Will Digital distroy photography

[Stinky]

At one time it required much to be a photographer. For most people shooting was a process of learn as you grow. Often you would get your film back will all kinds of interesting surprises. There was no auto focus, auto exposure, no ttl, and most of all no instant feedback other than polaroids. Much has changed. In the world of digital feedback gives you the ability to correct or change final to any way you really want it to be. The test preview is not some imitation but an actual image that can be used as the final. I can tell you how many times the Polaroid was one of the best shots.

The ability to edit right on the spot saves time in shoot extra to make sure you got it or to cover your butt is not needed any more. The camera manufactures have created slogans like, "so easy just point and shoot".

No more guessing at exposures. No more trips to the lab. No more polaroids. No more wondering if it is sharp. No more in a lab smelling chemicals. No more darkrooms. A new paradigm.

As I see it digital in one way is wonderful and exciting and on the other a dawn of the extinction of the way it was and all businesses that were of the past. No more film. No more labs. No more trays, timers and chemicals. All of them million dollar businesses.

Photographer now becomes retoucher, designer, printer and computer genius. Creativity is now opened up to the imagination.

Clients already do not want to pay us really what we are worth now can use their own cameras to shoot and if it not right they can change it on the spot. Or the kid right out of school gives it away to get the sample in their book. Photos for free! You see it really didn't cost anything. You don't have this great overhead in film, processing and Polaroid. Makes it easy to have any Joe with a camera say he is a photographer. (This is not to say with the invention of auto everything that this does not already exist.) I know you are saying that it take a lot more to be a photographer and I agree full heartedly. What my point is that with more and more automation available the volume of photographer increase and the injury to the profession increases in direct proportions.

As a group we already give away far too many of our rights. Fear has kept us at the same prices for editorials as 20 years ago! Though the price of everything around us has increased you can always find a good photographer who will give it away for next to nothing. Will digital kill the wounded market all together? Will retouching be an expected part of the process? How about prepress? Will designers become photographers? Or will photographers become designers? Why will the art director not just shoot it himself?

Much of what I am talking about is already happening. The bread and butter is disappearing, freeing up shooters to do other things. Some will die and others will fine new way to capitalize on all the new services they can provide their clients. Labs will fold and the young children will ask what is film?

I know that I have only touched on the issue and find that a PRO Digital forum is the perfect place to create our future. Please take time to really think about what you want to say before you reply because we all need the very best of your thinking as a community.

 

[Jim DeLuco]

Naw...it will just separate the portraitist from the candid photographer. There's plenty of business for the candid photographer in weddings but it has to be cheap, because of what you describe (Uncle Bill can do just as good a job as joe photographer). But Uncle Bill is gonna be a guest at the wedding so we need someone to take snapshots....$500, 7 hours coverage, all the proofs and the digital files or negatives included. Cheap and fast...nothing fancy. Some of the photos may actually be worth keeping.

I think the past is a good predictor of the future and the advancements in the technology has only helped the business. It is true, however, that there are more "professional" photographers out there now competing for the short dollar....so maybe you're right.

I've been thinking of offering cheap event photography...no proofs, just the photography and the files on a CD. If I bring a laptop with a burner, I can actually hand the CD's to the client before I leave the event and be done with it. $100 an hour, no film, no direct expenses...4 hour minimum.

What do you think?

 

[JohnLund]

Stinky,

You have raised a hugely important question, one I think every professional photographer should consider. I think we all have to set a goal for ourselves in this changing digital industry and work toward it.

If that means getting out of the commercial photofinishing business and into high-end pre-press work that is one area.

My own fate is a bit better, I am a writer and a photographer, so maybe I am not as affected by the digital future as long as I have clients dependent on me to combine words and photos. But I am certainly affected by how I take photos and present them to clients. That is why I am hanging around here, to learn how others are accomplishing this change in editorial and illustration photography.

For others like wedding, event, portraitists, and stock photographers...I really can't predict, but I agree that the business is changing drastically and we all better be ready.

I would be very interested to hear how we are going to protect our dwindling photo rights and ownership when our photos can be copied and sent around the world to who knows where in the click of a mouse.

If you have more info on this please advise.

Thanks Stinky for the thread, very timely,
JL

At one time it required much to be a photographer. For most people
shooting was a process of learn as you grow. Often you would get
your film back will all kinds of interesting surprises. There was
no auto focus, auto exposure, no ttl, and most of all no instant
feedback other than polaroids. Much has changed. In the world of
digital feedback gives you the ability to correct or change final
to any way you really want it to be. The test preview is not some
imitation but an actual image that can be used as the final. I can
tell you how many times the Polaroid was one of the best shots.

The ability to edit right on the spot saves time in shoot extra to
make sure you got it or to cover your butt is not needed any more.
The camera manufactures have created slogans like, "so easy just
point and shoot".

No more guessing at exposures. No more trips to the lab. No more
polaroids. No more wondering if it is sharp. No more in a lab
smelling chemicals. No more darkrooms. A new paradigm.

As I see it digital in one way is wonderful and exciting and on the
other a dawn of the extinction of the way it was and all businesses
that were of the past. No more film. No more labs. No more
trays, timers and chemicals. All of them million dollar businesses.

Photographer now becomes retoucher, designer, printer and computer
genius. Creativity is now opened up to the imagination.

Clients already do not want to pay us really what we are worth now
can use their own cameras to shoot and if it not right they can
change it on the spot. Or the kid right out of school gives it
away to get the sample in their book. Photos for free! You see it
really didn't cost anything. You don't have this great overhead in
film, processing and Polaroid. Makes it easy to have any Joe with
a camera say he is a photographer. (This is not to say with the
invention of auto everything that this does not already exist.)
I know you are saying that it take a lot more to be a photographer
and I agree full heartedly. What my point is that with more and
more automation available the volume of photographer increase and
the injury to the profession increases in direct proportions.

As a group we already give away far too many of our rights. Fear
has kept us at the same prices for editorials as 20 years ago!
Though the price of everything around us has increased you can
always find a good photographer who will give it away for next to
nothing. Will digital kill the wounded market all together? Will
retouching be an expected part of the process? How about prepress?
Will designers become photographers? Or will photographers become
designers? Why will the art director not just shoot it himself?

Much of what I am talking about is already happening. The bread
and butter is disappearing, freeing up shooters to do other things.
Some will die and others will fine new way to capitalize on all the
new services they can provide their clients. Labs will fold and
the young children will ask what is film?

I know that I have only touched on the issue and find that a PRO
Digital forum is the perfect place to create our future. Please
take time to really think about what you want to say before you
reply because we all need the very best of your thinking as a
community.

 

[William Mayer]

Hi Stinky

I think you are looking to much at the tools and not at the craft. Just like any other type of business that gets new technology, job discriptions will change. I always found it was for the better. I hope photographers do not get the feeling that they will have to start selling there work cheaper.

I am not going to do that. WHY? Because people hire you for the images they see on the paper NOT because of the paper. They also hire you because of your expertise. There will be no differance with everyone having a digital camera then there is now with everyone have a film camera. People have point and shoot cameras that take good pictures but a good photographer will create great photographs I feel with digital the photographer will have more freedom to create with the camera, more then he or she ever had before. As a result of this I feel your cost should go higher NOT lower.
Digital just gives you more control of your work from start to finish.

I have been photographing professionaly for only 8 years but found that photographers have some trouble raiseng there prices because of the fear they will lose jobs. I have been rasing my prices every year and found that I am just as busy as before, but have differant clients that I work with(better). Please remember if you do not raise your prises at least 3% each year you will be lossing money because of the cost of living.

I see great things ahead for Photographers and the industry If they take advantage of it.

William Mayer
Shel Ray Studios

At one time it required much to be a photographer. For most people
shooting was a process of learn as you grow. Often you would get
your film back will all kinds of interesting surprises. There was
no auto focus, auto exposure, no ttl, and most of all no instant
feedback other than polaroids. Much has changed. In the world of
digital feedback gives you the ability to correct or change final
to any way you really want it to be. The test preview is not some
imitation but an actual image that can be used as the final. I can
tell you how many times the Polaroid was one of the best shots.

The ability to edit right on the spot saves time in shoot extra to
make sure you got it or to cover your butt is not needed any more.
The camera manufactures have created slogans like, "so easy just
point and shoot".

No more guessing at exposures. No more trips to the lab. No more
polaroids. No more wondering if it is sharp. No more in a lab
smelling chemicals. No more darkrooms. A new paradigm.

As I see it digital in one way is wonderful and exciting and on the
other a dawn of the extinction of the way it was and all businesses
that were of the past. No more film. No more labs. No more
trays, timers and chemicals. All of them million dollar businesses.

Photographer now becomes retoucher, designer, printer and computer
genius. Creativity is now opened up to the imagination.

Clients already do not want to pay us really what we are worth now
can use their own cameras to shoot and if it not right they can
change it on the spot. Or the kid right out of school gives it
away to get the sample in their book. Photos for free! You see it
really didn't cost anything. You don't have this great overhead in
film, processing and Polaroid. Makes it easy to have any Joe with
a camera say he is a photographer. (This is not to say with the
invention of auto everything that this does not already exist.)
I know you are saying that it take a lot more to be a photographer
and I agree full heartedly. What my point is that with more and
more automation available the volume of photographer increase and
the injury to the profession increases in direct proportions.

As a group we already give away far too many of our rights. Fear
has kept us at the same prices for editorials as 20 years ago!
Though the price of everything around us has increased you can
always find a good photographer who will give it away for next to
nothing. Will digital kill the wounded market all together? Will
retouching be an expected part of the process? How about prepress?
Will designers become photographers? Or will photographers become
designers? Why will the art director not just shoot it himself?

Much of what I am talking about is already happening. The bread
and butter is disappearing, freeing up shooters to do other things.
Some will die and others will fine new way to capitalize on all the
new services they can provide their clients. Labs will fold and
the young children will ask what is film?

I know that I have only touched on the issue and find that a PRO
Digital forum is the perfect place to create our future. Please
take time to really think about what you want to say before you
reply because we all need the very best of your thinking as a
community.

 

[Neil Turner]

Evolve or die sums up the way that photography has always been and, probably, always will be. Just as Fox Talbot wouldn't have recognised the equipment and techniques of Cartier-Bresson then people coming into the industry in the digital age wouldn't have much real understanding of how it was for my generation getting to grips with the finer points of the Tri-X versus HP5 debate.

If you try and freeze creativity, or even the background to it, you destroy it. As a profession we have continually evolved and change is something that the "stayers" in the business have always embraced.

Ever the optimist...

Neil.

 

[robert41723]

i do not make my living via photography, but i do get paid for my work. i am therefore NOT a pro, but someone who is trying to learn as much as i can.

the advent of digital, will for the time being, cause many 'amateurs' to attempt to be 'pros', get paid for their work (cheaply i am sure) until they find out how much work goes into being 'a pro' (getting paid to complete an assignment for a client). the work itself is exhausting and frustrating (sometimes). many of these hobbyists will then drop out and continue to take 'snaphots' for their friends.

photography (not the business side) is an art, and only certain people can handle that...regardless of how they take a picture. it takes YEARS to learn how to take a good (not great) picture, and some people (try as they may) never get it. a good or great picture is easily distinguished from a 'decent' one.

digital darkroom techniques can enhance (or cover) the art or lack of it, but cannot replace it. still, the pro who can take a photo and present it (film and/or digital) will get the assignment, IF....the right 'business' presentation is done up front. that means the photographer must learn to 'create value'.

what the profession will need to deal with in the future is creating the perception of 'value' to the work, rather than assuming it is already there.

example: a 'client' who had asked for product line photos to be taken who had done it himself before (and they looked like it) hired me to do photos for a new brochure. we set up in the factory and took quite a few very cool looking pics. the client was very appreciative. BUT....he had mentioned a NEW product line they were bringing out in the next month, in a competitive field...i sat with him for 15 minutes, talked about the competition, how he sees the products being sold, the advantages...etc etc etc...in essence 'analyzing' his 'marketing'. after hearing him out and steering him towards some creative thinking i took him back out into his own plant and showed him a 'scene' of where i thought the NEXT pics should be taken and explained how that creativity would help sell the line. he almost fell over with the idea. i also explained how he could hire someone with any camera to take those pics or try to do it cheaply...but no one else would have the 'vision' that i would (and a few other 'sales' closings). we're waiting for the new products to be finished. i am charging him 2x what i did on the other shots, and it will take half the time.

i am no genius, and this is an extreme example (some luck), but in 'selling' what is done (the concept) versus the 'work' we do...may help some folks get away from old ideas. i do not 'market' my services (look for business).
yes, we do now have a contract.

i am not sure if this addresses any of the real idea here, but...my $.02...from the perspective of an 'outsider'.

 

[Ashley Morrison]

Being a top professional photographer is not about the tools, they help and are important; however, there are two things that have set the great photographers apart from the rest since the begining: lighting and attention to detail.

Access to the right tools doesn't neccessarily mean that anyone can do a good job.

It's the same in other fields: buying a modern hi-fi and recording equipment doesn't automatically qualify us to become sound recording engineers.

Taking a really good photograph - particularly in the commercial field - can be hugely difficult.

Achieving really stunning results depends on so many factors: the right equipment and materials; precise composition and styling; meticulous lighting; constant attention to 1001 details.

Digital will help us all become better photographers and that can only be a good thing.

Ashley

At one time it required much to be a photographer. For most people
shooting was a process of learn as you grow. Often you would get
your film back will all kinds of interesting surprises. There was
no auto focus, auto exposure, no ttl, and most of all no instant
feedback other than polaroids. Much has changed. In the world of
digital feedback gives you the ability to correct or change final
to any way you really want it to be. The test preview is not some
imitation but an actual image that can be used as the final. I can
tell you how many times the Polaroid was one of the best shots.

The ability to edit right on the spot saves time in shoot extra to
make sure you got it or to cover your butt is not needed any more.
The camera manufactures have created slogans like, "so easy just
point and shoot".

No more guessing at exposures. No more trips to the lab. No more
polaroids. No more wondering if it is sharp. No more in a lab
smelling chemicals. No more darkrooms. A new paradigm.

As I see it digital in one way is wonderful and exciting and on the
other a dawn of the extinction of the way it was and all businesses
that were of the past. No more film. No more labs. No more
trays, timers and chemicals. All of them million dollar businesses.

Photographer now becomes retoucher, designer, printer and computer
genius. Creativity is now opened up to the imagination.

Clients already do not want to pay us really what we are worth now
can use their own cameras to shoot and if it not right they can
change it on the spot. Or the kid right out of school gives it
away to get the sample in their book. Photos for free! You see it
really didn't cost anything. You don't have this great overhead in
film, processing and Polaroid. Makes it easy to have any Joe with
a camera say he is a photographer. (This is not to say with the
invention of auto everything that this does not already exist.)
I know you are saying that it take a lot more to be a photographer
and I agree full heartedly. What my point is that with more and
more automation available the volume of photographer increase and
the injury to the profession increases in direct proportions.

As a group we already give away far too many of our rights. Fear
has kept us at the same prices for editorials as 20 years ago!
Though the price of everything around us has increased you can
always find a good photographer who will give it away for next to
nothing. Will digital kill the wounded market all together? Will
retouching be an expected part of the process? How about prepress?
Will designers become photographers? Or will photographers become
designers? Why will the art director not just shoot it himself?

Much of what I am talking about is already happening. The bread
and butter is disappearing, freeing up shooters to do other things.
Some will die and others will fine new way to capitalize on all the
new services they can provide their clients. Labs will fold and
the young children will ask what is film?

I know that I have only touched on the issue and find that a PRO
Digital forum is the perfect place to create our future. Please
take time to really think about what you want to say before you
reply because we all need the very best of your thinking as a
community.

 

[PatiO]

I agree with previous posters who said, in essence: changing the tools does not necessarily change the industry.
Did the power saw destroy the home building industry? No.
Did the welding torch destroy the bridge building industry? No.
Did the camera destroy the portrait painting industry? No.
Did the steam ship destroy the shipping industry? No.

Photography will be around for decades to come, it may be done differently, but it will still be done by the same visionary kinds of people.

At least I think so. PatiO.

 

[medici]

The key is to pray, keep your copyright, say no to low paying shoots and Work for Hire, price for profit not just survival,..............and get a second job !

Mike

Ashley

At one time it required much to be a photographer. For most people
shooting was a process of learn as you grow. Often you would get
your film back will all kinds of interesting surprises. There was
no auto focus, auto exposure, no ttl, and most of all no instant
feedback other than polaroids. Much has changed. In the world of
digital feedback gives you the ability to correct or change final
to any way you really want it to be. The test preview is not some
imitation but an actual image that can be used as the final. I can
tell you how many times the Polaroid was one of the best shots.

The ability to edit right on the spot saves time in shoot extra to
make sure you got it or to cover your butt is not needed any more.
The camera manufactures have created slogans like, "so easy just
point and shoot".

No more guessing at exposures. No more trips to the lab. No more
polaroids. No more wondering if it is sharp. No more in a lab
smelling chemicals. No more darkrooms. A new paradigm.

As I see it digital in one way is wonderful and exciting and on the
other a dawn of the extinction of the way it was and all businesses
that were of the past. No more film. No more labs. No more
trays, timers and chemicals. All of them million dollar businesses.

Photographer now becomes retoucher, designer, printer and computer
genius. Creativity is now opened up to the imagination.

Clients already do not want to pay us really what we are worth now
can use their own cameras to shoot and if it not right they can
change it on the spot. Or the kid right out of school gives it
away to get the sample in their book. Photos for free! You see it
really didn't cost anything. You don't have this great overhead in
film, processing and Polaroid. Makes it easy to have any Joe with
a camera say he is a photographer. (This is not to say with the
invention of auto everything that this does not already exist.)
I know you are saying that it take a lot more to be a photographer
and I agree full heartedly. What my point is that with more and
more automation available the volume of photographer increase and
the injury to the profession increases in direct proportions.

As a group we already give away far too many of our rights. Fear
has kept us at the same prices for editorials as 20 years ago!
Though the price of everything around us has increased you can
always find a good photographer who will give it away for next to
nothing. Will digital kill the wounded market all together? Will
retouching be an expected part of the process? How about prepress?
Will designers become photographers? Or will photographers become
designers? Why will the art director not just shoot it himself?

Much of what I am talking about is already happening. The bread
and butter is disappearing, freeing up shooters to do other things.
Some will die and others will fine new way to capitalize on all the
new services they can provide their clients. Labs will fold and
the young children will ask what is film?

I know that I have only touched on the issue and find that a PRO
Digital forum is the perfect place to create our future. Please
take time to really think about what you want to say before you
reply because we all need the very best of your thinking as a
community.

 

[Michael Salzlechner]

Stinky

No definately not. Good photographers will still take good pictures and bad ones will still take bad ones. The learning curve has been cut in half but getting good exposures is only a part of it.

 

[Dave Kunze]

Back when my grandfather made his own emulsion and spread it on glass to make his photos, I can just imagine his sour grapes when film and film cameras were introduced. "Counfounded dangburn stuff is gonna ruin photography!" "Why, any fool with a dollar can claim he's a photographer by just takin' his tomfoolery to the dang druggist!" "Just who in tarnation does this Kodak feller think he is, anyhew?"

And the beat goes on.....

kunza

 

[Melanie Kipp]

Well, I must say this has been an great read to read.

 

[David M.]

"No more guessing at exposures. No more trips to the lab. No more polaroids. No more wondering if it is sharp. No more in a lab smelling chemicals. No more darkrooms. A new paradigm."> > >

Thank God.

 

[Melanie Kipp]

Meant to type " Thread to read".

 

[Rinus Borgsteede]

Will digital destroy photography?
NO
Rinus

 

[Jim Herndon]

I agree here. The real blow to working photographers came with the introduction of consumer film cameras - not digital cameras.

There are and always will be those who insist on taking their own portraits, getting a friend to shoot their wedding, or buying a top $$ camera and thinking they can photograph their inventory.

Professional photography survived the first Kodak - digital photography will be no different. It does create very real troubles with copyright control (scanning), but there are methods of dealing with this problem.

In the end, you still have to be able to take a good photograph.

If anything, digital photography (as well as other trends in society) are creating a more visually-literate public. People WANT better photography, but don't know HOW to get there. If anything, digital may in fact create more demand for professional photography.

Fascinating thread, thanks.

Jim Herndon

Back when my grandfather made his own emulsion and spread it on
glass to make his photos, I can just imagine his sour grapes when
film and film cameras were introduced. "Counfounded dangburn stuff
is gonna ruin photography!" "Why, any fool with a dollar can claim
he's a photographer by just takin' his tomfoolery to the dang
druggist!" "Just who in tarnation does this Kodak feller think he
is, anyhew?"

And the beat goes on.....

kunza

 

[mad kap]

At one time it required much to be a photographer. For most people
shooting was a process of learn as you grow. Often you would get
your film back will all kinds of interesting surprises. There was
no auto focus, auto exposure, no ttl, and most of all no instant
feedback other than polaroids. Much has changed. In the world of
digital feedback gives you the ability to correct or change final
to any way you really want it to be. The test preview is not some
imitation but an actual image that can be used as the final. I can
tell you how many times the Polaroid was one of the best shots.

The ability to edit right on the spot saves time in shoot extra to
make sure you got it or to cover your butt is not needed any more.
The camera manufactures have created slogans like, "so easy just
point and shoot".

No more guessing at exposures. No more trips to the lab. No more
polaroids. No more wondering if it is sharp. No more in a lab
smelling chemicals. No more darkrooms. A new paradigm.

As I see it digital in one way is wonderful and exciting and on the
other a dawn of the extinction of the way it was and all businesses
that were of the past. No more film. No more labs. No more
trays, timers and chemicals. All of them million dollar businesses.

Photographer now becomes retoucher, designer, printer and computer
genius. Creativity is now opened up to the imagination.

Clients already do not want to pay us really what we are worth now
can use their own cameras to shoot and if it not right they can
change it on the spot. Or the kid right out of school gives it
away to get the sample in their book. Photos for free! You see it
really didn't cost anything. You don't have this great overhead in
film, processing and Polaroid. Makes it easy to have any Joe with
a camera say he is a photographer. (This is not to say with the
invention of auto everything that this does not already exist.)
I know you are saying that it take a lot more to be a photographer
and I agree full heartedly. What my point is that with more and
more automation available the volume of photographer increase and
the injury to the profession increases in direct proportions.

As a group we already give away far too many of our rights. Fear
has kept us at the same prices for editorials as 20 years ago!
Though the price of everything around us has increased you can
always find a good photographer who will give it away for next to
nothing. Will digital kill the wounded market all together? Will
retouching be an expected part of the process? How about prepress?
Will designers become photographers? Or will photographers become
designers? Why will the art director not just shoot it himself?

Much of what I am talking about is already happening. The bread
and butter is disappearing, freeing up shooters to do other things.
Some will die and others will fine new way to capitalize on all the
new services they can provide their clients. Labs will fold and
the young children will ask what is film?

I know that I have only touched on the issue and find that a PRO
Digital forum is the perfect place to create our future. Please
take time to really think about what you want to say before you
reply because we all need the very best of your thinking as a
community.

The other day another photographer and myself shot a wedding , he shoots colour and I shoot B&W. He always shoots digital but the client wanted film so he brought out his F5 and went to work. I can't tell you how many times he checked the back of his camera to see the proof that isn't there. When you get into the habbit of checking all the time to see if your doing things right I think your confidence as a photographer goes down the drain.
MHO

 

[lafinfil]

Ok heres my rant. Professional photgraphy is about vision and the ability to take your vision from your eye to a fixed media - be it digital or film. Commercial photography is about the problem solving process. It is about bringing my set of skills to the table and using them to interpet a clients vision or in many cases create a vision for them and with them. Equiptment does not take photographs, a photographers brain does. I shot a number of jobs this week. Not one client cared if I shot on my D!H (trade show brochure), Hassy Superwide (interiors ) or Sinar 4x5 ( table top product for product packageing ) , They hire me because I know which one to use in a given situation to produce their vision. Ok , the designer who was dropping the D1H TIFF files into the brochure layout as fast as I was shooting them did care about the saved darkroom time, but I chose the right tool for the situation; a client who couldn't get things booked but had a hard deadline for the project . They had the designers and my back against the deadline wall . I'm a pro, thats what I get paid for. Producing. Photography is about light , capturing it , creating it . , correcting it , taming it and fixing it to a media in less than ideal conditions . Everyday. Digital film is exactly that . a media. I am really ammused by the death knell cast here. If you are a professional you create professional images . Digital makes it a little faster and saves a fortune in Polaroids. A photographer who produces bad work on film is going to produce bad work digitally, only faster. A bad photographer using film has to wait to get it back from the lab and has someone else to blame - the lab. A pros a pro and a hacks a hack. Price your work professionally for the usage required and market .Protect your copyright. Do not accept work for hire and look them in the eye when you turn it down and tell them why. Because you are a professional. If they take the job down the street to the wannabe - fine, When they get the job that requires some skill they will come back, That is an excellent time to raise your prices. I loved this post below. I find my experience the exact oppisite. I check every minute detail at every given moment of every job. I look for the pitfalls and avoid them . Nothing is left to chance and nothing goes without being backed up. Polaroids or histograms are checked and double checked. Film jobs go on multiple rolls get marked and held and run on different days . . I have had pro labs E-6 machine s go down with 15 rolls of 120 chrome in the racks . Good thing there were 60 rolls on the job and they were marked and batched for process runs. CF cards fail sometimes. The difference is a pro does not feel any lack of confidence, quite the oppisite. It's all instinct and training. I wouldn't know how not to do it. Digital is just another piece of film.

The other day another photographer and myself shot a wedding , he
shoots colour and I shoot B&W. He always shoots digital but the
client wanted film so he brought out his F5 and went to work. I
can't tell you how many times he checked the back of his camera to
see the proof that isn't there. When you get into the habbit of
checking all the time to see if your doing things right I think
your confidence as a photographer goes down the drain.
MHO

 

[Veniamin Kostitsin II]

At least i hope it won't for you. it did not for me, since as you have suggested i do shooting, retouching, design and art directing ...

so the actual amount of work has increased - and thanks to digital the amount of time i spent with film wend away.

i had to realize fast, that my customers wanted more than "just" images. luckily i was able to keep up with the demand for "other" services (although i have to subcontract now and then)

so ... digital did not kill me, on the contrary - it gave me a push.

however as you have said there is indeed threat to the "pro" market - how many printers offer "affordable quality digital photography" for the fraction of the price ? i know a few. the only thing we can do is stay ahead - not by cheaper prices, but with better service and quality. and i intentionally put service first.

on the other hand - going digital actually brought me a few customers i could never have had in the film world. those (whom i used to hate) who call and say that the want a shoot tomorrow morning and the files in the afternoon, preferably right after lunch. well ... their lunch, not mine.

and i sure do not want to send them away ;-)

cheers

veniamin kostitsin
http://www.digitalimage.at/

At one time it required much to be a photographer. For most people
shooting was a process of learn as you grow. Often you would get
your film back will all kinds of interesting surprises. There was
no auto focus, auto exposure, no ttl, and most of all no instant
feedback other than polaroids. Much has changed. In the world of
digital feedback gives you the ability to correct or change final
to any way you really want it to be. The test preview is not some
imitation but an actual image that can be used as the final. I can
tell you how many times the Polaroid was one of the best shots.

The ability to edit right on the spot saves time in shoot extra to
make sure you got it or to cover your butt is not needed any more.
The camera manufactures have created slogans like, "so easy just
point and shoot".

No more guessing at exposures. No more trips to the lab. No more
polaroids. No more wondering if it is sharp. No more in a lab
smelling chemicals. No more darkrooms. A new paradigm.

As I see it digital in one way is wonderful and exciting and on the
other a dawn of the extinction of the way it was and all businesses
that were of the past. No more film. No more labs. No more
trays, timers and chemicals. All of them million dollar businesses.

Photographer now becomes retoucher, designer, printer and computer
genius. Creativity is now opened up to the imagination.

Clients already do not want to pay us really what we are worth now
can use their own cameras to shoot and if it not right they can
change it on the spot. Or the kid right out of school gives it
away to get the sample in their book. Photos for free! You see it
really didn't cost anything. You don't have this great overhead in
film, processing and Polaroid. Makes it easy to have any Joe with
a camera say he is a photographer. (This is not to say with the
invention of auto everything that this does not already exist.)
I know you are saying that it take a lot more to be a photographer
and I agree full heartedly. What my point is that with more and
more automation available the volume of photographer increase and
the injury to the profession increases in direct proportions.

As a group we already give away far too many of our rights. Fear
has kept us at the same prices for editorials as 20 years ago!
Though the price of everything around us has increased you can
always find a good photographer who will give it away for next to
nothing. Will digital kill the wounded market all together? Will
retouching be an expected part of the process? How about prepress?
Will designers become photographers? Or will photographers become
designers? Why will the art director not just shoot it himself?

Much of what I am talking about is already happening. The bread
and butter is disappearing, freeing up shooters to do other things.
Some will die and others will fine new way to capitalize on all the
new services they can provide their clients. Labs will fold and
the young children will ask what is film?

I know that I have only touched on the issue and find that a PRO
Digital forum is the perfect place to create our future. Please
take time to really think about what you want to say before you
reply because we all need the very best of your thinking as a
community.

 

[chi]

with digital hurting film sales in combination with the recession, it seems as if 35mm film camera accessories are in an innovative slump. is it just me or is this slump making camera makers cut back on SLR research and development which in turn is making good (pro quality) 35mm equipment somewhat of a collectors item. what we're getting now is a lotta crappy plastic lenses coming on to the market with less focus on high quality pro items. pro-like quality items on eBay end up at prices that nearly rival new items at the B&H so it's like it's becoming somewhat of a collectors item. it's the market that decides where companies pour their money into. SLR sales are less than 5% of overall digital sales and out of that amount there is a small percentage buy pro-quality optics. this is just my observance of the after market for accessories.