Some 'Photography studios'

Jaffster

Jaffster

Messages
1,071
Name
Danny
Edit My Images
No
I'm now of a firm belief that anyone can open a shop and stay in business doing 'Photography'. I've just been on Facebook to see some pictures uploaded by a friend of her and her best friends "photoshoot"... she seems pretty impressed with them but I just can't believe that this Photographer is still in business :shake:

Here's a few examples:

IMAGES REMOVED

Spot the dusty sensor/lens? Spot the end of the backdrop on one of the images and what looks like a light on the other? Now, this isn't a direct 'pop' at this photographer as I have seen a few examples similar to this before but I must say that I'm bitterly dissapointed that someone would pay good money for these and the photographer doesn't even have the common decency to even apply a crop.

The subjects look un-natural and uneasy, like they're not confident at having the camera pointed on them.

Here's another example of another friend from Australia who payed for a studio day. I got talking to him about it and had a mess, he couldn't believe what just 20 minutes in photoshop could do (consider that the image I worked from was a Facebook low-res image):

Photoshopchange.jpg


I've always thought of post-processing as being a PART of photography, not an option. Even just a crop would do on some pictures?

What's the Talkphotography general view on shops like these on high streets. Do you think that they're giving a bad name for the rest of us or do you think that it doesn't really matter as most people don't actually know any better and just find it glamorous that they're having pictures taken of them in a studio?

Curious to how other members perceive these shops.
 
Have you checked with your friend before posting on here, and does she have the reproduction rights to these images?

My husband and I have a studio and I don't really worry too much that other studios are doing a poor job - makes us look better. I don't think it damages the industry as a whole, tbh, any more than bad service/product in any other arena

L
 
Good point, I agree.

However, my gut says that these are unedited proofs that have been sent, and she has been cheeky and not paid for the full versions.

Might well be wrong, but I hope for the tog that I am not.

It must not be forgotten that not every tog wants to be the best, or can be bothered producing top of the line stuff every day. THey should, but they don't.

We use this forum because we want to improve, and not everyone has that mindset.

I agree it is bad for the industry, but most people don't notice.
 
lawrie29 said:
However, my gut says that these are unedited proofs that have been sent, and she has been cheeky and not paid for the full versions.

Might well be wrong, but I hope for the tog that I am not.

It must not be forgotten that not every tog wants to be the best, or can be bothered producing top of the line stuff every day. THey should, but they don't.

We use this forum because we want to improve, and not everyone has that mindset.

I agree it is bad for the industry, but most people don't notice.
Click to expand...

If the photographer sent large resolution images like this to her without her paying, then he has no business sense :bonk:

does she have the reproduction rights to these images?
Click to expand...

By them being on Facebook, I would be presume so.
 
If they're on FB then they're now 'open-source' - anyone can download them...
 
Jaffster said:
By them being on Facebook, I would be presume so.
Click to expand...

Always dangerous to make assumptions - and even more so to edit something without being sure if you have the right.
 
Jaffster said:
Alright, I've removed them. Never mind.
Click to expand...
keep your passive agressive nonsense to yourself. I wasn't having a dig at the thread, and had already given a perfectly reasonable answer.

You could have just said 'yes, she has the rights' .

L
edited to say - I see you have edited - please ignore the pa comment, everyone
 
I couldn't really care if I have rights or not... just as with this place, I was trying to show him what could be done and it was also a great experiment for myself.

I am not using the image for personal gain or to make any money.

I do not see what the fuss is about and why the discussion can't actually be about these high street photography studios rather than if I have rights to post images or not.
 
Come on put your ego back in the box and get over it!

No-one was criticising you - simply asking a question
 
EdinburghGary said:
Incredible. Gives me confidence too :)
Click to expand...

You shouldn't need confidence Gary, you know deep down that your images are dazzling and you'll do well down your new business venture.

I'm still new to it but think I could do a better job with some lighting equipment provided.

I do think it's the key difference between someone who has taken photography as a hobby and strives for better images rather than (I don't mean to stereotype all students here) someone who's done a degree in photography and just wants to get to the £££ by getting a job in one of the said studios.

It appears that way to me, anyway.
 
odd how some studios can produce so so work, yet keep going.
does a prominent position, and plenty of advertising bring punters in, ?
ive seen work from a few "studios" that my mrs wouldnt take a second look at.
yet they still keep working.
maybe its down to the fact that a lot of the general public would'nt know a good shot, if it was rammed up their a...........

as Lois said thought. cant hurt our biz, if people compare other folks work to ours.

weve already had several customers doing just that.
lets say we have little to worry about.
 
Gutted, I was looking foward to these photos.

LOL at people who think photo's on facebook are still 'there property'!!
 
I think this is MOST common of all in the fyeo/boudoir style market. Flat, badly lit, badly posed images that do not flatter. And yet, time and again I have seen people post their pics with pride.

L
 
I'm not going to comment on the images here as the original photographer hasn't posted them as far as I know.
I will say theres some truth in the OP's comment that pretty much anybody can set up a studio and turn out some very "mixed" work and get away with.
I know of one studio set up fairly recently by someone with no photographic skills or training (never owned a "proper" camera even) he's making a living, and posting his work on facebook as an advert, quite frankly they are terrible, badly exposed, sides of background showing, colours out etc etc etc, and these are his promo pics for heavens sake.
 
Headless Lois said:
I think this is MOST common of all in the fyeo/boudoir style market. Flat, badly lit, badly posed images that do not flatter. And yet, time and again I have seen people post their pics with pride.

L
Click to expand...

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. ;)
 
My opinion for what it's worth, if a studio opens up, and yes anybody with a modicum of knowledge could do it, If they're still in business a year later they must be doing something right. What other photographers think of their work is entirely irrelevant, if the customer is happy, jobs done.
 
Arkady said:
If they're on FB then they're now 'open-source'
Click to expand...
Incorrect. Theyre still subject to the same copyright restrictions as they were before being submitted to Facebook.
anyone can download them...
Click to expand...
That part's true. But still not legally if they are previously subject to copyright restrictions. :)
 
Making a living from photography has little to do with great photography Jaffster, it is to do with taking a photograph that others will buy. It is not for you or anyone else to say what others will buy.

I remember asking a chap why he was giving up professional photography as his commercial photography was excellent. I was buying his mint condition hassleblad from him. He responded by saying that the last commercial portrait sitting was the final straw. The MD of the local factory - Ford motorcars had complained because he had taken half an hour to carefully wrap his equipment up after the shoot - he had spent that half hour in the MD's office lol.

You are right when you say anyone can set up a studio, after all it only takes money but as for making enough profit to stay in business thats something else - that takes a businessman rather than someone who can take great photographs.

Give me a businessman who takes great photographs and we are onto a winner but if I can't have that then give me a businessman who takes poor photos over a great photographer but bad businessman any day of the week

stew
 
Well I didn't see the originals - and they shouldn't have been altered or downloaded as Marcel pointed out.

The one that is posted looks awful - low res or not .... they went for a studio shoot and got studio shots. Poor B+W and fake backgrounds were not part of the remit I suspect
 
Marcel said:
Incorrect. Theyre still subject to the same copyright restrictions as they were before being submitted to Facebook.

That part's true. But still not legally if they are previously subject to copyright restrictions. :)
Click to expand...

Accepted - but that's going to stop them how?
Look at what just happened in Canada... FB is having to amend it's T&C all over again...
 
Sadly probably no-one. It was just that your post sounded like "once theyre on facebook they become OK to copy"
 
Yes that is the impression facebook gives off with thier T&C's. One of the reasons I do not post anything decent to fb.

The problem here is that the picture probabbly didn't belong to the person who posted it to face book in the first place.

J
 
I responded to a thread on TP just last week that was entitled "what makes a good photographer?" My comment here is just the same as it was on that thread - I just can't figure out why some photographers can attract business when some of the images they create are truly awful. Again, some of it must boil down to perception of some photographers and his/her industry links. I'll be honest, I've got a right cob on about all this of late: I dont profess to be a good photographer at all, I've recently been told by 3 models that they prefer the images I created for them over those that they paid big money for from a professional - but they also told me that they wouldn't use my images simply because as an amateur, my name does not have the same industry links, impact or feel that they'd get by publicising their invlovement with those who set up a studio and call themselves a professional. I do lots of family shoots for people who have been really disapointed with the results from their so called 'professional studio sitting'. Please don't think that I'm knocking Pro photographers - just those who give themselves the professional tag but whose images are just plain ordinary or poor to say the least. Sometimes it's not about the image created, but about the perception an individual is able to create. All sounds like a load of 'pants' to me but to be honest, as a result I'm jacking it all in and selling up my kit.
 
as a result I'm jacking it all in and selling up my kit.
Click to expand...

Isn't that a case of giving in to all that you object to.

Photography is no different to any other art. We all know very talented people who are struggling to get anywhere. We also know that there are plenty of talentless people making a fortune.

You know the saying very well "It's not what you know......
 
I'm guessing he was being sarcastic, well one would hope so. I guess i stand corrected on the FB thing, i'll shut up! ;)
 
I would just like to add that you could also say this is the case with other professions. Like computers for example. I've seen many people ripped of by said corner shop because they didn't know any different. I've then had to come along and sort the mess out. My two pennies worth anyway!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top