In brief, David Hobby (over at strobist.com) wrote last week that you can really feed your photography passion by shooting for free. That is, find something you want to photograph and use the promise of free photos to help you be allowed take the photos. One example given was taking photos for an animal shelter (for someone passionate about pet photography), another was taking photos of food for a restaurant that couldn't otherwise afford it.
The responses over the interwebs have fallen into three fairly predictable categories:
- The pros who feel that this undermines the value of what they produce. How can they feed their families if every Joe, Dick and Jane are willing to shoot for free?
- The amateurs who already don't get paid for what they do. They of course think this is a great idea as it gives them legitimacy for the photos they want to take.
- The in-betweens who want the best of both worlds. "Only take the gig if it is for a charity" is a common theme in this group.
I've been thinking about doing a few projects. One of them requires a fair amount of driving across Ontario (it will probably need to wait until we have second car). But one of them is way more possible in the here and now. In fact, the only thing stopping me was my shyness and the thinking that I should keep all the photos I take. I think the post over at strobist.com may just be the kick in my pants that I need.
But there is still a part of group 3 that I fall in. I've done a few photo shoots for money; I charged way less then a professional photographer would, but I also delivered way less as well (no backup camera, delayed proofs, mid-range resolution, amateur touch-ups). Only one of the gig's I had I think would have gone to a professional if I wasn't convenient. At this point in my life, I don't want to be a professional photographer (I like my day job too much), but at the same time I feel that when I'm not shooting for friends or family, I should be charging something just so people know that there are professionals out there who make their living doing this. But with the advent of affordable professional quality cameras and photo-processing software that professional photographers will need to differentiate themselves from us amateurs or risk going out of business. Us amateurs are a wave that I don't think can be stopped.
Anyways - those are my thoughts (as always, worth just as much as you paid).
2 comments:
There is a Photography contest in KW every year and they invite anyone who is an amateur photographer to enter. They define amateur as someone who earns less than half their income doing photography.
Competition stimulates innovation. I think amateur photographers have every right to work for free (and I definitely would), but we still hired a professional for our wedding cause we liked his work and wanted the security. I think the two can co-exist.
I fully concur with Caroly's view. Probably every industry in the history of the world has undergone evolutions and revolutions that have made things difficult for those working in the industry. This is just natural human progression. I don't think we should feel sorry for professionals because the market is flooded with talent (both professional and amateur) now. As a professional, they need to find a way to stand out from the crowd. I mean, if dolphins were suddenly able to develop software, I could gripe all I wanted at the dolphins but ultimately it's my responsibility to A) forsee potential changes in the industry, B) prepare and adjust to such changes, and C) have a back-up plan if A and B don't work. I mean, dolphins have a right to develop software too, right? It's just how life works: you have to ride the wave of change, or be drowned by it.
Post a Comment