BBC Today: Has High Tech Killed Pro Photography?

The amateur level has got more accessible and the quality better, but the top professionals always progress equally.

There is still a huge place for professional photography and throughout history as advancements are made, the same cries that it will die out are made.
 
Hi-tec has damaged appreciation of pro photography.

Go back to when I was young, and there were crappy cameras in bright colours with crappy lenses, and these gave images that were soft in the corners, and full of aberrations. There were also decent compact cameras made by Canon and Olympus and the like, with more complex lens designs that gave much better results. And then there were the pro cameras, with the quality expected of them.

Nowadays, you can get cheap crappy digital compacts in bright colours with crappy lenses, and these give images that are soft in the corners, and full of aberrations. There are also decent compact cameras made by Canon and so on, and so on.

The difference is that people knew that better could be acheived, and if they wanted it, they either invested (both in gear and in learning) or they hired.

Nowadays, people seem more content with less. People show me photobooks of their wedding that they did themselves because hiring a photographer seemed an unnecessary expense. The photo's are .... ahem .... not as good as they could be, but they're happy.

Facebook and its ilk gives people exposure to hundreds upon hundreds of awful and awfully taken snapshots that would have been binned (or at least left in the envelope) by the previous generation. This exposure is lowering peoples acceptance levels.
 
I cant be bothered reading yet another article on this.. But the answers the same..NO ..I have spent most of today in freezing cold taking photographs that require more than the ownership of a posh camera.. I setup 150 kids for a mass picture this morning in the rain and you can see every face.. I then went to cricket and only had an hr to capturee the game.. I got everyhting needed because I know what I am doing... I completly froze my bits off this afternoon at footy but I got the goals and the celebrations. I was nearly crying I was that cold.. no matter what i covered up somehting else got cold and I had bad toothache....

Everyhting I have done today was commisioned and will be published because I have proved over time as a freelancer that i can and will deliver whats required as and when needed..doesnt matter how cold or wet i get.. how long it takes or how ill I feel..

yes someone else can come along and do what i ahve done.. but you cant buy a camera on monday and take my place on tuesday..
 
I'm starting to think the opposite - so many people fill the web with snapshots & bad photos but they are not interested in Photography or learning so the good photographers out there will always stand out. The people who make photo books from their guests shots were probably never in the market for a pro so the easy access of digital media has given them the opportunity to record their chosen moments. (my brother chose to do this for his wedding 7 years ago, I was stunned at how many people cannot even take a half decent photo with a point & shoot)

There's a saying "It's not hard to shine amongst s * * t"
 
I shoot Equestrian. Many many times I've heard riders say....'I know you've taken some Dad, but I'm getting mine from the proffessional'
''Dad' quite often has a perfectly capable camera hanging round his neck.
 
I wouldn't say it's killed pro photography, but I reckon it's damaged it. The one big advantage that a digital camera gives over film is that you can see straight away if the shot has come out as you expected, or if you've cocked up in some way. With film, you'd have to shoot the entire roll and wait until it had been developed to see how well or otherwise you had done.

For a lot of subjects this might not matter, but for those once-off shoots it could make a world of difference. How many threads have we seen on here about wedding photography and how many have reported that they are having the photographs done by their uncle Fred, because he's got a nice camera. In the same vein, how many threads have we seen from photographer's saying they are about to undertake their first wedding shoot. How confident would they be of being able to produce the goods if they didn't have instant viewing access to the shots they were taking?
 
Everybody has an oven, but few people ever become Michelin chefs.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
That doesn't stop them thinking they are though, and that applies even more so to photography....
Click to expand...

But a restaurant with a rubbish cook will soon go out of business
 
Iris said:
But a restaurant with a rubbish cook will soon go out of business
Click to expand...

Many a restaurant with an excellent chef has gone to the wall. ;)

In the case of photography self-belief plays as big a part as talent when it comes to selling....
 
I think too many articles and people are forgetting that photography is an art.

At the end of the day I bet you could give most pros what would be considered a sub standard camera and they would still take fantastic pictures, whereas super high end equipment in the hand of a novice doesn't equal great pictures.
 
It's damaged the mountebanks who originally made a living in those spurious wooden floored studios whose walls were adorned with the portraits of people who had been previously duped.

I'm talking about the people who do "family photography" against a white background, with the same exact lighting that never moves an inch, in which families are fleeced of hundreds, even thousands of pounds in exchange for crude, cookie-cutter portraiture.

Now there's hundreds of these people popping up in every city. Same goes for wedding photographers, the kind who make a point of proclaiming that they "specialise in natural light" and shoot in a "documentary style". You know the ones.

Everyone involved in these unethical practices have been joined by thousands of other people who've realised you need little more than a cheap DSLR and the ability to snap the hand off your moral compass in order to qualify for business.

Of course, true professional photography hasn't been hurt one iota, and the people who shoot commercially have just been forced to work harder and more creatively in order to get noticed.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
Many a restaurant with an excellent chef has gone to the wall. ;)

In the case of photography self-belief plays as big a part as talent when it comes to selling....
Click to expand...

And many a restaurant (chains normally) will do fine serving sub standard food.
 
London Headshots said:
It's damaged the mountebanks who originally made a living in those spurious wooden floored studios whose walls were adorned with the portraits of people who had been previously duped.

I'm talking about the people who do "family photography" against a white background, with the same exact lighting that never moves an inch, in which families are fleeced of hundreds, even thousands of pounds in exchange for crude, cookie-cutter portraiture.

Now there's hundreds of these people popping up in every city. Same goes for wedding photographers, the kind who make a point of proclaiming that they "specialise in natural light" and shoot in a "documentary style". You know the ones.

Everyone involved in these unethical practices have been joined by thousands of other people who've realised you need little more than a cheap DSLR and the ability to snap the hand off your moral compass in order to qualify for business.

Of course, true professional photography hasn't been hurt one iota, and the people who shoot commercially have just been forced to work harder and more creatively in order to get noticed.
Click to expand...

I don't think people were fleeced. They could easily have walked out so if they chose to spend vast sums that's down to them. They will never be able to recreate that look at home, and people do still like the white background look.

Industries will continue to change. 90 years ago taxi drivers and chauffers were probably moaning that cars became easier to drive so more people were doing it themselves. Most people these days don't buy a table made by a carpenter, we buy one made abroad in all probability, by a machine operator!

Sure, in the 60s and 70s cameras were manual focus, film and did need someone who knew what they were doing. The 80s saw AF cameras, still film but getting easier to use. Of course, digital means you can shoot thousands of pictures for no cost, and hope that some one out ok. Yes it's easier, and the average joe can get better pics from a compact now, than they would have done 20 years ago. yes, anyone can start on a whim whereas they couldn't 20 years ago.

But these days the mindset has changed and pictures are no longer the rarity they were. My grandparents have half a dozen pics at most of them under the age of 10, my mum has around 40, I probably have a couple of hundred whereas my son has thousands before the age of 4. In the case of weddings, they have changed too. There is so much more to spend our money on, like mortgages, loans, credit cards, cars that many people have low budgets for weddings.
 
Interesting perspective. And you identify yourself as a family photographer. Funny that.

Er, I don't really get your point. You've simultaneously tried to explain why I'm wrong, at the same time as completely reenforcing the points I made.

You're right though, they could've just "walked out", because everyone has a choice. I won't make the leap that this rather warped thinking makes me believe you're either a little guilty of what I describe, or you're naive to the concepts of a sales pitch.
 
I know sales very well and the processes involved, maybe it means I dont suffer from pressure sales whereas other people struggle. Have been in Sales for some 17 years or so both selling and managing sales teams. I have received Kirby and timeshare pitches in order to get the free gifts, knowing that there is no way I will be sucked into signing. I for one, would never book something without knowing the prices beforehand and know that if I could not afford £700 for a picture I would not pay it.
 
Cool story, but I think you're kind of missing the point here though.

Fleecers exist, and some people get fleeced. Greater access to camera technology means there are now more people offering work that isn't worth the money. Commercial photography has not been affected by this. That is my only point.

You disagree, but also, confusingly, completely agree.

Let's leave it there.
 
I thought you were implying that the likes of Venture were fleecing customers.

I dont think that this industry is any different to any other. Good and bad providers.

I could not comment on commercial stuff, but I dont think its just the more people offering work that is the thing. 30 years ago, most people had basic film cameras. They would get poor results overall so when you got married you would pay for a pro as otherwise you have no nice pics. These days, you know that everyone will have compacts that can get decent pics, and probably a few people with dslr cameras so you know that without a pro you can get decent pics (maybe not by our standards but by the publics standards). So, a tog falls lower down the list of priorities. A market has been created then for the cheaper tog, and thats when someone may think about earning a fast buck.
 
cambsno said:
And many a restaurant (chains normally) will do fine serving sub standard food.
Click to expand...

True but they usually still fulfil a need ie speed and convenience

It's been said on here many a time that you need to offer over and above good pictures to get work, I don't think that has changed - show the public that you can provide them with something better than they can achieve themselves.

Not everyone who goes out and buys a DSLR does so to progress into a career or undercut the professionals out there - some do so simply because even on the auto settings, their camera will still take better photos than a standard point and shoot. Maybe the eventual over-exposure of truly horrendous photography will strengthen the trade of the professional in time :D (youarenotaphotographer.com anyone)
 
London Headshots said:
Cool story, but I think you're kind of missing the point here though.

Fleecers exist, and some people get fleeced. Greater access to camera technology means there are now more people offering work that isn't worth the money. Commercial photography has not been affected by this. That is my only point.

You disagree, but also, confusingly, completely agree.

Let's leave it there.
Click to expand...

To the man who thinks he can't be replaced.

http://londonphotographers.org/2012/01/archant-iwitness24-rights-grab/
 
KIPAX said:
yes someone else can come along and do what i ahve done.. but you cant buy a camera on monday and take my place on tuesday..
Click to expand...


KIPAX said:
nobody is saying they cant be replaced are they?...
Click to expand...


hmmm..:thinking:

I guess I don't appreciate the ins and outs of shooting sports.
It seems to me that some genre's of photography rely more on hardware technology to be successful than others.
It stands to reason that those are the genre's with the greatest exposure to being replaced by Tuesday.
 
Daryl said:
Same thread going on in business... much more heated.....
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, now I need a shower, was like being dipped in sewage.

Its a free country, its a free market, poop or get off the pot, but whatever you do....shut the bog door.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top