Tuesday, August 12, 2008

Photo Business News & Forum - Top 10

Last night, we surpassed 1.2 million pageviews for the blog, and hope that everyone who's been here has learned a lot! Here are the top 10 posts, in order of pageviews, during that time.


  1. Nikon vs. Canon - Introduction - Our head-to-head comparison of our two newest cameras, back in December of last year, the D3 and the EOS 1Ds Mark III.
  2. Photo Booth Rig - The 'in detail' demonstration of a really cool photo booth where people can make images of themselves, and get a print, in under a minute!
  3. State of the Union - From the Photographer's Perspective - a look at how the photographers covered the event (including me), as well as some insights into the work environment and challenges we all face.

(Continued after the Jump)

  • A Must Watch - Do You See Yourself? - Harlan Ellison's on fire in this 3:24 piece excerpted from the upcoming feature documentary on him "Dreams With Sharp Teeth"
  • The Conundrum of Doing Nothing - This post, in such a short period of time saw a grassroots spike in readers. The bottom line - doing nothing can be very profitable!
  • US Presswire - Introduction - Many of you apparently 'saw the light' and spread the word about this in-depth piece on how bad shooting spec, especially of sports, is for you. It wasn't without it's detractors, of course.
  • Orphan Works 2008 - A Wolf In Sheep's Clothing - The orphan works dilemma needs to be solved. Just not this way. Museums and libraries find their missions frustrated by an inability to identify and contact rights holders
  • Anatomy of an Assignment: 3 Minutes and Counting - This post will always hold a special place for me, as it was the basis for the AssignmentConstruct site.
  • Free Not Working for Thee? - I hear a great deal from photographers who are asked to work for free, or whom were replaced by someone willing to work for photo credit, and paying to shoot something (by way of paying un-reimbursed expenses associated with the no fee shoot).
  • The Art of the Retoucher - This was a very early post, about how amazing retouchers work, and links to some of their samples.

So, you chose them - send the links to your friends, and share the knowledge!

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.


[More: Full Post and Comments]

Monday, August 11, 2008

Heineken In Hot Water Over Alledged Copyright Violations

Well well. Heineken is the latest Virgin Mobile to fall into the Flickr trap with their allegedly infringing uses of a large number of photos from the Flickr site, with thanks to Rob Haggart over at A Photo Editor for bringing this to our attention - (Heineken Discovers Flickr Isn’t Full Of Free Photography, 8/11/08).

Haggart recieved a letter from one of the allegedly infringed photographers, and the offer to "settle" the matter was

(Continued after the Jump)
about $30 USD. All sorts of screen shots (here) show Heineken's website with the images there, since the site has been taken down. Here's one of Heineken's responses to a photographer, which reads, in part:
"...after our investigations, we have concluded that any use of the images was at best ...use of a temporary nature only and would not form the basis of any copyright claim in this jurisdiction. However, in order to resolve matters, and save time...we would be willing to pay in full and final settlement an amount of €15 per image allegedly used. This in our view represents a reasonable commercial royalty for the use of such images in this jurisdiction if, as we say above, there was any actual use in legal terms.

Before making any payment however, we will require you to provide us with evidence of the alleged use of each image, and proof of ownership by you of the copyright in each such image."
Virgin Mobile ran into the same problem, as discussed here, and reported here - Virgin Mobile sued over Flickr image used in ad.

When will billion-dollar corporations and ad agencies stop trying to go free & cheap for their content? This won't be the last time this happens - I can promise you.

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.


[More: Full Post and Comments]

MoMa - Simon Says GET OUT!

Andrew Peterson (a.k.a. Thomas Hawk) is not a disrespectful person. Andrew Peterson also does not like to be taken advantaged of, lied, or mis-treated.

So, Andrew learned that the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (a.k.a. MoMA) has changed it's policy, as is outlined here:

(Continued after the Jump)
Cameras
Photography is not permitted in the galleries. Flash photography is permitted only with a handheld camera in the Atrium.
Peterson decided to join the museum, and take in the sights, because (no doubt), according to their website, SFMoMA celebrates its' commitment to photography here:
SFMOMA began collecting and exhibiting photographs in 1935 — the same year it opened — making it one of the first museums in the country to examine photography as an art form. Today, the Museum's collection includes pictures from all over the world and embraces a wide range of subjects and authors from such diverse purviews as science, industry, government, entertainment, media, amateur amusement, and the fine arts.
Then, the man tasked with ensuring a quality visitor experience in one of the most liberal/free/accepting communities on the planet - Simon Blint (Facebook Profile), Director of Visitor Relations at the SF MoMA - decides that he is going to call in the museum's private Gestapo to halt a man with a fisheye lens from taking pictures in just the location he not only was explicitly permitted to, but had called ahead to confirm was acceptable.

One of Simon's friends - Simon Read, decided to defend Simon on his blog here:

He wrote:
On Friday, Blint asked a patron to stop taking what appeared to be some inappropriate photographs.
"Appeared to be" and "inappropriate"? As someone who was born and raised in the San Francisco Bay Area, help me understand how Simon Blint can know what's inappropriate? Is Mapplethorpe inappropriate? (Slate.com - Robert Mapplethorpe's Sensationalism) Certainly not in San Francisco, where he's celebrated (and collected). Peterson notes the hypocrisy on his blog when he writes "It is ironic that the great Cartier-Bresson, who took thousands of photographs of unsuspecting people in his work, hangs in the museum while a photographer practicing the same type of work gets ejected...". Blint must have missed this.

Simon's Pal Simon further defends his pal:
It did not take long for Peterson...to disseminate his vitriolic rant to more than a dozen websites. The immediate result was an onslaught of vicious criticism, attempts to get Blint fired, and countless e-mailed threats—this, to a man who was doing nothing more than his job.
Actually, his jobs' description, back in July of 2004 reads, in part:
The Head of Visitor Services is responsible for directing front line resources to ensure that visitors have a positive and enjoyable museum experience...
It appears that he's failed in that - Mr. Peterson had no such thing occur, and he's a member of the museum who followed the written rules.

If you want to check in to see if his job gets listed, here's the link to where they post their openings. It's not there as of 8/11/08. Maybe it's time to get the Museums' previous Head of Visitor Services - John O’Neill, back.

Simon's Pal Simon goes on to then say "Regardless of who was right or wrong..." as if he's the modern day Rodney King suggesting "why can't we all just get along", then goes on to say "...Peterson/Hawk has crossed the line. A rational human being would have simply written a letter to museum management, stating his case and asking for the situation to be put right. Peterson/Hawk has instead savaged Simon Blint’s online reputation, which is guaranteed to hurt his employment prospects for years to come."

Yes - a search for Simon Blint turns up all sorts of references to Peterson's experiences. Perhaps Blint should treat all his museums' visitors as if they will shout from the rooftops about bad experiences they might have. Heck Hotels.com gets the new world order concept in their latest ad campaign where hotel staff are concerned about the review they might get on the Hotels.com website (one ad here). A letter to museum management would have received some apologetic form letter, and little else. Instead, SF MoMA searches too return the article. While Peterson may have used choice words and colorful language, he outlined his experiences, and only Simon's Pal Simon has said anything (so far). To suggest, as Simon's Pal Simon did "SF MOMA has yet to present its side of the story. Whereas Peterson/Hawk can skewer Blint at his leisure, Blint has a chain of command he must work through before he can defend himself." Yes, and it is exactly that bureaucracy that would have kept, in all likelihood, Peterson from a resolution that not only was satisfactory to him, but also would have established a precedent for handling things appropriately in the first place.

Blint should write an apologetic letter to Peterson - personally. That would be a start.

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.


[More: Full Post and Comments]

Sunday, August 10, 2008

Breeders' Cup - Coming Up Lame

Imagine my surprise when a missive related to the Breeders' Cup landed in my inbox suggesting they have the right to limit images that are produced by the news media.

When you are producing an event, it may - or may not - be news. There are a number of examples where the news media has opted not to cover "news events" - domestically there's the LPGA and the Associated Press, as noted in this article, and internationally, there was the boycott of Crickett coverage in Austraila (as seen here), so the notion that the BC isn't taking a risk is pure folly.

Here's what, in part, Thoroughbred Times reported:

(Continued after the Jump)

The company will require licensing permission for photos and other images captured by credentialed media at the Breeders’ Cup and used for anything other than editorial coverage within 30 days of the event... {Peter} Land said licensing fees for commercial use of photos from the Breeders’ Cup most likely would be determined on a case-by-case basis. Media organizations using photos and images for editorial purposes after 30 days would not necessarily be charged....“Even though there is a 30-day sentence, it doesn’t mean you can’t use it after 30 days, you just need our permission,” Land said.

Mr. Land (LinkedIn profile) got this idea during his five years at the NBA, where he was in-charge of their marketing and communications shop.

Land was quoted in the article as saying "It’s not directed at the journalism community. This is primarily directed at photographers. Mostly these kinds of credential languages are prepared to prevent someone from using the images outside of the media environment." The problem is, that if a photographer wants to license an image to the journalism community - like Thoroughbred Times, Bloodhorse, or any other publication - not to mention newspapers, they're precluding them from doing that. Further, there are limitations on the commercial use of corporate logos, so the use of the Breeders' Cup logo in posters or advertising would meet that restriction.

If you're writing a license for your use, you might try this:
This photograph is licensed for one time advertising use in XYZ Magazine, for a full page ad, where the photograph appears 1/2 page, in the print edition only. The exercise of this license is contingent upon Client securing any and all necessary rights clearances from any recognizable individuals in the photograph, trademark owners, or other parties who may have a right to preclude the exercising of this license."
I am not a lawyer, but it's essentially like you selling a piece of the pie that is necessary to make up the whole pie - before the pie is consumed. Check with someone to ensure this language holds water, but it's a step in the right direction.


The problem is, I think, that the sport of horse-racing needs as much publicity as it can get - it hasn't reached the critical mass of the NBA/et al. With tracks such as Bay Meadows closing, and the likelihood of Santa Anita being sold, the sport is focusing it's attention in the wrong places.

This idea is the BC's Eight Bells - and needs to be put out of it's misery even before it gets out of the gate, let alone before it leaves the track!

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.


[More: Full Post and Comments]

I Pledge To Screen My Photographers More

With thanks to the multi-tasking Daryl Lang over at PDN, for bringing to our attention the member of the press corps who interupted the speech by Sen. Barack Obama recently (Video: Obama Photographer Self-Destructs, 8/7/08). Go watch the video, and read what Daryl wrote, and follow his links. In short, a credentialed member of the press covering the news made himself the news.

This isn't new. And Let's remember folks - you get what you pay for.

(Continued after the Jump)

Let's be clear - this photographer was working for Bloomberg News, and I know full well that they have a great deal of assignments they need covered. But, the problem is, they don't have a stable of photographers everywhere, and they are harried. So, they cut corners, and when they are paying as low a wage and with as substantial a rights grab as they are, this is what they risk getting.

I can't tell you the number of times I have been in a press pen, and watched as other "members of the press" applauded and whistled when a speaker made a remark. Often, it's just one or two, and it happens a few times a month. It happens, and I cringe. Or, when I am at a press availability, and the "reporter", before asking their question, has to tell the musician just how many albums they have of the artists, and right after the press availability, are trying to get me, or some other member of the press to take a posed photo with their camera (usually a point and shoot) of them and the artist. I always decline, as do my professional brethren.

We are there to cover the news - whatever the news is. We are not there to fabricate the news or become the news. If there had been a forum for a Q&A with the candidate, then the question "why don't you start your events with the pledge of allegiance" might be appropriate - from a reporter. Surely, NOT from a photographer.

When you want a professional, hire one, and pay them a professional wage. When you're not paying a professional wage, the ones who look professional, act professional, shoot professionally, and are true professionals, will decline your assignment request. I recommend you take a minute to see how professional (and legendary) photographer PF Bentley handled a bad-deal situation in this previous post we did - At least the Hypocrite Knows Right from Wrong (1/11/07). When you have decided that any Joe can do your assignments as long as they have a camera and a few photos on a website, and the Joes that know that what you're paying isn't a fair wage, and say no, the Joes that don't know look at this as either a great opportunity to "build their portfolio", or, as a great opportunity to make a political statement.

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.


[More: Full Post and Comments]

Saturday, August 9, 2008

Conde Nast - A Quick Chuckle

A colleague forwarded me a note about Si Newhouse, and Conde Nast, that appeared in the New York Times - Can Si Newhouse Keep Condé Nast’s Gloss Going? (7/20/08) that gave me a laugh - except that it was a laugh of "you've got to be kidding". Previously, I've analyzied both Conde Nast's contracts (Conde Nast/CondeNet Contract: Introduction, 4/26/08) as well as earlier this week (Conde Nast, Encyclopedia Britannica - Selling "Their" Images, 8/5/08). So, when the New York Times wrote about Mr. Newhouse:

You might know some of his children: Vogue, The New Yorker, Architectural Digest, Glamour, Vanity Fair, Gourmet, GQ, and Condé Nast Traveler. These titles are a polite way of saying that Condé spends money like no one else in the industry — more on salaries, paper stock, writers, photographers, travel, clothes, parties and just about any other line item imaginable.
I thought - PHOTOGRAPHERS? You've got to be kidding! They pay their photographers a "day rate" (an antiquated term to be sure) of under $500. They may pay more on "photo shoots", but not more on photographer's fees!
(Comments, if any, after the Jump)


Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.


[More: Full Post and Comments]

Wednesday, August 6, 2008

To Be (Represented) Or Not To Be

That surely is the question. When I started as a photographer, I thought that I had to have a rep. But what's a rep?

In photography, generally speaking, you may have representing you, possibly a photo agency, such as Black Star, Aurora, or Zuma. (This is not the same as a stock house where you file your images for re-sale). These organizations not only secure for you assignments (or atleast they're supposed to), but also represent and license your stock photography. Their stated objective is to represent you in the many facets of photography. What we're discussing here though, is not that arrangement, but the arrangement between one individual (and perhaps an assistant or two if they're successful) and a small group of photographers - often not more than 5.

For this post, we'll be discussing the latter, and not the former.

Also, generally speaking, there are two groups of photographers that want a rep. Those that need them because they need help managing their assignment load that they have better, growing their market, and increasing their presence from local to regional, or regional, to national. Then there are those that think that all of the problems of running their business could be solved if they just had a rep. Rarely is there the "hot" photographer, that made PDN's 30 under 30, got an award from Communications Arts, or got picked up for a huge national campaign that became controversial or "blew up". We're not going to touch on those folks either.

First - to the photographers who expect that the rep will solve all the ills of their photographic life.

(Continued after the Jump)

Get a grip. They won't. It's not that they can't, it's that it's not their job. Their job is, to take it to it's most basic level, to pitch you - your style and approach to photography, and so forth, to the clientele and projects that you are best suited for. Then, when there's a good stylistic fit, they will negotiate all the angles of the deal, and they will take somewhere around 20% for doing that.

There are probably no less than a hundred photographers who want a rep, for every rep - and that's every rep there is, not every rep that's available. So, the likelihood that you can get a rep to take you on is less than 1%. I know that's a generalization, but it's enough of a sensible figure to dissuade you from the notion that getting a rep is easy, or likely.

First, let's discuss the economics of being a rep. There are some firms that have multiple reps, and each handles several photographers. That's not the most common situation, so we're narrowing down this even further to discuss an individual rep. First, it should be their full time job, not something that this person does part-time (unless they were a full time rep for a long time, and decided to dial their workload back), and it's fair that they'll be earning somewhere around $100k, as their salary. In order to cover that, let's make the assumption that they have $20k in overhead. Remember, this is a generalization. So, with them at $120k a year that they have to generate, they're getting that income from, let's say, 4 photographers. Overall, these four photographers need to generate $10k per month, or, $2,500 each - for the rep. 20% of $12,500 is $2,500. So, you need to generate $12,500 each month in fees, in order for this rep to keep you. You don't line-item a rep's fee, it usually is based upon your fees.

If you're not generating that amount of business now, then the rep may be taking a loss for the first few months that they are ramping you up. Recognize that that time they put in is an investment in you and the relationship, and if they don't get you an assignment for three months, they're considering that they are in the hole $7,500. Ask a prospective rep what they would need to earn each month (on average) from the work they do for you, and how many photographers they handle. Knowing this will be helpful as you both evaluate each other. Can you produce that amount of work? Can they wait around until you do? Can they get that amount of work for you?

How do reps go about selecting who they will represent? It would be a conflict if they handled photographers with overlapping styles or specialties, so they might have one photographer who does food, one who does annual reports, one who does architecture, and one who does children's advertising. They might even throw into the mix an illustrator as well.

Now would be a really great time for you to click over to Caitlin Ravin's blog, and check our her two part series (which was the inspiration for this post):
Now that you've done that, think about if you're right for a rep.

Some reps will participate in the cost of a marketing campaign that you both are working on. Perhaps they'll be the ones to fine-tune a mailing list and will split that cost with you. Reps have even been known to split the costs of ads in Black Book, Workbook, and so forth. Every relationship is different, but remember, their business is generating income from your business, so what helps your bottom line, helps theirs.

Again, if you want someone to run your business, hire an office or studio manager. If you want someone to give you advice on where to take your business next, grow your marketing campaign, hone your portfolio, and so forth, hire a consultant. Pay them well, follow their advice (no matter how painful it may be to hear from time to time) and begin an ongoing relationship with that consultant.

If you want a rep, as is stated on Caitlin's blog - it's like marriage. Begin the courtship, engage in a dialog, and hopefully, it will be the right fit.

If not, remember, life must go on. Without a rep, you'll want to learn marketing, best business practices, negotiating, pricing, and so forth, on your own - if for no other reason than for you to survive long enough to get a rep. But, once you get one, with all that knowledge, you'll be able to be a far more active participant in the process they will engage in with and for you, and you'll far better understand what they're doing (and how much they'll do!) for you.

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.


[More: Full Post and Comments]

Vacation - Do You Reveal Your Whereabouts?

I can't tell you the number of times, in passing, a friend has mentioned to me they were going on vacation in a few days. They might even tell me they'll be gone for the weekend, or a whole week. What is always substantially after their return, I get a call from them.

"Aren't you on vacation?" I'd ask. Only to be told that they were back a week ago. In other words, I don't keep close track of my friends' vacation schedules. Sometimes I comment about their trip before they've gone, sometimes, I think they are supposed to be gone but have returned, and sometimes I think they're back early, when they were to have been back several days ago.

How, though, does this impact your work as a freelancer?

(Continued after the Jump)

Well, consider that while you're on a shoot with a client, and they're talking about their upcoming vacation plans, and they ask you about yours. If you tell them you'll be gone the first week of July, or the last week of August, they likely won't remember the specifics, and when an assignment comes up, the may well assume you're on vacation, and you'll lose an assignment.

Or, if your voicemail or e-mail reveals that you are on vacation, that client will call someone else for the assignment since you won't be responding to that e-mail (in their mind) even though you're likely checking your e-mail during vacation. Thus, even though the assignment was for the week you've gotten back, because you could not book it while gone, you lose it.

Since I don't keep close track of the vacation plans of my friends, I surely don't expect my clients to keep close track of when I return - and to wait for me to get back for me to send them an estimate, or tell them I am available.

So, in my office, we don't discuss, in the future tense, vacation plans. If were on vacation, it would be "John is out of the office right now..." with no specific information about when I'll return, that my office manager would pass along. Or, "John isn't here now..." or something to that affect.

Further, consider this - if you're at a station in your career where the affordable vacation for you is a weekend drive to the local amusement park, if you heard from your vendor that their vacation plans (recounted after the fact) included a week in Paris, a week in the Grand Canyon, a week in X location, even if that week-long trip was something you'd saved for for years, what are the chances that that the person who can only afford the road trip will be jealous? The thought might cross their mind "must be nice being able to afford that trip...", and yes, that, in turn, could cause you to lose a $2k assignment.

This doesn't make it right - that a client would judge their vendor like that. That clients are so quick to chose someone else when you're not responding (or not responding fast enough.) However, people do, and thus, clients do. Are you willing to risk the loss of an assignment during a date when you are not on vacation and are otherwise available because you revealed your vacation plans, and clients were either jealous, or thought you were not available when they needed you?

Keep this in mind when setting up your away messages and voicemail - even when you're travelling for a few weeks or a month on an assignment and not vacation! Revealing your lack of availability to prospective (and even repeat) clients quite possibly will cost you assignments - and income.

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.


[More: Full Post and Comments]

Monday, August 4, 2008

Conde Nast, Encyclopedia Britannica - Selling "Their" Images

Over seventeen years ago, I was a young upstart photographer, and I was approached by Washington Life Magazine, a brand new magazine, to shoot for them. And I did. Black and White, color if it was to be a cover story. After a year or two of steady work, the publisher, who ran the business out of her home in DC sat me down. She did so seperately with every photographer. Divide and conquer. She explained her position quite simply.

Washington Dossier, a magazine that was started in Washington DC in 1975, and which folded in the late 80's, did not own any of the assignment photography it commissioned. She did not want to make that same "mistake", and wanted to own, outright, all the images she commissioned me, and others to produce.

I sat on her couch, in her living room, and contemplated my situation, as the grandfather clock ticked off the seconds, and the minutes passed. What should I do, I thought. Tick-tock, tick-tock. Tick...

(Continued after the Jump)

I said to her that I understood her position as a business, wanting what she had been paying for for one use, and re-paying for re-uses, and further, to have an asset to value. But, I relied on my re-licensing to her, and I did not want to be in a position where she would become a photo agency, selling, re-selling my images - especially if I wasn't going to get a portion of those re-uses.

"We're not going to do that", she responded.

"But you could." I noted.

"We just don't want to have to deal with photographers in the future to re-use photos we hired them to take in the first place", she said.

And, on that point, I said "well, we'll have to agree to disagree, and while I respect your position as a businessperson to require this, as the person who would be responsible for providing that content, I just can't do that." That, is exactly what I said. And that was the end of the conversation. They've surely had a collection of photographers over the years who have signed those agreements, and that's fine for them. Not for me.

Over the years, I've seen many photo credits outside of Washington Life. An example By photographer Tony Powell, seen in this brochure for the Shakespeare Theatre.

They frequently appear on blogs, like TV Newser, here, and also of Sen. Harold Ford, in an an image here.

And when the Smithsonian had a fiasco on it's hands with a senior staffer who had allegedly abused her expense account, the cover photo and other images of their cover girl Pilar O'Leary got re-used with the photo credit of "Washington Life.", in many places, including the Washington Post, as seen here, and other places.

I have seen and heard colleagues try to justify their work for the likes of Vanity Fair, and other Conde Nast publications. Now, starting slowly, VF is selling prints from their past assignment work in their Vanity Fair Store, as shown here:

Those are very respectable prices - yet the photographers, atleast under the terms of the agreements they sign for assignments now, are not entitled to a dime from the sales of those prints. Next up will be more recent prints, you can bet on it.

So too, are images available for sale from the Encyclopedia Britannica image archives, as About The Image reported here. 55,000 images, over two-thirds digitized, and ready to e-mail to you!

When clients tell you they need all rights, copyright transfers, work-made-for-hire, and so forth, and tell you they'll never do anything with them "we just need to get all the rights...", it's highly likely they are mis-informed, or just not telling the truth.

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.


[More: Full Post and Comments]

Enter Laforet: Game On!

It is with pleasure that I highly recommend you check out my friend Vincent Laforet's blog - titled - what else? - Vincent Laforet's Blog! Calling something that Vincent has engaged in something as basic as that belies it's future potential. Consider something titled 17, or, The White Album.

Vincent uses this as the graphic lead-in for his blog - a very cool aerial:

So what's he got over there?

(Continued after the Jump)

Before leaving for the Olympic Games, he's posted tech tips, a link to his piece "The Cloud is Falling", and it's an opportunity to dialog direct with Vincent.

He's also got a list of his mentors (in case you were wondering), his favorite blogs and websites, and a list of friends and colleagues. I'm guessing that since he listed this blog on the Blogs I Read Daily section, I didn't make it onto the Photographers Friends & Influences section. Who knows, maybe that will change!

So, head on over there, and see what he's got to share. Bookmark it, and follow along as Vincent blogs from Beijing! (Censors permitting!)

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.


[More: Full Post and Comments]
Newer Posts Older Posts