Harlan Ellison -- Pay the Writer

So this bring up a good point and how most industry are going it seems.

Did the Digital Camera kill the biz?

Has the digital camera killed the photography business?  

The Federal Bureau of Statistics states that "pro photography is one of the the only professions that has not had any income growth in 14 years. Only 5 percent growth in 27 years. Equipment costs 10 times what it did 30 years ago".

Since the digital camera has come into main stream hands, there has been a lot more competition with the average amateur.  That has also driven down the fees.  Should professional photographer be worried?  Yes and no.  I think digital camera has killed the "traditional business" of photography.  Meaning on time you had to know how to light a subject, product, interior or whatever.  You had to estimate the number of polaroids in your bid.  The more polaroids you used the more it was charge to you or the client.  Now with digital there is none of that.  You can keep deleting the file until you get it right.  You could shoot 200 frames to get it right from one shot.  Imagine 200 8 x 10 polaroids or 4 x 5 polaroids for on shot.  Cha Ching.   Not only do you have to know about the cameras, but the editing programs that go along with it.  

Personally, I find it a very exciting time.  With more people going after the same work it makes you step up your game.  For me, I feel I have an advantage....experience.  The longer you have been doing something , the more comfortable you become.  Can I handle 20 person production in several locations, of course.  Could I have handle it say 10 years ago.  Not on your life.  

So has the digital camera killed the business?  It has just changed it.  The camera is just a tool.  Same with all the all the other software programs.  You have to know how to work the tools,  of course.  But talent trumps all.  My experience has been the longer you are doing something the better you become.  Which in turn is the experience.  Having the new latest camera / program is not going to make you a better photographer.  You taking more pictures is going to make you a better photographer.

I write this to remind me that I need to practice what I preach. So off I go and shoot to become a better photographer.

What Magazine are looking for

I created a few of the most asked questions to me about magazines.  So I asked the people I have relationship with.  These are magazine that represent perhaps the top 5 home decor magazine.  These answer have not been doctored in any way.  They have asked to remain anonymous for legal reasons. 

 Here are the questions and answers....Each color represents the magazine's response

 HI XYZ,

 

I know your crazy busy. I was wondering if you can help me out for a second. I'm doing a "how to" or "do's and don't" video with interior designers that want to be published. Sorta like this one I did on a shoot on my blog: http://scottvandyke.blogspot.com/

 The idea is to inform interior designers what magazines are looking for from the source. I think this would be very good for interior designers not to waste the magazine time or get their expectation up. So if could just answer a couple of question that would be so helpful.

1What is the biggest oversight or mistake with submissions? You can limit one answer or add as many needed. (example...someone sent you a "heavy" country home look and we a contemporary magazine)

 

We need a very extensive explanation of the home’s green features. Also, we need scouting photos of both the exterior and interior (every room). Both of those are often overlooked.

 

#1 biggest mistake? When the person submitting hasn't looked at recent issues of XYZ home. Not understanding that a review process takes time and not understanding a monthly magazine's lead times.

 

I think the the biggest mistake is that people THINK they CAN’T send in a submission. They’re under a misconception that you have to know someone or that we’re looking for a particular style. We consider every submission equally.

 

it really  doesn’t matter if someone sends me contemporary homes even though that’s something we don’t cover...it’s the quality of the photographs that I’m interested in...only problem I have is with digital images – if they take long to open

 

I would agree with the above. Sometimes I get submissions of homes that are not appropriate to the magazine. Not be be a snob, but the home will not be "High-end" enough for the XYZ reader.

 

people sending content that doesn't match that of our publication.  

 

 

2. How does your magazine like to see submissions? (examples...Hard prints, prints with captions or digitally).

 

Digital is great…j-pegs and a Word document listing green features and other pertinent information.

 

how to submit? When someone doesn't know me or XYZ home....with a cd of low res images plus a project description sent in the mail.

 

Hard prints or laser printouts are the best way to present projects these days. 4x5 or 2 1/4” transparencies are still ok. Emailed submissions or disks aren’t good because we don’t have the manpower to make printouts of all the submissions. Captions aren’t necessary.

 

It doesn’t really matter but websites are easiest and portfolios are becoming more of a problem to deal with

 

I prefer digital submissions, with some sort of brief description of the home, and what makes it special or unique

 

we have an online submissions process through our website that is the best way.  second to that is someone emailing one of the editors with a story idea, and images of the project

 

 

3. Do want the submissions to be professional shot? (examples...no, it would be helpful or does not matter we send our own photographer's out...ect)

 

No…amateur scouting shots are fine. We will send out a photographer to do professional shots if we choose to feature the home.

 

professionally shot? No, we generate our own pix.

 

Submissions do NOT need to be professionally photographed. It absolutely does not matter

 

I think however it is executed would be in the best interest of the interior designer – so I would suggest professionally shot.

 

I prefer digital submissions, with some sort of brief description of the home, and what makes it special or unique

 

It makes it easier for us if the homes are already well photographed, and all the important rooms are pictured. If they are stunning, I also like to see an exterior and/or view and landscaping photos, as well.

 

We have accepted jobs that are pitched with only scouting shots. I prefer to use the photographer that submitted the home if possible (as long as their portfolio is good quality)

 

we will send out photographers on anything that we choose as a feature or my house, so all we need for those types of stories are good scouting shots.  if someone is submitting a smaller story, such as houses we love, then they will need to have good images in keeping with the style of photography in the magazine.  If something that would be a feature has been professionally shot, that is fine, but the photographer who worked on the story/shoot, should know that we might assign the story to someone else and have it re shot if the look is not in keeping with our style of photography.

 

4. Any other comments?

 

We are happy to send over a checklist of green features that the designer can fill out and send back to us. This guarantees we get all the information we need to consider the house.

 

The pictures need to fully portray the project, and we must see an image of the living room, dining room and master bedroom in order to make a decision.

 

You hit the nail on the head with number 1. I have received many submissions where the photographer was not familiar with our audience, and sent photos of homes that we would never be able to use.

 

 

 

This goes under WTF?

This nuts...as if  the police did not have enough to do.  Wait till your mother gets stopped!

Photographers Rights UK from Nick Turpin on Vimeo.

The Next Great Hunk Of Crap Technology

This came from
http://www.aphotoeditor.com/
Rob Haggart site

Sony Releases New Stupid Piece Of Shit That Doesn't Fucking Work

MET MUSEUM AD campaign image came from Flickr

In today NY Times "weekend arts" section, at the bottom of the page ran the Met Museum Ad campaign "It's Time We Met".  Clever and I like it.  It shows a couple kissing in the 19th Century Galleries.  The most interesting thing about this picture is the photo credit and it reads:  "6:35 pm  19th Century Galleries.  Photo by Laura P Russell via Flickr".  Yes Flicker.  So look up Laura profile.  

In short, she a mom and happily married.  Loves to take pictures and is not a professional but would love to get paid by it.  Read if you will.

What strike me is that this a national if not a worldwide AD campaign for the Met.  They pulled an amateur photograph to do the job.  I think the photo works well for the campaign.  It shows everyday people doing everyday things at the Met.  Very human and believable.  When I did some research, the Met has their own Flicker page which is great.  They are doing a contest and rules are there.

So, the prize if you win is $250 cash plus a one year Met Net membership at a $60 value. I did e mail Laura to ask if she was paid and Laura did e mail me and said "Thanks for the shout out. Yes, we got paid, got credit, and retain rights".  If you look up on Corbis Stock site, an images with 1/8 in size worldwide rights, in a Newspaper for three months is $1925 priced out.  You can argue this is not a professional who took the picture.  I would say, this an image being "used" professionally for an advertisement.  So what is the difference?  If an images is going to be used professionally does it matter who took the picture?  Should they not all get paid about the same?

So, could this be the new wave of Marketing?  Put up a contest and and the winner get a much "under value" price to use the image for however long? Or do people want to have less of "polished" look.  Chase Javis right hand man Scott talks about "imperfect" image on Chase Blog the other day. 

I know contest have been around forever.  I just wonder though is this ploy to take advantage of the amateur photographer or just a new look, trend or economic hard times?  Should the professional be worried?  I say no for now.  Not until creative start pulling from the social web sites for other campaigns.

92YTribeca: Music. Film. Comedy. Talks. Classes.

this is funny