Reading mode: Light Dark

Responding to doubters

Go to last post
M

mike m134089

Leading Member
Messages
609
Reaction score
0
Location
US
Hi everyone.

I just read an article in Minnesota Bride about digital photography which says it might be convenient, but certainly doesn't touch film quality. They didn't bother to interview anyone who uses digital full time and have quotes in there about how all digital images look "digital" and that with film a real photographer can make each wedding look unique.

Someone else said that it was not possible with digital to slow down the shutter speed on the dance floor to get a blurred artistic shot. I want to smack someone.

How do you all deal with doubters and people who have been exposed to disinformation? I know I can show them my work, but I am interested in how people handle the doubting phone call prior to the appointment.

Take care. Mike
--
1D, Tokina 28-80 2.8, 28-105USM, 50 1.8
 
Mike,

I've never seen it but I don't think Minnesota Bride would be on the leading edge of technology :^)

Once again, the mainstream magazine editors (Shutterbug, Pop Photo)are either so out of touch with the reality of running a photography business or are in bed with the film companies (Fuji and Kodak make a lot more $$$$ selling film than they do selling digital gear) that they are still pushing film...

95% of the articles are glorified press releases.

Kel
 
When we made the switch to digital we had a number of digital and analog prints displayed in our reception area. When a client would express concern about the quality of digital vs analog we would invite them to show us which of the displayed prints were digital. The largest print displayed was a digital 20 x 30 close up of a blonde little girl in a first communion dress with tons of detail in the lace and hair and smooth natural fleshtone. Most clients would point to that print first and say "that one is definately not digital". We would have to correct them, it was kind of fun.

One lady, with her hands on her hips, would not believe me until I told her if she was that uncomfortable with having digital photos done that she should be best off finding a photographer that still shot film. Her tune changed and she booked an appointment. I guess I called her bluff.

We need to educate our customers and the best way may be to show and tell.

Good Luck,

Bart
--
[email protected]
 
Agreed. When they told me they were doing a digital article I had my ad placed within those pages. If I knew it was going to slam digital, I certainly would not have done so.
Kelvin Tookay said:
Mike,
I've never seen it but I don't think Minnesota Bride would be on
the leading edge of technology :^)
Once again, the mainstream magazine editors (Shutterbug, Pop
Photo)are either so out of touch with the reality of running a
photography business or are in bed with the film companies (Fuji
and Kodak make a lot more $$$$ selling film than they do selling
digital gear) that they are still pushing film...

95% of the articles are glorified press releases.

Kel
Click to expand...
--
1D, Tokina 28-80 2.8, 28-105USM, 50 1.8
 
Show them the portfolio, I doubt they would really know nor care which was or wasn't film.

Write a letter to the editor expressing your dismay with the lack of objectivity in the article and it's impact on your ability to do your job as a competent professional. Offer to assist a writer in studying the issues and your (and other's) digital results.
 
Mike M said:
Hi everyone.
I just read an article in Minnesota Bride about digital photography
which says it might be convenient, but certainly doesn't touch film
quality. They didn't bother to interview anyone who uses digital
full time and have quotes in there about how all digital images
look "digital" and that with film a real photographer can make each
wedding look unique.

Someone else said that it was not possible with digital to slow
down the shutter speed on the dance floor to get a blurred artistic
shot. I want to smack someone.

How do you all deal with doubters and people who have been exposed
to disinformation? I know I can show them my work, but I am
interested in how people handle the doubting phone call prior to
the appointment.

Take care. Mike
--
1D, Tokina 28-80 2.8, 28-105USM, 50 1.8
Click to expand...
Show them.

Pull your advertising from publications which have a conflict in interest to you.

The customers who split hairs over technical points will end up getting a friend to take their photos, because they dont care about skill and creativity.

a
 
Mike M said:
Agreed. When they told me they were doing a digital article I had
my ad placed within those pages. If I knew it was going to slam
digital, I certainly would not have done so.
Click to expand...
Seems to me that they mislead you...

--
James 'Zoned' Orr

'I may not be right, but I've never been wrong, seldom turns out the way it does in a song...' - Jerry Garcia
 
Andrew64673 said:
The customers who split hairs over technical points will end up
getting a friend to take their photos, because they dont care about
skill and creativity.
Click to expand...
This is true! However, my friends have trusted me so I got alot of stuff to show from my digital now!

--
Clint Smith
Tinker Photography
If God is love, and love is blind . . . Ray Charles must be God!
 
you just hit them over the head with Canon 1Ds until they admit that digital rules!!!
Mike M said:
Hi everyone.
I just read an article in Minnesota Bride about digital photography
which says it might be convenient, but certainly doesn't touch film
quality. They didn't bother to interview anyone who uses digital
full time and have quotes in there about how all digital images
look "digital" and that with film a real photographer can make each
wedding look unique.

Someone else said that it was not possible with digital to slow
down the shutter speed on the dance floor to get a blurred artistic
shot. I want to smack someone.

How do you all deal with doubters and people who have been exposed
to disinformation? I know I can show them my work, but I am
interested in how people handle the doubting phone call prior to
the appointment.

Take care. Mike
--
1D, Tokina 28-80 2.8, 28-105USM, 50 1.8
Click to expand...
 
Is Minnesota Bride published by the Amish people?
Mike M said:
Hi everyone.
I just read an article in Minnesota Bride about digital photography
which says it might be convenient, but certainly doesn't touch film
quality. They didn't bother to interview anyone who uses digital
full time and have quotes in there about how all digital images
look "digital" and that with film a real photographer can make each
wedding look unique.

Someone else said that it was not possible with digital to slow
down the shutter speed on the dance floor to get a blurred artistic
shot. I want to smack someone.

How do you all deal with doubters and people who have been exposed
to disinformation? I know I can show them my work, but I am
interested in how people handle the doubting phone call prior to
the appointment.

Take care. Mike
--
1D, Tokina 28-80 2.8, 28-105USM, 50 1.8
Click to expand...
 
... actually point it out?

Most people are surprised when they realize that my 1Ds is not a film camera. I don't make any issue of it. If they ask, I'll tell them of course, but really they don't care how you do it, so long as you do it.

Granted I've no knowledge of the whole wedding ritual thing, although from my perspective many of the participants may not be behaving rationally ;-)

--
Phil
http://www.wigglesworld.btinternet.co.uk/
 
Here are some quotes from an article in MN Bride, which have me really upset since I was talked into placing my ad as a digital photographer on the pages of this article.

I plan on writing a letter to the editor. How would you respond to these types of comments?

"Do you prefer traditional or more artsy shots?" and then claims that in digital one can't slow down the shutter speed to get an impressionistic dance floor shot.

Greg Jansen Photography says "digital produces sharper images than film and what he calls a hyper-realistic look. It is a consistent, across-the-board look, he says. While these sound like plusses, it can mean that your digital wedding photos look very much like everyone else's digital wedding photos. "If you like that look, great," he says, " but as a photojournalist, I try to make everywedding look different."

Here's another stupid comment: "...But Gunther isn't sure CDs are all they are cracked up to be. "CDs scratch," she says. They can also be misplaced. She adds that it is hard to predict what's going to happen with the technology and she worries about giving someone a product that might be obsolete done the road. (Imagine, for example, where your parents would be if they had trusted their wedding to the "magic" of a Beta video tape.)
voland said:
Mike M said:
Hi everyone.
I just read an article in Minnesota Bride about digital photography
which says it might be convenient, but certainly doesn't touch film
quality. They didn't bother to interview anyone who uses digital
full time and have quotes in there about how all digital images
look "digital" and that with film a real photographer can make each
wedding look unique.

Someone else said that it was not possible with digital to slow
down the shutter speed on the dance floor to get a blurred artistic
shot. I want to smack someone.

How do you all deal with doubters and people who have been exposed
to disinformation? I know I can show them my work, but I am
interested in how people handle the doubting phone call prior to
the appointment.

Take care. Mike
--
1D, Tokina 28-80 2.8, 28-105USM, 50 1.8
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
1D, Tokina 28-80 2.8, 28-105USM, 50 1.8
 
Mike M said:
Hi everyone.
I just read an article in Minnesota Bride about digital photography
which says it might be convenient, but certainly doesn't touch film
quality. They didn't bother to interview anyone who uses digital
full time and have quotes in there about how all digital images
look "digital" and that with film a real photographer can make each
wedding look unique.
Click to expand...
How funny is that .. and that they printed it !!
mike m134089 said:
Someone else said that it was not possible with digital to slow
down the shutter speed on the dance floor to get a blurred artistic
shot. I want to smack someone.
Click to expand...
Oh no you should not .. (smack I mean)

this simply offers you perhaps the best local publicity opportunity you are ever going to get and probably "for free"

imho ... you should actually want to "kiss" someone .. Mike I mean that
mike m134089 said:
How do you all deal with doubters and people who have been exposed
to disinformation? I know I can show them my work, but I am
interested in how people handle the doubting phone call prior to
the appointment.
Click to expand...
What you do now .. first is ensure you have your arguments ready .. your justification for feeling agrieved .... that you feel they ripped you off for advertising money by printing your add next to an article saying your method is rubbish ....

Then collect your best shots .. of slow dance floor blurrs to sharp candids to formal poses ... best prints and large .... digital files on CD .... etc etc .... perhaps an expert collaborator (out of state colleague in same line of work - will loose you less business after this than a local colleague) and contact them to ask for a short meeting and or interview ..

what you are actually after is an article in next month to answer the misinformation you feel is in that aritcle ... complete with example high quality pictures and in depth discussion evidenced by images ....

Oh .. include bride refeneces if you have some that are very very pleased with your work ... and willing to cooperate
mike m134089 said:
Take care. Mike
1D, Tokina 28-80 2.8, 28-105USM, 50 1.8
Click to expand...
At your meeting demand / argue cajole .. do it all with a big smile lots and lots of charm and no bad language whatever they say ... remember no one likes to be called stupid not you nor them ..... and this could be a very good publicity opportunity for you .... and as a result could turn out to be a very bad one for the people who were interviewed in that article you mentioned which made you cross ....

Dont get mad .. dont get even ... get ahead :-)

Best of luck ....
Hope this helps

--
Mark
 
I generally find that most of my clients commercial, wedding, or other are impressed with the fact that I'm all digital all the time. I have not once been questioned on the ability of digital to give the same or better results as film. My portfolio must be convinceing enough by itself.

As for the arcticle in the rag you mention. It is a clear indication of the ignorance of the photographers interviewed and their appearant lack of ability to truely comprehend the medium. Kinda sad that they lack the ability to evolve.

Sean
 
That is good advice. When I speak to the editor I will bring this up. Thanks for the encouragement. Mike
Mark_A said:
Mike M said:
Hi everyone.
I just read an article in Minnesota Bride about digital photography
which says it might be convenient, but certainly doesn't touch film
quality. They didn't bother to interview anyone who uses digital
full time and have quotes in there about how all digital images
look "digital" and that with film a real photographer can make each
wedding look unique.
Click to expand...
How funny is that .. and that they printed it !!
Mark_A said:
Someone else said that it was not possible with digital to slow
down the shutter speed on the dance floor to get a blurred artistic
shot. I want to smack someone.
Click to expand...
Oh no you should not .. (smack I mean)
this simply offers you perhaps the best local publicity opportunity
you are ever going to get and probably "for free"

imho ... you should actually want to "kiss" someone .. Mike I mean
that
Mark_A said:
How do you all deal with doubters and people who have been exposed
to disinformation? I know I can show them my work, but I am
interested in how people handle the doubting phone call prior to
the appointment.
Click to expand...
What you do now .. first is ensure you have your arguments ready ..
your justification for feeling agrieved .... that you feel they
ripped you off for advertising money by printing your add next to
an article saying your method is rubbish ....

Then collect your best shots .. of slow dance floor blurrs to sharp
candids to formal poses ... best prints and large .... digital
files on CD .... etc etc .... perhaps an expert collaborator (out
of state colleague in same line of work - will loose you less
business after this than a local colleague) and contact them to ask
for a short meeting and or interview ..

what you are actually after is an article in next month to answer
the misinformation you feel is in that aritcle ... complete with
example high quality pictures and in depth discussion evidenced by
images ....

Oh .. include bride refeneces if you have some that are very very
pleased with your work ... and willing to cooperate
Mark_A said:
Take care. Mike
1D, Tokina 28-80 2.8, 28-105USM, 50 1.8
Click to expand...
At your meeting demand / argue cajole .. do it all with a big smile
lots and lots of charm and no bad language whatever they say ...
remember no one likes to be called stupid not you nor them .....
and this could be a very good publicity opportunity for you ....
and as a result could turn out to be a very bad one for the people
who were interviewed in that article you mentioned which made you
cross ....

Dont get mad .. dont get even ... get ahead :-)

Best of luck ....
Hope this helps

--
Mark
Click to expand...
--
1D, Tokina 28-80 2.8, 28-105USM, 50 1.8
 
A reporter mislead to get an angle on a story? say it ain't so!
Zoned said:
Mike M said:
Agreed. When they told me they were doing a digital article I had
my ad placed within those pages. If I knew it was going to slam
digital, I certainly would not have done so.
Click to expand...
Seems to me that they mislead you...

--
James 'Zoned' Orr

'I may not be right, but I've never been wrong, seldom turns out
the way it does in a song...' - Jerry Garcia
Click to expand...
--
It has to be about the Art, but it is also about Science

Fuji S2Pro, Nikkor 50mm 1.4D and 35-70mm 2.8D, Epson 2200.
 
A few weeks ago, I was in a gallery that specialized in fine art photography. I've had images in five shows at four galleries in the area since March of this year. I mentioned that I was a fine art photographer, and mentioned the galleries that had shown my work previously. The proprietor of the gallery became interested, and we talked about the style of my work, typical print sizes (11x14s, 12x15s and 12x18s), themes, etc. She got out her appointment book and was agressively trying to get me to commit to an appointment to review my book in person. We had some difficulty sheduling because the gallery was 75 miles from my home. Then she said "or you could send us slides." I said, "or I could send you a CD of high resolution images. My work is digital."

She closed her appointment book and said "I'm sorry. We don't represent that kind of work. We're committed to maintaining a place for traditional fine art photographers."

I responded that I would appreciate it if they could take the time to review my work, even if they did not want to exhibit it, because they obviously had curated many fine art photographs and I would be greatful for any critique of my book. She replied "I'm sorry, I would think you'd be better off at " and named a place down the street. "I think they do some digital." Of course the place down the street was a tourist shop with post cards and a few pictures on the wall of well-known local scenes.

I've learned never to start the conversation without them seeing my book first.....

--
It has to be about the Art, but it is also about Science

Fuji S2Pro, Nikkor 50mm 1.4D and 35-70mm 2.8D, Epson 2200.
 
If you really want to mess with her mind, have you favorite photo printed on an Iris Giclee printer. It is expensive, but is one of the finest prints around.
Manta Ray Arts said:
A few weeks ago, I was in a gallery that specialized in fine art
photography. I've had images in five shows at four galleries in
the area since March of this year. I mentioned that I was a fine
art photographer, and mentioned the galleries that had shown my
work previously. The proprietor of the gallery became interested,
and we talked about the style of my work, typical print sizes
(11x14s, 12x15s and 12x18s), themes, etc. She got out her
appointment book and was agressively trying to get me to commit to
an appointment to review my book in person. We had some difficulty
sheduling because the gallery was 75 miles from my home. Then she
said "or you could send us slides." I said, "or I could send you a
CD of high resolution images. My work is digital."

She closed her appointment book and said "I'm sorry. We don't
represent that kind of work. We're committed to maintaining a
place for traditional fine art photographers."

I responded that I would appreciate it if they could take the time
to review my work, even if they did not want to exhibit it, because
they obviously had curated many fine art photographs and I would be
greatful for any critique of my book. She replied "I'm sorry, I
would think you'd be better off at " and named a place down
the street. "I think they do some digital." Of course the place
down the street was a tourist shop with post cards and a few
pictures on the wall of well-known local scenes.

I've learned never to start the conversation without them seeing my
book first.....

--
It has to be about the Art, but it is also about Science

Fuji S2Pro, Nikkor 50mm 1.4D and 35-70mm 2.8D, Epson 2200.
Click to expand...
--
GaryK
 
You could point out to the magazine that all of the prints in their magazine are DIGITAL. Unless MN has some other way of printing that dates back to the days before digital printing.

The other thing is that I just would not mention the way you photograph the wedding. I never told a bride what brand of film I used, or the asa. After the wedding you could tell them, but then everyone seems to think it is cheaper for you to shoot digital and they should get a better price.
Mike M said:
Hi everyone.
I just read an article in Minnesota Bride about digital photography
which says it might be convenient, but certainly doesn't touch film
quality. They didn't bother to interview anyone who uses digital
full time and have quotes in there about how all digital images
look "digital" and that with film a real photographer can make each
wedding look unique.

Someone else said that it was not possible with digital to slow
down the shutter speed on the dance floor to get a blurred artistic
shot. I want to smack someone.

How do you all deal with doubters and people who have been exposed
to disinformation? I know I can show them my work, but I am
interested in how people handle the doubting phone call prior to
the appointment.

Take care. Mike
--
1D, Tokina 28-80 2.8, 28-105USM, 50 1.8
Click to expand...
--
GaryK
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top