I figure the only way I'll be made obsolete is when computers becomes sentient, at which point fighting for my job will probably be the least of my worries
Yeah, you'll be busy fighting the robots that took your job, probably with lasers.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
NYTimes: Amateurs keep Photogs from feeding kids
- Thread starter El Cabong
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, you'll be busy fighting the robots that took your job, probably with lasers.
in the digital era, taking nice photos is fun and low-cost.
If no one wants to pay me for my photos, or give donations, so be it...I still give many photos away for free.
It is a form of free content that brings visitors to my website.
this type of "free content" whether images, words (blogs), apps, whatever, will continue...in many ways it is the new paradigm—free content with revenue from advertising. (but don't tell Apple, they like to have their cake, and eat it too).
many photographers are "pro" because of connections and relationships, not because they take great pictures...
want some great free hi res photos?....go to my website!
If no one wants to pay me for my photos, or give donations, so be it...I still give many photos away for free.
It is a form of free content that brings visitors to my website.
this type of "free content" whether images, words (blogs), apps, whatever, will continue...in many ways it is the new paradigm—free content with revenue from advertising. (but don't tell Apple, they like to have their cake, and eat it too).
many photographers are "pro" because of connections and relationships, not because they take great pictures...
want some great free hi res photos?....go to my website!
Bah! You'll never get anywhere with that lens. You need this to be considered a "real" pro.
Or a stalker lol
This is a good way to look at it and it should be a fair warning that always wanting things for cheaper and cheaper if not free is at some point going to put people out of business who were not directly in that path.
I don't do many events, but one that I do cover pays in the mid five digits for a week's work and is one of the most well known global think tanks on earth. I have seen and met past presidents, nobel laureates, etc. So I get to sit in on and be a part of some pretty heady stuff in terms of where *we* are all going next, who will be on top and who is headed for the human scrap heap. The loss of photo, writing and other creative jobs is not good actually, it is not great for amateurs in the long run because a lot of the things they looked up to as artists them selves are going away and being cheapened. I used to hold Time magazine in high regard, did some great work for them. Now look at them, look at how bad their covers are, it's a waste..
What I am saying is that we can't keep pushing the bar lower and lower as a consumer because if people have lower revenues, then they spend less and that means they will spend less on your product or service if you spend less on theirs.
At some point, rallying for a "Free-conomy" is going to have dire effects for everyone, the crash of 08 shows how delicately this is all balanced.
So by some number of photographers losing their jobs, it is not out of the realm of possibility that the trickle down effect will see that one or two of you will lose your current job, it really does work that way.
Free or cheap is not always good for everyone, somewhere, somehow, it is going to "Cost".
I don't do many events, but one that I do cover pays in the mid five digits for a week's work and is one of the most well known global think tanks on earth. I have seen and met past presidents, nobel laureates, etc. So I get to sit in on and be a part of some pretty heady stuff in terms of where *we* are all going next, who will be on top and who is headed for the human scrap heap. The loss of photo, writing and other creative jobs is not good actually, it is not great for amateurs in the long run because a lot of the things they looked up to as artists them selves are going away and being cheapened. I used to hold Time magazine in high regard, did some great work for them. Now look at them, look at how bad their covers are, it's a waste..
What I am saying is that we can't keep pushing the bar lower and lower as a consumer because if people have lower revenues, then they spend less and that means they will spend less on your product or service if you spend less on theirs.
At some point, rallying for a "Free-conomy" is going to have dire effects for everyone, the crash of 08 shows how delicately this is all balanced.
So by some number of photographers losing their jobs, it is not out of the realm of possibility that the trickle down effect will see that one or two of you will lose your current job, it really does work that way.
Free or cheap is not always good for everyone, somewhere, somehow, it is going to "Cost".
So the good news is that the NYT article only tells one side of the story.
Pretty much the middle of the road and lower is being harshly affected. Big impacts are on generic stock, weddings and events and PJ work. Anyone who is in the top of their game in those sectors are most likely safer because they have the time and capitol to out-think and out-shoot the brace of changes.
For example, I saw the stock thing coming 15 years ago, I made the conscious choice to not join Getty, saw that they were heading into the crapper. I also shoot a hard to access and yet very much sought after niche in a niche local. So even though sales are down, I still do far better in stock than my competition who joined Getty years back, I do it all underground, on a site that is not for my competition or even you to know about and see, it works.
Overall, this quarter has seen a 40% increase in gross revenue. But I have diversified, not doing weddings or run of the mill events diversified, but have taken full advantage of technology and keep well ahead of the pack. I also have had zero debt for over 8 years and invest wisely in my tools.
So all in all, I have done things that keep me comfortably employed as a full time shooter.
To make it as a full time shooter today, you have to be a professional. And that does not just mean billing for your services. You have to do things in camera your competition can not, you have to be a trend setter, not a follower and you HAVE to put your self in the shoes of your client, fully help them achieve their goals. Just because you take decent images and bill it no longer means you are a pro, anyone can do that.
What makes a professional now is a person who is incredible at what they do with a level of service that is peerless and final results that truly make anything else look like a joke. There is no "Semi-Pro" anymore, you are either a full time professional who is at the top of their game or you are simply not a professional....or at least you won't be much longer.
There will still be millions of dollars in income to be earned in photography, you just have to be good enough and driven enough to figure out where that opportunity lies.
Pretty much the middle of the road and lower is being harshly affected. Big impacts are on generic stock, weddings and events and PJ work. Anyone who is in the top of their game in those sectors are most likely safer because they have the time and capitol to out-think and out-shoot the brace of changes.
For example, I saw the stock thing coming 15 years ago, I made the conscious choice to not join Getty, saw that they were heading into the crapper. I also shoot a hard to access and yet very much sought after niche in a niche local. So even though sales are down, I still do far better in stock than my competition who joined Getty years back, I do it all underground, on a site that is not for my competition or even you to know about and see, it works.
Overall, this quarter has seen a 40% increase in gross revenue. But I have diversified, not doing weddings or run of the mill events diversified, but have taken full advantage of technology and keep well ahead of the pack. I also have had zero debt for over 8 years and invest wisely in my tools.
So all in all, I have done things that keep me comfortably employed as a full time shooter.
To make it as a full time shooter today, you have to be a professional. And that does not just mean billing for your services. You have to do things in camera your competition can not, you have to be a trend setter, not a follower and you HAVE to put your self in the shoes of your client, fully help them achieve their goals. Just because you take decent images and bill it no longer means you are a pro, anyone can do that.
What makes a professional now is a person who is incredible at what they do with a level of service that is peerless and final results that truly make anything else look like a joke. There is no "Semi-Pro" anymore, you are either a full time professional who is at the top of their game or you are simply not a professional....or at least you won't be much longer.
There will still be millions of dollars in income to be earned in photography, you just have to be good enough and driven enough to figure out where that opportunity lies.
This used to be the case but is no longer. Now you truly do have to offer work that is far above what most amateurs consider good. I think part of the problem of perception is sites like these and Flickr in which they are nothing more than gear-centric, back patting circle jerks in which there is no real critique, just "Great Capture" and "Wow, nice bokeh"....and nothing else.
So then you go to the site of said "Great Free Hi Res Photos" and see very little that is even average.
Most amateurs and even some pros think they are way better than they actually are and it is the photo communities like Flickr and others that perpetuate this fallacy.
Careful there. Many of history's greatest photos have been among the simplest and most straightforward. Migrant Mother and Afghan Girl are not among the most complicated photos ever taken, but the photographers who took the images (Lange and McCurry in this case) did great work in getting there and capturing the moment in a remarkable way.
Let's not lose sight of the reality that many people value simplicity and success is not a matter of who can awe people best with technology.
Let's not lose sight of the reality that many people value simplicity and success is not a matter of who can awe people best with technology.
Yes. I stopped using flickr over a year ago, I only go back to check on the strobist boards for occasional inspiration or time killing.
Looking at the comments is soooo bewildering. Its people masturbating with their camera and keyboard, IMO.
That is why I don't allow comments on my photoblog. If you like it, awesome. Hearing it from you won't benefit my skill set in any way, it only serves to stroke one's ego.
I would much rather you email me and tell me you will pay me to photograph something for you
Yes. I stopped using flickr over a year ago, I only go back to check on the strobist boards for occasional inspiration or time killing.
Looking at the comments is soooo bewildering. Its people masturbating with their camera and keyboard, IMO.
That is why I don't allow comments on my photoblog. If you like it, awesome. Hearing it from you won't benefit my skill set in any way, it only serves to stroke one's ego.
I would much rather you email me and tell me you will pay me to photograph something for you
While I completely agree about Flickr et al not being filled with useless commenters, I would only add one small caveat: any publicity for your work is good.
I have sold two images in the last month, both for sizeable chunks of money, based on clients finding my work on Flickr. While I try to blog most of my best work, I figure that I can safely ignore the comments on Flickr, while still benefiting from the exposure.
I'm an amateur and I know for sure I suck
I post what I think are my better images on my public picasa album and have gotten lots of views but no comments. I wish people would give me some criticism. Hopefully I'll have time for an upcoming photography class where the instructor will make it a point to give some good CC.
That is a very good point.
I did not delete my flickr account, but rather, stopped adding to it.
Someone contacted me for a band shoot because they saw some older work on my flickr, googled my name, saw my portfolio, then emailed me.
Maybe I should reconsider?
I guess another one of my concerns with having an active flickr account is that is is just one more "account" I don't really want. Its bad enough that I have to upload my photos to my computer, edit them, export them from aperture, touch up where needed in photoshop, upload to photoblog. I guess uploading to flickr couldn't hurt...
Are there applications that can bring them straight from aperture to flickr or something? I think I remember seeing that somewhere?
This is the best way to go about critique, in person. You would think that people online would be more honest since they are hiding behind screen names like "Macshroomer" but oddly, it is not the case and I have a hunch that it has to do with fear of retribution on their own images.
I also think that while exposure on flickr is good, it is also bad. The problem being that as countries like the UK fight for "Orphan Works" bills making the web even more of a free for all, the exposure to image theft starts to outweigh the exposure for sales.
There is more carnage to follow, this is not done hashing it self out yet. Wait until a few ad agencies, news agencies and magazines get sued in using amateur work because either the image was not property, model released or that fantastic user content breaking news image was actually inaccurate, misrepresented or flat out fake and libels someone.
The transition is not over, the world still wants to see great photography that is not oozing in HDR or graphic art derivatives while the aggregators of free content and cheap photoshopped imagery desperately try to make some think otherwise..
Well... I may as well link to a pro's site, too--just to keep things in perspective...
As far as commenting on photos on this forum... I'm not willing to be pigeon-holed quite as simply as macshroomer makes his case for. Let's take a step back here, and consider the difference between a professional critique and feedback on a somewhat socially driven forum. It would seem a bit obvious that the quality and depth of the criticism offered here would be varied and inconsistent--no argument there. But, only speaking for myself, I try to be honest in my feedback. Sometimes it's very brief, other times I put more time into it. Some photos are well done, and I just feel like congratulating the person on having done/made a nice image. And all things in between. I'm not obligated to put much time into any of the feedback, so I do what I feel like I have the energy and time for--nothing more, nothing less. Also, I consider the actual forum, and its purpose. Most people asking for feedback are just trying to learn, so pointing them in the right direction without skewering them with how ordinary or even bad their picture is doesn't seem to accomplish anything really positive here, unless our intent is to simply run off anyone who is beginning, learning their stuff, or isn't in a group of folks who already can produce pretty darn good images. But... that isn't the intent here. Quite the opposite, actually. So, in an environment which hopefully provides a fairly "safe" place to ask for feedback, I think the feedback is actually far superior here to what you'd find on Flickr--no comparison, actually. Flickr is a fawning, sugary place. This isn't. Debates break out. Philosophy about anything gets tossed about, and given a fair shake. Often, some people seek improvement while others simply post images without asking for feedback (speaking mainly of the POTD thread.) When someone posts a new thread asking for CC, more often than not, they get some. It seems pretty straightforward to me.
Now, I know you can take criticism to another level--the pro level or the .PhD level in art criticism or whatever, with no holds barred and take it or leave it criticism from cynical judges, who are often right. It can be a cruel world, where entry is difficult because your ticket has to be punched by the right people, based on their criteria. But, so what?? Not everyone needs to go there. There are so many degrees of "good" that people seek, and they encompass a lot of forms--composition, color, subject, emotion, etc... and with the tools available to so many people today that are much more capable than anything the average person could get his hands on in the decades past, learning to raise one's ability to even know what direction in which to look for improvement is often all the criticism that is needed... so they can come here.
As far as commenting on photos on this forum... I'm not willing to be pigeon-holed quite as simply as macshroomer makes his case for. Let's take a step back here, and consider the difference between a professional critique and feedback on a somewhat socially driven forum. It would seem a bit obvious that the quality and depth of the criticism offered here would be varied and inconsistent--no argument there. But, only speaking for myself, I try to be honest in my feedback. Sometimes it's very brief, other times I put more time into it. Some photos are well done, and I just feel like congratulating the person on having done/made a nice image. And all things in between. I'm not obligated to put much time into any of the feedback, so I do what I feel like I have the energy and time for--nothing more, nothing less. Also, I consider the actual forum, and its purpose. Most people asking for feedback are just trying to learn, so pointing them in the right direction without skewering them with how ordinary or even bad their picture is doesn't seem to accomplish anything really positive here, unless our intent is to simply run off anyone who is beginning, learning their stuff, or isn't in a group of folks who already can produce pretty darn good images. But... that isn't the intent here. Quite the opposite, actually. So, in an environment which hopefully provides a fairly "safe" place to ask for feedback, I think the feedback is actually far superior here to what you'd find on Flickr--no comparison, actually. Flickr is a fawning, sugary place. This isn't. Debates break out. Philosophy about anything gets tossed about, and given a fair shake. Often, some people seek improvement while others simply post images without asking for feedback (speaking mainly of the POTD thread.) When someone posts a new thread asking for CC, more often than not, they get some. It seems pretty straightforward to me.
Now, I know you can take criticism to another level--the pro level or the .PhD level in art criticism or whatever, with no holds barred and take it or leave it criticism from cynical judges, who are often right. It can be a cruel world, where entry is difficult because your ticket has to be punched by the right people, based on their criteria. But, so what?? Not everyone needs to go there. There are so many degrees of "good" that people seek, and they encompass a lot of forms--composition, color, subject, emotion, etc... and with the tools available to so many people today that are much more capable than anything the average person could get his hands on in the decades past, learning to raise one's ability to even know what direction in which to look for improvement is often all the criticism that is needed... so they can come here.