Losing business to amateurs

[chainsawal]

I thought about this thread last night... and although I agree with almost everything everyone has said, I tried to put it in as simple of a perspective as I could.

The OP was upset at the amateur who was undercutting him...

But here is where the real emotion should be directed (because the industry is changing rapidly).

1. Be mad at cell phone manufacturers because many people are getting "good enough" pictures of their family so they don't need any / or as many pro photo sessions.
2. Be mad at DSLR manufacturers for making pretty great gear at prices the everyday Joe can afford.
3. Be mad at technology, because digital broke down the barriers that traditional film had (in fact, how many people knew the old school photographers who shunned digital in the beginning?)
4. Be mad at the Internet for allowing people to educated and learn about the art easily - no need to apprentice under a pro any longer.
5. Be mad at the Internet for allowing consumers to find options (the old days you knew 1 or 2 local photographers who had studios and that was it... now even housewives have websites where they shoot on the side so the options are limitless).

I am obviously being a little sarcastic with the "be mad" ... the reality is nobody should be mad. Businesses change.. and sometimes you need to adapt, and sometimes there business is no longer viable depending on the area of expertise.

Photography is a tough business right now... and like someone above said, if I could shoot my college's sports (U of Florida) for free to get a field pass... I wouldn't hesitate to do it. All I lack is the 400mm f/2.8. but otherwise am good to go!

 

[West -]

Exactly, crying over loosing your job has been around since the dawn of time.
Horse carriage builders must have been really pi**ed when they started building cars.

 

[limr29 2]

What I've learned here in this thread is that...

a) if you have money, you can do whatever the f*** you want, no matter who it hurts;
b) unscrupulous behavior is good business; and
c) if someone gets upset at the lack of integrity and/or compassion, then they will be told that it's just simply "the way it is" and we all just need to suck it up.

None of this gives me even one iota of hope in humanity.

 

[limr29 2]

The OP was upset at the amateur who was undercutting him...

Actually, no. The OP was upset about an amateur who took a job away from his friend.

I'm also apparently not particularly impressed with today's reading comprehension skills.

 

[West -]

What I've learned here in this thread is that...

a) if you have money, you can do whatever the f*** you want, no matter who it hurts;
b) unscrupulous behavior is good business; and
c) if someone gets upset at the lack of integrity and/or compassion, then they will be told that it's just simply "the way it is" and we all just need to suck it up.

None of this gives me even one iota of hope in humanity.

I guess we could have a group cry everytime someone looses their job ... I'm in

 

[limr29 2]

I guess we could have a group cry everytime someone looses their job ... I'm in

Yes, because that's exactly what I implied

 

[Gary A.]

I guess we could have a group cry everytime someone looses their job ... I'm in

Yes, because that's exactly what I implied

LOL ... yes it is.

 

[tirediron]

I guess we could have a group cry everytime someone looses their job ... I'm in

Yes, because that's exactly what I implied

LOL ... yes it is.

Hmmm... didn't really seem like that to me.

 

[tecboy]

Well, this amateur probably doesn't have insurance and a second body. If her primarily dslr fails, her only solution is to take pictures with her cell phone. It is not her fault if the pictures are blurry and dark.

 

[unpopular]

All I see in this thread is a bunch of protogs from the "old mens club" whining because they can't keep up.

Seriously. If you can't compete, retire already. If you can't afford to retire, well tough titties.

I have ZERO patience for this garbage, especially when coming from a generation that stereotypically complains so much about entitlement and sings the praises of free market.

You're not entitled to clients just because your fist camera was a Kodak Pony.

 

[bratkinson]

"You get what you pay for" used to be the rule...now it's more of an exception in my mind.

Never mind that somebody can spend $500 or less on a kit and think they are ready to do weddings. Some of the members of this forum appear to have done just that! Zero to wedding photographer seemingly overnight!

What's happened is that most people are now satisfied with "OK" or "good enough". Whether it's pictures from a cell phone or a iPhone that has problems. It's good enough to get the job done. With extremely rare exception, the high end, high quality manufacturers are all long gone. Everyone shops on price and price alone. I once bid a Federal Government contract that was presumably based 75% quality and 25% price based on RFP information. I came in 2nd. I later got a private letter from one of the government employees in the decision committee and they said my experience, expertise, and quality far exceeded the #1 bidder. But his price was $2,000 less than my $155,000 price. So much for quality.

In short, "good enough" is OK these days. And if someone is willing to accept less than good quality work or workmanship, so be it. And it's hard to be FREE as a competitors price.

 

[imagemaker46]

When I was shooting news ... I could care less about the amateur or what they were packing ... I knew my abilities and it I didn't feel a challenge from the amateur sector. It wasn't a fair fight. All the hobbyists did were to get in the way. I know my colleagues felt similarly.

If the profession of photojournalism has a funeral, this quote might be engraved on the tombstone.

What the news photogs think has absolutely nothing to do with what the accounting department thinks or what the CEO/CFO thinks as a viable profit margin (say 30%) or what the shareholders demand in a ROI.



Your statement hasn't any currency in the viability of photojournalism as a profession. I believe that even today photojournalists do not feel threatened by amateurs with big cameras. The downfall of photojournalism and news periodicals in general is the internet. Due to the fragmentation of the advertising dollar, the news industry is having to change it's business model to cope with the internet for content, with the internet for advertising (see Craig's List, websites, et al). And todays corporate structure/ownership demanding higher profits over a quality product.

Gary

A lot of what I see on the news is cell phone pix and vids. But they still have some hi grade stuff for certain events.

The industry is redefining itself. With all the bloggers and talk radio the line between op-ed and news is blurry at best. Now news decisions is being made by accounting. Sorta like health care where the accounting department is calling the shots on the treatment instead of the physician. Now the accounting department is dictating how news will be covered and presented. Having five full-time photogs and a zillion "free lancers with cell phones" is cheaper than 20 staffers and five stringers. There was a time when working for a major paper or wire service required a degree in journalism (or equal). The photojournalist needed to understand the tenants of journalism first and be a photographer second. Now it is all about scooping the competition ... keeping costs low and profits high. It is very difficult to both report and shoot, one or the other will suffer. So you have to keep a few photogs around for important stuff and stuff where you need a media pass to cross police lines or get into a sporting event. (Hard to shoot a ball game with a iPhone. But I did shoot a football game with a wide angle ... it was a bet. lol)

Gary

I don't ever remember a time when a photographer needed a degree in anything to work for a newspaper or wire service, I don't have a degree in anything, most of guys I know that have been in the business for more than 30 years don't either. Back then, it was more of a matter of having a camera, and learning on the go, the good ones got the jobs, the not so good ones worked when the workload was higher.

 

[imagemaker46]

Well, this amateur probably doesn't have insurance and a second body. If her primarily dslr fails, her only solution is to take pictures with her cell phone. It is not her fault if the pictures are blurry and dark.

This photographer does in fact have 2 Nikon D3 bodies, a 300 2.8, 70-200 2.8 and probably more gear than I do. She is not under equipped to do the job, that wasn't what I was saying in the original post.

 

[imagemaker46]

All I see in this thread is a bunch of protogs from the "old mens club" whining because they can't keep up.

Seriously. If you can't compete, retire already. If you can't afford to retire, well tough titties.

I have ZERO patience for this garbage, especially when coming from a generation that stereotypically complains so much about entitlement and sings the praises of free market.

You're not entitled to clients just because your fist camera was a Kodak Pony.

The photographer I mentioned in the original post is in his mid twenties, he lost the job to woman in her 40's who had the money to retire. I was just adding a post to start a conversation on how things are for a friend of mine and another example of how photography is changing.

This would fall into the reverse of what you are saying. The old mens club laid the ground work for everyone else, just the same way the generation before me laid the ground work for my "old" generation. I'd rather help out a young guy now, which I do, than poach his client.

You have your opinion on what ever is stated here and I respect that, and once again it is a pointless post. As usual you decided to take another shot at my profession and anything I say.

 

[The_Traveler]

. I came in 2nd. I later got a private letter from one of the government employees in the decision committee and they said my experience, expertise, and quality far exceeded the #1 bidder. But his price was $2,000 less than my $155,000 price. So much for quality.

I've spent a good amount of time on purchasing decisions and have found that, if the second or third lowest bidder is better for clear discernable reasons, then the bid can be awarded and all it takes is some amount of justification on the part of the purchaser (typically this is the COTR or Contracting Officer's Technical Representative). The contracting officer and his minions are malleable and if the purchaser fights and gives defensible justification, the bid will go to where the purchaser thinks.