| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
2006 Clarkson Sports Workshop
Mitch Stringer, Photographer
 |
Towson | MD | USA | Posted: 9:33 PM on 01.11.06 |
| ->> Just sent in my registration for the 2006 Clarkson Workshop. Anyone else registered or planning on going? I saw a bunch of people went in 2005. How was it? Any reccomendations of what are "must do" events and advise on what to pass up? Thanks. |
|
John Harrington, Photographer
|
Washington | DC | USA | Posted: 8:12 AM on 01.12.06 |
->> One of the notions that seems to often have applications is the idea that you are judged by the company you keep. When I've seen the t-shirt bearing the sign "I'm with stupid", my first thought is not one of the expected laughter response, but, rather, to ask "why?" Why associate yourself with someone you've deemed to be that way.
Not withstanding Mr. Clarkson's long and illustrious career as a sports photographer, I can't help but take exception with one of the "stupid" organizations he's "with".
Buried deep within their website, there is listed an advisory board for OnRequest Images:
http://www.onrequestimages.com/www/About/AdvisoryBoard.aspx
And Mr. Clarkson is listed there. Now, SS has had a chat about them before:
http://www.sportsshooter.com/message_display.html?tid=18809
and ASMP has also weighed in with objections about how really really bad OnReqest is for photographers (an analysis which was agreed upon by EP, PPA, APA, and SAA):
http://www.asmp.org/news/spec2004/customstock.php
So, ask yourself, while Mr. Clarkson may have produced a large number of assignments for illustrious publications over the years, and we should all laud him for those endeavors, why would photographers pay to support and learn from someone who's taken a turn that can only be described as having a long term detrimental effect on the photographic community?
If someone were to come on SS and praise the notion of selling "fan credentials" to the sidelines, making jobs covering games harder because there would be fewer spaces to work from, and non-professionals with their point and shoots getting in the way, SS'ers would be all over admonishing them, EVEN if it was a celebrated previous SS message poster (in other words, that poster wouldn't be insulated from criticism because they had previous significant contributions to SS), so why shouldn't we consider that Mr. Clarkson's business decision to become involved with an organization where:
* You are teaching clients there is little or no reason to:
1) Ever actually assign a photographer to shoot
2) License exiting stock
* The photographer shoulders ALL risk
This business model, in my opinion, is actually worse than RF.
Some might point out their Custom Assignment model, which I believe is a ploy to attract photographers opposed to spec, where OR acts as a “rep”. I expect once you’re in, they will begin to pitch you on spec jobs.
From their website:
"When you shoot stock, you eat all of the production expenses until your work is licensed by your agency, and you never know if the images will be licensed by anyone. Why do that, when you can shoot "custom stock" for us, and have a shot at generating fees from your images at the outset, because our clients have specified exactly what they need. Why not take advantage of the down days that you have between your other shoots, and generate some funds for yourself on those days?"
This is a very clever pitch from the masters of spin, designed to leverage the photographers' fears. What they don't tell photographers, and what photographers apparently don't realize (or are willing to overlook) is that "custom stock" is not stock at all, and that by shooting SPEC ASSIGNMENTS, they are destroying the market for assignment work and the licensing of stock photography. They are transferring all risk from the client and agency onto photographers' backs. They are burning down their own house, board by board, to stay warm. They are sawing off the limb on which they sit. In effect, these *photographers* are saying to our clients: 'Hey clients- Don't hire photographers. Don't pay photographers a fee to shoot your assignments. Don't pay the production expenses associated with the production of your campaign. Don't license existing stock images. Why should you pay fee and expenses to a photographer when I'm willing to shoot your campaign for FREE, at no risk to you. In fact, 4 of my fellow photographers will shoot your campaign too. We'll each cover all of the expenses in producing the images, and we'll upload our images to your lightbox within 72 hours of your request. And then you can select from all of our images. Take your pick and then you'll just pay a stock license fee for the images you choose. No creative fee, no expenses. And no need to pay anything whatsoever to me or any of the other photographers who shoot and submit images that you don't select for use. And I'm willing to eat the production expenses and receive only 50% of the stock license fee that you pay to OnRequest.'
So, if you want to "learn" from someone who stands proudly as an advisor to this business model, I'd ask -- will Clarkson be wearing an "I'm with Stupid" t-shirt under his "sheep's clothing"as he not only teaches you about good sports photography, but then also pitches you on this really great idea called "Custom Assignments"....do you really want to be on the sidelines with four of your colleagues shooting the same game, knowing that only one of the five of you might get paid for the assignment, IF the client likes the photos, and the other four of you will not only get nothing, but will have to eat your expenses.
Think twice...no, think THREE times before getting involved with individuals who see the OnRequest business model as acceptable, and if after three times, you think it's good, think a fourth time.
John |
|
Nick Doan, Photographer
|
Scottsdale | AZ | USA | Posted: 10:47 AM on 01.12.06 |
->> I may not be as long-winded as Mr. Harrington, the first question that jumps into my mind is, "has he attended any of the workshops?"
I have not researched OnRequest Images, or any of the business endeavors that Rich Clarkson may have been a part of. But, we all know how easy it is to list somebody on an advisory board on a website. Before we condemn anybody, I'd like to see some solid proof of "wrongdoing". Everything else is just hearsay. (Remember that whole "innocent until proven guilty" that the US Rule of Law is founded upon? Well it also works well as a moral compass too.)
But, enough of that. All Politics aside (and if you wish to continue it, please do so in another thread), I've attended the workshop exactly once. While I was there, I met some great people. Learned from some amazing photographers including, Mark Terrill, Joey Terrill, Robert Seale, John McDonough, Dave Black, Brian Bahr and the legendary Bill Eppridge. Not to mention meeting with editors from the NY Times, the AP and Golf Digest. (And, don't let me forget Shawn Cullen...if you ever need help, he's a great guy to call.)
I made contacts there, got to know people there, and learned things there that I could not have anywhere else. I had access to people that have helped generate assignments I would have never gotten otherwise. (Being solely a freelance photographer, being able to generate assigments through contacts and networking is crucial!)
And, it's impossible to not make friends there. It's a great week to spend time getting to know other photographers. And, to learn from your peers as well as the instructors.
Rich Clarkson and his staff make themselves available to facilitate all of this. And, no matter what anybody is implying about them, they are a stand-up, decent group that has helped countless photographers over the years.
As for advice about the workshop itself...there are so many different aspects of it that it is hard to advise what is a *must* attend event, and what isn't. For some having access to shoot events is very important. For myself, spending time learning different techniques and methods, and even getting solid business advice, as well as getting critiques from the instructors and editors have proven invaluable. It becomes more of a question of what you *want* to learn, as opposed to what you need to attend. My advice to people is to not get so enamoured with the idea of rushing out to shoot events that they miss the opportunity to learn from the instrcutors, and to just spend time talking with people. The only "must-attend event" I can think of would be the evening get-together in the hotel bar. The drinking isn't as important as the developing of relationships and sharing of ideas with everybody.
I had a wonderful time, and hope to attend again if I can find the time and resources. |
|
Randy Janoski, Photographer
|
Washington DC & Nashville | TN | USA | Posted: 11:01 AM on 01.12.06 |
->> John, I stand right beside you in every thing you've stated.
Unfortunately it will fall on to many deaf ears.
Here's a tidbit from their site, if you go to the jobs page (home page, about, jobs) the copy starts off with, "At OnRequest Images we work hard, we also laugh a lot." Yea, guess who they're laughing at! |
|
John Harrington, Photographer
|
Washington | DC | USA | Posted: 11:37 AM on 01.12.06 |
->> >>> "has he attended any of the workshops?"
No.
>>> I have not researched OnRequest Images, or any of the business endeavors that Rich Clarkson may have been a part of.
So I’m not sure why you feel comfortable defending a position/organization/individual-affiliated-with-organization you’ve not researched. I’d encourage you to read the linked information before you give a knee-jerk reaction to postings which question OnRequest and those affiliated with them.
>>> But, we all know how easy it is to list somebody on an advisory board on a website.
No, actually, in this case, being an advisor of a company with multi-million dollar investors, being listed as an advisor weighs heavily…it’s not easy, nor does OnRequest list him for superfluous reasons.
>>> Before we condemn anybody, I'd like to see some solid proof of "wrongdoing". Everything else is just hearsay. (Remember that whole "innocent until proven guilty" that the US Rule of Law is founded upon? Well it also works well as a moral compass too.)
I’ve presented facts from their website and opinions from industry trade groups, and it’s up to you to view that information, and determine for yourself whether or not from a photographer’s point of view it’s good business for one of every five photographers who take on the same assignment to be paid, while the rest are not and still covered their expenses, and even that one out of the five may well not get paid if the end client opts not to use the photographs. To me, to trade groups like EP/ASMP/APA, etc, what OnRequest is doing is wrong, for the contributing photographers and the industry.
>>>. All Politics aside (and if you wish to continue it, please do so in another thread), I've attended the workshop exactly once.
Actually, when someone posts an “I’ll be there, who else is going…” type of message, it can come across as an endorsement by the attendee, and even appear to some as a promotional message for the program. Letting that content stand without enlightening others as to industry-wide concerns about OnRequest, which Mr. Clarkson advises to such an extent that he is on their Advisory Board (and may well be an investor or being paid to advise them), it is not off topic, and this is not “politics”, it’s business.
>>> While I was there, I …. learned things there that I could not have anywhere else… For myself… getting solid business advice…
I won’t make a blanket statement about Mr. Clarkson’s business acumen, but I will say that his involvement with OnRequest should certainly give one pause as to the value of the advice given his endorsement of such a poorly thought out business model which will reap more damage to the photographic community than royalty-free images, or the firing of staff photographers because freelancers are cheaper and will still deliver work-for-hire images at a fraction of the costs of maintaining a staffer.
John |
|
Nick Doan, Photographer
|
Scottsdale | AZ | USA | Posted: 12:20 PM on 01.12.06 |
->> Let me clear up one single point. Rich Clarkson does not stand up at his workshop and preach to people for an entire week. The business advice that I received came from the likes of Dave Black, Joey Terrill, Robert Seale, Brad Smith and Matt Ginella. Rich also had some very good advice, but his business models are not approachable by most independent photographers.
There are many paths that people take through their careers. And, everybody has a different way of doing business. The Workshop is geared for open communication from the instructors to the Attendees.
And, though the OnRequest business is considered detrimental to our industry. The Workshop is very worthwhile People can learn many great things there.
And, let there be no mistake about this. I *am* making a personal endorsement for this workshop. |
|
Mitch Stringer, Photographer
|
Towson | MD | USA | Posted: 2:29 PM on 01.12.06 |
| ->> Folks, I did not intend to set off a firestorm. My basic question was asking, from a techniques of shooting perspective, is the workshop helpful? How was the access to shoot the venues? That was my intent. I am on the waiting list for the SS Workshop and was hoping to have another viable learning option if I ultimately do not get to go to the the SS Workshop in April. The SS Workshop was my absolute first choice. I have no intention in entering into a business relationship with Clarkson or any other entity he may or may not be involved with. Any insights regarding my primary questions? Thanks. |
|
Joy Absalon, Photographer
|
Centreville | VA | USA | Posted: 8:07 PM on 01.12.06 |
->> Mitch feel free to email me directly if you have any questions, etc.....I'm local to you and would be happy to help you out.
I've attended two Clarkson workshops and my skills have improved and I've made numerous contacts that have helped get me better paying (and more frequent) jobs.
Rich Clarkson does NOT instruct at all. The instructors are the likes of Dave Black, Joey and Mark Terrill, Bill Eppridge, Peter Read Miller, John McDonough, Robert Seale, Mark Reis, etc....Mr. Clarkson moderates and introduces the instructors and is there to oversee that the week runs smoothly. The Rich Clarkson staff work extremely hard all week long to make sure the attendees are well taken care of and that concerns/questions/subject matter are all explained and understood.
Ron Taniwaki from NPS is there to help with Nikon equipment and is an amazing source of help and information. Other vendors are present so that you can learn about, and use hands-on, products that you may have never used or tried before (items such as strobe lighting, pocket wizards, etc...). Being able to "borrow" and use these types of gear in real situations for an entire week (before ever having to spend any of your hard-earned money) is another plus in my mind.
I may be attending my third workshop this year if my new job permits me the time to do so. |
|
Peter Gaby, Photographer
|
Madison | WI | US | Posted: 9:30 PM on 01.12.06 |
->> Mitch: I have to concure with Nick.
It's a great workshop.
and also agreeing with Joy as well.
I've been to 2 of the workshops the last 2 years, and hope to make at least 1 of the workshops this year.
If you have other questions or would like more advise, please contact me via my SS page
Peter |
|
Robert Leverton, Photographer
|
Ellicott City | MD | USA | Posted: 9:30 PM on 01.12.06 |
->> Here is my take on the workshop.
There are great names (photographers) at these things. While you might be able to catch them in the hallway or such it is difficult as the big names hangout in tight (pro) groups and are tough to approach let alone ask to lunch. However, it is possible to formally schedule time with them for portfolio reviews. They almost always make their appointments although I had a two cancel on me.
The photo shoots on location with a pro are ok. They give some pointers but nothing major... It should be obvious, but good photography is about having the right gear for the situation. Pros have the right gear.
Peers, wow! There are a lot of talented people out there jockeying for jobs. Needless to say, you have to be GOOD and I mean GOOD. A half-baked portfolio only serves to warn the key editors who not to hire. However, if you are really good you WILL get noticed. I remember one student who just had an incredible eye; she impressed the staff at every turn. I would literally cringe when we showed images from the same shoot in the morning critique sessions. My stuff was good and on par with most students, but her stuff made your head swim, what a creative eye! I'm pretty sure she had a few doors opened for her at workshop.
Classes, well, you do get some good tidbits on what peak action is, establishing a theme, lighting, etc. But not worth the conference fee if that were all you had to take back with you.
So, what was worth the price of admission? Getting creamed (they call it critiquing) by the pros. They had such insight into what makes a photograph and did not candy coat truth. Most people will say "oh, nice picture" and leave you with nothing learned. They are brutal but honest. "The shot is too tight" "That shot has a really poor background, were you even thinking about that?" Do X it will clean up your background. The ball is at least 6 inches off the pitchers fingers, that won't do. Needs to be on the finger tips!" "Study the pitcher's timing and you should have it after a few pitches." After a few days of this, I was impressed with how my images had improved. I had started to pay attention to my surroundings instead of just shooting and hoping for a good pic.
Will I attend this year? No way! I'm need a lot more practice... The next time they see me at their conference, and they will, is when my portfolio is ROCK solid, and I'm ready to land a job with the big dogs. I learned a lot and need more then just a year to put it into practice. |
|
Peter Gaby, Photographer
|
Madison | WI | US | Posted: 9:41 PM on 01.12.06 |
->> Robert has hit the nail on the head with his critique.
if your faint at heart about getting bad reviews, then this is not a workshop to attend.
But if you can soak that up, and come around the next day and improve, then I feel this is a great workshop.
As I said, I've attended 2 workshops.
Sports in 2004, and Jackson Hole in 2005.
I didn't hesitate spending the money for this knowledge, and I feel that it made me a better person in getting good constructive feedback.
I had a great time with 1 on 1 contact with many of these pro's and felt that was probably one of the best reasons to attend.
I couldn't make it to the 2005 Sports workshop, but was actually in Colorado Springs the weekend it opened, and was amazed that 2 of the instructors from 2004 remembered me when I stopped to say hi.
As Robert said, this workshop has the potential to open doors.
But try and bring your A game
Peter |
|
Mark J. Terrill, Photographer
|
Simi Valley | CA | USA | Posted: 3:20 AM on 01.13.06 |
->> Mitch,
I'm re-posting what I wrote a few years ago about the differences between the SportsShooter Workshop and the Clarkson. I hope this helps answer your question.
Since some of you might be wondering about the differences between Sports Shooter Luau and the Rich Clarkson Sports Workshop, I thought it would be apropos to repost my answer to that question in another forum below. Hope it helps.
Both workshops have a lot to offer, but they're different. It really depends on what you're after. The Clarkson workshop is a five-day workshop and gives you the opportunity to go out and shoot an assignment and then have your work critiqued on a daily basis. The Sports Shooter Luau is a two-day event, is all speakers and portfolio reviews and it's free. That's is the major difference between the two.
You can also make great contacts at the Clarkson workshop, not only with the instructors, but other students as well. Of course the Sports Shooter workshop is great for that as well. That's one of the main reasons that I went as a student. My brother and I both made some good friends and great contacts at the workshop. As a result, he is now doing quite a bit of work for Sports Illustrated Golf Digest. I don't think that would have happened had we not attended. We probably wouldn't have been asked to attend as instructors either.
One of the instructors that attends on occasion is Steve Fine, Director of Photography for S.I. When some people say that Clarkson's workshop seems kind of pricey, I remind them that no amount of money would get you in to see Fine in New York, but you can come to Colorado Springs and get some time with him as well as all the other instructors. Now, I don't know if he's coming to this one yet, but S.I. almost always sends a few editors and photographers to the workshop. To me, that alone is worth the price of admission.
There is so much to do there and so many options that I think anyone attending needs to tailor their workshop experience to their individual needs. When I attended as a student, it was more important to me to make contact with people and get some inspiration from listening to the speakers and seeing their work than to go out and shoot.
Here is how a typical day goes. We usually meet at around 9 a.m. with a few words and maybe a story from Rich Clarkson (my favorite part). Then a speaker will usually talk and show some slides for about an hour. At about 11a we critique student’s work from the day before. After that Portfolio reviews are done, as well as some on location demonstrations, and everyone is also free to go out and shoot until the evening speakers at about 8p. That usually goes about 2 hours. Then comes the best part for just about everyone. We adjourn to the hotel bar for a few hours to drink, chat, mingle and maybe do some more portfolio reviews. Throughout the entire day there are things going on that you can shoot, so you need to make some choices.
The bottom line is that both workshops are fantastic and if I wasn't teaching at both of them, I would be at both as a student. |
|
Mark J. Terrill, Photographer
|
Simi Valley | CA | USA | Posted: 3:23 AM on 01.13.06 |
->> Robert,
Thanks for the honest evaluation. You point out a few things that we as instructors (something that I'm still learning to do) need to work on.
Mark |
|
Jon Malinowski, Photographer
|
New Windsor | NY | USA | Posted: 11:38 AM on 01.13.06 |
->> I attended a couple years ago. It was fantastic. Probably the most inspiring week in my development as a photographer. Why was it great? Here are some of the reasons:
1) A super-tough Mark Terrill porfolio review. Loved it.
2) Dave Black. When he showed his work, the top pros in the room were ooh-ing and ahh-ing. Made me realize that there's always a higher level.
3) A Joey Terrill class on cheap lighting tecniques, color temperature, etc.. It made me understand that sometimes the job requires 20 strobes and somtimes you can do it with one.
4) A Robert Seale location shoot in Garden of the Gods. He explained, he demonstrated, and then we got to shoot. Very well done.
5) The daily critiques. If you're sensitive, go elsewhere and live in your own fantasy world. This was the opportunity to have some of the best look at my work and rip it apart. Priceless. But once or twice that week they said, "Wow! Great image." That taught me that I have the ability to make great photos, but I have to work hard every time out. Don't wimp out if they rip you the first day. Get mad, go out and find the better image.
If you go, don't treat it as a vacation. Get up early, shoot. Go to the classes. Participate in the critiques. Use the hour or two you half off to shoot some more. Then go to the slideshows at night. Then edit your images. You'll get more out of it. There's a lottery for credentials, so you might not get what you wanted, but I think you'll have fun either way.
Highly recommended. If you decide not to go because of your stand on Clarkson's business partners, that's fine with me, but it was a very positive experience for me. |
|
Joey Terrill, Photographer
|
Tarzana | CA | USA | Posted: 9:38 PM on 01.25.06 |
->> In response to Mr Harrington and his thoughts on the Rich Clarkson workshops, I'm wondering if he would include Getty, the New York Times, and other "all rights" organizations in his diatribe promoting guilt by association? If so, simply being a member of this organization (SportsShooter) would make him guilty by the same logic.
Many photographers representing those organizations regularly write, post and teach here in the hopes of trying to help fellow photographers. Should Mr. Harrington tender his resignation from SporsShooter or not attend SS Workshops? Of course not.
I know Clarkson well and he is famous for saying, "Make your own deal." Just attending his workshop doesn't mean you have to "make his deal"--whatever that may be. Go, don't go, whatever. Just do it for the right reasons.
My two cents. |
|
Peter Gaby, Photographer
|
Madison | WI | US | Posted: 1:18 AM on 01.26.06 |
->> Mark and Joey have made great comments about Rich's workshop.
I'm an above average photographer, and hope that someday someone will see that I could have potential.
That was what I liked best about both of Rich's workshops that I have attended.
You can get some really great personal time with some of the best photogs and editors in the country.
And i'm not talking just about the pros.
There are a number of people that have attended that may ormay not have hit it big time, but you certainly can see the potential they have during morning critiques.
I meet Max Morse 2 years ago in Colorado Springs, and can't say that the door opened for him there - but i'll bet that he got his foot into some doors because of his work.
If you can afford the workshop - whether you do sports or nature or wildlife, then i'd seriously look into Rich's workshops.
Not sure if i'll make one of the workshops this year, but I know i'll be at one next year, and hopefully will be able to attend the SSA next year as well.
Peter |
|
Peter Gaby, Photographer
|
Madison | WI | US | Posted: 1:24 AM on 01.26.06 |
->> I also want to sum up what Jon said.
5) The daily critiques. If you're sensitive, go elsewhere and live in your own fantasy world. This was the opportunity to have some of the best look at my work and rip it apart. Priceless. But once or twice that week they said, "Wow! Great image." That taught me that I have the ability to make great photos, but I have to work hard every time out. Don't wimp out if they rip you the first day. Get mad, go out and find the better image.
This is very true. - But I too think it is the best part of doing these workshops.
You get the truth. - and it does make you become a better photographer.
I know I get lazy sometimes with editing my photos, and that's one of the things that this workshop also helps to teach you.
Editing your best shots.
You get great access to events around the OTC, and there are always things around the Colorado Springs area to photograph.
Peter |
|
John Harrington, Photographer
|
Washington | DC | USA | Posted: 3:21 AM on 01.26.06 |
->> Joey --
>>>>if he would include Getty, the New York Times, and other "all rights" organizations
If you are an employee of an organization, I have zero problems with WMFH, or "all rights". In fact, some newspapers even revert all rights to their staff photographers after six months. I applaud this, however I think that that is a movement that will not gain much steam.
The NYT has been the subject of much criticism over the years for their rights grabs and low pay. They have lost many of their top photographers over this issue, and guess what? That leaves space for less experienced and more-willing-to-cave photographers to come in and fill the void. Using the analogy of union picketers and what they refer to as the "scabs" -- those willing to cross the picket line, there are photographers who made a huge sacrifice after having turned away from the NYT on principle, and who saw their "friends" come in to take the assignments. So, if you're a photographer who stood their ground and took the hit when the NYT demanded unreasonable rights concessions and cuts in pay, you have my utmost respect, along with numerous other photographers. If you were one of those that, seeing your fellow photographer standing their ground, saw an opportunity to swoop in and get their work, well, I have less respect for you. So, you'll not see me supporting individuals who've exhibited short-sighted decision making like this when they are teaching others to follow in their footsteps.
As to Getty, what can I say that hasn't already been said a dozen times over? Well, if you're a contributor to Getty, you can be assured that that is NOT a lifetime job, nor one that will be economically viable for even the mid-term. Getty is moving towards "wholey owned content". Here's an example -- you have high selling images of a businessman on a cell phone, Getty's paid you upwards of $2k as your 50% split in the last two years. Guess what? You've got a high chance that they will "reshoot" that image using WMFH photographers in Thailand or other locations, where they can get someone to shoot that among their other list of big sellers for $100 a day with Caucasian models, and those WMFH images will then appear first in the search results, and your $2k will drop to $200 or so, since they are more interested in licensing images where they get 100% of the sale. IF you're an employee of Getty, making upwards of $60k with benefits, WMFH seems ok, but beware if you're asked to "reshoot" these images. If you're a contributor, or you get the occasional $400 assignment with WMFH, you're making a short-sighted decision. I know you think they'll get sued for infringement, but they have lawyers who know just how to walk the line to ensure that the "reshot" images don't infringe.
So, would I suppport, have high respect for, or recommend individuals who fit these (or other similar) categories? No. It'd be like encouraging people who've run businesses at a loss before closing their doors, or those who've filed for bankruptcy one (or more) times, teaching classes on running a successful business. When you are engaged in WMFH, or in encouraging others to do so, you might be making money in the present, but you must continue to do so for the rest of your life or the money stops.
Do many of the NYT/Getty/et al photographers have amazing creative visions, whom make some of the world's greatest pictures? Absolutely. Yet, the history of the creative world is littered with brilliant creative minds who've had fatal flaws which precluded them from doing more. That's unfortunate.
You said "go, don't go, just do it for the right reasons." Well, if you aspire to his creative vision of how to make pictures, that'd be one reason to go, provided you were aware of his other business dealings. My post was intended to enlighten those who may not have been aware of how he sees the business of photography. However, he's going to be profiting off of a business model which is hugely detrimental to your fellow photographers, and quite possibly those that go, indirectly, and I take issue with that.
There are numerous other sports photography workshops (and workshops for every other kind of photography you can think of), and I'd much rather see folks who do have a long-term vision for their own success -- consistent with a business model that is sustainable over the long term -- being successful in their workshop efforts, over folks who's vision includes profiting from a business model which diminishes the value of photogaphy by pitting five photographers against each other with the end result being that maybe one of them will get paid.
John |
|
Mark J. Terrill, Photographer
|
Simi Valley | CA | USA | Posted: 5:00 AM on 01.26.06 |
->> "There are numerous other sports photography workshops (and workshops for every other kind of photography you can think of), and I'd much rather see folks who do have a long-term vision for their own success -- consistent with a business model that is sustainable over the long term -- being successful in their workshop efforts, over folks who's vision includes profiting from a business model which diminishes the value of photogaphy by pitting five photographers against each other with the end result being that maybe one of them will get paid. "
John,
What has Mr. Clarkson's personal business dealings got to do with teaching sports photography? It's not as though he stands there and pushes a business agenda for five days. However, even if he did, there are about ten other instructors there with their own business opinions. This is why your diatribe against Mr. Clarkson not only insults him, but my brother, myself and the other instructors. I guess we're all guilty by his association with a company that has never even been mentioned in the eight years that I've been attending his workshops.
Aside from that, you've painted Mr. Clarkson with some pretty broad strokes. You've made the jump from him being listed as an advisor to OnRequest to practically insinuating that he's running the company. He's an" advisor." You profess to know a lot about what his being an "advisor" means. I have no idea what it means and neither do you. It could mean that he has given them the same advise that you're giving us. The point is that you have absolutely no idea. Yet you've seen fit to essentially slander a man based what you think it means. That's poor journalism.
Perhaps you should find out what political parties and religious organizations Mr. Clarkson and his instructors are affiliated with. If their beliefs don't agree with yours, you'll have two more reasons to dissuade people from his workshops. Makes about as much sense.
Mark
BTW. Please tell me that you haven't posted your home address on your SS page. If so, that's a pretty poor business practice. |
|
Ben Shyman, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 10:02 AM on 01.26.06 |
->> This thread has strayed far from Mitch Stringer's original posting.
I attended the Clarkson workshop last year and I am hopeful to attend again this year. At last year's workshop I had my portfolio reviewed by Joey and Mark Terrill, Dave Black, Brad Smith, Rob Clark and Matt Ginella. I made several important business contacts that have improved my freelance opportunities enormously. I attended a portrait session of an athlete on the USA Olympic Boxing Team lead by Joey Terrill which was fantastic. This session helped me overcome some of my fears with using strobes and got me jazzed to improve my own portrait work. I had the opportunity to attend some great lectures and was inspired and humbled by the awesome quality of the images. The opportunity to learn from fellow attendees is tremendous. Many of those attendees I am in regular contact with. Some are ss.com members, others not. Every shooter has their own thing going and is willing to share their passion and experiences for sports photography. What can be better than that?
As far as shooting, I shot baseball, swimming, gymnastics, boxing and tried my best (and failed miserably) on some very challenging assignments. But since I usually learn more from my failures than my successes, what better place to make them than at the Clarkson Workshop where instructors can immediately provide advice on how to improve your work....and then you can go out the next day and re-shoot and get it right! No better feeling that that I promise you.
Overall, the opportunities that the Clarkson workshop presents are amazing. But like anything else in life an opportunity is only as good as what you make of it. My recommendation is to go and just have fun.
Ben |
|
Sean Carman, Photographer
|
Seattle | WA | USA | Posted: 11:03 AM on 01.26.06 |
->> I went two years ago and was able to listen to Mark Terrill, Joey Terrill, Dave Black, Corey Rich, Robert Seale, and others give lectures and presentations, to see New York Times photo editor Brad Smith and the other leaders of the workshop, including those named above, critique hundreds of photos, to get a critique from Mark Terrill, to meet and get to know photojournalism legend and super nice guy Bill Eppridge, go out every day and try to make photos, get taken under the wing of the U.S. women's olympic wrestling team (!), joke around with Patricia Miranda as she was running through her daily weights routine, shoot swimming with a 300 2.8 and lighting under the guidance of Dave Black, see my photos compared to photos by some of the best people working today, etc.
It was a great experience. I would recommend it to anyone. |
|
Margaret Bowles, Photographer
|
Charlotte | NC | | Posted: 11:45 AM on 01.26.06 |
->> I would like to add my support for this workshop. I went two years ago, and it was a terrific experience at every level. The instructors are the best in the business. I decide to forego shooting several afternoons just to spend my time observing the instructors as they set up some complicated shots. I spent one afternoon with Robert Seale as he orchestrated a gymnastics shot and one with Joey Terrill as he put together a complicated indoor swimming shot. My portfolio was critiqued by SI's John McDonough. He didn't laugh.
You asked about things not to miss. Some people wanted to shoot in the afternoons; I wanted to spend as much time with the instructors as possible. It depends upon what you want out of it. I do recommend that you pay close attention to the sign-up process for a portfolio critique. You literally have to run to the sheet you want; they fill up in about thirty seconds.
I liked it so much, I am doing the Photography at the Summit this April. |
|
John Harrington, Photographer
|
Washington | DC | USA | Posted: 12:50 PM on 01.26.06 |
| ->> Uh oh. The Terrill brothers have ganged up on me on the playground. Sorry guys, mom didn't send me to school today with any lunch money. |
|
David Seelig, Photographer
|
Hailey | ID | USA | Posted: 1:55 PM on 01.26.06 |
| ->> I applaud all those who remind us how bad buisneess practices hurt us. However the workshop is a teaching affair I went a few years ago and wanted to learn more of lighting I did that in spades. Not to mention my start in learning digital. The teachers there are first rate. I heard different people including old friends of Mr Clarkson decry buisness practices like Getty. I shoot things for buyout and some subjects I would never shoot for buyout. The workshop is a great place to learn it is a workshop. A place to learn how the ins and outsof the buiness. I am to the left of Senator Kennedy but I talk to Senator Larry Craig of Idaho whenever I see him |
|
Sean Carman, Photographer
|
Seattle | WA | USA | Posted: 3:15 PM on 01.26.06 |
->> Success in the business of photojournalism depends, to a great extent I think, on the quality of the images you produce. There's an artistic aspect to this business (I'm not a pro, by the way, just an enthusiastic hobbyist). Chip Litherland and Suzy Allman were at the Clarkson workshop a couple of years ago when I attended, and they turned in stunning images every single day. Others did too, but I can still remember some of the images Chip and Suzy turned in. They are burned into my memory. They were that good. I was amazed.
When we saw presentations by the working pros, you saw the same level of achievement.
The Workshop is about the art of making great photographs. There aren't classes on how to run your business, about copyright law, or about how to negotiate a contract, or what value to place on what terms those contracts might contain. The workshop is only about making good pictures.
So it is misleading, I think, to respond to a question about the value of the workshop by criticizing one business decision by one of its organizers. Mr. Harrington's criticism sounds like a petty complaint that is tangentially related to a larger and admittedly important issue, but quite apart from whatever merit his comments may lack, they give the wrong idea of what the workshop is about.
Rich Clarkson, by the way, runs a business. He probably has a lawyer. The elements of libel are 1) a false statement; that 2) is made with intent to harm. If the subject is a public figure, you also have to prove malice. I don't know if Mr. Clakson would count as a public figure. He might. "Malice" can be proved by the content of the statement itself. It's hard to prove malice, but people do occasionally win libel suits. Defamation is a false statement made with intent to harm the public reputation of an individual or business.
What you have done here is make statements, in a public forum popular with Mr. Clarkson's target audience, that may be easily proven to be false, and that seem, on their face, intended to harm Mr. Clarkson's reputation and his business. The suggestion of malice is bolstered by your petulant follow-up about being beaten up on the playground. These statements indicate that you understand you are bullying Mr. Clarkson, and that you are engaged in a fight with him and his supporters. All of this might persuade a judge or jury that you acted maliciously in making your original post.
Worst of all, you've directed your statements not at a lone photojournalist who may not have the resources or interest in responding, but at a guy who runs a successful business, and is the official photographer for Denver's professional sports franchises for crying out loud, and probably has a lawyer, or knows one or two.
Something to think about. I would, if I were you, be more careful in the future. In this situation there are generally 2 easy ways to protect yourself: 1) make sure what you are saying is true; and 2) be polite and considerate. Generally, it's impossible to prove malice if the statement is made in a lighthearted way, or with a proviso that gives some consideration to an opposing view.
Another way to keep yourself out of any hot water would be to refrain from making mean-spirited posts on message boards.
What I'm saying I guess is, if I were you, I'd go back and delete my posts, and hope the matter fades away. There are responsible ways to discuss these issues. This was not one of them. |
|
Sean Carman, Photographer
|
Seattle | WA | USA | Posted: 3:21 PM on 01.26.06 |
->> Also, so I don't create a firestorm of my own, let me say that you may have a defense to any action, and I'm not suggesting that the appropriate response to your post is form someone to file a lawsuit. I mean, maybe you have a defense because your statement raised a political issue, and you can argue that the First Amendment actually protects your statements.
I'm just saying, I think it's a bit out of line, and maybe a little bit dangerous, to malign someone in public about a business affiliation they have, especially when the larger point you are trying to make has nothing, really, to do with that individual or the business relationship in question. So he's a consultant to a company with a business practice you deem harmful. So what? That's not really your issue. Your issue is the larger business practice.
Just be more careful, and more considerate of others. This particular post may not get you into trouble, but this kind of thing easily could some day.
That's all. |
|
Mark J. Terrill, Photographer
|
Simi Valley | CA | USA | Posted: 5:40 PM on 01.26.06 |
->> "Uh oh. The Terrill brothers have ganged up on me on the playground. Sorry guys, mom didn't send me to school today with any lunch money."
John,
I'm not going to take your lunch money but, as Sean pointed out, Mr. Clarkson might.
Mark |
|
Rick Rickman, Photographer
|
Laguna Niguel | CA | USA | Posted: 6:29 PM on 01.26.06 |
->> Sean:
I appreciate your notes of caution. You share good advice. I also know that John Harrington is one of the more forth right photographers in the industry with true concern for the betterment of photography as a profession.
He shares valuable information with this industry here as well as on his terrific website. John is a man who I believe carefully examines all sides of situations before he weighs in on anything. I don't believe he has any need for concern and only says things that have validity.
All of us, every photographer I know, including some of the very best in the industry have done things in our careers that aren't always the best for the business. It comes with what we call learning and growing.
I sincerely believe that when we find situations that need addressing that we address those situations. It helps others to become aware of various pitfalls that exist.
There are good sides and bad sides to almost any situation and in this case I think John may have been trying to explore some down side issues that people need to be aware of.
Rich Clarkson has done some terrific things for this industry. He has been a mentor and success conduit to many including myself. In the course of his more than 50 years in this business I'm sure he's made some decisions that he might do differently if given the opportunity to do them again just as I and I'm sure many of you have.
I believe firmly however that we all do the best we know how most of the time. It's good that people like John are here to help share insights into situations that need to be thought about and addressed. It takes great courage to do that and I believe that if more people in the world exhibited that kind of courage the world would be a better place.
Rick Rickman |
|
Sean Carman, Photographer
|
Seattle | WA | USA | Posted: 8:57 PM on 01.26.06 |
->> Rick,
Thanks. I appreciate your post, and thanks for your wisdom.
It is true that I waded into the issue without knowing Mr. Harrington, or the good work he has done. So to the extent I have been unfair to you, John, I apologize. That was not my intent. Some of the remarks in my e-mail were probably, in hindsight, more cutting and curt than they should have been.
I suppose I reacted the way I did because I saw first-hand how hard Rich Clarkson works at putting on an outstanding workshop, that is a great learning experience, and it did, I admit, bother me that he was being criticized for a single business relationship he has -- that we really know nothing about -- and that is unrelated to the purpose and structure of the workshop. It seemed like a bit of gotcha politics.
In any case, sorry for the verbal sparring. I meant no disrespect, and I agree that a robust discussion of these issues benefits everyone.
Best,
Sean |
|
Trevor Brown, Photographer, Assistant
|
Denver | CO | USA | Posted: 2:11 PM on 01.27.06 |
->> To all who have been following this thread,
I have had the privilege of working for Rich for the past 4 years.
After cold calling him and meeting with him in 2001, he took a gamble
on me and offered me an internship which has since turned into a full
time job. Since then, I have learned more about photography than I
ever dreamed about, have been able to work with people I never thought
I would, and gotten to experience some pretty unique things.
I have been following this thread for the past few days and I have had
feelings of anger and sadness. Rich is a great man who has given more
to photography than most of us will ever give combined. Photography is
all the guy ever thinks about. He loves it more than anything, except
teaching it and passing it on to younger generations. That is how much
he cares about it. To see his name dragged through the mud like this
is flat out ridiculous. Just because a company has his name listed on
their website as one of their advisors, doesn't mean he is still
involved with them. When On Request was just starting up, they asked
Rich to be an advisor and he agreed. He gave them advice, none of
which they used, and he hasn't spoken with them since.
Why they still have his name up on that page, I am not sure. It is something Rich may ask to have changed.
What angers me most about this thread is that it started out as an
innocent question about Rich's workshop and Mitch got 1 post from Bert
before it turned into a discussion of something totally unrelated. To
all of you who posted their feelings/experiences of our workshop, thank
you for your comments. There were many supportive comments as well as
some that show that maybe there are a few things we could tweak to make
the experience better for our students.
While I think there definitely needs to be discussion about issues
pertaining to the health of photography and the different business
models that are used today, this was not the place to start it.
Respectfully,
Trevor |
|
Peter Lockley, Photographer
|
Washington | DC | usa | Posted: 6:26 PM on 01.27.06 |
->> One of the great things about Rich is that he has a story for every occasion, usually ending with a funny punchline and some sort of life lesson. One of the stories that has always stuck with me is about Truman Capote and his time in Kansas writing "In Cold Blood." He talks about a shy young woman follows Capote around as his assistant, and a journalist who talks to her in a patronizing tone, thinking she is nobody. It turns out that she is Harper Lee, author of "To Kill a Mockingbird."
The moral of Rich's story is "always know who you are talking to," before you go and put your foot in your mouth. I think you could extend that sentiment to "always know WHAT you are talking about."
Perhaps if John had ever attended the workshop, he would have heard that story, and thought twice before publicly discrediting someone like Rich Clarkson, based on something as insignificant as an advisor listing on a website he dislikes.
As Trevor mentioned, many companies seek advice from Rich, and for good reason. Whether they use it or not is completely out of his control.
Mitch, to answer your original question:
I have been to the workshop three times, and each time I have left with more knowledge, inspiriration, and focus than I would have thought possible within the span of a week. There are very few workshops that bring together a staff with that amount of talent, enthusiam and accessibility. If I could go every year I would.
My advice for getting the most out of the workshop would be to attend as many group sessions and portfolio reviews as possible. You have all year to shoot on your own, so take advantage of what the workshop has to offer. Also, don't be shy, the instructors are there for you and happy to help. The late night "sessions" at the bar are a lot of fun too.
-Peter |
|
Patrick Murphy-Racey, Photographer
|
Powell | TN | USA | Posted: 7:14 PM on 01.27.06 |
->> I used borrowed money and a credit card in 1991 to be able to attend the LA U.S. Olympic Festival. I was so broke at the time that I had to call my managing editor at the paper that had hired me just two years prior and get him to pay my hotel bill (Rich likes nice hotels) so I could leave the state. On that workshop, I met Peter Read Miller who helped me through my initial path to Sports Illustrated along with Tom Lynn from the Milwaukee Journal. That workshop along with the Eddie Adams workshop in 1989 changed my life. I realized that there was more to hopping from newspaper to newspaper in hopes of finding Nirvana (not the band). People like Rich Clarkson, Heinz, Steve Fine, Jeff Weig, Maureen Grise, Dave Black, and the other SI shooters allowed me to lift my gaze to heights I never knew existed and offered me skills and opportunities that I figured were too far away for my reach. there still has yet to be a perfect book on sports photography. Until one comes along, the good people here in this electronic forum and Rich's workshop are pretty much it in terms of how to take a shortcut to improving your portfolio and finding people to put your book in front of. Some people begrudge Rich for thinking of ways to make money off of shooters, and you have to balance that with the benefit his workshops (and friendship) offer. I attended a total of three in LA, St. Louis, and Denver. The people I met at each of these are still among my friends today and I have fond memories of each one.
I'm with anyone that wants photographers to have a bigger slice of the pie. This whole work for hire thing, bad contracts, and many layoffs have really put a lot of hungry photogs into the marketplace. That combined with digital making anyone a shooter has caused problems for many. I see Rich's workshops and others like them to offer help and real advice about real pictures to people. Photogs find themselves held in a constant tension between wanting to to great work and having to pay the bills. That will never change. The key is to get so good at what you do that people always call you.
Think about 50 years in the business... And still being on top of the game... Rich is the man, no matter how you look at it. I gave him a lot of my money for a few years, and every dollar came back to me in spades. I say go to his 06 Workshops if you can, but stop signing bad contracts and taking crap deals... Sorry to rant... |
|
Mark J. Terrill, Photographer
|
Simi Valley | CA | USA | Posted: 5:22 AM on 01.28.06 |
->> Rick Rickman writes about John Harrington--“John is a man who I believe carefully examines all sides of situations before he weighs in on anything. I don't believe he has any need for concern and only says things that have validity.”
John Harrington writes--“So, if you want to "learn" from someone who stands proudly as an advisor to this business model, I'd ask -- will Clarkson be wearing an "I'm with Stupid" t-shirt under his "sheep's clothing" as he not only teaches you about good sports photography, but then also pitches you on this really great idea called "Custom Assignments.”
Rick,
You know I have nothing but the utmost respect for you. You’re one of my heroes, but you have to be kidding. Where is the validity, truth, respect or honor for that matter in what Harrington has said in the above quote?
I appreciate that you’re trying to defend a friend of yours and point out his positive traits for those of us who don’t know him. However his flip response (see quote below) to a serious situation coupled with his self-aggrandizing bio written in the third person on his SS page tells me about all I need to know about him.
John Harrington writes--“ Uh oh. The Terrill brothers have ganged up on me on the playground. Sorry guys, mom didn't send me to school today with any lunch money.”
I have a real problem with people who are so militant in their views that they will take a “by any means necessary” attitude to get their point across. There are many organizations like PETA whose principals I generally agree with, but once you start blowing up laboratories to get your point across, you lose me. Harrington high-jacked this thread so he could stand on his soapbox, attack a legend in this business, who isn’t even here to defend himself, and shove his views down our throats. And he did so with that same “by any means necessary” attitude.
John Harrington wrote—“Buried deep within their website, there is listed an advisory board for OnRequest Images: And Mr. Clarkson is listed there.”
I can just picture him in a dark cellar with a computer and a magnifying glass, jumping for joy as he digs up this little nugget of dirt on Rich Clarkson.
The irony of all this is that, in his attempt to damage Mr. Clarkson and OnRequest, he probably brought OnRequest to the attention of many photographers who had never heard of them and are more than willing to take their deal. I also predict that the Sports Photography Workshop will be filled two months earlier than it normally is thanks to him. As I see it, the only damage done is to Harrington’s credibility and career.
Unfortunately, the Internet has become a place where people can say anything they want as they claim to be the ultimate authority and way too many people are willing to take what they say as gospel. I suggest that anyone reading these message boards take anything that anyone says here with a huge grain of salt and consider the source.
John Harrington wrote--“One of the notions that seems to often have applications is the idea that you are judged by the company you keep. When I've seen the t-shirt bearing the sign "I'm with stupid", my first thought is not one of the expected laughter response, but, rather, to ask "why?" Why associate yourself with someone you've deemed to be that way.”
To John Harrington,
In light of Trevor Brown’s revelations concerning Mr. Clarkson’s involvement with OnRequest, I hope you’ll wear your t-shirt proudly while you eat crow.
Mark |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|
