Story   Photographer   Editor   Student/Intern   Assistant   Job/Item

SportsShooter.com: The Online Resource for Sports Photography

Contents:
 Front Page
 Member Index
 Latest Headlines
 Special Features
 'Fun Pix'
 Message Board
 Educate Yourself
 Equipment Profiles
 Bookshelf
 my.SportsShooter
 Classified Ads
 Workshop
Contests:
 Monthly Clip Contest
 Annual Contest
 Rules/Info
Newsletter:
 Current Issue
 Back Issues
 Subscribe
Members:
 Members Area
 "The Guide"
 Join
About Us:
 About SportsShooter
 Contact Us
 Terms & Conditions


Sign in:
Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features.

Name:



Password:







||
SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board

FREE FREE AND FREE
Jesse Beals, Photographer
Silverdale | WA | USA | Posted: 12:12 AM on 12.18.08
->> http://mickwhite.org/kvs/

Yeah at this rate we will all be out of the newspaper field of sports photography.

Free photos to anybody. 54 photographers and counting in Washington State have signed up.

Hello un-employment "HELLO"
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Kirby Yau, Photographer, Assistant
San Diego | CA | USA | Posted: 12:18 AM on 12.18.08
->> http://mickwhite.org/kvs/photographers.htm

Wow thats a lot of retired dentists.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (1) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 12:39 AM on 12.18.08
->> Maybe someone should explain to him what the ramifications of his "public service" is?

http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/2014
http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/1989
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (1) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Renay Johnson, Photographer, Assistant
San Diego | CA | | Posted: 2:22 AM on 12.18.08
->> Apparently he is looking to getting out of running the site and is looking for someone to take over. One of us could take it over and close it *evil grin*
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (1) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jesse Beals, Photographer
Silverdale | WA | USA | Posted: 2:57 AM on 12.18.08
->> Sad to see three of the shooters are in my county. It's no wonder the on-line high school photo sales have taken a nose dive this season compared to last year.

Why would parents buy the photos from the paper when they can get them for free.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 10:11 AM on 12.18.08
->> "Yeah at this rate we will all be out of the newspaper field of sports photography."

Only if you are shooting images that look exactly what their photogs are producing. If you are going sell in that market you need a better product and from the looks of the eight galleries I've seen so far, that wouldn't be too hard to do. Make great pictures and they'll move just fine.


"Why would parents buy the photos from the paper when they can get them for free."

1. Hopefully, the newspaper is producing a higher quality images.

2. Parents don't mind spending money on higher quality images if they possess the 'Basic Four' - face, ball, peak action & emotion. I've looked at eight galleries and the 54 PWCs images are worth exactly what they are offered for IMHO. Loose shots of butts and backs are not competitive images.
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Kevin Johnston, Photographer
Oden | MI | USA | Posted: 10:15 AM on 12.18.08
->> "Apparently he is looking to getting out of running the site and is looking for someone to take over."

I guess running a website for free doesn't work any better than shooting for free huh?
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (3) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Juliann Tallino, Photographer, Photo Editor
Port Townsend/Seattle | WA | USA | Posted: 11:18 AM on 12.18.08
->> I agree with Clark, I always see some GWC giving away photos for free at the games and events I shoot. You get what you pay for, they never really effect my sales. They've always been there. Some of them aren't even GWC's. I shot a basketball tournament last January that a players Dad who happened to be a commercial photographer was also shooting, he was giving his images to the kids for free. Understandable, he was doing his kids team a favor. But I'm still making sales from that tournament a year later, received an order this past week. I set up strobes, he shot available with a 5D. His stuff wasn't bad, looked okay in our tiny community newspaper, being a photographer he knew what he was doing, but the strobes made my images stand out from his in my opinion. Light wasn't very pretty in that old gym.
Anyone that passes up on a good photo for one of those free ones on that site wasn't going to buy anything anyway.

I just want to know how shooting a high school basketball game is considered a community service?
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Juliann Tallino, Photographer, Photo Editor
Port Townsend/Seattle | WA | USA | Posted: 11:30 AM on 12.18.08
->> I grabbed a couple of photos from 2 different galleries, they're tiny. 72dpi 800 x 533 px won't make much of a print. More likely kids are just grabbing them for their myspace page.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Kevin Sperl, Photographer
Gilford | nh | USA | Posted: 3:01 PM on 12.18.08
->> I look forward to the day when the majority of posts on this forum are filled with stories about how this group of talented photographers/business people have moved forward with their talents into new ventures as opposed to a lot of complaining about how things "ain't like they used to be."
 This post is:  Informative (9) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Adam Cairns, Photographer
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 3:21 PM on 12.18.08
->> I couldn't help but thing of Strong Bad when I saw the KVS website:

http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail51.html
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (2) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Michael Fischer, Photographer
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 3:24 PM on 12.18.08
->> Juliann beat me to it. Poor images versus good images that are strobed. If they just want a keep sake, they will do the freebie.

However, a certain portion of them will want something better. They will appreciate the difference in quality. Those are who you target.

The free shooters actually expand the potential base; the work is to find those who want something "more". This is marketing 101, folks.
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Eric Canha, Photographer
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 3:25 PM on 12.18.08
->> Kevin why not add world peace to the waiting list too.

Unfortunately many posts that focus on new ventures or paradigms get beaten to a bloody pulp. People trying something 'new' tends to scare the crap out of the 'old school' and is instantly met with posts of how it will ruin this model or that model.

I've watched as Clark has advised people to "start their own paper" and other members make similar posts about building new businesses, niche businesses based on their years of experience, simply die for lack of interest.

Don't get me wrong, I love it here, REALLY. I especially value some of the relationships that have been forged with members here behind the scenes. E-mails that go back and forth as new business models, and practices, get fleshed out. Robert could jack the rate to $50 or $100 and would still be the BEST c-note I'd spend all year. But that won't change the fact that fear will alway scram louder than hope.
 This post is:  Informative (3) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Scott Evans, Photographer
Bay Village | OH | USA | Posted: 3:27 PM on 12.18.08
->> amen Kevin. Just because I want to make sales does not mean the PWC owes it to me to be respectful of that. Why should they care and why should I even expect them to? Its up to me to adapt to a changing environment or find something else to to do.
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Allen Lester, Photographer
Norfolk | VA | USA | Posted: 3:49 PM on 12.18.08
->> And along the “FREE” services line….

We had the photography contract for a recent marathon, which, of course, requires that we buy the rights from the event owners. Well, the finish line sponsor came up with a great idea. They were going to shoot “All” of the finishers and give them the prints for “FREE”. Again this was without benefit of professional photography experience or equipment and with an inkjet printer. Needless to say this great idea was squashed when the event organizers got wind of it,
BUT… the shoot for free and give away the goods mentality is alive and well.

Allen
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Steven Bisig, Photographer
Seattle | WA | USA | Posted: 4:12 PM on 12.18.08
->> I was shooting a semi pro football game last year and one of their "photographers" was also on the sideline. I asked him who he was shooting for and looked him up later that night. I just about spit my food out when I saw that they were giving there service away FREE!!
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Peters, Photographer
Highland | IL | USA | Posted: 5:38 PM on 12.18.08
->> Steven,

If the team itself is distributing its own content without charge I view that much differently than someone unaffiliated with the event showing up and subsequently giving away content. They could be doing so to drive traffic to their site (and thus increase their online ad revenue) or they could be building fan base loyalty with an expectation of increased ticket sales and sponsorships. In both cases they would have a clear expectation of financial gain in return for the investment in producing such images.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Phil Hawkins, Photographer
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 5:50 PM on 12.18.08
->> He lists SS as "Other photo source". Liar!!

Phil
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (1) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Steven Bisig, Photographer
Seattle | WA | USA | Posted: 6:51 PM on 12.18.08
->> Hi mark,

Good point, however, I was one of the teams official photographer documenting the game and selling the prints to individual players (both teams) and team for marketing use. Later I found out he was giving away free images from the game.

Either way, the 4 letter word free is hurting us when bidding asignments.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Chad Ryan, Photographer, Assistant
Fort Wayne | IN | USA | Posted: 12:08 AM on 12.19.08
->> I took Bert's advice and opened an email exchange with the operator of that site today. After we got through each of us standing on our soap boxes, we actually had a good conversation. Mick White had no idea however directly or indirectly that he was stripping the value of photographs and creating an environment that takes work away from professional photographers.

We still have our differences, but he said he can see the harm in what his site offers.

My point is we can bash these guys on our message board and send them nasty emails, but bitching about it doesn't solve squat. What we need to do is maintain our professionalism and respectfully, yet confidently, state our arguments against what they are doing. We tell them that they deserve to be paid for their work if others use it. We explain the damage their intentions do to our industry and I don't mean breaking it down to newspapering or event photo sales. I'm saying the sale of images in general. Most will blow it off and turn a blind eye, but maybe we get through to a few of them.

Take emotion out of the argument and try explaining the benefits of charging a fair amount for their work - both to them and to the industry as a whole.
 This post is:  Informative (3) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Davis, Photographer
Decatur | AL | USA | Posted: 12:32 AM on 12.19.08
->> Chad, This is all about education, and you went about it the correct way.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Renay Johnson, Photographer, Assistant
San Diego | CA | | Posted: 12:59 AM on 12.19.08
->> Chad, I almost sent the guy and email yesterday, but I knew I would probably not be able to keep the emotion out of the email, so I vented here with a my half smart comment. Good for you. I tried to explain to someone who gives away his pictures how it hurts photographers all the way around and he turned a deaf ear so I know what it's like to get the photographers who blow off the concept that they are not helping the industry. I agree with Mark that you handled that well.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Phil Hawkins, Photographer
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 3:30 AM on 12.19.08
->> I emailed the guy too, and he just does not understand what he's doing. I don't think he's a bad guy, he just does not get it. He just doesn't think his quality is competing with the pros. I hope that if others email him in a rational respectful manner the lights will come on. He doesn't understand, and it's not his fault. But wow! If I were in his town I'd be comin' at him like a spider monkey!
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Marc Gold, Photographer, Photo Editor
Reston | Va | usa | Posted: 6:46 AM on 12.19.08
->> Filename: Winloc@FortunaCA 074.JPG
Camera: Canon
Model: Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTi
ISO: 1600
Exposure: 1/80 sec
Aperture: f/5.6
Focal Length: 154mm

Is this really photography. It is difficult to understand how some people, would consider buying this stuff.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (1) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Peters, Photographer
Highland | IL | USA | Posted: 8:52 AM on 12.19.08
->> They're not buying it - it's free.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (1) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jeff Martin, Photographer
wellington | OH | usa | Posted: 11:27 AM on 12.19.08
->> Phil, maybe he just doesn't care. In his eyes, he's having fun and helping out his community. He doesn't feel responsible for any part of the photography industry. He probably doesn't think he can make any money of his images so what does it hurt to give it away.

I don't see any solution to the GWC problem and it's only going to become a bigger problem.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

William Maner, Photographer
Biloxi | MS | USA | Posted: 12:02 PM on 12.19.08
->> It's a classic "free market" (pardon the pun) situation.

A consumer makes choices among the offerings presented. It's the consumer who decides what product he decides to take. If's he satisfied with lesser quality because it's free or cheaper to obtain, then so be it.

If a consumer is willing to pay for quality, then so be it.

It's up to the pro to demonstrate why his product is better for consumers.

It seems like a lot of folks are wanting to cut out the competition because it appears to easier to denigrate or restrict the GWCs than to sell consumers on better quality work.
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Davis, Photographer
Decatur | AL | USA | Posted: 12:37 PM on 12.19.08
->> What is more a threat to our industry, GWC giving away FREE photographs, or GWC charging industry rates?

Education is the ONLY way to help overcome the problem. Will educating solve it, NO, but, it will help. Education will teach them to walk away from a bad deal and they will feel good about it.

Many talented photographer's, for whatever reason, do not value their work. They want to give work away to be noticed. Mentoring and educating along the way can only HELP everyone.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Phil Hawkins, Photographer
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 12:38 PM on 12.19.08
->> William,

With all due respect, your post is oversimplification at it's worst.

Let's say a used car dealer decides to give away his inventory of 15 year-old used cars, and he has hundreds of them. The new car dealer next door has far nicer cars, they are more reliable with more features, he has a repair facility and a body shop and a professional sales staff and financing.

Are you really so naive as to believe that people will forego the free older cars JUST because the new car dealer has a superior product? And "so be it" that because of the free cars the new car dealer goes bankrupt? "It's up to the pro to demonstrate why his product is better for consumers."??? You know better than to believe that, my friend.

Free disrupts a normal market, regardless of the variations of quality. I would hate to see what would happen to you or what your opinion would be if this guy were in Biloxi.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (2) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Phil Hawkins, Photographer
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 12:51 PM on 12.19.08
->> I'd like to relate a story on this subject that has been irritating me for a couple of years.

I got an email from a design company that was redesigning the visitor center at Yosemite National Park. They wanted to use 3 of my images to put on display in perpetuity, but they did not want to pay anything. I said "No thanks", tempted though I was for ego's sake. Fast forward to about 2 years ago when the project was completed, I see images posted from several Yosemite photographers whose names would be instantly recognizable as high-profile established landscape photographers in Yosemite, one of which I think was William Neil, who writes a column in Outdoor Photographer.

I about **** my pants when I saw that. These guys GAVE AWAY their images for FREE? Unbelievable. My guess is that their prints are for sale at the Ansel Adams Gallery and they thought it would be free advertising. That's the only rationale I can come up with to justify that decision, if one can call that "justification". Incredible.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (1) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jeff Martin, Photographer
wellington | OH | usa | Posted: 1:01 PM on 12.19.08
->> Phil, I think that some would pick a reliable new car over a free 15 yr old one. Heck, it's almost that way now. A new $20K car at 15 yrs old is worth what? about 3-400. Damn near free compared to $20K.

The problem is I have yet to find some one who gives away cars as a hobby or thinks it's fun. When I see one of these guys at an event I'm shooting, I hate it. But that's my problem, not his. I have no control over what he does or charges. It hurts my chances of making sales. Sometimes I don't waste my time shooting those teams if I know this is going on. The GWC isn't worrying about me and I can't really understand why he should.
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Matthew Cavanah, Student/Intern, Photographer
Columbia | MO | US | Posted: 1:15 PM on 12.19.08
->> I emailed Mick this morning after reading this thread. I didn't beat him over the head or anything, I just gave him my view on the situation as a photojournalism student that will be looking for a job in a year and because of the growing trend of giving photos away, I might not be able to find a job once I graduate.
I'm sure many of you who have emailed him already got somewhat of the same response I did, but one thing he wrote caught my eye.
The King County Journal, their local paper, folded a few years ago. For some he's become the best reliable source of high school sports info in the area. He just happens to provide photos too.
He said with the surge of mail he's been receiving, he's going to try to make some compromises regarding how the photos are handled. Linking to the professional sites of photogs that work for him and such.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:18 PM on 12.19.08
->> With all due respect Phil, your post to I think is oversimplification as well.

The truth be told there all a lot of variables that affect a market. While price is usually the major factor, the combination of other factors such as status, quality of workmanship, visual appeal, uniqueness, available inventory and perceived value to name a few.

Using your logic, it would make sense that a potential homeowner would rather purchase a 30 year-old $60,000 home than a 10 year-old $240,000 home with the same square footage regardless of the location in the city the have chosen to live in.

I submit that FREE is a necessary component of a normal, healthy free market, because without it their is no competition. Without competition there is complacency, which leads to inferior products or services.
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Davis, Photographer
Decatur | AL | USA | Posted: 1:31 PM on 12.19.08
->> Clark, wow, where did you come up with all that?
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jason Orth, Photographer, Photo Editor
Lincoln | NE | USA | Posted: 1:33 PM on 12.19.08
->> Jeff and Clark hit something that smart business people know, it's about the VALUE of the product. The free (obviously) or underbid product is "good enough" to many consumers.

The difference is, without some of today's technology the GWCs couldn't even produce "good enough" at any price. Now they can. NEW price points have been added.

Therefore the client base of people willing to pay your price because they had no other option has eroded. It isn't a case of getting no picture or high-priced picture.

To spin the car analogy: the person doesn't only have the choice of walking or a BMW, now they have the option of buying a Chevy or a Hyundai, or somethng in the middle. Yeah, maybe the BMW driver scoffs at the Chevy, but if the consumer's happy it doesn't matter and either BMW is satisfied with its existing customer base or (in their case) produces something for a new base.

Technology has changed, and the bell can't be unrung.

If the only advantage you had over the GWC was the technology, then it's time to find new technology that will deliver something the client WANTS to buy or improve your skill set to meet an unmet demand or move on.

Maybe you did have the better composed or sharper or the shot that is better according to a niche-group of photo "experts." But if the client isn't so enlightened and doesn't see your great piece as worth their hard-earned money then maybe your ego is the problem, not the GWC.
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:34 PM on 12.19.08
->> PWC, GWC, and *WCs don't give away their pictures because they want to make money from their images, they give away photos to boost their self-esteem and to increase their self-worth and impress the peer group they are involved in. They will go broke spending time and money giving away images for praise and thanks they get from those they are seeking acceptance....until it becomes expected and a burden.

This group is only competition if a 'pro' shooter is shooting with the same gear, from the same angle/field position, capturing the same moment and creating the same quality image.

If the so called 'pro' can't distinguish his product from that of the *WC then are they a pro? In this business if photographer can't make a better/different/more appealing image than the *WC, regardless if 100% of their income from photography or not, they are not a pro in my book.

Actually *WC (BTW I'm using the asterisk is a wild card character insert the first letter of your choice) can be your best source to more print sales ;-) Pretty much any one of them that I've met in the past six years, who I've had three or more conversations with, have all referred business my way and continue to do so. If approached properly *WC can become real assets to your youth/prep sports business.
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Davis, Photographer
Decatur | AL | USA | Posted: 1:34 PM on 12.19.08
->> Based on Clark's view, I need to start creating inferior images, so I can compete with a FREE market place. While at it, I will find another source of income too!
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (3) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 2:32 PM on 12.19.08
->> Mark wrote: "Clark, wow, where did you come up with all that?"

From reading way too many books and articles on business, product and market theory.

Then later wrote: "Based on Clark's view, I need to start creating inferior images, so I can compete with a FREE market place."

You probably need to re-read that post and think about it longer. If you think complacency and an inferior product will help your business, by all means enjoy, but that was not the point.

It was good to see however, at least one person understood exactly what I wrote.

Jason is on the right path with this statement: "If the only advantage you had over the GWC was the technology, then it's time to find new technology that will deliver something the client WANTS to buy or improve your skill set to meet an unmet demand or move on."

If you are a photographer today, you will have to evolve into what I call a Media Specialist for the decades to come.

An independent media specialist will have a diversified skill set combining and redefining layout and design, niche publishing, video and multimedia production and presentation, graphic design and typography, news and creative writing as well as media sales and web site design/maintenance. Those who don't have competent skills in two or more of the areas I mentioned will find themselves on the trailing edge of and not in the middle or leading edge of the industry.

An example is the Kent Valley Sports site. It has one very compelling attribute, setting aside image quality, there are 50 or more photographers contributing content to the site and driving hits from more three dozen communities to their site. The one thing I do respect about KVS is the site operator's ability to bring together that many shooters for a common publishing cause. You would be lucky to get five SS members to work together for as long as he as maintained his site.

The value of that traffic in terms of selling advertising could be worth as much as platinum, especially in an area that does not have a daily or weekly publication as noted above.

If transitioned and maintained properly could derive a very nice income for its contributors and the site owner and still fulfill its original feel-good purpose.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jeff Martin, Photographer
wellington | OH | usa | Posted: 2:39 PM on 12.19.08
->> Clark, he is looking for someone to take over the reins.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Troy Harvey, Student/Intern, Photographer
Ventura | CA | United States | Posted: 2:51 PM on 12.19.08
->> this post goes back to the original point of this thread...Free,Free and Free...

That’s funny. Isn't this the question that SS.com is asking right now for their current pole question? Take a look.
http://www.sportsshooter.com/poll.html?results=1

Wow...look at that 43% (as of the time I checked it) said they do work for free. And just to point out...yes this is a very broad question…I do understand that.

Besides the old saying "you get what you pay for" will always stand true...well in my mind anyways.

Just an observation and my 2 cents!
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Scott Evans, Photographer
Bay Village | OH | USA | Posted: 4:50 PM on 12.19.08
->> Phil, I simply cannot believe this is honestly how you define free: " My guess is that their prints are for sale at the Ansel Adams Gallery and they thought it would be free advertising". Yes, the advertising might be free but there would be a clear expectation of future financial gain if the prints were for sale. In that context, the guy had a business motive aimed at profit and I'd submit this is distinctly different than giving one's work away.

That aside, Jason makes a great point.."If the only advantage you had over the GWC was the technology..." I have seen written here many times that its the shooter, not the gear. Has something changed and now the gear makes the difference?

I also see the argument that education is needed it seems to me that there is NOTHING to educate a PWC about. They have a camera, they like to shoot and give images to people to enjoy...pretty simple. Their concern is not for the business or health of the industry or for professional photogs. They've got no skin in that game. They don't, and shouldn't, care anymore than we go out of our way to make sure they make money at their business venture through our own actions. If we help a neighbor fell a tree in their yard (for instance), should the local landscaping company come beating down my door asking me not to do that since they have better chainsaws and it hurts their business?

I just cannot fathom that anyone actually thinks you can just politely ask/educate/demand/whatever that someone not shoot and provide images simply on the basis that it hurts your business. No industry or business operates like that and photography is no different.

The landscape has changed and you either adapt or get mired in the proverbial tarpit of "the way it used to be". Why can't people understand that? You may need to change your client base which might be a painful experience but if retailers figured out how to compete with the internet, my guess is that we can figure out how to compete with the PWC.
 This post is:  Informative (6) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Phil Hawkins, Photographer
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 5:46 PM on 12.19.08
->> Scott, great post. Points well taken.

But when I said "My guess is that their prints are for sale at the Ansel Adams Gallery and they thought it would be free advertising", it's only a guess on my part. But the fact still remains they gave a huge national park concessionaire free images. I guarantee you the design company did not work for free, and the contractors who did the work did not work for free, so even if it was for advertising, in a REAL indirect way, full of rationalization, I submit to you they should not have given the images for free.

A neighbor helps another neighbor remove a tree? That's a one-time occurrence, and the neighbor helping the other neighbor was not soliciting other people to do tree removal for free on an ongoing basis as is the case in the original post. Bad analogy, but I get your point.

This guy's website is SOLICITING people to work for free and give their work away for free on-going. What's next, "Let's do free weddings to give back?" puh-LEEEZE.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jeff Blake, Photographer
Columbia | SC | USA | Posted: 6:46 PM on 12.19.08
->> I don't know, that basketball shot is pretty awesome. No ball AND motion blur. A two-fer!
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (2) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jean Finley, Photo Editor, Photographer
Iowa City | IA | USA | Posted: 7:00 PM on 12.19.08
->> I wonder if stagecoach drivers, or milk men, or the guys that used to pump my gas, did this much belly-achin' back in the day.

Find a product/service of value to provide and provide it.
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Davis, Photographer
Decatur | AL | USA | Posted: 7:12 PM on 12.19.08
->> Yep, They just didn't have a mass forum for it.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (2) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Tony Sirgedas, Photographer
Pierce County | WA | USA | Posted: 7:23 PM on 12.19.08
->> Pretty harsh world here when a guy who's retired takes on the ire and quite a bit of hate mail for putting up a site to keep busy and help keep kids sports information available. I now his site has driven a number of folks over to my site for sales.
Mick's made some changes to his site since this all started. I'm sure some of you have had good dialogue, but there have also been a few who have crossed the line.
But if I were to put the heat on anyone it would be those photographers who are in buisness and giving away their work for free. They are the ones who should have known better, some who even belong to the PPA running their own studios.
I shoot and work the market these folks are also in. I have no problems at all making my sales from the events we are both at. It's all about the product you provide and how you promote yourself.
Mick, thanks for the link and the next time we're at the same place I'm buying dinner or coffee afterwards.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Scott Evans, Photographer
Bay Village | OH | USA | Posted: 8:40 PM on 12.19.08
->> Phil, I sincerely appreciate the mannner in which you responded to this and I do have to say that don't completely dismiss what you said. I do get it and I feel the same pain from this that many of us do. I guess I just think we need to discuss ways to be competitive and make money rather than complain about why we can't. Perhaps one will lead to the other if we are lucky. Again, thanks Phil, happy holidays.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Phil Hawkins, Photographer
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 10:11 PM on 12.19.08
->> Thanks, Scott, I think one of the real slippery issues in the industry of photography is that it is still to a very, very large degree both a hobby AND a profession. The two bang up against each other in unfortunate ways sometimes, and in this economic climate the effects are exacerbated.

Well, I'm off to Yosemite to shoot shoulder-to-shoulder with the hobbyists who compete with me in capturing the best image of Tunnel View and such. I sell images on the net for profit; how DARE they set up their tripods next to mine!

Bastards.

Maybe I'll just simplify the problem and push them over the cliff. Problem is, one of those hobbyists let me shoot several shots from his new 5D MKII last time I was there, and WOW!! I gotta git me one of them, but that's another thread.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Scott Evans, Photographer
Bay Village | OH | USA | Posted: 10:24 PM on 12.19.08
->> Phil, make sure to grab the 5DM2 BEFORE pushing him over! Eliminate some competition and "fund" some new gear all at the same time...now THAT's what I meant by finding a workaround! Enjoy Yosemite, beats the snot out of hockey rinks and gyms.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 2:20 AM on 12.21.08
->> My next column is about whether shooting for free is worth it. It will be in the next issue of News Photographer and online on my site on about the 15th.

I've written about the topic quite a few times over the past several years:

http://www.loundy.org/commoncents/2002/cc_11-02.html
http://www.loundy.org/commoncents/2005/cc_01-05.html
http://www.loundy.org/commoncents/2006/cc_03-06.html
http://www.loundy.org/commoncents/2006/cc_08-06.html
http://www.loundy.org/commoncents/2007/cc_03-07.html
http://www.loundy.org/commoncents/2008/cc_06-08.html
http://www.loundy.org/commoncents/2008/cc_08-08.html
http://www.loundy.org/commoncents/2008/cc_09-08.html

--Mark
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

This thread has reached the maximum number of posts
If you would like to continue it, please create a new thread.
[ Create new thread? ]



Return to --> Message Board Main Index
Getting paid to eat pizza, smoke cigars and drink beer? One lucky photog ::..