Facebook people who call themselves photographers

You're fighting for a point, but you just provided a PERFECT example of what vinnief was talking about. How many go pros do you see on peoples heads on the hill? And shitty go pro edits with basically no editing and just music tossed in with it? And they get no exposure because no one gives a fuck. Some will watch it because they don't know the difference, they don't ski and they might just be watching a family members edit. Same with photography. People who aren't gonna pay a professional photog are people who don't give a flying fuck about composition and all the other nuances of photography. They just want photos of a special day. They're not looking at them 20 years later and saying "oh wow, he really framed us well with the background honey." Stop putting the photography industry on a pedestal and saying the cheap, low quality labour is somehow unique to photography and hurting it.
 
294447_252483058129684_248842551827068_777860_277287807_n.jpg


Your Welcome.
 
There have been and are companies that try to sell cars at similar price point as lamb, and some have gone under, and some haven't. It's capitalist competition man. If you wanna follow through further with your example, do you think honda undercuts the sales of lamborghini?
 
One of my friends who does some modelling just posted this picture on facebook
317380_10150399076008436_769833435_10117627_2074409532_n.jpg
at first i thought it was just loading and was in that blurry state the new fb seems to do before loading it properly. this was from an album by the photographer called portraits the rest i dont have any real issues with but this is a piss take. none are badly watermarked or anything like that just this one reminded me of this thred
 
i am in no way a photographer but my friend gave me his cannon something that was like 1400$ and i followed him in a car, and took this i feel like a real photographer for about 10 secs.

s477ef.jpg
 
I don't mind kids owning DSLR's, photography is a great hobby and can be tons of fun and really rewarding. I just hate some peoples attitudes. Owning a Rebel t2i doesn't make you a photographer, you are not a pro. Personally I think thats the problem with all the kids we've posted in these threads, they just need an attitude check.
 
I think you're missing my point.

Quality photography is worth more, and thus more expensive. Shit photography is worth less, and thus less expensive.

One can't make the argument that shit photographers are offering an equal service at a better price. They simply aren't. That's not to say that many people can't tell the difference (which is quite often the case), but that's not what I'm arguing here.

I personally don't care about shitty photographers; I find it amusing. Again, if your photography is any good, you shouldn't feel threatened by amateurs. Who cares if some soccer mom is going to pay Joe Shmoe $300 for crappy senior portraits instead of your (hopefully) quality work for thousands? Furthermore, why are you so concerned with selling a product that is largely too expensive for that demographic?

People pay for what they get. What's it to you?
 
Eh you're not getting it.

You're right, those people don't care about composition. And I don't know why you felt the need to repeat that point because I've already said it several times. But the problem is that a lot of professionals like to do jobs such as weddings on the side because it's an easy way to make a pretty good amount of money. People taking shitty photos with their point and shoot DON'T rely on these jobs as a source of income, so they can charge ridiculously low prices. I don't recall ever saying cheap, low quality labor is unique to photography. Nobody ever said that. It's just that art industries are unique in that people can't tell low quality from high quality, not sure why you're not understanding that.

Also, I think that if you presented a couple with the photos that their friend with a T2i took on auto, then somehow showed them photos that a professional (with an extensive knowledge of lenses, lighting, editing, etc.) COULD have taken, they would regret cheaping out at least a little. Who wouldn't want their wedding photos to look as unique and perfect as possible? It's just that unless they see the comparison, they won't realize what they're missing out on.

Regardless, I'm not a photographer and I don't do any photography at all really, so it doesn't affect me. I'm just explaining why some photographers are upset by it.
 
Basically what needs to happen is we need to spam and troll these guys with a bunch of ridiculous crap? This thread is absolutely hilarious though, way to true.
 
or you(not you specifically) could not be a bitch and freelens for no extra cost ontop of the lens
 
ok, ummmm explain that statement (nit trying to instigate, i actually want to be learned)
 
Idk, it looks like the very tip of his finger might be in focus...just a really narrow depth of field. Maybe just a bit of a smaller aperture would've been better.
 
Do you think maybe their price should go down? Someone charges 10 g's for a wedding, but there's a family friend who does it for 500, who do you think is gonna be taken? Of course the pro photog will take better photos than the family friend, but if they save $9500 in the process, you think they care that much? I find many (not all) artists have this sense of entitlement, where they feel like the worth of their work is so much greater than it actually is. Lets go with the price of $10000 for a wedding. Now lets say the guy puts in 100 hours of his time into the wedding (not very reasonable, but illustrates my point even more). At that rate, he's charging $100 an hour. Now this is the extreme, usually they won't put 100 hours into a project like that, so he's charging them MORE than $100 an hour. I have a buddy who's a photog, and he charges 2200 flat for a wedding. He is a crazy good photog, who's been taking photos for years now and is going to school for it as well. If a photog wants to stay competitive, he shouldn't price himself out of the market. You need to build a name that people will pay for, not just charge people up the ass because a lens cost you $1500. Either make some money now so you can make more later, or make no money and bitch about how people with no "artistic integrity" are stealing your work. Oh, I obviously don't specifically mean "you," just bitchy ass artists who complain about shit but can't see shit from the perspective of the people who would actually be paying for their services.
 
You make a good point.

Usually the price discrepancy is not that large. more like a $1500 difference or so. I don't think your buddy is lowering his prices to compete. $2200 is quite a bit, I would consider that a fairly professional rate. We haven't been talking about 10,000 vs 500, we've meant more like 2,000 vs 500.

Professional freelancers charge A LOT per hour. If somebody charges 2,000 for a wedding, that comes out to around 66/hour (approximately 8 hours of filming, and something like 22 hours of edit time). 66/hour would be a pretty reasonable rate for a professional to charge, and that really is what the work is worth. But the problem is that your average people can't really understand that that's a reasonable rate, and they don't understand what exactly the difference in the product would be (unless they saw a comparison). So you're right, we have to drop prices a little if we want to get the same jobs. I don't think it's that the artists can't see it from the perspective of normal people (every photog in here understands WHY people choose cheap photogs), they're just bummed about it.
 
Obviously those are extremes which were used merely to illustrate my point. My buddy is not relying on photography to make him his money yet though, and the weddings he's done/will do have usually been people he's worked for in some other photography capacity, and they just happened to have a friend who was getting married, so he had a good word put in for him because they were able to see the quality of his work beforehand. These were people who appreciate photography hiring him. Sometimes being in the right place at the right time has a lot to do with it as well.
 
I think this deserves highlighting.

Quality photography is too expensive for many people, which is understandable. However, there will ALWAYS be rich people/businesses who see the value in quality photography and are willing to pay for it. This is another reason why I think it's silly for people to get bent out of shape because someone's niece is being paid $300 to shoot a wedding instead of you. If you were above that like you claim to be, you wouldn't care that you're missing jobs you supposedly don't want.
 
Is that aimed at me?

If it is, I said it didn't affect me personally that much since I don't do photography (and I think the wedding video business is changing a lot right now), and I'm pretty sure I never said I didn't want those jobs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top