accomplished photographers between fifty cents and five bucks for the same thing. We did it to ourselves by selling out for quick cash long before digital was a gleam in a rocket scientists eye.
What is the best strategy for a Pro these days? First I believe it is to be better by a mile than your competition. Better in terms of how you run your business, better in terms of how you service your client and of course, better as it pertains to your photographic/technical skills and vision. Another course that will help a Pro survive, if he or she has the chops, is to excel in markets "wanna-be" shooters can't touch with a ten foot pole. I shoot corporate/annual reports work for Fortune 100/500 companies. How many Rebel shooters can step up to the plate when the task is to be in a dozen cities in as many days, lighting and shooting constantly changing scenarios, CEO's that you have 5 minutes to meet, have them get comfortable with you, get the image and get out? The answer is none. Another of my markets is commercial and residential architecture. Sure some amateurs venture into this arena, but they don't have tilt-shift lenses and a hundred thousand bucks worth of lighting. Even if they did, they couldn't replicate the work a competent architectural guy can produce. One of my largest markets is aviation and I'll have to tell you that there are all kinds of folks salivating over the opportunity to hang around a vintage P-51 Mustang or a shiny new business jet and click a few pictures, they'd do it for next to nothing, or less. The subjects are so darn beautiful that a third grader with a point and shoot could come up with something decent, but load them in a photo aircraft with the doors off, or in the tail of a B-25 with the end removed and bounce them around for a while looking through a camera, then see what they produce, besides their last meal. Ask them to style and light the inside of a business jet, basically and aluminum tube filled with furniture and no power outlets, see who wants to be your competition there, very few. There are a half dozen people in the world who can really do an aircraft interior justice.
My point is, the true pro shooter who wants to survive needs to position himself/herself in markets that are virtually inaccessible to the ever increasing tsunami of digital "pro's". Any other strategy, I fear, will be like watching yourself bleed to death through a pin prick.
JW...Show more →
Dittos on the 'Great Post' reply.
Jim, LOVED the sound track on your aviation section===I got a pylon pass at the Reno air show one year and stood there as P51's roared by with a wingtip 20ft overhead. Your soundtrack brought that back and for that, I thank you.
On the arial photography--look out. My company is doing a lot of what is commercially called 'oblique photography' using drones to do the flying and selling large volume to industry. We don't post process (at least not individually) like you, and the image quality doesn't hold a candle to yours, but it's getting there.
|
