Quote Originally Posted by David H. Bebbington
Writing is much more lucrative for me than photography ever was, whereas photography is much more fun without commercial pressure! Regards, David
Yes. The big thing is that photographers can be lucky: the occasional good picture makes them look good. Writers can't fake it the same way: what you write has to be grammatical, correctly spelled, usw.

One of my dearest friends, the late Colin Glanfield, was a significantly better photographer than I, but wanted to be a writer, at which he was merely good. I'm a significantly better writer than he was, but would love to be a better photographer. I make up for it to some extent by being a competent photographer (good amateur level) and knowing a fair amount about technique and history.

Stories? Endless, from my assistant days. The art director who wanted a lion in the back of a baby Peugeot. Think of it as a 500 lb kitten and a 2000 lb ball of wool. The reshoot (comped into the Peugeot hatchback shot) was made from a pic of the Peugeot and a pic of the lion in a hatchback-shaped frame made of railway sleepers (?ties in American). And he was shooting 10-on (Pentax 6x7) and the best pic was always frame 11...

The art director with the car magazine, with nude or semi-nude bimbos draped over the cars. He was not as other men, and he said, "I hate this ****ing job. It's the same old ****ing rubbish, week after week. And the ****ing cars are no better."