Pros Opinion on a Newbie...

[rufus5150]

I totally felt like I've been attacked by the photographer maphia in this thread.

I think you're mixing up your threads. Your work was attacked in the another thread (by at least one poster I saw). I just re-read this entire thread and I would say exactly 0% of it was directed as a criticism of what you're doing. People have disagreed with you, but then again, you started this thread having seen the other threads.

I'm left to wonder... what did you expect out of this thread, exactly?

 

[Lynnzora]

I absolutely get your point but some were directed towards me... And being someone in a simular boat as amature photographer (not nessisarily a newbie). I felt an impulse to kind of speak up. Especially when the tone of the messages turned ugly. I guess was just a breaking point because I've watched newbie after newbie get on here and ask a question that a pro feels is easy and stupid and they express that to the newbie and follow it up with a "go read your freakin manual." This section is for beginners so that's who is going to post on here. If the question sounds stupid then just don't answer. If a newbie gets on talking about how they're going to start doing $40 portraits and $100 to make some extra money. You can honestly tell them your opinion without being rude and tear somone down. "You don't even know how to properly light your pictures, your work is horrible, etc..." Instead you can tell them that it's risky doing something like this... tell them why. I'm just saying show some tact. And also realize that all newbies aren't cut from the same cloth... There's some who pick up the camera thinking oooh I can make a quick buck. Others have passion for photography enough where they're going to study it. I've seen newbie pictures who are AMAZING. When I was pregnant with my son I went to Sears to take a quick maternity pic because I was 9 months and running out of time. It was a last minute thing because had been putting it off. I swear that the pic I got from them... mann I've taken pictures wayy better. However, they're considered to be pros though. Get what I'm saying? Instead of putting all newbies in this box and putting all of them down... I think the focus should've been the question at hand. Not saying that all newbies produce crappy pics and if you end up with a good one, you were just lucky. I mean, come on.

 

[Lynnzora]

Lynnzora, I'm sorry you feel attacked, but I don't see how it was personal toward you in any of the posts (and I just re-read the whole thread, too). I see a lot of people speaking about things that are perhaps paralleling your experiences (like the wedding thing), and perhaps you took it personally?

In any case, they're just opinions. Do what you want with them. I don't necessarily agree with some of the views expressed here either, but it's not personal (and if someone wants to hold a personal grudge against me because I might accept gas money to do a "favor" [which hence forth shall be my code word for amateurs accepting pro bono/low cost jobs ] at a friend's birthday part or something, meh, I could do without them then).

I strongly believe that the amateurs who take learning jobs along way are not taking food out of the mouths of professionals. There is not that much market over lap when you consider the budgets each are catering to. A person with a 500-1000 dollar budget for photos is not going to suddenly jump to a 5000 dollar package, regardless of the difference in quality. They're going to find the best they can 500-1000.

And in regards to misrepresenting skills, or competency in one field and taking jobs in another... well, I totally agree. But like I said above, I think that's more of an ethical business practices thing, than a photography thing. It's just basic common sense not to go booking a hockey game if you're used to working in a sears portrait studio. Duh.

So don't take it personally. Take what you want, and leave the rest.

Awww thanks... I'm really not broken up over it. lol... I just think some people can be rude in expressing their opinions. I've taken from it what I want... The rest :thumbdown:. Thanks for your comment.

 

[Village Idiot]

I think you're mixing up your threads. Your work was attacked in the another thread (by at least one poster I saw). I just re-read this entire thread and I would say exactly 0% of it was directed as a criticism of what you're doing. People have disagreed with you, but then again, you started this thread having seen the other threads.

I'm left to wonder... what did you expect out of this thread, exactly?

Oh! Oh! Me! Me!

:shock:

Believing you take good pictures and taking good pictures are two different things. Some one that has influenced me vastly (who is a very distinguished pro) once posted that in order to really know if your work is good or bad you have to be able to distance yourself from your photos and not be emotionally involved with them when you sit down to critique them.

Only saying this because of photos of yours that I've seen in another thread. But you've not had your camera very long and there are certain things that you have to learn (as mentioned in a previous post) before attempting that type of photography. It's like handing you a camera, macro lens, and extension tubes and then telling you to take macro pictures and stack focus. Unless you learn about it, you'll realize that you're missing vital equipment to get this done.

 

[Lynnzora]

I think you're mixing up your threads. Your work was attacked in the another thread (by at least one poster I saw). I just re-read this entire thread and I would say exactly 0% of it was directed as a criticism of what you're doing. People have disagreed with you, but then again, you started this thread having seen the other threads.

I'm left to wonder... what did you expect out of this thread, exactly?

I'm actually not mixing up threads. I've never read a thread about this topic. If I did, I wouldn't have started this one. I guess I just expected tact in communicating opinions. No one said straight out that YOUR pics are crappy. They said newbies produce crappy pics. Well I can be being modest but I do consider myself a newbie although I've been taking pics for a while, taken many of classes, won some small local rewards, and currently studying photography AGRESSIVELY in college. So putting all newbies in a box isn't going to fly. But what was I expecting... I guess just adult convo with tons of opinions expressed in a tactful way. A way that didn't put down anyone. Am I really hurt no! I was in part being a little sarcastic. Will I still post on here. Absolutely.

 

[Lynnzora]

Oh! Oh! Me! Me!

:shock:

Ok thanks lol

 

[Seefutlung]

I think many of the experienced photogs have repeated read threads similar to "... I just got my first wedding ... what f/stop should I use ...?"

And I think many of the experienced photogs (at least I do) that that in mind when responding to this thread.

Gary

 

[Seefutlung]

As the person who first used the word "crappy". I never stated that newbie's take crappy pictures ... what I said was " ... For me, it isn't about competition, it is all about taking good money for a crappy product. I am against the disservice an unqualified newbie gives to the client."

Anybody can take crappy photos, regardless of experience.

Gary

 

[Stilltime]

As the person who first used the word "crappy". I never stated that newbie's take crappy pictures ... what I said was " ... For me, it isn't about competition, it is all about taking good money for a crappy product. I am against the disservice an unqualified newbie gives to the client."

Anybody can take crappy photos, regardless of experience.

Exactly! So why is this the prevailing argument against amateurs taking money for their services/prints? If all parties are upfront about their capabilities and expectations, then what is the problem?

Promising something that you cannot deliver and taking money for it is a crappy business practice, but if that's not happening, then what is the problem with charging someone a small fee to go out to their kid's birthday and take pictures? If the person is happy to pay your fee, or even just cover your costs to do it for free (like gas), what's the problem?

I think what Lynnzora and myself are questioning is why there is a problem offering your services to someone who is fully aware of what you may/may not be able to deliver. So far, there's no compelling reason why an amateur should not take money for photos beyond being a scammer and selling their services based on skills they don't have. When that's not taking place during the transaction, what, exactly, is the problem?

I recently posted an ad on my local freecycle for free photography, because my dogs and my daughter and the squirrels at my local park are getting sick of me. I went out last week with a fellow freecycler and took over 200 pictures of her dog, and we all had a blast. I now have some new photos to play with from a different setting, and she has some above average photos of her puppy. I'm not over-the-moon thrilled with them, but I did it for practice, and practice I got! According to some on here, that falls under the free/favor/pro bono category that devalues photography as a profession. I don't understand that logic and would really love to hear more on the subject.

 

[Christie Photo]

What makes it sad is that people can't listen. We've had people comment towards the end who didn't even read the whole thread.

Ummm... that was me. I just wanted to address your original concern:

...just don't get what's wrong with that as long as the consumer is happy with the end result.

Did you hear what I was saying?

It went like this: "Everyone has to start somewhere. Just do it with your eyes wide open, knowing the full ramifications."

-Pete

 

[rufus5150]

They said newbies produce crappy pics.

So putting all newbies in a box isn't going to fly.

Maybe I'm not reading this thread with any sense of comprehension (which would be, I'm afraid, seriously out of character for me) but no one, let alone a collective 'they' have generalized a statement that all newbies produce crappy pics. You've made this claim a few times in this thread and I think it's born of an unfair reading of your responders.

I think it's safe to say, independent of this thread, that newbies (or 'inexperienced photographers' they need not be 'new' by any stretch of the imagination) by and large do not produce quality pictures. That is not to say they don't produce amazing photos, too, they do, just as some professionals who consistently produce above-par results will make mistakes and produce pictures that are less than stellar and downright 'crappy'.

There is a place in discourse for generalizations, if only for brevity. Assuming we're all adults or close to (as you expect the responses to be, based on some of your replies), we're adequately capable of understanding that a general term applies to trends and generalities and will never encompass the totality of anecdotes. Let's take for instance a generalization from this very thread:

HAVE A "THE CUSTOMER'S ALWAYS RIGHT" ATTITUDE

So if the customer comes up and says, "I know we agreed to $200 for the shoot, but here's $100 and I want 10 free prints." There's an outlier case, but yet I can guarantee even people who believe the customer is always right understands it's not a generalization that pinholes every single instance of customer service. The customer in that case is not only wrong, but could be justifiably beat about the head.

The majority of responses (all, IMNSHO, except for perhaps my last snarky question, to which I say only 'reread your original post!') to this thread have been well-rationed out and lacking in the very confrontational nature that the threads that inspired you to create this one are generally littered with.

You asked why people raise concerns when someone says they're going to do a wedding or portrait sessions. I think you've got a very broad spectrum of replies. And with that, you'll find it very difficult to generalize what the pro (or experienced) photo population (elsewhere, here on the board or simply in this thread) makes of the proposal, as you seem wont to do.

There's a lot of good in this thread. You may not agree with it, as I may not agree with you or any of the other responders.

That being said, if you're doing things like taking portraits of underprivileged people for experience or a little dime and taking a side job now and again. Bless you. Good for you and go for it.

 

[Lynnzora]

Ummm... that was me. I just wanted to address your original concern:


Did you hear what I was saying?

It went like this: "Everyone has to start somewhere. Just do it with your eyes wide open, knowing the full ramifications."

-Pete

No, no... Pete I wasn't refering to you at all. You're a pro that I honestly see give constructive feed back to newbies all the time WITHOUT putting down their work. You have a great attitude. If someone advertises that they're a professional photographer, experience and about their work books a wedding and does horrible. They're going to pay with a lawsuit. That's on the phogtographer.

I however, don't see any ramifications in doing free work for people or for a small fee that will get me from point a to point b... or something to eat while I'm doing someone else a favor. Especially when they're fully aware of what I do. I did want to comment on the whole idea of shadowing another photographer... That's an excellent idea and a way to learn alot BUT it is so competitive now-a-days that photographers see someone in training as competition in the future. There's very few people willing to help others now-a-days. It's sad.

 

[Christie Photo]

I however, don't see any ramifications in doing free work for people or for a small fee that will get me from point a to point b...

Well... like I say... that's another variable...

You'll be fine MOST of the time. It's a workable plan. The ramifications are a "maybe." No matter how clear you make it to the customers, they may have a level of expectations that they feel is reasonable, even when working for nearly nothing. They may not make this clear to you... unless they're not satisfied... after all is done.

People are funny. The SECOND any money comes into play, they can change. Everyone loved my work when it was free. When asked to pay, everyone became a critic.


-Pete

 

[rufus5150]

I however, don't see any ramifications in doing free work for people or for a small fee that will get me from point a to point b

There's absolutely nothing wrong with this, but the advice from this thread remains: know what you're getting into. If only for the ability to tell people what they should expect.

Let me relay a bit of a personal story. I joined TPF after owning my camera for a while. I knew what all of the modes did, I'd read Understanding Exposure, I knew how to get a decent exposure. I'd been told by friends, family, and even people I didn't know that my photos were good. I had an 'eye' for photography, I had people offer me money to do pictures.

The pictures I was doing from that time frame I can now barely go back and look at. They're painful.

TPF made me realize two things -- first off, it knocked me down a notch. I didn't come out guns blazing and all but the good, honest and sometimes harsh feedback brought me down to earth. The second thing I realized is that I'm not going to be there every time my image is viewed. I'm not going to be able to say 'That 8x10 headshot? Yeah the sun was hidden behind some clouds and there was this drainage thing off to the left that was impossible to photoshop out, and the focus on the eyes was a bit blurry because Bob's dog kept bumping my tripod.' Your images have to stand on their own or, at best, they must stand up with only a title to rely on.

So I improved without taking anyone's money. I laughingly told someone the other day that i think you make it to at least 'competent' here when your images get few if any replies. This generally means that the technical aspects are correct, the composition is probably text-book correct, but your images don't have anything that makes them stand out from the crowd. The beginner's forum posts get a lot of feedback either of the encouragement variety (which has its uses) as well as a lot of criticisms of the technical. The professional galleries when the images are outstanding get replies with the nit picks, the things that often only photographers will care about. Then the other images that are mind blowing often get ample praise or even questions of technical nature trying to eek out of them how they managed to accomplish this or that.

If you post images for criticism and you get virtually no response, you've either made it to a significant comprehension level in regards to photography or you've pissed everyone off!

After I had been here a while, I considered the weekend-warrior thing and trying to make a dime. I've had "hobbies" before that have either paid for themselves or made me some cash on the side. I looked at what my skill set could accomplish and then I saw the outrageous prices for head shots on pro photographer's websites. $50? $70? $100 for a single headshot or maybe 2 poses. I could undercut that!

Those threads had something, though. My livelihood isn't dependent on photography whereas many photographers in the area base a huge amount of business off of headshots for businesses or actors or such. Two things are going to come out of that -- I'm never going to be able to bump my prices up to those levels (or I'm going to find it difficult later on) and I will never, never get any help from the community of photographers. (Which, as an aside, the jerks are few and far between. All but one of the photogs I've met have been willing to share their experience.)

So maybe I price them to my skill level, but still within the realms of industry expectations. Either that or I should hold off until my skill demands those types of rates.

I waited. In fact I made my first sale of an art print to someone nearly wholly unknown to me and I wouldn't have sold that print had I not felt comfortable knowing that it will go through life without title, explanation, or whatever, hanging on someone's wall. And now I'm tiptoeing gently into being a part time professional photographer, careful not to extend my boundaries to where I'm uncertain I can go. Had I not stopped, had I not been stopped, in my tracks by the sometimes harsh tone of threads here, I'd have been in bad shape.

And herein lies the crux of this story applied to the general. The person that does a friend's wedding as a favor, then another for someone who can't afford it, gets it in their head that they can do this as a weekend-warrior gig for pittance. Can amazing things happen? Maybe. Will the customers be happy? Maybe. Will this happen with everyone that asks? No. But then again, we're photographers. We warn everyone. We mitigate the risk! ( ) The risk of disappointment, both for the photog and the customer is high, though, even if you discuss that risk ahead of time.

More dangerous yet, are the more-than-competent weekend-warriors and part-timers who can probably provide at least competent level service who are undercutting the pros by thousands of dollars. Yes there's a market for $200-wedding photo gigs, but at some point, you're basically loss-leading them to the point that the businesses can no longer sustain. Wal-Mart makes good use of this in new markets. Whereas its completely within your legal right, it's then that the issues of morality and ethics comes up in regards to business. If you do the one-off event gig for $200 frequently enough that it cuts significantly into the business of the full timers who charge 10x that, they'll need to find something else to do. They stop doing the event-type gigs, and either you need to raise your rates because demand is up (at which point people will undercut you) or the customers will be left out in the cold with no one to pick up their jobs. The inexperienced rarely ever thinks of the potential customer.

For those jumping in without too much foreknowledge of business, it is in your (and the industry's) best interest to price what the market will bear for the product you are offering. There's a lot of room to move in that.

Sorry for the exposition!

 

[Mystwalker]

A pro who charges $6000/Wedding may be threatened by someone who charges $4000.

But to compare these upper tier guys to someone who charges $200 - like comparing my Camry to a Lambo.

I am sure you get what you pay for and the difference will be immediately evident in preliminary discussions/interviews.

By the same reasoning, a client of the $4k/$6k will not consider using the $200 photographer. Clients of the $200 photographer can not afford to get into the $4k+ range.

Startup photographers do not "devalue" the profession. They offer a needed service because not everyone can afford to spend a couple grand on photographs. On other hand, "pros" who have wedding gigs coming up and are asking basic technique questions, are scary. But that's is between the "pro" and their client.