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.
Originally Posted by David H. Bebbington
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."