Sony has announced a new "Alpha Female" program, a creator-in-residence opportunity that will award six-month grants to five female filmmakers and photographers. The program, which is no longer accepting submissions, aims to "elevate diversity in thought and creation," according to Sony. The first class of recipients will be announced some time early this month.
Recent Videos
The awarded grants include $25,000 in funds, as well as $5,000 in product loans and another $5,000 in product allowances. The program is a mentorship that involves being paired with Sony Artisans of Imagery, and there's also guaranteed presentations at LA and New York exhibits for all five participants. The program is open to US and Canadian applicants only.
Sony has also vowed to fund projects by women in its Alpha Imaging Collective and Artisans of Imagery, as well as photography and filmmaking events that are focused on and backed by women.
I wish people would stop telling boys and girls that women need special opportunities. We need EQUAL opportunities. It would be unacceptable if only men were allowed to participate, and it is equally unacceptable when only women can.
Also, no woman and no man is powerful beyond measure, making such a ridiculous statement is an insult to the intelligence of, I guess in this case, women. Pat those inferior women on the back, tell them how great and special and powerful they are, and give them some protected space where they don't have to compete with men. I really hate this kind of patronising silliness.
I welcome this, and look forward to seeing the images.
You need to understand that women see and interpret things differently to men, not just in photography, but all aspects of life (look at how a woman dresses compared to a man). Current photo competitions, where the majority of entrants are male, tend to yield male oriented photos in the results (this is just a numbers game), whereas I want to see images produced by women, and they must be judged by women. I'd expect to see a nice contrast in style to a typical man produced image.
@RayGreen: 'women see and interpret things differently to men' You realise this was the underlying rational as to why women weren't allowed to vote right? Including the whole 'they get hysterical and can't control their emotions' generalisation.
Fact 1: although there have been some very notable female photographers, the field is still rather male dominated.
Fact 2: Photography is a medium that records and reflects a time and a society, both informing current discourse and preserving a legacy for posterity, whether we are talking about documentary photography, or art, or even just current aesthetic trends.
Argument - if Fact 2 is true, surely we want to encourage representation across the board, and domination from any given demographic is undesirable. Increased representation and variety of perspectives can only improve photography for all of us (yes, even men.)
(To the point that some people have raised on why we even want more female photographers, and we we aren't also worried about female plumber representation. In any field that reflects and preserves, representation is always a good thing.)
"surely we want to encourage representation across the board, and domination from any given demographic is undesirable." who are "we", and how do you come up with such conclusion?
I would say that Industry is male dominant, but major part of photography is done by mothers documenting their families lifes. That is as there has been in history more house wifes than house huspands...
There's pretty much an equal split between males and females taking photos and sharing them these days. This nonsense about it being male dominated is only observed when limiting factors come in on top of the 'photographer' label. I just wish people would mention these other factors instead of generalising.
Fact is it's only ever something prestigious that these virtue signalers feel comfortable pushing women towards because of ingrained chivalry. If these people were actually rooting for equality they'd be encouraging more women to become garbage collectors too. There's a lot of money in that, it would probably help equalise the wage gap, but equality isn't the priority here, just the impression that you want equality.
In my experience the people who hate positive discrimination are the people who do not experience any other kind of discrimination. You may argue that two wrongs don't make a right, but I'd be interested to know how you would propose we rectify imbalances left over from centuries of real discrimination going the other way.
Photography competitions are disproportionately male dominated. More female representation and plurality of perspective helps us all. If this helps do that, why cry about the principle.
Lets hope that in 20 years this sort of initiative is defunct. I don't think we're there yet.
I don't care what color or gender someone is, if they are good at what they do, then they're good at what they do. I bet there are more female knitters than males. Does that mean we need JoAnn Fabrics to start an Alpha Male Knitting Scholarship?
Yes but there are still plenty of ways for men to be recognised for their talent. Raising other people up doesn't put you down.
Knitting doesn't contribute to culture and history in the same way photography does, so it's not a valid comparison. Photography affects all sorts of cultural perception and discourse, and also preserves that for history, so plurality of input is valuable. Not so for knitting.
Whatever. If they were that good to begin with, they wouldn't need special treatment. In this day and age of fragile snowflakes, I'm not surprised, though.
It's not about being good enough, it's about giving more of them a big platform. In a mixed competition maybe a fifth of the spot-lighted entrants are women, lets say 5 total. In an all-women competition, that number goes up to 25.
In the future, if equality is achieved, this will not be necessary or desirable. I think the core of our disagreement comes from the fact that you think either equality has already been achieved, or is not desirable. I disagree with both those assertions.
Lots of men here arguing about whether women still need a helping hand.
Anecdotally, I have lots of female friends who say something along these lines: things are a lot better than they used to be, but there is still an attitude from vendors, agencies, and clients, that men are taken more seriously.
I do cringe when I see men saying 'women don't need this'. I'd far rather hear a woman's perspective. As a white guy, I think the world is great and dandy most of the time, but if someone from another group tells me they still have issues, I shut up and listen.
I think the problem with white men complaining about double standards, is that almost every other demographic would point out there's always been a double standard. It's kind of a 'welcome to the club' situation for white guys.
I realise that being white doesn't automatically give you a golden ticket for life, and I don't think anyone is saying that. But as a white guy myself, I'm self-aware enough to recognise that it's given me a step up in life (specifically - from other white men, who disproportionately represent the people who've been in a position to, and have given me, opportunities), even when I've had to work hard to get where I am.
The problem stems from the fact that when one demographic is dominant, they tend not to be very good at sharing, or even acknowledging the issue.
In the 80's and 90's most white guys would probably have told you that there was universal equality for all races and genders. On reflection, I think we can fairly unanimously say that in the 80's and 90's there was still a huge amount of work to do. This is well illustrated by the fact that only just recently in 2017 and 18 we realised just how many famous men had been abusing their privilege with women.
The 'double standard' argument only really comes into effect when women truly have overtaken men in terms of access to success. Looking at almost any metric, I don't think we can say that yet. Until then, I'd argue it's not a 'double standard' yet, it's a stepping stone to equality, and when that's achieved I'll join you in bemoaning double standards.
That's because you can't see your double standards.
Look, it's who we serve that matters. Not race or sex. You're mixing the two. That's racism and sexism. You are conveniently throwing the baby out with the bath water.
MLK said judge not by their skin; but by their character!
If you serve only yourself you're on team evil. And that's bad character. Which has everything to do with what is really right.
Anyone who puts goodness under their own way; has evil for a father. A slave to sin. And there is no middle ground in that one.
Choose; because you are. Everyday. It's Life or death. Our only base choice. Put on good character; in deed. Pretense is evils only way.
That's some eloquent misdirection. I involved race for illustrative purposes. If you take race out, and only leave 'male', I think my argument stands.
I agree wholeheartedly with you that we should all be judged on our character and talent alone. 100% with you there. The issue is when society does not afford certain demographics the same opportunity to be judged, or judge them by the same standards. Regarding your criticism of my double standards, I would argue right back that many, many double standards already exist working against women, more so than the double standards that work for them. You might argue that adding more double standards to address existing ones is the wrong thing to do, and I'd happily debate that with you, but you seem to be coming from a starting point that says 'we are all already equal', and my point is that we are not yet, so initiatives such as this have a valid aim, even if you disagree with the medium or execution.
I'm just sick of this BS. Most of my prefered photos are from women, this is sony trying to capitalize on the cultural marxism and feminism, which are creating a even more sick society. Just search on youtube for the documentary Brainwashed, there is no need to incentivize women for nothing they don't want to do organicaly.
I'm not sure if greater equality will be a tide that lifts all boats (including grumpy old men) or it will require some folks being knocked down a notch or two (for example, grumpy old men). Either way, it's a good thing, and long overdue. This Sony project is a tiny step in the right direction, but welcome nonetheless.
If most of your preferred photos are from women, surely you should be excited to see the competition results.
If Sony are at all cynical, it is probably just in recognising that this is another way they can get a foot in front of the perceived-stuffy older camera manufacturers.
I also don't know where you got the idea that women don't want to take photos organically. You are discounting the fact that there may be industry (and for our part, techy) trends/factors that put them off. Or many other potential factors we don't know. This is photography, not being a lumberjack, I'm sure just as many women want to take pictures as men, but the industry has a bit of an image issue.
An alpha female that is powerful beyond measure seems very intimidating. A dominatrix photographer that arrives at your wedding with a camera and a whip. Ugh...
In my years as a pro, I had a huge, massive, round zero advantage for being a man.
In fact, I was excluded of some specific segments I couldn't apply to, for example sensual photography (female clients simply said "no business with male photographer"). Also, a well know studio chain in my area only accepted female photographers in their staff.
So I can confidently say I had zero advantages for being a man, and also suffered sexism.
Did I cry like a baby for equality? Did I ask the World for pity or justice? Of course not.
You just shut up and fight. Fight like a man, sorry for the pun.
You know what women can do to have more space in the photo industry? Vote with their own presence, skills and passion.
In my whole life, I met very, VERY few women willing to learn anything behind the camera.
I certainly met more men interested in that nerdy craft. By far, I mean.
Maybe, JUST MAYBE, that explains why there is more male photographers?
marcio_napoli, gender transition surgery is now available across Europe (not sure about USA - research required..). But it would defo enable you to 'fight like a woman', sorry for the pun (not really).
@Marcio, Neither have I had any advantage. In fact, all during my life I have been disadvantaged, victimised, faced prejudice and discrimination for being autistic. I don't winge about it. Sometimes I had to use the law to protect myself.
@Paul Jones, just want to add a note about sensual photography.
If I'm taking nude pictures, so what I'm a man? Can't it occur to women I'm a professional photographer, therefore I'm a billion times more interested in the composition and lighting than sexual thoughts about my client's anatomy?
Here's the thing: although being a fashion photographer, yes, I've done a few sensual shoots in my life. (very rare, very few though)
One of them for a magazine specialized in nude, think of it like a very small profile Playboy (therefore in good taste, I must add).
We had a gorgeous model for that shoot, and it was full nude, etc.
I don't recall thinking, not even for a split second, about sexual thoughts.
Me and the crew (all of them males), were just thinking "how can we improve this pose, this composition, this lighting, this makeup, this hair style, etc".
Why? Because we're professionals.
Is it too hard for women to presume we care more about our professionalism than their anatomy?
If you were a male office manager in the 60's, you'd probably have said that you never met a woman who showed interest in being an office manager. Yet in 2018 we know that as many women as men want to be office managers. Social conditioning has a very, very long tail.
As for thinking you had no advantages - that observation is only relevant if you are fully aware of the disadvantages others have had. Avoiding those disadvantages is in fact an advantage.
It's interesting that you raise the fact that it is currently a nerdy craft. I don't think fewer women than men want to take photos (just look at the explosion of women photographers when phones became everyone's imaging tool), but industry image plays a huge part.
I appreciate your perspective, but recipients of advantages are rarely fully aware of those advantages, and it is a noted phenomenon that even those why receive huge boosts in life are reluctant to admit that, to themselves as well as others.
@FodgeandDurn, no disrespect intended but please, it's not hard to connect the dots when things are obvious.
First, we're not in 1960 anymore. An argument 6 decades old holds zero credibility.
You and I know women have gained so much power in the past 20 years that they're literally taking men jobs left and right, sometimes JUST because they're women.
Once they were victims? Yes. But now they hold so much power that's essentially hypocrisy when they keep acting as victims in 2018. They're not anymore. That's hypocrisy.
Times have changed since 1960.
Regarding "I don't think fewer women than men want to take photos (just look at the explosion of women photographers when phones became everyone's imaging tool)", I do hope I have misinterpreted your statement?
You're not considering what women do with their iphones as photography, are you?
We're counting ****professional**** photography here, *quality* driven, made as a craft.
What goes to facebook and instagram does not count.
why only (x) trans ? how about the rest 60+ genders according to the libs, every camera maker should provide the platform for each of them with the same amount of prizes so they don't feel marginalized
Dorothea Lange, Diane Arbus, Cindy Sherman, Annie Leibovitz, Julia Margaret Cameron, Nan Goldin, Sally Mann, Mary Ellen Mark. Rineke Dijkstra, Eve Arnold, ….I think we’ll be alright ;)
There are many groups of women photographers working towards equality in the market, and a higher profile for their members (mfon, the old girls club, womenphotograph etc.). Totally support these groups, and understand the need for them - all power to their elbow.
But when commercial organisations such as Sony create these programmes, I have to ask why? The cynic in me sees an exercise in jumping on the MeToo (a movement I respect) bandwagon for commercial motives. $25,000 seems a small price for the publicity this prank will generate, and the benefits to their corporate image.
It seems more likely to me that women are not very successful competing in a space dominated by men. This is an exercise in virtue signaling from SONY; however, I personally am not against it. They should be able to do whatever they want with their money.
Show me something with a larger broader demographic than this that indicates gender disparity within the photographic community in 2018 and I might believe you. Otherwise it's a debunked myth.
What is Instagram? A social media platform that every grandma and teenage Jane, Amanda and Marisa with a phone upload their starbucks selfie pictures to. What does that have to do with becoming a successful photographer? Sony seems to think that there are more successful male photographers than female
Don't play dumb. Instagram is a platform where people take photos and upload them. ie. Photographers sharing images. Whether they are pro or casual or art or old or young is irrelevant as one can become the other quite easily. It's a massive pool and it represents a global demographic. If there was an institutionalised barrier holding a gender back, it would show here. But it doesn't.
Like I said 'Show me something with a larger broader demographic' - otherwise you have an argument that only stands in a limited capacity or within your own imagination.
Although the application window is now closed (that was an oversight on our part), we still consider this kind of initiative from a major manufacture to be interesting and newsworthy. I'm sorry we didn't get to the story earlier, and I can only apologise if our tardiness prevented any of the commenters here from applying for a grant. We'll keep an eye on how this program develops and keep you all posted.
Not being personally oppressed by anything, I sometimes have trouble wrapping my head around the whole oppression thing, and the need for programs to help overcome discrimination.
Something that made me think a bit more about the issue, and challenge my own presumptions, was an article I read in which a speaker described dividing an audience into male and female groups and asking them to list the measures they take on a daily basis to avoid sexual assault. The list produced by the women was long and detailed. The men's list was very short.
The point, I guess, is that while men are not immune to sexual violence it just doesn't provoke the same level of concern as for women. Applying that to photography, I think of all the sketchy places I traipse around alone to obtain images, and realize that they might well be off limits to women.
So that's one example of the advantages men enjoy. Good on Sony for its initiative. Maybe I'll buy one of their cameras!
Because it wouldnt happen. That's like asking "What if DPR advertise for more crotchety old men for the comment section". Its already over-represented.
" That's like asking "What if DPR advertise for more crotchety old men"
Actually, that sounds like a pretty good idea. Play to the majority demographic. I'd get my attention :). Probably buy something too :)
Better yet, advertise to unhappy disaffected bitchy people in general and whiny people. There's always somebody who wants to whine about opinions with which they don't agree. That's a CLEAR majority :)
@PAntunes: that's maybe because young photographers have less money and less experience than adult photographers?
On the other hand, a female photographer has just as many opportunities as a male one, at least in our western civilization. Nothing and nobody will prevent a female from becoming a successful photographer IF she has the talent!
@Vincent DP, less money and less experience? why? I could start a photography business at 45 and have less money than the Beckham kid...
It's not a question of opportunities. It's a question of interest. Are we interested in seeing what new talent produces? Are we interested in seeing more work from a female perspective? Or are we that stupid that we feel that if we can't participate in a contest, it's bad?
The way of the lier is to say anyone with any issue must be because of X, Y and Z of their own crabby opinion. False witnesses. What most do like and don't like about this deserves some honesty.
I would not have a issue at all with a womans contest (or a mans) per say; just as long as it wasn't divisively inferred (and flat said) it's the off the backs of mean old men. "Because we say so!". That's the real problem. Lies. Just because one guy or some are arses; doesn't mean a minority of women can't also be too!
Why are we letting the untruthful rule? Evil divides. Steal, kill and destroy and from the root or seed; is evils goal. Don't you know that? Children are their first victims. Evil targets women; just BECAUSE of childbearing. Believe it. I say we cherish women! Protect them. In deed.
And how do we know anything, about anything? Evil is as evil does. Logic or don't. By choice.
... Ponder. It's lying and yes slander; that's the biggest deal and over a great many bad things. Think about it. Slander is the most; that good isn't. True. Be true.
This WHOLE thing slanders men collectively. That's all kinds of what they (men and women) are claiming is bad. Sexism. Bigotry. Divisiveness. Rage. Factions. Selfish. Clicks. Hypocrites major.
I'm just here for the "help help I'm a man and I'm being oppressed by marketing!" and man, DPReview commentariat never fails to disappoint.
People looking for things to be offended by will find things to be offended by, and it sure seems like DPR commentators are some easily offended snowflakes.
I'm interested by: "We're giving you an outlet". Seems rather paternal to me.
A lot of conspiracy theories and wild tangents going on here.
About 1/6 of Sony's Ambassadors are female. Sony probably recognised there could/should be a greater representation and decided to launch this project to encourage growth. I see nothing sinister here.
It's sexist. If you are trying to advance women's equality, this is not the way to do it. All it does is encourage resentment from men, and rightly so.
When a group is looking for increased representation, its called positive discrimination or equal opportunity. If you dont understand that, then its you who are sexist, racist, ageist, ethnicist, etc.
positive discrimination is not the same as equal opportunity. We can all agree on the latter, but the former is self-defeating, undermining people's respect for those who are favoured.
These (zero gender roles) people really are brain washed and ironically while calling logic dogmatic. LOL.
It is not a mystery why. They are simple trying to prove their immoral deeds are good. That's calling bad good. Not being honest.
Which points straight to that very tough concept (baser good thinking) and in that area (one again) of NOT ALWAYS considering everything as either/or. Some are. Some are not.
Now the reason for this (if you really want to know something) is this is how pure evil hides(lies to us). The only way. In so called half-truths; which if you think about it then can only be whole lies. The devil's in the details; is another way of saying it. It's ALSO why everything can not be a yes or no answer. The spin gets so tight that it takes effort to unwind; the convoluted complication. What a tangled web we weave. The biggest failure of mankind is not listening to logic. Fear of listening (because owning mistakes isn't accepting abuse) and taking it personally...
... 1. We all foul up. That doesn't mean anyone is not valuable or perfectly loved at the core. Yes loved and specifically by GOD at the core! We need to see the ridiculousness of the idea, of any person (but Jesus) being un-flawed (sinless whatever). It's just silly; SO that's *why* you need not take offense. God says you are valued and people tend not to value you. ALL of you. ALL of you are LOVED. But what is your response?
2. We can't be responsible for other people choices. That is (remember) ridiculous; because they are certainly not responsible for ours.
That was TWO important ways, to never take anything personally! Remember both are ridicules and then you're gold(with that) . Concepts that evil DESPERATELY tries to hide! Don't allow it.
Most of MAC Cosmetics ambassadors are women.. What's your point? More photographers are men than women so you're saying that a smaller pool should have a better chance, the definition of discrimination. You can't FORCE people to be interested in something.
The only resentment that I see is from men who can't handle the fact that women (who are still given a hard time and face many more hurdles to be taken 'seriously' than men do) are getting something specifically tailored for them, on this occasion. Give it a rest. Men commenting on how women aren't, or should be treated differently are a big part of the problem.
Which just goes to show.... These crying for equality (with fake evidence) do not really want equality. They want special treatment at the expense of others. It's entitlement. Guess what? You can't have it. That wouldn't be equality. You've made your own bed and have to, just like the rest of us. Now stop pretending. You're getting what you said was good. Plus; all you're going to get by all your sucking up is birds of a feather; that will just through you right up under the bus(fake love). So there's your wake up edification.
Man or women.
And technically women (and men) SHOULD be treated different and NOT treated differently depending. Do you see how they try to ASSUME.
These are probably the same people who feel that the pregnant, elderly, and disabled shouldn't take priority on public transport. "hey, I wuz ere first. Ain't mah fault she's pregnant"
This actually launched last month already and entry has already closed. Here are the dates from the contest rules which can be found on the official page. The Contest starts September 14, 2018 at 8:00:01 A.M., Pacific Time ("PT") and ends October 7, 2018 at 11:59:59 P.M. PT (“Contest Period”).
It is just a marketing tool. I would like to see their promo programs for middle East, Saudi Arabia or even mother country Japan. This is targeted to the north American women only.
The human mind still has a LONG way to grow before we can decide to forget about race, gender and ethnicity as somehow having ANY bearing on the type of photograph a person can take.... it's pretty sad to even need to have this discussion in the year 2018!
@fuego6 its more sad that we are being homogenised into one "thing" rather than lots of different types of people. I don't want to forget about race or gender rather as the French say "Viva-la difference".
@thelps... yes.. true.. but when we fixate on race and gender as "important" factors in a person's ability to succeed, achieve or thrive... it tends to be because we do not believe that race or gender is supposed to do as such. I'm not saying we should not appreciate the differences that gender and race bring to life (quite the opposite actually) - but when we still need quotas, contests, and earmarks to say "women can take good photos too!".... we continue down this hole that is quite sad.
I am living literally encircled with women who, no matter amateur or professional, are great photographers. Photographers much better than me. Studio or street art or still life. More than that, a lot of women I know are marvelous artists. They draw and paint works so wonderful that I don't think they would ever need to be interested in photography. But some are still interested. But my wife does not want to even touch the camera. I tried. No. She just does not want.
Most people realize that Sony is a company, selling products to make profit, not an ideal or humanitarian organization. So they offer a program for women who want to develop their professional skills, and that make them sell more stuff. That's pretty much it.
Yes, Sony is a 'for profit' company not the UN, but they are putting up $25k of their own money. They could have just invested those in ads and flying out more utubers to the next product launch. Would that have made you happier?
Personally I don't think this is a bad idea, or oppose it at all, but those involved need to consider that Sony are doing this for their own benefit- to have women in adverts directed at women, rather than to narrow a gender gap.
I think that making a women only contest does the exact contrary than helping them breaking a social barrier. In fact it's like diminishing their value as photographers, like saying that since they are not good enough to compete with men, they need to have their own space. I always thought, since I was a kid, that it's obvious that a brain inserted on a female human body can achieve the same exact goals than one inserted on a male one. At a certain point I understood that this assumption wasn't always the case. Now I see that it's not even the case right now for everyone...
Such a program might encourage some to join in on their way to build a career within photography.
I am struggling to understand how such a program, which in fact is both marketing and a possibility for female photographers to develop professionally, can be seen as "diminishing their value".
@Magnar W Because any help you give women is based on the assumption that they need help. Which in itself is sexist. This might have been a good idea a few decades ago, but in a society were equality is pretty much achieved (talking about europe don't know what america is up to) these programms do more harm than good by enforcing the public opinion, that women need help to achieve something.
A more extreme example to show the point: in germany we have a gender quota for the board of supervisors of DAX companies since 2016. Something heavily protestet by female members already represented in those boards, since they fear this devalues their position.
It seems like admitting that women are not at the same level of men. It's the same we do in sports, since there are obvious strength differences. But since those differences were never found on intelligence and creativity it doesn't seem the case in my opinion to make a women only program. That is not denying that somehow the number of women in the sector is suspiciously low (like many other sectors I would add, a lot of which are even more important!), but in my opinion those things simply want cure the symptoms rather than the disease.
This is a matter of perspective and interpretation. What if Sony with this program says: Women are great photographers! We want to see new talents grow! Wouldn't that be encouraging?
This seems like a positive view, I can see and respect your opinion, but I think it just looks at the surface. What if they would have done the same thing, but reserved for black people instead of women?
Ragnar do you think women can't develop professionally on their own without added assistance? If your answer is yes then you are implying they are inferior innately. If your answer is no then Sony shouldn't be doing this. This is the problem with giving assistance to one particular group over all others.
It is silly to think women are held back in the field of photography. I personally have met three local wedding photographers in my area and all three of them were women. It is 2018 nobody is holding anybody back in most fields of endeavor.
@ Max Iso: Some men here can't let go that they are not invited to a female program with a few attenders and instructors … and why are you putting words in the mouth of this Ragnar. Who is Ragnar, anyway?
BTW since when is Brooke Shaden a Sony artisan??? Majority of her pictures are taken with a Canon 5D Mark II and Nikon D80 if I recall right. Kinda funny cause it seems Sonys uses some of these older pictures in their gallery.
Sounds to me like Sony offered her a good amount of money and a free camera. She's been doing photos with her 5D Mark II for years, cause she never really cared for the latest technology.
Many professions are female dominated - ones which once were heavily male dominated.
For example 80% of new veterinary surgeons are female in America. Law, medicine, psychiatry, education, social work and many other professions are heavily female dominated.
All of which was achieved without positive discrimination - women did this without anyones help
I suspect photography hasn't yet become female dominated because women haven't, unlike other professions, joined in big numbers.
The other fact people need to think about is this.
Around 50% of working age people are female.
If many of those decide to go in to high paying professions like law, medicine, veterinary science, teaching, psychiatry, etc then there simply won't be enough women to go round for the other professions!
The only way this can happen is if women doctors, etc are sacked on mass and forced to go in to professions currently male dominated ( photography, computer programming, etc )
In this shrinking marked it is right to get as much publicity as possible. Specially for Sony, which has now so much brilliant competition. They need to exploit even the smallest opportunity to sell one more camera.
I'm happy that at least one of the top comments wasn't a man voicing his opinion (with no evidence whatsoever to back up their argument) that women don't need this.
Risky. Sexist campaigns can cost a lot of sales if they are very successful. The new vw beetle became very successful with women, to the point men did not want to be seen in it. Doubling 5% of your market, at the cost of a 20 % loss of 95% of your market would not be a good deal. Sales drop, while the virtue signallers shout out approval.
If there are approximately 50 percent male and fifty percent females in a given market, then how does the "20% loss of 95% of your market" math work out? So it turns out that chicks dig the new Beetle. I don't think VW lost out on anything.
Sony means well, but across the arts I have heard female artists personally object to their gender being made into a genre through grants, festivals, et al. I tend to agree with them. Caroline Polachek and Jodie Whittaker come to mind as recent exponents of this idea.
I'm being a bit of a pest but the issue lies with attention wanted and attention given. Its not an issue for women because if they want it they get it and if they don't it doesn't matter to them. Its an issue for sony only if the group which embraces the attention starts to rely on it. That drags sony into whatever the group do (even if just a bit). Its a mistake to think other groups affect this collaboration. Personally I don't think it's a feminist issue at all and more to do with a balancing change in most societies. Like how the world's become more accepting of gay/lesbian relationships
As "biggercountry" said - that is the correct behavior. In all kind of minorities matters.
This kind of "programs" actually do more harm then good. I'll give you another example. In my country, in order to "better integrate ethnic minorities", in universities there are a certain number of scholarships reserved to them. Would you like to be treated by a doctor that graduated "normally" or by one that entered through a special program, even if his admittance to the medical school was rather based on his membership to a certain minority?
In my view that actually makes things worse, since when seeing a doctor/specialist from a minority you can't help wondering if he is really a good one. And it might very well be one of the best... but that program actually undermines his authority.
Ok that last post of mine is off topic. The question you're implying is whether sony is deliberately contributing to creating a genre out of gender. And I'm saying they don't have to be even if they might be. In a perfect world things would be more balanced and the behavior you're talking about doesn't help the issue at all. But there's a difference between a competition targeted at a group (whatever the group) and millions of tax payers $$ spent on a minority. And it lies in sony being able to capitalise on the promotion. If they got nothing from it I'd agree with your sentiment
I have no problem with this—some lucky woman gets free stuff, what’s wrong with that? Looking forward to the $25,000 reserved for male photogs! I’m sure they’ll announce that next.
So you do agree that there should be gender equality? Or is your statement a sarcastic one that actually denounces gender equality? Or is it non of both and you are not sure and you just wish to express your concerns stemming from the fact that there is no equal competition dedciated to male photographers only?
If the latter is your stand point, then you would have to find the answers to question one and two. In case it is question one then you should research and study the millenias, centuries and decades of oppression of the female gender and maybe you can understand that today is not about a de facto status quo but a time of repairment and mending the wounds of the past. If you know that you would understand that it is understandable that there is only a female photographer contest and that, even if a bit whimsical and controversial, it is at least an effort that can be somewhat appreciated.
Part two: If your standpoint is question two then I would still implore you two study the history of gender discrimination and if at the end you still insist that there should be no such gender equality than it is an opinion that should be respected.
Btw. I’m just sitting in a bus on my way to somewhere and I was just reading a couple articles on gender discrimination at work (something that is still kinda rampant in the country I live in.). I am doing my research on this matter now, since my wife came to me with a heartbreaking story and it opened my eyes.
@Devon The issue of discrimination is a larger one, and I suspect that's why it's never really addressed and often scoffed at. If we take women as an example and look at the inequality there you'll see it's not about them that creates the problem and so it's ignored. Women can do most things equally to their male counter parts and can do everything a man can do. If we look back 100 years or so women didn't work. Because they had duties; work was below them. A 'working girl' is a hooker. Its not like people don't like a romance and the importance out on both parties. Traditionally women are the reason men work, fight, die. And yet the problem exists. Surely the issue is larger, but a problem that might as well be tackled from that angle
@DevonJk85 You say: "centuries and decades of oppression". But women photographers these days are NOT oppressed, why should they get a bonus for their mistreated same sex ancesters?
If one were a bit sarcastic he coud say: Centuries ago red haired women were believed to be witches and burnt (so far so bad), so now we have to compensate all TODAY living red haired women. And voila a new photographer’s contest, just for red haired women is born. Applause, applause.
Thank you for not responding in spite and sarcasm. I appreciate the commentary. I have to be honest. I am not very educated in this matter. All I have is a very small and mostly unfounded opinion. Nevertheless, it does not take away the sentiment that I do wish that my wife in particular can be given a more fair work environment in which she doesn’t feel humiliated and discriminated. How all of this fits in the right historical context and a sensible argument, I don’t know yet. But I want to learn.
The Sony a7CR is a high-resolution addition to the company's compact full-frame a7C series. So what did we make of it and where does it leave the a7 IV that it sits just above?
Lomography's LomoChrome '92 is designed to mimic the look of classic drugstore film that used to fill family photo albums. As we discovered, to shoot with it is to embrace the unexpected, from strange color shifts to odd textures and oversized grain.
The LowePro PhotoSport Outdoor is a camera pack for photographers who also need a well-designed daypack for hiking and other outdoor use. If that sounds like you, the PhotoSport Outdoor may be a great choice, but as with any hybrid product, there are a few tradeoffs.
The Sony a7C II refreshes the compact full-frame with a 33MP sensor, the addition of a front control dial, a dedicated 'AI' processor, 10-bit 4K/60p video and more. It's a definite improvement, but it helps if you value its compact form.
Why is the Peak Design Everyday Backpack so widely used? A snazzy design? Exceptional utility? A combination of both? After testing one, it's clear why this bag deserves every accolade it's received.
If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.
What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.
Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.
Looking for the best gifts for photographer friends and family? Here are a dozen picks from stocking stuffers on up that will not only help put some more presents under the tree but also actually get used.
As the year comes to a close, we're looking back at the cameras that have clawed their way to the top of their respective categories (and our buying guides). These aren't the only cameras worth buying, but when you start here, you really can't go wrong.
Plenty of amazing cameras, lenses, accessories and other products came through our doors in 2023. After careful consideration, healthy debate, and a few heated arguments, we're proud to announce the winners of the 2023 DPReview Awards!
The Sony a7CR is a high-resolution addition to the company's compact full-frame a7C series. So what did we make of it and where does it leave the a7 IV that it sits just above?
Lomography's LomoChrome '92 is designed to mimic the look of classic drugstore film that used to fill family photo albums. As we discovered, to shoot with it is to embrace the unexpected, from strange color shifts to odd textures and oversized grain.
Sony's gridline update adds up to four customizable grids to which users can add color codes and apply transparency masks. It also raises questions about the future of cameras and what it means for feature updates.
At last, people who don’t want to pay a premium for Apple’s Pro models can capture high-resolution 24MP and 48MP photos using the iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Plus. Is the lack of a dedicated telephoto lens or the ability to capture Raw images worth the savings for photographers?
Kodak's Super 8 Camera is a hybrid of old and new: it shoots movies using Super 8 motion picture film but incorporates digital elements like a flip-out LCD screen and audio capture. Eight years after we first saw the camera at CES 2016, Kodak is finally bringing it to market.
In this supplement to his recently completed 10-part series on landscape photography, photographer Erez Marom explores how the compositional skills developed for capturing landscapes can be extended to other areas of photography.
If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.
Sony, the Associated Press and 'Photo Mechanic' maker Camera Bits have run a month-long field-test to evaluate capture authentication and a subsequent workflow.
A color-accurate monitor is an essential piece of the digital creator's toolkit. In this guide, we'll go over everything you need to know about how color calibration actually works so you can understand the process and improve your workflow.
What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.
It's that time of year again: When people get up way too early to rush out to big box stores and climb over each other to buy $99 TVs. We've saved you the trip, highlighting the best photo-related deals that can be ordered from the comfort of your own home.
The LowePro PhotoSport Outdoor is a camera pack for photographers who also need a well-designed daypack for hiking and other outdoor use. If that sounds like you, the PhotoSport Outdoor may be a great choice, but as with any hybrid product, there are a few tradeoffs.
Sigma's latest 70-200mm F2.8 offering promises to blend solid build, reasonably light weight and impressive image quality into a relatively affordable package. See how it stacks up in our initial impressions.
The Sony a9 III is heralded as a revolutionary camera, but is all the hype warranted? DPReview's Richard Butler and Dale Baskin break down what's actually new and worth paying attention to.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.
DJI's Air 3 and Mini 4 Pro are two of the most popular drones on the market, but there are important differences between the two. In this article, we'll help figure out which of these two popular drones is right for you.
The Sony a7C II refreshes the compact full-frame with a 33MP sensor, the addition of a front control dial, a dedicated 'AI' processor, 10-bit 4K/60p video and more. It's a definite improvement, but it helps if you value its compact form.
Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.
The iPhone 15 Pro allows users to capture 48MP photos in HEIF or JPEG format in addition to Raw files, while new lens coatings claim to cut down lens flare. How do the cameras in Apple's latest flagship look in everyday circumstances? Check out our gallery to find out.
Global shutters, that can read all their pixels at exactly the same moment have been the valued by videographers for some time, but this approach has benefits for photographers, too.
We had an opportunity to shoot a pre-production a9 III camera with global shutter following Sony's announcement this week. This gallery includes images captured with the new 300mm F2.8 GM OSS telephoto lens and some high-speed flash photos.
The Sony a9 III is a ground-breaking full-frame mirrorless camera that brings global shutter to deliver unforeseen high-speed capture, flash sync and capabilities not seen before. We delve a little further into the a9III to find out what makes it tick.
Comments