The future of photography?

[Simpo Two]

Got a leaflet through the door today.

It says: 'A professional photo shoot with a mobile studio set up in the comfort of your own home for only £50 for 20 colour shots and 20 B&W'

I applaud his industry if he's just lost his proper job, but it doesn't bode well for anyone wanting to make a living.

[Kermit power]

How much would that sort of thing usually cost then?

I consider myself fortunate that I'm a decent enough amateur photographer that I can take photos of my little cherubs decent enough to satisfy my wife and family, so I get to adorn the walls with A1 canvas prints of them, which serves the dual benefit of saving a truckload of cash and keeping me out of the shots!

[MartinP]

With photography there's always someone who'll do the job for next to nothing. They'll find out eventually they can't make a living in that bit of the market, or it's someone just out for a bit of pocket money.

[markmullen]

MartinP said:

With photography there's always someone who'll do the job for next to nothing. They'll find out eventually they can't make a living in that bit of the market, or it's someone just out for a bit of pocket money.

Absolutely.

On a similar vein I had a call from a record company yesterday, wanted to use one of my landscapes for an album cover. Sounded OK, my shot fitted in with what they wanted, they said they'd already used the photo in a mock up and it worked well, would I be interested? All going swimmingly till I asked about budget. "Ah, we don't have a budget, we'd give you a credit". The chap seemed quite puzzled when I confirmed that he wasn't working for free, nor was the musician, nor was the record company, and the CD wouldn't be given away. Essentially everyone else in the process was being paid, but they expected the photographer to work for free.

I've no doubt they'll either steal it and hope I don't find out (I will, what I do have are a very particular set of skills; skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like them etc etc) or alternatively go down the list of potential shots till someone gives it away for free.

[covboy]

I think it will (or already is) becoming more difficult for “pro’s” to make a living in this line of work
The advances in digital media, mean a lot more people can produce the sort of effort that would have required a professional set-up a few years back.

I’m always amazes when checking out sites like Flikr and the like, at the wide variety and quality of some of the efforts. People with a natural artistic flair can now produce images of great quality which in the days of “film” photography they would never be able to (or want to) get near.

[Mermaid]

Simpo Two said:

I applaud his industry if he's just lost his proper job, but it doesn't bode well for anyone wanting to make a living.

It has been a race to the bottom for a while. Commodity . Have to add real value & differentiate nowadays.

[Kermit power]

covboy said:

I think it will (or already is) becoming more difficult for “pro’s” to make a living in this line of work
The advances in digital media, mean a lot more people can produce the sort of effort that would have required a professional set-up a few years back.

I’m always amazes when checking out sites like Flikr and the like, at the wide variety and quality of some of the efforts. People with a natural artistic flair can now produce images of great quality which in the days of “film” photography they would never be able to (or want to) get near.

I suspect the biggest issue is cost.

I've got something like 35,000 shutter actuations between my two DSLR bodies over the last 5 years. Many of those were deleted in camera, and the vast majority made it no further than Photoshop before being canned.

I've got maybe a few hundred shots that I felt were worth processing and saving, and a few dozen that were worth printing and/or circulating to friends & family.

Before the digital era, that would've cost me thousands in terms of film and developing. Now it costs me nothing.

I improve more rapidly as well, because I can get instant feedback as I take photos instead of having to try and remember all the details of the shot (not just exposure, aperture & ISO which can be written down but more ephemeral stuff like light direction and quality) to refer to when looking at the print days later.

Above all, however, assuming I've got the lighting more or less OK to start with, then I can hammer through hundreds of shots of the kids, safe in the knowledge that I should have 3 or 4 really good ones at the end of a session. A pro might only need a couple of dozen exposures to get enough really good shots to satisfy a paying customer, but that's nothing like the advantage that it was in the days of film.

[covboy]

Kermit power said:

I suspect the biggest issue is cost.

I've got something like 35,000 shutter actuations between my two DSLR bodies over the last 5 years. Many of those were deleted in camera, and the vast majority made it no further than Photoshop before being canned.

I've got maybe a few hundred shots that I felt were worth processing and saving, and a few dozen that were worth printing and/or circulating to friends & family.

Before the digital era, that would've cost me thousands in terms of film and developing. Now it costs me nothing.

I improve more rapidly as well, because I can get instant feedback as I take photos instead of having to try and remember all the details of the shot (not just exposure, aperture & ISO which can be written down but more ephemeral stuff like light direction and quality) to refer to when looking at the print days later.

Above all, however, assuming I've got the lighting more or less OK to start with, then I can hammer through hundreds of shots of the kids, safe in the knowledge that I should have 3 or 4 really good ones at the end of a session. A pro might only need a couple of dozen exposures to get enough really good shots to satisfy a paying customer, but that's nothing like the advantage that it was in the days of film.

Agreed - I'm in the same boat

[MartinP]

Yes, its certainly more accessible which I guess encourages people to have a go at selling their services. By the time the photographer Simpo mentions has realised he's flogging a dead horse, they'll be several more come along to replace him/her.

There's certainly a good market out there though for high end, high quality family photography supplied in premium products. Of the small group of wedding photographers that I trained with, most have a very healthy sideline in family portraiture.

[GetCarter]

Digital has (of course) also seen the demise of 90% of music recording studios. There are now only three decent ones left in London. Almost everything else is recorded in home studios / back bedrooms.

...and mostly sound like they were.

[Kermit power]

GetCarter said:

Digital has (of course) also seen the demise of 90% of music recording studios. There are now only three decent ones left in London. Almost everything else is recorded in home studios / back bedrooms.

...and mostly sound like they were.

They may sound like that to you as someone with a background in music, but how do they sound to most people?

I love listening to music, but most of my listening is in the car or on my phone via headphones when I'm in the office, on a train or whatever. I don't ever sit down in a dedicated room just to listen to music.

I suspect this sort of listening profile puts me firmly in the majority of the population, and I find that there will always be some other source of noise which is more likely to become annoying before I start to worry about the quality of the recording. Yes, I'm sure it could be recorded better than it is, I have no reason to doubt you on that, but for the sort of listening I do, the quality of the recording is more than good enough.

This is also similar to photography, in that for the people at the top of the game, the decline in quality they've seen from the digital era might seem criminal, but for the vast majority of the population, they've just seen the upsides and completely failed to register any of the downsides.

[Bacardi]

Kermit power said:

... good enough..

"It is a wretched taste to be gratified with mediocrity when the excellent lies before us"
Isaac D'Israeli

Kermit power said:

This is also similar to photography, in that for the people at the top of the game, the decline in quality they've seen from the digital era might seem criminal,

What decline in quality?

[Kermit power]

Bacardi said:

Kermit power said:

... good enough..

"It is a wretched taste to be gratified with mediocrity when the excellent lies before us"
Isaac D'Israeli

But if as far as you're concerned what you've got is excellent, why would you consider it mediocre?

Bacardi said:

Kermit power said:

This is also similar to photography, in that for the people at the top of the game, the decline in quality they've seen from the digital era might seem criminal,

What decline in quality?

I don't know. I'm not at the top of either the photography or the music game, so the digital era seems like all upside to me. There's plenty of people around who complain about it though, so I assume they perceive some sort of decline in quality?

[Mr Will]

I've considered doing this, not as a living but for pocket money and the fun of it.

I enjoy portrait photography but there is a limit to how many pictures I can take of my own family before they all have the same pissed off expression. The idea of spending an occasional evening taking some decent pictures of someone else's family instead and then walking away fifty quid richer sounds pretty appealing.

[Kermit power]

Mr Will said:

I've considered doing this, not as a living but for pocket money and the fun of it.

I enjoy portrait photography but there is a limit to how many pictures I can take of my own family before they all have the same pissed off expression. The idea of spending an occasional evening taking some decent pictures of someone else's family instead and then walking away fifty quid richer sounds pretty appealing.

I reckon that's probably going to be the future for that sort of photography - hobbyists who are good enough doing it just as a way to cover some or all of the cost of their camera kit.

Weddings and other major events which can't be re-run will doubtless still require professionals, as you only get one shot at that and could totally ruin someone's day if you get it wrong, but for an informal family portrait session where you could easily show people shots on the laptop as you're going along, how many people are going to be willing to pay hundreds any more?

[Mr Will]

I think there is a big shift needed in the whole business. Too long has it revolved around selling photographs rather than photography. We need to refocus on the service rather than the product; the service is where the value actually lies.

[Simpo Two]

Mr Will said:

I think there is a big shift needed in the whole business. Too long has it revolved around selling photographs rather than photography. We need to refocus on the service rather than the product; the service is where the value actually lies.

That implies that you can do well by taking crap photos as long as you smile and deliver next day. And that is the point - nobody knows what is good any more. You have completely removed the actual product from the equation.

[Mr Will]

Simpo Two said:

Mr Will said:

I think there is a big shift needed in the whole business. Too long has it revolved around selling photographs rather than photography. We need to refocus on the service rather than the product; the service is where the value actually lies.

That implies that you can do well by taking crap photos as long as you smile and deliver next day. And that is the point - nobody knows what is good any more. You have completely removed the actual product from the equation.

You misunderstand me; I don't mean customer service, I mean the service of (quality) photography. Charge for the time, skill and experience that separates you from the amateurs. That is the value that you add, not the number of images the client receives at the end of the shoot.

[LongQ]

Mr Will said:

Simpo Two said:

Mr Will said:

I think there is a big shift needed in the whole business. Too long has it revolved around selling photographs rather than photography. We need to refocus on the service rather than the product; the service is where the value actually lies.

That implies that you can do well by taking crap photos as long as you smile and deliver next day. And that is the point - nobody knows what is good any more. You have completely removed the actual product from the equation.

You misunderstand me; I don't mean customer service, I mean the service of (quality) photography. Charge for the time, skill and experience that separates you from the amateurs. That is the value that you add, not the number of images the client receives at the end of the shoot.

You need to be able to define "quality" in a way that makes it valuable (in the added value sense) to a large percentage of the population. To do that you have to be in a position to properly understand from both a visual and commercial perspective what people are prepared to pay for. i.e. what 'the punters' perceive as being of valuer AND how much value.

When taking a snap was both challenging and expensive (in the days of film at various times) people might be satisfied with anything they could afford. Buy a Box Brownie, run a few films, set it aside for a few years or more.

When SLRs came along in a big way better 'quality' was available for as long as you could afford the processing costs. Despite the investment in equipment running through a large number of films was not something one did regularly (in my experience).

Now you can pepper the social media of the world without limit using a phone and the latest fad application to replicate any style you like. You might not produce "quality" images by comparison with what is possible today but they will likely be at least as good as much of the stuff that passed for 'not at all bad' in past times.

More to the point as so many people can produce that level and be personally satisfied with what they produce it follows that anything similar will also be considered to be OK. Thus the bar is set lower than it might be given the technical capability of the kit that is available. Maybe.

On the commercial front companies might see that they can survive with lesser quality (on the web for example) produced at a much lower cost and changed frequently. Meanwhile many are attracted to the 'work' on a Pro or semi-pro basis to make a few quid out of the hobby.

The game changes. One niche closes and another opens up.

Camera sales (for Japanese manufacturers as least) fell dramatically last year although the high middle to upper end apparently held up quite well. Does this tell us anything for the future?

[Elderly]

Over in the 'Business' forum there's a thread illustrating what PH'ers make, now assuming that many of these photographs were marketing shots, most are very sloppy (imo) but I guess were deemed fit for purpose.