Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 76,260   Posts: 1,680,539   Online: 1073
      
Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 125
  1. #101

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    544
    Quote Originally Posted by Diapositivo View Post
    The fact is that these days using film in itself is rather the exception than the norm.
    The case may be that in the wedding photography sector the work produced in film is percentually* higher than in general photography. Maybe film is used in 3% of general photography and 5% of wedding photography.
    <snip>
    * How do you bloody say "percentually" in English without having the spell checker scream?
    "The case may be that in the wedding photography sector the percentage of work produced in film is higher than in general photography."

    hth,
    kevs
    testing...

  2. #102
    JBrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,801
    Quote Originally Posted by TooManyShots View Post
    The point which is greatly missed is that everybody has to start from somewhere and paying their dues, from the bottom up. It takes years and maybe luck to become established. Or in most cases, things do not work out. You don't just shoot a 5k wedding just because you shoot with film. When people talk about the "exceptions," they are leaving out the "disclaimers" as well. What about Gary Fong?? Is he still shooting weddings? When he first started, he was charging some ridiculously low price on weddings. Or maybe he finds it more profitable to teach classes how to become pros and selling his light diffusers.
    It isn't luck. It's talent, hard work, shameless self promotion, and the willingness to demand what you are actually worth. I don't shoot low wage stuff because it damages my brand. An upstart may need to do some things to build a portfolio, but that should be over as soon as possible. Cheap jobs involve ugly clients and crap locations, hardly what portfolios are made of. Furthermore, my clients don't care what I shoot on, it's me they want, my results they want, not a workflow or format.

    None of the things you cite pays a living wage. I don't know my clients average income, but I do know they perceive what I do as highly valuable.

    You are confusing the part of the market you have been exposed to with the whole market. There is more going on than you think.
    That's just, like, my opinion, man...

  3. #103

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    Sorry, still not getting it.

    The exceptions ARE the ones that succeed, 9 of 10 business starts fail.

    Also, I'm not suggesting film will make you or break you as a pro. I'm suggesting that simple competency with your tools, some creative marketing, skillful salesmanship, hard work, and good business practices and plans, will get you a lot further than 10-years of work trying to make a living competing with the weekend warriors in the $500 market.

    Another example.

    http://joebuissink.smallfolio.com/

    As I remember the story Joe decided he wanted to be a wedding photographer as a second career, he was already quite competent with a camera, decided what market he wanted to serve, came up with a plan, gave away his first wedding jobs to people at the low end the market he wanted to serve, marketed like heck at those weddings to build his prospect base, worked all his connections, and built his business without ever doing a wedding in the $500 market.

    Gary Fong, by his own admission was a really lousy photographer when he started, but he knew what he wanted to do and made a system and refined it to make buy-ups the norm. When he sold a $500 wedding deal his norm when all done with that client was three times that, $1,500 not $500. Like Joe he worked his tail off to find the prospects that could move him up the food chain to.

    Their creativity in marketing, salesmanship, BS, schmoozing, and business sense made them what they are, not their photographic skills or the technology they used. Same for Jose and Johnathan.

    Heheheh.....next time when you need to cite an exceptional example, just put up a disclaimer saying that "it may only work for him or her." And not for everyone. So that we can avoid using this exceptional example to setting a new standard in the market. I am getting tired of this discussion here. Oh, I am getting it all for sure. FYI, according to Wiki, Gary Fong was charging $150 for shooting weddings and using his room (parent's house) as his office. That was his day rate and back in the film days. According to his biography, he didn't even have a goal in life. He believes that this Zen approach to life and his career in photography allows him to make millions. I am sure there are a lot of Gary Fongs in these day and age too.

  4. #104
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,086
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Last I heard Gary Fong had made a really good living for quite a few years, saved a lot of his pennies along the way, and retired. He simply didn't need to work work any more and weddings really are work, even if you enjoy it, so he retired.

    The light doohickey business and seminars was something he was doing on the side so to speak, it was nothing near approaching a full time job for him.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  5. #105
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,086
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Not trying to discourage you TooManyShots. Simply speaking from hard won lessons, hate to see anyone make the mistakes I made.

    Just an FYI, Joe is far from the only one who has made that general idea work, albeit the magnitude of his success is larger than most, as was Fong's.

    Local lady raised her kids, then when the kids were in HS she got a job at a local "old tyme" photo studio to get out of the house, she decided she liked photography went to schools and seminars and learned the business. Most importantly she had always been active in the community, kids school stuff, volunteering and more. When she leapt out on her own she went straight to $2,000 base price weddings and marketed directly through her social network. Last I heard she was averaging about $5,000. I think she's been in business 8 years now.
    Last edited by markbarendt; 12-01-2012 at 04:18 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  6. #106
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,860
    Quote Originally Posted by TooManyShots View Post
    Heheheh.....next time when you need to cite an exceptional example, just put up a disclaimer saying that "it may only work for him or her." And not for everyone.
    No one ever said or implied that it would work for everyone. I and others countered your claim that film "is not happening" in wedding photography, and criticized it as overly broad. When you changed your reference point to "the general market", you got no argument to your claim. Is everyone who is not chasing the bottom or lower middle of the market "exceptional" to you? A pro can do quite well and not be at "the top of the food chain", and there are those in that group who use film, or who could benefit by using it.
    So that we can avoid using this exceptional example to setting a new standard in the market.
    Absolutely no one has attempted to do that. Maybe you have just misread or misunderstood their words. Maybe you don't realize clearly that both Jason Brunner and Dan Bayer (PKM-25) are people who have been professionals for a long time and have broad experience, much more than some spec work and bicycle races. Argue all you want, but they have far more credibility.
    I am getting tired of this discussion here.
    Sorry it hasn't been to your liking.
    Oh, I am getting it all for sure. FYI, according to Wiki, Gary Fong was charging $150 for shooting weddings and using his room (parent's house) as his office. That was his day rate and back in the film days. According to his biography, he didn't even have a goal in life. He believes that this Zen approach to life and his career in photography allows him to make millions. I am sure there are a lot of Gary Fongs in these day and age too.
    They are out there, but it would likely be tougher for him now. There are a lot more people now who fancy themselves photographers because their camera takes nice pictures, who get in it for a little cash and the fun of calling themselves pros. Of course there are talented and sharp people who will not be on that level for long, if at all.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  7. #107
    georg16nik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    885
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by TooManyShots View Post
    .... Of course, if your typical clients are making more than 6 figure annual incomes, you would probably don't care too much about the normal folks. To generalize your unusual experiences to the general photography market is just wrong....
    You are looking at the world while holding the telescope from the "easy" side.

    There is no such thing as general photography market.
    1. There are easy to get into (and regret it) markets - in that market falls the target group, to whom camera manufacturers sell dreams.
    2. There are harder to get into markets, sorta boutique niches - in that market falls "real craft "artists and those with business knowledge.


    When activities are difficult, only people who have the strongest stake will participate.
    Hence 9 to 5, Monday to Friday job is what the majority fall into. They regret it during the weekends but then comes Monday...

  8. #108
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by kevs View Post
    "The case may be that in the wedding photography sector the percentage of work produced in film is higher than in general photography."

    hth,
    kevs
    Thanks. So percentually really does not exists. Re-reading my statement I see I had an easy substitute in "comparatively". :-)
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  9. #109
    wogster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,267
    Quote Originally Posted by TooManyShots View Post
    No, this isn't about your ability. It is about the business of photography. Just because you are capable of shooting film, it does not mean you can make a successful business out of your photography. You must have a market for you works. And clients who are willing to pay for your services at your asking price. And whether or not you can fulfill your client's expectations with the necessary turn around time. I am pretty sure it is not a smart idea to promote yourself as a film wedding photographer in order to define your niche market and your style.... you have to ask yourself if the couples would care if the photos are shot with film or digital?? All they want is good quality photos. Not all couples are art majors. Not all couples know anything about photography.
    There is an old saying, to the carpenter who has only a hammer, everything looks like a nail. I decided a few years ago that digital is like another film format, actually I consider the DSLR as one and the P&S digital as another. A good carpenter has more then one tool, heck a few carpenters I have met, have half a dozen different hammers A good photographer carries more then one camera, and for most there should be a film camera, maybe more then one, and in different formats, and a digital. The one time I shot a wedding, I had 2 cameras, one with B&W and the other with colour film. Now I would probably carry the digital as well. Some shots you want in B&W, some you want on colour film and some you will want digital. The key is to use the tool that gives you the result you, as a photographer want, with a minimum of fuss and time wasted.
    Paul Schmidt
    See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com

    The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....

  10. #110

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    Another reason film rules. I just shot and had developed C-41 film that expired in July 1994. I would like to see one use PC software from 1994 process digital images on today's computers! [Except possibly on a Mac, because we all know that Macs have been and will always be vastly superior to any stinkin' PC.]
    Do this well with E-6 from 1994 you will not. Chance to fix aged dyes there is not with E-6.
    ME Super

    Shoot more film.
    There are eight ways to put a slide into a projector tray. Seven of them are wrong.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin