Date: 2012-01-12 11:12 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gonzo21.livejournal.com
Photography is dead as a paid-for art. The internet has reduced the value of photography to zero.

Date: 2012-01-12 11:22 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gonzo21.livejournal.com
Ha. :) I'm sure if you asked around you'd find somebody prepared to do it for much less.

But no, that's true, high end photography of Events (tm) will survive. Although I'd be surprised if you can find a photographer who can make a living at it anymore, and if it isn't people who do it at their weekends as a hobby type thing to make a little extra money.

Date: 2012-01-12 11:41 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gonzo21.livejournal.com
What sort of price range does wedding photography fall into these days?

Date: 2012-01-12 03:06 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lpetrazickis.livejournal.com
We paid $1700 CAD in 2008 and were quite happy with the results.

Date: 2012-01-12 03:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] arkhamrefugee.livejournal.com
Depends on what kind of services you want. Standing poses and some shots of the ceremony can go as low as US $1200. Start adding in time, and the number goes up exponentially.

Date: 2012-01-12 11:56 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cybik.livejournal.com
I have various friends who are hobby photographers. I have a couple of friends who are professional. The ONLY one of my hobby-photographer friends whose photos are as good as the professionals is the one who has been doing it for forty years.

Date: 2012-01-12 02:04 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] octopoid-horror.livejournal.com
What's really, really funny is that quite a few people I vaguely know have recently been posting links like the one you did, or other things about the contrast (pun semi-intended) between professional and amateur photographers even when they're both using the same camera.

The funny part is that almost none of them are professional photographers - most of them could be described as bungling amateurs who happen to have a really expensive camera and take exactly the kind of photos that you would expect, but as far I can tell they're posting the links with the assumption that they're on the professional side, when any real professional would laugh at them

Date: 2012-01-12 11:54 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cybik.livejournal.com
You obviously haven't got married recently! It's a huge industry and (as someone who cares very deeply about art, I have no problem with this) photographers can charge a lot because the difference between an amateur and a professional is very noticeable. It'll be a very long time before it dies out because people are aware that it's one of the areas that shows that.

Date: 2012-01-12 12:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gonzo21.livejournal.com
True, it is an area I am clueless about, I had no idea there were quite so many wedding photographers out there.

Date: 2012-01-12 12:33 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cybik.livejournal.com
I didn't quite realise how many photographers there are until I a) went to an arts university and b) started to plan a wedding...!

Date: 2012-01-12 12:39 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gonzo21.livejournal.com
I suppose at over a grand a pop, you don't need to land that many wedding gigs to make a living. :)

Date: 2012-01-12 12:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] skington.livejournal.com
A (now closed) bug in our bug database was called "There are too many goddamn wedding photographers" ;-)

Specifically, we were generating usernames based on domain names, and varying the last character in case of conflicts. There are so many domains of the form wedding-photographer-glasgow.com etc. that we used up all the available characters.

Date: 2012-01-12 12:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gonzo21.livejournal.com
Heh, excellent. :)

/ insightful commentary.

Date: 2012-01-12 12:45 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] naath.livejournal.com
The quality different is noticeable to some, yes (not to me for the most part, because I'm kind Art-Blind like that, I can tell a passable picture from one that's out-of-focus or actually-of-you-thumb but I can't tell a pro one from a decent amateur). This difference means that if you need someone to take one (set of) photograph(s) and have them come out great then you need to hire someone who you think is generally great first time.

On the other hand if you want a really good photo of, say, Westminster Abbey ... well, you can look through loads and loads to find the time an amateur got lucky for less money than you'll spend hiring a pro to go there and take one for you.

Date: 2012-01-12 11:49 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] channelpenguin.livejournal.com
my semi-pro photographer BF agrees. Event, yes, specific commissions yes - anything else? Dead.

Date: 2012-01-12 11:51 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gonzo21.livejournal.com
I only know the three semi pro photographers. One had to give up entirely, one now just does weekend work for specific events, and the third converted a room in their house to a studio to do special event mother and child type things, and they spend a lot of money on promotion. But she's married to a very very rich guy, so it's kinda hobby territory there, she doesn't I don't think make anything at it.

Sad though. The general level of quality in images in the media will I think slowly decline over the years. Because there's a lot more to taking a good photograph than pointing a camera.

Date: 2012-01-12 05:08 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] channelpenguin.livejournal.com
Steven (http://www.duskart.com) sells some stuff (travel magazines mainly), did my sister's wedding and does rock band shoots (all for friends for free so far). He refuses to do "kiddies, pets and weddings" but it's not a big earner.


My ex-colleague who went pro (http://www.kevinmullinsphotography.co.uk/) does weddings (documentary style), sporting events and (if I recall) portfolio pics for actors/models etc. He is doing really well, really does a lot in terms of professional societies, competitions, magazines etc. to get noticed.

Date: 2012-01-12 11:34 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] apostle-of-eris.livejournal.com
No, not the value, the price.
Value =/= price.

Date: 2012-01-13 11:19 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gonzo21.livejournal.com
Good point. I should have said the internet is driving the price of many things down towards zero. Not the value.

Date: 2012-01-12 12:33 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] drdoug.livejournal.com
On the Scottish MPs thing, I take the main point, but this:

1992 Conservative govt (Major)
———————————————
Conservative majority: 21
Without Scottish MPs: 71
NO CHANGE

... leapt right out at me. The idea that the Major government would not have been profoundly changed had it had a majority of 71 rather than a Euro-rebel vulnerable 21 is ... rather at odds with how things seemed at the time, let's say.

Date: 2012-01-12 04:35 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] danieldwilliam.livejournal.com
My memory of the Major government was spending ages trying to work out if enough Tory MP's would die for a hung Parliament to result.

Date: 2012-01-12 12:40 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] drdoug.livejournal.com
Also, nice to see ancient classics like Fred Brooks' 'The Mythical Man-Month' reverified in modern settings.

Date: 2012-01-12 12:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] skington.livejournal.com
I thought the article could have been clearer if it had avoided all references to adding people to an existing project, and stuck to the much stronger (and far more interesting) claim that even if you don't change the number of people in a project, large numbers are worse.

Date: 2012-01-12 12:56 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] drdoug.livejournal.com
Yes. And there was intriguing stuff about a greater rate of errors with larger teams. I've not much experience of large teams but I'd be interested to get more insight in to why - whether it's Brooks' O(N^2) coordination cost biting, or less ownership/identification of the project (which might offer an idea for why large projects like the Linux kernel seem to suffer less from this) , or what.

Date: 2012-01-12 07:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] khbrown.livejournal.com
The old why can't nine women produce a baby in one month fungibility question?

One thing I did wonder about the article in the link was where teams of between 5 and 19 programmers were.

Date: 2012-01-12 07:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] khbrown.livejournal.com
I admit I don't have much experience of projects - pretty much everything I've ever done coding wise has been solo or with one other person. Nevertheless I still wonder if they could have plotted number of people and efficiency and come up with an optimal number or range. But in some ways it might also be an apples/oranges comparison, when the larger team means having the various specialists you mention who will likely drag the average LoC down.

Date: 2012-01-12 10:06 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] danmilburn.livejournal.com
The Nokia office I worked in until recently have Scrum teams of 6. One of those might be a tester, but that's still 5 devs.

My current team has 14 people who do dev work plus a bunch of QA, docs, etc. In my opinion this is too many. (There is a reason why they've done this, which is that the plan is to create new products based on the existing code base so they've overhired to get people familiar with it who can then start on the new stuff. It's still too many.)

Date: 2012-01-12 02:41 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] danieldwilliam.livejournal.com
I think wedding photographers are providing a service rather than the photograph. One is buying their time not their output.

How much does a skilled individual cost for a day or two’s work?

Date: 2012-01-12 05:12 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] channelpenguin.livejournal.com
Exactly. It's the time. Cost? You get me for £40-60/hr as a developer, or £25-50 as a rock singer (at the moment - this is likely to increase over the coming year).

Date: 2012-01-13 04:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] danieldwilliam.livejournal.com
Just so.

You can have me as a teacher of improvisational theatre for free.

As an accountant I’m available for multiples of what it costs to hire me for improv.

Date: 2012-01-13 04:07 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] danieldwilliam.livejournal.com
I'm afraid so - just a little accountancy whimsy.

January 2026

S M T W T F S
     1 2 3
45 6 7 8 910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jan. 9th, 2026 11:08 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios