Saturday, May 23, 2009

Pricing & Negotiating Photography - One Solution

When I find programs that I think are worthwhile, I send them your direction, and such is the case with Pricing and Negotiating, ASMP's program featuring Susan Carr on pricing, and Blake Discher on negotiating. While the schedule of where they will be can be found here, next weekend - May 30th, they will be in Richmond Virginia giving a Saturday morning presentation. Here are the details for that:

(Continued after the Jump)

What Do I Charge?

Susan Carr presents a candid discussion on licensing and pricing your work.

Seminar topics:
  • What you need to know about copyright.
  • A real world look at how to license photography.
  • Why are copyright, licensing and pricing connected?
  • Pricing models.

  • Learn the steps to determining what to charge.
  • Selling your price.

I Stink At Negotiating

Join Blake Discher for his highly acclaimed “Strictly Business 2” lecture on how to win jobs.

Seminar topics:
  • Learn how to prepare for a negotiation.
  • Researching the client.
  • Increasing your clout.
  • Listening skills.
  • When is it time to walk away?
  • The follow-up is critical.
This will be four hours of packed information that will be well worth your while to attend. You can register by clicking here.


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, May 20, 2009

Zackary Canepari - NYT Staged Photo Controversy

Zackary Canepari has a pretty big problem. At the ripe old age of 30 or so, he is likely now persona non-grata at the New York Times, and his journalistic ethics will also likely give other editorial publications pause to hire him.

PDNPulse first reported, in New York Times Withdraws Posed News Photo (5/19/08), about the photo above, and the Times' withdrawal of the photograph, including an apology that PDN ran.

What was this photographer thinking when he staged a news photo?

(Continued after the Jump)


While we have not spoken to Zack, his Lightstalkers page shows he's been in and out of India and the Middle East for almost two years, and according to Verve Photo, in this article Zack Canepari - The New Breed of Documentary Photographers (2/27/09), he's been a photographer since 2003. Canepari started doing portraits - making images happen, not standing back and waiting for them to happen.

Unfortunately, when publications pay a pittance for their photographers, and do not pay a living wage, the photographers with the integrity necessary to work for the top publications in the world do other things - their own projects, books, commercial work, and so on. Heck, even a few teach classes and workshops. Because the New York Times has not, well, pardon the pun, kept up with the times, in terms of pay, they have reapt what they have sown. I would not be surprised that there are others they didn't catch, and in an era where photographers are driven to compete, whether Zack's posed photo, which is over the line, to the Reuters photographer with the "enhanced" smoke , which is egregiously over the line, until photographers are paid fairly enough that they can do their jobs - and, it should be said, are staffers with job security, pressures like this will continue to errode the public's trust in journalistic works. The problem is, once people realize this and think about course-correcting, it will be too late, and visual journalism will have been dealt a mortal blow around the world.

If, as Verve Photo suggests, Zack is "the new breed of documentary photography", the world of photojournalism is in dire straits indeed.

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, May 18, 2009

Smithsonian Folklife Festival Mis-Steps



The Smithsonian is responsible for a lot of amazing things. This year, they're responsible for one thing that is, frankly, an abomination - the devaluation of intellectual property - at the annual 2009 Folklife Festival.

A call when out recently, which read, in part:

We are specifically looking for volunteers with experience in audio, video, and photo documentation. As a documentation volunteer you will be asked to assist with recording performances, interviews, and presentations in different program areas. In addition, photography volunteers will be asked to take photos of specific subjects
along with general happenings at the festival.


Really?
(Continued after the Jump)


So, the Smithsonian is looking for a few good men...err....chumps? Rubes? It's one thing to ask a fan of golf who would have paid to attend a golf tournament as one of those guys that holds up the "Quiet" signs, since there are no professional sign holders like that. The Smithsonian has an amazing team of photographers that work diligently in their museums, and who not only look forward to getting outside during the festival, but no doubt also enjoy the overtime or comp-time they get from doing all that extra work. Further, they are professionals, who know what they're doing, and how to do it.

They've solicited for photographers on Craigslist, and overall are looking for people for a total of ten days worth of work. Who's going to screen these people for the right gear? The right skill-set? Who's going to manage the intake of all the images, with proper and accurate captions? What all-rights-in-perpetuity-without-pay contract will they be asked to sign?

Photographers....err...Documentation Aides, will be asked to attend a pre-production meeting volunteer orientation on Saturday during the late morning. Then, they will be assigned things and places to photograph. Yes, this is work.

James Smithson, who founded the Smithsonian, for the purposes of an "increase and diffusion of knowledge", is probably rolling over in his sarcophagus right now in the castle in DC. He died in 1829, and ten years later Daguerre made the first ever photo of a person, making his "daguerreotype" showing a city street with a man getting a shoe shine in Paris, and heck, France agreed to pay Daguerre a pension for his formula, provided he declare his discovery as being a gift to the World from France, which he happily did, in 1839. The Smithsonian Folklife Festival is clearly not honoring the French this year - they are honoring "The Power of Words in African American Culture"; "The Americas: A Musical World"; and "Wales Smithsonian Cymru highlights the creative culture of this dynamic country". Nothing like celebrating amazing creativity on one hand, while stamping on the value and intellectual property of the visual creative community with both feet, like so many fragile grapes, destined for a wine bottle. Yet, after the fact, the photographs, lack of solid captions, great-pictures-if-it-weren't-for-the-fact-that-it-was-shot-on-small-jpeg, and so many other professional-level services will be the swill that the organizers will be tasting. Sure, there will be a few gems - even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile, but how many things that should have been documented, will be lost to the mis-steps of amateur hobbyists who will try to fill the shoes of professional photographers?

It's one thing to ask people to send in their favorite photos, or even for the Smithsonian folks to browse Flickr looking for great folklife festivals, and then having the museum encapsulate them in some way, but to be looking for day-in and day-out volunteers to work (yes, Documentation Aide appears under "Work Descriptions" on the Volunteer Questionaire, so it will be work), is just plain wrong. It may be well-intentioned, but as my mom tells me - the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The Smithsonian Folklife Festival should utilize it's talented in-house team of photographers, and leave the one-chance-only documentation of this event to the professionals.



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, May 13, 2009

Speedlinks & Commentary - 5/13/09

It's been some time since we've done Speedlinks, so I thought I'd compile several that I thought note-worthy, and I'll add in a bit of commentary to each, so, enjoy today's speedlinks.

  • Awkward Family Photos - This site is not only good for a barrel full of laughs, it is also a variation on the website Photoshop Disasters, because it shows so many photos that are just plain bad. Take for example, this one - Mothers Day, and this one - Too Close for Comfort - which makes me think the photographer had a backdrop that was too small, and he kept telling the subjects to move closer together, then there's this one, and here are "The Cling-Ons", the over-use of white in Whiteout (I mean, doesn't that photographer understand that this is over-the-top, and borderline Stepford?), and as someone who is 6'7", this - Big Love - is just composed poorly, an over-use of a primary color in Into the Blue, and lastly, - Family Tree - that photographer just isn't right in the head. So, take a spin, laugh a little (ok, a lot!), but most importantly, learn a few lessons - the first one I'll suggest: 1) It takes actual talent to be a photographer, not any "Joe" can do it!
  • Starting Over - As an Entrpreneur - Here is one more story that tells people that when they lose their job, being a freelance photographer is the solution. A few tips for the intrepid photographer who lost her PR agency job and decided to freelance - 1) Don't pose with an outdated film camera, and if you are going to, make it a Hasselblad and not a Mamiya 645 (yes, Mamiya fans, bring it on), 2) "faux borders" on images is so 2001, and 3) get a separate wedding site. Mixing commercial marketing and wedding work is not good for getting commercial work. You take a good picture Tarah, but your marketing plan needs some polishing - what did you learn at Mortar?

(Continued after the Jump)

  • The Gravediggers of Photojournalism - Jahreszeiten publishing is using Stalinist tactics to try to force photographers to surrender a broad swath of photographers rights for next to no additional revenue while the "publisher Thomas Ganske professes to be a protector or champion of intellectual property rights. For instance, he was a prominent signatory of the so-called Heidelberg Appeal, according to which: “Authors and publishers reject all attempts and practices to undermine the fundamental intellectual property rights to literature, art and science, the fundamental right to freedom of research and teaching as well as freedom of the press and publication.” Hmmm, this sure sounds a lot like Conde Nast's attempts to secure, and I quote "All rights throughout the universe...". Where were all these photographers when ASMP and others were fighting the assinine Conde Nast(y) contracts? (Conde Nast Contact: Introduction, 5/26/08). There are over 3,000 signatures, which the publisher will laugh at unless they get an EP-like group to actually refuse to work under those conditions. That is, until the iStockphoto hobbyists, looking to get validated by being in these magazines, see Jahreszeiten as their own Mount Everest. Paging Seth Resnick and Paula Lerner....

  • PDNPulse - Mrs. California Blames Photographer - I agree with Mrs. California - the photographer has released what really looks like outtakes that caught her either inbetween shots or otherwise affected by the wind. Further, since when do tasteful images of the human form raise legitimate objections? take a look back at the historical statues of nude women or famous paintings by all caliber of artists from the middle ages, where the nude female form was celebrated. Lastly, I am damn tired of people being chastised for their own personal opinions - especially when they are expressedly solicited. Her keeping her title is just, and just like I dislike celebrities using the Oscars for the espousing of anti-whatever sentiments when they should just be thanking people for their award, so too do I dislike it when someone hijacks an event for their own personal agenda. It doesn't help that he has no qualms about infringing on copyrights with reckless abandon (alledgedly), as detailed here.

  • Alamy Mis-Steps - It seems that a bunch of Alamy contributors are (rightfully) upset about the agency mis-licensing RM photos at lowball rates to "preferred customers", with one person reporting a sale of $10 for an image that priced out at $600.00 using Alamy's own calculator. Seems something's afoot over at Alamy, and it might just be some smelly socks.
So, with all of the above feel free to fill the comments with all manner of opinion, just keep it civil, or you'll get deleted, and remember, my opinion or commentary doesn't have to match yours, but you should respect mine even if you don't agree with it, since you did choose to come here and read it of your own volition.

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, May 11, 2009

Answering the Phone 'After Hours'

It's 9pm on a Monday. My Office Manager and Post Production Manager, and intern have all been long gone. At 7pm, my phone rang. It seems a major public relations firm, which had originally thought they could just snap some photos of attendees at a Senate hearing with their office digital camera. Then, they scrambled for a last minute photographer. They got a photographer I knew was less than experienced on the assignment (I asked whom they got, and they told me), and the person on the other end of the phone was that PR firms' client, and she was very upset. I talked to her for about 20 minutes, and the assignment wasn't just the coverage of the hearing, it was also several portraits of people coming in from out of town for use in marketing and advertising, and while this photographer was less than experienced covering the hearing, he would have been out of his element completely in producing a quantity portraits that were advertising quality in several settings.

What to do?

(Continued after the Jump)

I opted first not to bad mouth the other photographer, bad karma. She tried to corner me into reassuring her she would get what she needed. I started outlining the logistics of the project, interspersing several general ideas about how I would have done it, and then I closed with - "with all those portraits, and the hearing, it will be a challenge for sure." I didn't want to lie, but I did want her to know it was not going to be smooth sailing. She felt as if she had no choice and was locked into the other photographer, and she asked how much I would have charged and I gave her a figure that was over twice what that photographer had quoted her. (I asked, and she told me.) She assured me that next time she would call me directly, and not farm out the photography request to her PR firm. The beauty of this is that not only would she have paid double what the other photographer quoted, but it is now reinforced in her eyes that I am a premium brand photographer (and thus, am billing at a premium rate.) I closed the conversation saying that I would be up fairly late this evening, and if she decided she really wanted me to take on the assignment, I would do what I could to make that happen, even on short notice.

Even though I would have like the assignment for tomorrow, it wasn't meant to be. Yet, at 7 o'clock at night, I was able to have a conversation with this prospective client, as if it was 2pm in the afternoon.

Returning to the 9 o'clock hour, my phone rings again. Before my caller ID delivers to me the name of the party calling, I say to myself "oh, nice, she's calling back. Guess I'm doing that project after all...", and then, up comes a very regular clients' number, and I say to myself "hmm, that's odd." (this all happened in about 2 rings). Answering the phone, it is another client, "Hi John, what are you doing answering the phone at this hour?" I respond "I am working on some paperwork and so on, but I am happy to be talking to you. What's up?" The client says "well, I am at an event the continues on tomorrow, and it was just mentioned that they want a photographer for a luncheon, are you available?" I respond "sure thing, I am happy to take care of that for you tomorrow, consider it done." He says, "it's really going to be about 10 minutes of work, but I know you have a minimum, so just bill me for that." I say "Yes, we do have a minimum that would apply, and I'll get that paperwork off to you in the morning, but we're all set for you, have a great evening." Now, this client can turn to his superiors on site there and say "I've just secured a photographer for you for tomorrow." They will look at him and be impressed and possibly even pay him a compliment or two about his ability to get things done so quickly, and he will garner cache akin to the hotel concierge who secures two orchestra tickets to the sold out performance at the city opera at the last minute. Thus, he looks good, I look good in his eyes because I was available and able to confirm for him, and, oh yeah, I have a paying assignment tomorrow.

As photographers, it is important to realize that we don't have hours, really. When you can answer the phone at 1am, with a cheery face, and acknowledge that you can be on hand at a 7:30am breakfast, because either A) they forgot to book a photographer, B) their photographer that was traveling with the group missed their flight/lost their luggage with the gear in it, or C) their photographer got sick and they just got the voicemail, you not only earned that assignment and the revenue that goes with it, but also a client who will stick with you in the future, or who is reaffirmed that you are their go-to person for their photography needs.


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, May 10, 2009

Photo and Negative Scanning: The ScanCafe Solution

Converting your analog images to digital is a time-consuming process. From first-hand experience, I can tell you how much time and energy it takes. Over the past decade, I have migrated all of my best images from analog to digital, and that process has been completed. It was completed at a huge economic cost in terms of real dollars spent paying in-house people to do it, as well as the economic cost of not having them scanned earlier.

I can't imagine how I would have felt if my images had been damaged in a flood or fire, and not scanned. Several psychology resources we looked at in thinking about the importance of analog conversions for the non-pro photographer, turned up top-of-mind items to take when being evacuated from an unsafe area, items like wedding or family photo albums. On news broadcasts where families are combing through their destroyed homes, time and time again, we see them finding a family photo, or photo album, and being so grateful that it survived.

For the family happy-snapper, and the seasoned professional, the film archives need conversion, and ScanCafe is at the forefront of providing the best service in preserving your memories, or your pro archives.

(Continued after the Jump)

I remember a business like Nancy Scans, about a decade ago, would charge $40+ for scans, and that was a deal. I compared the costs of staffing an in-house position against outsourcing it just a few years ago, and for medium format, outsourcing was the best solution, and in-house, I thought, was the best for 35mm, but I can report that that determination is questionable now that I look back at the end costs.

One of the things that the out-source service I was using, JaincoTech, was doing, was keywording and caption transfer from slide mount to metadata. ScanCafe does not do that, at least not on their website of pro scanning options. But here's the huge difference - I was paying $5 (and up) per scan there, and ScanCafe is doing scans at $0.24, which includes color correction, scratch/dust removal, and even minor damage to the image. Money Magazine said they were the “Best quality and cheapest…The best scanning service.” (article here). Don't have a negative? At $0.27 per print, they'll scan those too. How did I learn about this, and become more comfortable with them? My friend and colleague David Hume Kennerly is on their advisory board, and turned me on to them.

So, imagine you're a wedding photographer right now with 20 rolls of 35mm film from a wedding and you want them scanned for your archives or website. Assuming an average of 35 images per roll, for $168 you can have all of them scanned. Now, here's a great option for revenue generation. Why not contact ALL your past brides, and offer to deliver to them all the images you shot on CD from the film you never turned over, for, say, $300? Not only will you turn a tidy profit, but that gives you the entree to offer family portrait or children's/pets portraits to them during your conversation. Since the bride has likely ordered every print she'd ever hang around the house or give as a gift, there's little extra revenue from that film now.

Whether it's photo scanning, slide scanning, or negative scanning, ScanCafe looks to be a great solution. Further, for those extremely challenging black & white scanning issues, they can handle that too. I will be meeting with their CEO, Sam Allen, this week to ask him more about his service, so if you have questions, or they don't have a service you want, e-mail me or post in the comments below what you'd like to know, and I will put those questions to him.




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, May 4, 2009

Book Scanning Technology

Ever wonder how it's possible to digitize books by the thousands? Who's turning all those pages? Well, wonder no more, as here's the answer - a neat little contraption with two Canon EOS cameras, and a vacuum that automatically turns the page after a high resolution image is made of each page.

We recently had the opportunity to see the digitization in action - the same process that Google is using in their project. These are custom-made units, and the connectivity is amazing. The operator is simply on hand to trigger the page capture (buttons, on the left of the console, slightly visible in this image), and swap the books. Everything else is automated. With a room full of these devices, it's no wonder the process of digitizing all the worlds' books is almost half-way complete!

(Continued after the Jump)

At left, note the black piece covering the right page. That is the vacuum, which has is about to turn the page, from right to left. Watching the vaccum in action, once it gets past the peak point, and begins to decend to the left, it releases the vaccum, and the page naturally falls down. The vaccum moves out of the line of sight of both Canon cameras, and both facing pages are captured, and then the vacuum moves back into position to make the next pair of images.

A closer look at the lens choice, shows a 24-70mm f2.8 L series lens being chosen. This would make sense, allowing the operator to make adjustments when books got larger, or smaller. The ports in use are clearly the shutter release, the USB, and the power adapter. In this closeup, the lens appears to be set at or near the 70mm mark, and the lens is also set to MF (manual focus).

This device allows for books of all ages (and even levels of fagility, if watching the delicate vaccum in action is any indication) to be digitized very quickly. New Scientist seems to be suggesting (Google sees infrared in plan to scan world's books, April 4, 2009) that scanning these books is taking too long, but that didn't look like a slow process to me, I was amazed at the speed of these machines. NPR wrote about Google's Patent application, in The Secret Of Google's Book Scanning Machine Revealed (4/30/09), but, as with all USPTO applications, the line illustrations leave a little to be desired.

Back in 2004, Information Today wrote - Google and Research Libraries Launch Massive Digitization Project , (12/20/04), about the process, and Googles plans, but to see it in action, is amazing. I was watching as books far and away out of copyright were digitized. This is in contrast to the lawsuit filed against Google, and, as reported in the Washington Post - Google Settles Publishers' Lawsuit Over Book Offerings (Washington Post, October 28, 2008), but which, as reported just last week (Google Battles For ‘Opt-Out’ Extension To Deadline In Book Lawsuit, 4/29/09),
"Internet search giant Google has requested before a judge a two month extension to a deadline for authors and publishers to opt out of a settlement to a legal battle over its intention to develop the world’s largest digital library, the Associated Free Press accounted. Google’s decision was prompted after a group of authors and their heirs asked the US District Court judge hearing the case to give a four month extension to the already effective May 5 deadline so that the “enormously complex” settlement could receive the time it was due for study."
So, the discourse continues - now with a few more visuals for you to contemplate.

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]

Get the DAM Book!

Get 'em while they're hot! Peter Krogh's The DAM Book, Second Edition is now out!

Peter's First Edition is great, and I strongly recommended it in my book. Now, he's updated it (the First Edition was from 2005!) and he includes all sorts of pointers for the latest Lightroom and Photoshop workflow solutions. It's the best and only real book that provides solutions and throughly thought out ways of thinking for the individual photographer's digital asset management needs.

There's not much more to say today, than "do not pass go. Do not collect $200. Simply spend your $31.49 and order this book now."

(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]

Sunday, May 3, 2009

Pete Souza - Recording History - A CBS Profile

Below is a nice piece on Pete and the work he is doing documenting history in the making.

(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]

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Is The Amateur Really A Threat to the Pro?

Consider the photographer who has an unlimited amount of time to accomplish an image. Or, the student, who has a week or two to complete an assignment on, say, lighting a bowl of fruit. Or, the hobbyist photographer, who stumbles upon a great image. Are these photographers a threat to the photographer who works on assignment?

(Continued after the Jump)

I submit that they are not, in almost all cases. Judy Hermann, over at the ASMP Strictly Business blog wrote a few days ago - A Walk in Your Client's Shoes - and noted, in part, "If it was your job on the line, what would you need to see, what would you need to hear, what would you need to know to feel safe hiring a particular photographer?"

A track record of success is one of the key elements that a prospective client is looking for. Sometimes, a client is looking for multiple jobs for the same client in a portfolio over a period of time - say, a campaign. This suggests continuity and consistency that they can depend upon. Sometimes, a client will see your coverage of a significant event, and determine that if you were hired (i.e. depended upon) to cover *that* event for someone, surely you could cover X event that your prospective client needs you for. And sometimes, not seeing just sample work on a website, but clips and covers is a demonstration that you can deliver on time and with a high degree of certainty.

When you are a student, you might shoot the assignment three or four times, realizing you missed a critical issue each time, and then, finally got it right. The hobbyist photographer can take thousands of images of the sunset, their kids, and so on and, based upon the laws of statistics, eventually get an amazing shot. Sometimes, they simultaneously stumble into *how* to make that image, and thus repeat it. Usually, however, they don't. Einstein once famously said "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

No one has to say "he's a professional accountant", or, "she's a professional doctor." Merriam-Webster sets forth the use of the word "professional" - "participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs {a professional golfer}", thus, "professional photographer" needs the modifier "professional" in front of it. As does "professional surfer", "professional volleyball player," and, yes "professional bass fisherman."

Journalist Samuel Friedman wrote, in the CBS News piece - Outside Voices: Samuel Freedman On The Difference Between The Amateur And The Pro:
To treat an amateur as equally credible as a professional, to congratulate the wannabe with the title “journalist,” is only to further erode the line between raw material and finished product. For those people who believe that editorial gate-keeping is a form of censorship, if not mind control, then I suppose the absence of any mediating intelligence is considered a good thing.
Rob Haggart, over at A Photo Editor, defined professional by quoting a Mario Batali, in writing that the difference between an "amazing amateur chef and a professional chef is the ability to make that perfect meal 100 times in a row." Thus, the counter to Einstein's insanity definition, is the definition of "professional" that I will put forth here. The definition of professional is "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting similar results."

How many times a month can a magazines' photo editor commission an assignment and get nothing usable back before their job is on the line? Once? Twice? If twice every other month a shoot was unusable, their judgement would be called into question and in short order they would lose their job. How about the advertising job, where the photographer can't deliver while the ad agency rep and their client are both on set, and the shoot fizzles because of the photographers' inability to deliver?

The challenge for the photo editor, art buyer, and so on, is to separate the wheat from the chaff, the professional who can deliver, from the amateur who has a nice portfolio, but can't be counted on with a high degree of certainty to produce. The problem arises, when the prospective client is not comparing apples to apples, but the professional and the amateur, as if they are interchangeable. It's one thing when the art buyer is looking at a stock image - it either is good enough, or it's not. It either meets their needs, or it doesn't.

However, when it comes to assigning work, commissioning it, or otherwise asking for images of non-repeating, or not-re-shootable work, getting a professional who can deliver, means the amateur will lose out. When the amateur doesn't lose out, a risk greater than gambling in Las Vegas is undertaken, and the commissioning party is betting their job. Over time, those who fail to discern the differences between the amateur and the professional, become the chaff to their "wheaty" brethren who survive in their field.

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