|
Well, today I'm going down to the local newspaper to sign a freelance contract. It's not the kind of thing I ultimately want to do, but I'm looking forward to shooting. Besides, this is the best thing I've got after a month and a half with no job. They don't pay much so it seems I'll have to supplement that income either by shooting elsewhere or having a part time job. I'm a little scared, actually. I just sort of stumbled into this through a series of events, and it represents a leap from the regular clock-in clock-out jobs I've had all my life into real photography. Besides the night and weekend hours, low pay, and leftover assignments, anyone else know what I should expect out of this?
|
| # ? Dec 3, 2008 13:25 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2013 07:34 |
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:VR and real-estate photography I briefly shot for an Ottawa photographer who does both stills and VR tours for houses. He's got a great business going, mainly because people are far more likely to be interested in a house where they can see every aspect before even stepping foot in it. The difficult part is in building up an initial client base, because many real-estate agents figure the difference isn't worth it until they see the results.
|
| # ? Dec 4, 2008 19:08 |
|
|
Haha, seems like strobist is advocating doing projects for free now: http://strobist.blogspot.com/2008/1...orking-for.html Not laughing at him though, he's going through some rough times.
|
| # ? Dec 5, 2008 16:21 |
|
|
LuisX posted:Haha, seems like strobist is advocating doing projects for free now: I'm not sure if he's talking about really working for free, exactly, or kinda advocating time-for-CD type work? I'll give it a deeper read later, maybe. More importantly, I think strobist guy has been running his website and not working as a photographer for to long to be commenting on this kind of thing.
|
| # ? Dec 5, 2008 16:24 |
|
|
TsarAleksi posted:I'm not sure if he's talking about really working for free, exactly, or kinda advocating time-for-CD type work? I'll give it a deeper read later, maybe. It's kind of a misleading title. When you're the one starting the project, you're not working for anyone, so you aren't really working for free. He's basically suggesting people stop waiting for someone to pay them to shoot what they want, and go out and shoot what they want, and eat their own time/dime to do it. For instance, I love taking photos of attractive people in interesting environments. If I meet someone that I think would make a good model, and have an idea for a shoot. I ask them to come sit for me. I don't ask them to pay me for it, because it was my idea. That's his general gist. Also I'm pretty sure he's been shooting freelance for papers consistently, but the blog pays most of his bills. Even if he hadn't been shooting for 20 years, the advice is good.
|
| # ? Dec 5, 2008 18:08 |
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:It's kind of a misleading title. When you're the one starting the project, you're not working for anyone, so you aren't really working for free. He's basically suggesting people stop waiting for someone to pay them to shoot what they want, and go out and shoot what they want, and eat their own time/dime to do it. Ah, I see. That makes sense... but it's pretty darn obvious that you should explore creative subjects even if your not getting paid, I guess.
|
| # ? Dec 5, 2008 18:26 |
|
|
LuisX posted:Haha, seems like strobist is advocating doing projects for free now: Of course he thinks you should work for free, he's (one of many) unemployed press guys with work that is nothing special who has to write a blog and sell seminars to pay the bills. What a joke. I guess he is finding out that the real world of freelancing is a lot harder than his old job with that weekly paycheck. He basically just announced to the world that no one wants to hire him and his work is worth $0. Gee I can't imagine why he isn't getting more assignments, maybe it's because he's out working for free instead of building his business or finding clients who DO pay. The only way that advice is valid is if you are an amateur who has no portfolio, no experience, and is not aspiring to be a pro any time soon. Things you should do instead of working for free: 1. Marketing. Instead of losing money on a job for a client who thinks you are worth nothing you could be researching and reaching out to clients who do pay and value photography. This seems obvious to me but what do I know. 2. Produce personal work. Make yourself the client, set a budget, trade or collaborate with other creatives. Maybe this is what he was getting at but just said it in a retarded way, but doing personal work on your own time and dime is not the same as approaching businesses and offering to do something for $0 and then let them use the images. If you're not getting a paycheck then no one else should be using your poo poo commercially. 3. Assisting. Volunteering with your professional organization. Networking. 4. Organizing or running your business are all better uses of your time. Set up Quickbooks. Write a business plan. Write a marketing plan. Redo your website. Find an accountant. Read a business book. Make cold calls / call your old clients and see how they are doing. Download some retouching tutorials from Lynda.com. etc. All of his reasons are bullshit. Free gets you access? A certificate of insurance gets you access. Free gives you control? Having a solid vision and selling that to clients gives you control. If you can't sell clients on it then make yourself the client and produce your own assignments. Free gets you better jobs or more real work? This is the biggest lie that has been told to aspiring creatives since the beginning of time. Also: quote:But I Don't Want to be Branded as a Free Photographer. Says the guy who shoots bar mitzvahs and works for free in between blog posts. But I bet these crappy "business" articles with questionable advice get lots of hits to bring in that sweet, sweet Adsense money he probably desperately needs since he can't find paying work. I'm sure John Harrington had a seizure when he read that post, can't wait to see what he says... brad industry fucked around with this message at Dec 5, 2008 around 19:28 |
| # ? Dec 5, 2008 19:26 |
|
|
Did you already posted on his blog? There's a guy who also wonders what would Harrington says. Edit: Oh poo poo you are all over the place. LuisX fucked around with this message at Dec 5, 2008 around 21:26 |
| # ? Dec 5, 2008 21:10 |
|
|
That's not me, no. I just can't believe a guy who admits that his business sucks so much he has to work for free to get his name out just wrote an article telling other people to go do the same. Doing TFCD and collaborating with other people for your book is completely different from hitting up your local chamber of commerce offering to work for nothing. Does he think other business owners can't smell the desperation? How do you convince people that you deserve a real rate or a budget to cover expenses when you offer to walk in and do it for free? I am no expert authority or anything but goddamn, if you want to be a professional you have to realize you are running a business and treat it like that, especially in this business where you are basically worth as much as you say you are. A day spent working on marketing is 100% better than any $0 job you could be out doing instead. edit: I just skimmed the comments, notice how all the people who say "Yeah I did something for free and it led to ____" are all doing lower-end consumer stuff like family portraits or dog photos (not that there is anything wrong with that, just that I think most people are aiming a little higher). No one is on there saying "I did an editorial shoot for free and it led to a cover" or "I did some headshots for free and got a 5 figure ad campaign." If you want to know how to succeed in this tough market and economy go read that last article I posted. Working for free is the complete opposite of what you should be doing. brad industry fucked around with this message at Dec 5, 2008 around 22:21 |
| # ? Dec 5, 2008 22:04 |
|
|
Gotcha, I went to Harrington's blog and I saw someone pointing him at the strobist blog, thought it was you. You may not be the #1 expert in the photo-business, but you (and others like you in these forums) are all we have. Some pro photographers are talking about how doing projects led them to higher end jobs. Chase Jarvis chimed in betting that most pro-photogs started doing something for free in their early days. I remember Dave Hill saying something akin to that too (pissing off local photogs with his low-low prices and getting national-scale gigs after that).
|
| # ? Dec 5, 2008 22:19 |
|
|
Chase Jarvis and Dave Hill both have extremely unique, well defined visions and they are both excellent at marketing that to art buyers. That is why they got larger jobs, not because they were willing to take low-pay work when they were starting out. The first pro jobs I starting doing about a year ago were $100 a pop editorial shoots. Those led to bigger and better things but it was because of the work I produced and how I presented it to other clients (for all they know I got paid thousands, they don't see the invoice or know how old I am). I sure as hell don't tell anyone that I worked for that little, much less use it as a marketing strategy like the Strobist guy is saying. I think there is a subtle but important difference between taking a $100 job that is being offered and actively marketing yourself as someone who works for cheap/free and seeking it out if that makes sense. Taking the job is doing them a favor and proving that you are as good as you say you are for larger jobs (with them or someone else), offering/begging to do it for $0-100 is shouting with a megaphone that you are desperate as gently caress and you can't be trusted with a big job because even you don't think you're worth it or can handle it. I don't want to get too much into  you are your own brand, man but it's true. You have to create the perception that "you" the brand is worth it.
|
| # ? Dec 5, 2008 23:49 |
|
|
brad industry posted:Chase Jarvis and Dave Hill both have extremely unique, well defined visions and they are both excellent at marketing that to art buyers. That is why they got larger jobs, not because they were willing to take low-pay work when they were starting out. It really doesnīt seem like you read the post. He isnīt advocating showing up for advertised gigs and doing them for free. He is suggesting people not wait for money to do a type of project they want. He specifically mentioned coming up with a vision or statement, and then setting out to shoot those type of photos, planning the shoot yourself, even though there isnīt a client backing it financially. When you are the one with the plan, vision, and the one who invited everyone else to show up (model, stylist, whatever), you're the boss, and you aren't working for free, even if the other people involved get to use the photos elsewhere afterward. He's basically talking about TFP. I'll admit he used a dumb title.
|
| # ? Dec 6, 2008 01:31 |
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:It really doesnīt seem like you read the post. He isnīt advocating showing up for advertised gigs and doing them for free. He is suggesting people not wait for money to do a type of project they want. He specifically mentioned coming up with a vision or statement, and then setting out to shoot those type of photos, planning the shoot yourself, even though there isnīt a client backing it financially.
|
| # ? Dec 6, 2008 03:11 |
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:He's basically talking about TFP. I'll admit he used a dumb title. Yeah I don't understand why he didn't just make a post about doing personal work, the first time I read it all this "working for free" and "free = access" implied to me approaching people to do projects for nothing which to me is stupid. I guess it would have been harder to stretch out "hay guys you can do projects all by yourself without a client!!!" into that many paragraphs. Anyways, there is a forum for emerging/young photographers that just got started up over here: toomuchchocolate.org So far it looks like it is going to be really good, mostly because the guy running it is moderating the sign ups and he is doing a great job. The discussions so far are really intelligent and I think it is going to be a cool project. You have to be actively pursuing a career in editorial/fine art and have a portfolio to view to sign up, if you meet the criteria you should do it. brad industry fucked around with this message at Dec 6, 2008 around 20:38 |
| # ? Dec 6, 2008 19:23 |
|
|
brad industry posted:Anyways, there is a forum for emerging/young photographers that just got started up over here: toomuchchocolate.org
|
| # ? Dec 7, 2008 00:56 |
|
|
Signing up for TMC myself, this should be interesting.
|
| # ? Dec 7, 2008 15:42 |
|
|
brad industry posted:You have to be actively pursuing a career in editorial/fine art and have a portfolio to view to sign up, if you meet the criteria you should do it. Absolutely no hobbyists? I enjoy taking pictures, am looking to get better and am not ken rockwell.
|
| # ? Dec 7, 2008 19:49 |
|
|
How long does it take to get accepted?
|
| # ? Dec 7, 2008 19:55 |
|
|
There are tons of forums for amateurs and hobbyists already, they're keeping it more exclusive so that the discussions can stay on topics relevant to young professionals. I don't want to sound like an elitist dick or anything but every photo forum on the internet has the same problems (from my perspective) - people who are actually working are outnumbered 100:1 by mid-life crisis bird watchers, internet fad fanatics, nerds obsessed with gear, big-fish-in-little-pond people with awful work, etc. Not that there is anything wrong with that, just that I know for me personally it is very hard to connect with other people at similar points in their career to talk about the things we deal with on a daily basis and that is what TMC is trying to be. I'm not sure how interesting it would be to hobbyists anyways, most of the topics don't have anything to do with actually making photos. Anyways John Harrington put up an excellent response to the "work for free" thing: http://photobusinessforum.blogspot....ary-and_07.html brad industry fucked around with this message at Dec 7, 2008 around 21:37 |
| # ? Dec 7, 2008 20:33 |
|
|
All my professional work is in weddings. I would really like to expand my business and am considering a move to a bigger city to work as an assistant/photographer. Is this forum a) going to let me in b) going to help me at all?
|
| # ? Dec 7, 2008 20:49 |
|
|
I guess I won't be accepted. I'm just a teenager with distant ambitions to go professional. Anyways, looks like I'll have to charge my friend to take some portraits of her. Is undercharging just as big a sin as doing it for free?
|
| # ? Dec 7, 2008 21:14 |
|
|
Has anyone that's gotten in think the discussion is worth the hassle to getting accepted? I'm a professional retoucher with no portfolio(heee) and I don't want to have to try and convince dude I am for reals (if it's lame, you know!)
ferdinand fucked around with this message at Dec 7, 2008 around 21:40 |
| # ? Dec 7, 2008 21:36 |
|
|
I think (so far) it easily the best photo forum I have been on, the discussions are intelligent and the topics are actually poo poo worth talking about. I am pretty much the target audience for this though. If you are pursuing a career as an editorial/fine art photographer then yes, you should sign up. Otherwise no, I don't think you would get much out of it because it's not aimed at you. Honestly I think most hobbyists would think it was boring. I'm looking at it right now, 5 threads at the top of the list: -how to approach a photo agency and ask for representation -how to write an artist statement? -creating/making/releasing your own book -post your most recent job -photographic theory
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 04:00 |
|
|
brad industry posted:I think (so far) it easily the best photo forum I have been on, the discussions are intelligent and the topics are actually poo poo worth talking about. I am pretty much the target audience for this though. If you are pursuing a career as an editorial/fine art photographer then yes, you should sign up. Otherwise no, I don't think you would get much out of it because it's not aimed at you. Honestly I think most hobbyists would think it was boring.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 05:14 |
|
|
brad industry posted:I think (so far) it easily the best photo forum I have been on, the discussions are intelligent and the topics are actually poo poo worth talking about. I am pretty much the target audience for this though. If you are pursuing a career as an editorial/fine art photographer then yes, you should sign up. Otherwise no, I don't think you would get much out of it because it's not aimed at you. Honestly I think most hobbyists would think it was boring. I would love it if it had read-only access for non-members, ala Something Awful. that's just me though. I always wanted a modern definition of fine art.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 05:43 |
|
|
LuisX posted:I always wanted a modern definition of fine art. Titties.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 05:51 |
|
|
HPL posted:Titties. So I guess met-art 
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 07:53 |
|
|
Fragrag posted:How long does it take to get accepted? Not sure. I can, however, tell you that it took 3 days to get rejected.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 08:50 |
|
|
Guys, there's a million-and-one photo forums across the internet; I know Brad Industry is the bees knees around here (with good reason), but don't get all heartbroken and butthurt if something he recommends isn't right for you yet. I want to make more money out of my photography too in the future, but I can recognize that at this point a site like that is beyond the scope of what I'm doing.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 15:10 |
|
|
Thinking about the whole "working-for-free" issue, reminded me of the following article posted in this thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/sh...hreadid=2874026 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...0302837_pf.html quote:What people don't think about, writes Jim Frederick in The Baffler (#9), is the economic impact of these industries' growing dependence on the countless hours of labor provided by young, willing, unpaid workers. Take MTV -- probably one of the choicest internships around. Frederick reports that the network uses between 150 and 200 unpaid interns at any given time and requires from each at least two days a week of work. If MTV's army of interns were to be paid minimum wage, he estimates that the cost would set the network back some $642,270 a year. Extending the same formula to the estimated 40,000 unpaid internships that are filled each year nationwide ? and assuming that they each last 12 weeks ? he comes up with a whopping cost savings (for business) or wage loss (for interns) of $39.5 million. You guys think that there are some parallels? Harlan Ellison summed it up when he described the highlighted people above as media whores.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 16:12 |
|
|
LuisX posted:You guys think that there are some parallels? Harlan Ellison summed it up when he described the highlighted people above as media whores. The companies are giving greenhorns the chance to get some experience and network in exchange for their labour. It's almost like an extension of college or university where it's twice as bad because the students are paying thousands of dollars for the chance to study and absolutely no guarantee of future security. If you intern for a media giant like MTV, you're potentially fast-tracking your career by years as opposed to the traditional path of starting out by grinding it out in some little UHF station in Alaska because they're the only place that would hire you with no experience.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 16:29 |
|
|
I can't help but get a feeling from reading Harrington's blog that he's just concerned that many companies are starting to not care whether or not someone is a "Professional" photographer, and would rather pay joe blow to do the job for less money/free. He is essentially saying "Hey assholes, stop taking away my work!" Photography being such an accessible hobby is definitely the root of the problem. However, chest puffing about his worth as a photographer over the boring hobbyist that's taking his jobs still isn't going to change the fact that many companies just don't give a poo poo. Meanwhile all these people doing it for a hobby continue to do it for cheap/free because they simply get a thrill from others seeing their work published in something. I think it's good that aspiring professional photographers have their own forum where they can talk to each other. They have legitimate things to discuss that do not apply to me or many other photo hobbyists. While I'd like to see their opinion on fine art, etc., there are blogs for that and I don't really need to muddy-up their discussions. Its hard not to detect a bit of elitism in a Professionals-Only forum, but its not unexpected. Brad, answering honestly, do you feel most professionals have a chip on their shoulder for hobbyists? I personally couldn't blame them. Certain photographers are certainly going to weather the storm and continue to make a good living, but the aspiring ones definitely have it hard, and it is only going to get worse.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 16:32 |
|
|
I think there will always be a need for professionals. If I ran a company and needed a photo on time, on budget and guaranteed quality, I'd hire a pro for sure. Part of the problem is that photographers aren't doing a good job of educating the public as to what all goes into the photographers fees. I can take myself as an example. Every time my friends would get married, they'd always be complaining about how much the photographer cost and back then, I would be amazed right along with them. Once I started doing actual photography as opposed to dinking around with a point & shoot, I started to realize just why it cost so much, especially from a time perspective.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 16:38 |
|
|
I don't think that hobbyists are really a problem. If someone is willing to hire joe Drebel to shoot for him then either that guy has a better book than you or the client is more concerned with cost than quality. We have the same problems in the wedding business. I always tell my potential clients that they should hire me because they like my style not my price point. Bargain shoppers are the worst people to work for. There will always be a market for good photography and one for cheap photography.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 16:42 |
|
|
As neither a pro, nor a hobbyist with aspirations, I see this without any personal impact. The problem seems to be that by "hiring" an amateur, you're essentially saying you just don't care about the quality. You'd rather have something for free than pay for something good. Might you get something good? Sure, we've got some amazing amateurs right here. What's your recourse if you don't, though? Zip. And the guys doing for free jobs that should be paid for are not ultimately helping themselves. I do some stuff for my wife's church and my son's daycare, but in neither case is it anything that would be paid for under any circumstances. Generally, it's "this would be improved with some photos, let me help" as opposed to, "we're looking for a photographer, can you do it." I see this as an important distinction.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 17:30 |
|
|
I have a family friend who is currently trying to get caught up on digital but doesnt have time for classes. She was a pro shooter years ago and shot film, anyway she wants me to start giving her lessons on work flow management, photoshop, dSLR and other various digital aspects of photography. What should I charge for this kind of work?
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 18:32 |
|
|
raggedphoto posted:What should I charge for this kind of work? Check around town and see what other people are charging for classes of a similar nature. No point in short-changing yourself. What you're teaching her could potentially save her hundreds if not thousands of dollars in labour time.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 18:42 |
|
|
I wouldn't charge a friend for giving a few lessons in all things digital. I feel weird accepting money for stuff like that. Hell I feel guilty charging friends to shoot their weddings (even the very small amount I charge them).
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 18:47 |
|
|
8th-samurai posted:I wouldn't charge a friend for giving a few lessons in all things digital. I feel weird accepting money for stuff like that. Hell I feel guilty charging friends to shoot their weddings (even the very small amount I charge them). Ordinarily I'd agree, but it sounds like what she's asking for may turn into quite a lengthy venture. Teaching her "photoshop" may take quite a while depending on how good she is with computers etc etc.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 18:54 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2013 07:34 |
|
|
RangerScum posted:Brad, answering honestly, do you feel most professionals have a chip on their shoulder for hobbyists? I personally couldn't blame them. Certain photographers are certainly going to weather the storm and continue to make a good living, but the aspiring ones definitely have it hard, and it is only going to get worse. No I don't think most do. In my opinion if your business is threatened by amateurs then your work sucks to begin with or you are scraping the bottom of the barrel for clients anyways. I think there are some people doing events or low-end consumer work who bitch about mom's with DSLRs and things like that but for everyone else amateurs aren't even on the radar. The kinds of people who will "hire" a free photographer would never pay for one to begin with, don't value photography, don't give a poo poo about quality, think you are just some idiot who pushes buttons, and are going to run to every other lovely client in your area and tell them about how you will work for free. While you are off busting your rear end for clients who don't and never will give a poo poo, all the ones who do value photography are all thinking, "If he's charging nothing/cheap he must have no clue what he's doing and isn't a real pro, why would I hire him for an assignment or give him job with X budget? He won't be able to handle it." There are thousands of wannabes out there who think they are photographers and are desperate for any job, no matter how lovely the client or how little it pays. If you are for real trying to start a business you don't want to be like all those guys. 8th-samurai posted:We have the same problems in the wedding business. I always tell my potential clients that they should hire me because they like my style not my price point. Bargain shoppers are the worst people to work for. This is why I have no desire to do consumer work, because the vast majority of normal people don't know anything about photography and don't have any clue why they should pay for it. I want clients who see my work and understand my vision and know that that is worth paying for.
|
| # ? Dec 8, 2008 18:56 |
|
