Stop Accepting $200 Assignments!

I’m a struggling freelance photographer just like many out there, I’m sure. I’m not widely known, nor have I been in the industry for decades with a client list that stretches for miles, but I know the sooner I learn to value my own work and the sooner I learn to value the industry in which I work, the better my business will be, and the sooner those big jobs will start rolling in.

NOTE: I pulled the names off this post because I feared that these up-and-coming photographers might get some backlash for openly discussing their struggle with $200 assignments. Most of the veteran photographers I’ve talked with had the same problems starting out, so I know it’s not anything new to the industry. The key seems to be getting over it as quickly as possible. In fact the 1st photographer wrote this several months ago and is already in a much better position, on his way to building a nice list of recurring higher paying clients and was relieved to know he would not be forever associated with his early struggles.

Consider this a snapshot into the minds of up-and-coming photographers in this industry and the kind of impact one influential person can have on their thinking.

Up-and-coming Photographer 1 (NY):
Those of us that attended the most recent Eddie Adams Workshop quickly came to see that it was a rare opportunity not only to show our work and meet the newest generation of image-makers, but to get advice from many of the best editors and photographers in the world.

The guest speakers were the highlight of the workshop. They gave us insight into recently completed projects, practical advice on how to handle story subjects, and how to begin and manage a career. This year we heard from people such as Nick Nichols, Platon, Jimmy Colton, John Moore, Bill Epperidge, and many others.

This year, of course, the workshop took place during a difficult time in our industry. There were just as many cautionary tales about earning a living as a photographer as the stories of adventure. Everyone of course was eager to do great work, but we all kept asking the same question: where are our fees going to come from, and will we be able to earn enough to make a career as an image maker?

On the second to last night, there was a panel that I had hoped would really address this issue. Moderated by MaryAnne Golon, it consisted of Santiago Lyon of the AP, Nat Geo photographer Gary Knight, James Wellford of Newsweek, and David Griffin of National Geographic. They covered a number of topics, but it wasn’t until a student stood up and asked a question about how we, as the next generation of photographers, were supposed to survive financially in this new photo world, that my interest became particularly peaked.

Each panel member had different bits of advice to give, some I had heard before, some not. Then Brian Storm, sitting near the panel, got up and turned to the students and said something that has stuck with me and many attendees that I’ve talked to since the workshop ended a few months ago.

Brian said that photographers should, “stop accepting the $200 gigs,” because those low-fee jobs, along with those who are working for free, are bringing down the collective value of our industry and are encouraging our clients to expect more for less. He also pointed out that MediaStorm turns away well over half of the jobs that come to them, so there’s obviously a demand for original, creative content, and we all needed to figure out how to tap into this new multimedia friendly market.

At first, I was surprised by Brian’s remarks. Like many of my colleagues I struggle to make ends meet as a photographer. Even with a prestigious internship to my credit, and with several clips from the biggest newspapers and magazines in the industry in my portfolio, I have to spend most of my days hustling and marketing myself to land assignments and clients. Since I’ve been working full-time as a photographer, I have turned down perhaps half a dozen assignments because the pay was so low it just wasn’t worth leaving the house.

But, if I hadn’t accepted other low-paying assignments, some of the kind Brian was talking about, I would be writing this story from the basement in my parents’ house in New Jersey, not from my East Harlem apartment.

I simply cannot afford to turn down the $200 gigs and continue to work as a professional. I’d have to leave New York, which as we all know, is the center of the photo world. I’ve invested a lot of time in the city as a subject. I’ve also invested a lot of time visiting various photo editors in NY, trying to establish a network of contacts. Finally, I stay in NY because, for me, it’s the best place for a shooter. Some of the low-paying gigs I accepted also led to other work and other contacts, and gave me great tearsheets.

The irony is, I agree with Brian’s comments. Nothing upsets my professional equilibrium more than when I think my services or my craft or my industry in general is being undervalued by a customer or client. I never accept a client’s first budget; I always—always—try to negotiate a higher fee. But if I had not accepted some of those low paying assignments, assignments for money that Brian says fall below current industry standard rates, my career would have been hamstrung. Those jobs have allowed me to build a portfolio, and those jobs have helped give me a small bit of revenue that has allowed me to keep my head above water.

Going into the workshop, I had one camera, one lens, one flash, and rent due. Since then I’ve gotten gigs that include advertising and corporate work (weddings too) and I can now be more discriminating when it comes to deciding what assignments to accept and what assignments simply aren’t worth it. I still wake up every day happy to be a photographer. It’s my career; it’s my life.

Now, I know that my experiences as an up-and-comer in NYC would be very different from those of my fellow workshoppers, so I asked a few of them to react to what Brian said, as well as give their two cents about accepting low paying gigs:

Up-and-coming Photographer 2 (CA):
I personally agree with Brian on the subject of turning down jobs of $200 work. I feel that as the saturation of photographers in the industry is increasing, everyone wants a bite and so photographers cut each other off to get a gig. I don’t think it’s fair for the work put in and for the industry itself. I believe it’s bad business management and it’s not the fault of the photographers. No one educates photographers on how much to charge and established photographers are reluctant to share their rate cards or share how much they charge for services. I believe that needs to change. I figure, photographers should be communicating with each other some more and keep the reputation of a high quality service. I compare this to gasoline, restaurants or other retail businesses, where a new business will open with very similar but competitive pricing to an established business. A hamburger at one restaurant will be $5.00 and at another place will be $4.75, and at another at $4.50, all with the same quality burger. It should be the same with photography.

I have turned down jobs that are $200 or less. I have been offered two hour shooting gigs for $100 and I have to turn them down. I don’t see a shoot every only taking two hours, because afterward I’m spending perhaps another hour on the computer editing and color-correcting images, and another 15-20 minutes burning a disc. So my time working has increased from two hours to maybe three or four. I feel worse when I have to turn down weddings or other long hour day shoots if they ask me to shoot it for $200, because it feels as if the client is devaluing the work. The worst part of all this, equipment prices get higher and higher every year, or new and better equipment comes out every other month now, and to stay on top of the game, you need state-of-the-art equipment so that it at least can push out two to three years of life from it. So I believe photographers need to agree more on charging and balancing costs and value, so that this industry can continue to strive and keep its prestige. In the end, it’s not just a hobby, it becomes a business, and it takes just as much vision in having a business as in having a vision for a photo project.

Up-and-coming Photographer 3 (NY):
I definitely agree with what Brian Storm had to say at Eddie Adams. I think its great to hear that there is such a demand for quality multimedia, but I think one of the major problems right now is that it’s hard for qualified multimedia journalists to find clients that understand the value in good multimedia journalism and are willing to give them the time and money for quality work. During a panel discussion at Eddie Adams this past year Brian Storm mentioned that Media Storm is turning away half the jobs that come to them, and many of us young journalists in the audience jokingly called out “can you pass them our way!” It’s a transitional time in our industry where less of us are working for traditional news organizations and only a few production houses such as Media Storm have been established, so until we find our niche in the world of journalism, we freelance. There are many advantages to working solo, but one of the biggest challenges is connecting with clients that are willing to pay more than $200 for a job. Many of us are trying to keep up with the bills and pay off student loans, so certain months it’s hard to turn down that $200 job. I think for young journalists to survive in this current climate we need to work together so we don’t feel pressured to compromise our integrity. I don’t know what the future in digital reporting will be, but I feel like one thing we can plan for is to make ourselves visible and accessible to future clients. Production houses like Media Storm, collectives like Luceo Images and photo agencies such as Redux Pictures all seem to be going strong. I think the next step might be to have more Multimedia agencies vs. still photo agencies, that feature qualified multimedia journalists and connect them with clients. At this period in my career, I could use the middle man.

Up-and-coming Photographer 4 (CA):
I feel like young professionals like myself are in this weird state of flux, like a catch-22. I’ve grown in my young career through the teachings some really talented, established photographers and have tried to maintain the industry standards of charging appropriately for content. Yet I’ve quickly found that these “high morals” (which I agree with) have yet to be fruitful. We are all trying to start up a lucrative, sustaining business in photography when the industry as a whole, journalism especially, lies in this uncertain state of a new media Renaissance. I always thought I would be a newspaper photojournalist, now the game has changed. It isn’t anything new. The playing fields are getting smaller and have a lot more players eager to stand out. I don’t have the long standing portfolios of contributing to the New York Times. Those client decorations seem to help define you as a pro and justify to clients that you are worth paying pro fees to. For unestablished, young pro photographers, this seems like a huge hurdle to get over. When so much of this business is based on word of mouth, how are young photographers supposed to get their names out there when they are trying to charge the prices of established photographers? The same great mentors/photo editors that are telling us all to maintain good pricing standards are the same people we seek out for jobs and are low balling us because of the flailing market. At some point a young photographer needs to get his/her feet wet and make a sale. After all rent is due.

Up-and-coming Photographer 5 (CT):
Brian Storm made a very strong point when he spoke at the Eddie Adams Workshop this year but I would argue that the issue is a little more complex then was perhaps discussed. I strongly agree with his thoughts on maintaining a level of commitment to the value of what we produce as photographers. This will help to avoid driving the market value down and consequently out pricing one another to the point where it is simply not viable to make a living as a freelancer. When we have some level of control over the fee negotiations on a particular job, it becomes essential for us to charge the appropriate amount for the work. Doing work for free undermines the amount of time, effort, and creativity that others put in on similar jobs and cannot be an option when we, as a community, are trying to regain control over price point.

The challenge, however lies in the work we do for clients who are large enough and unfortunately prestigious enough that they can set their price point with the understanding that we need the exposure they offer to build a reputation. This is especially applicable for photojournalists in this current market where even the ‘top tier’ news clients sometimes only offer day rates that hover around the $200 mark. As we move forward in this time of transition, it will become even more important to strike a balance between excepting work we feel strongly about for slightly less than we would have hoped and also demanding we are paid fair value for work we are in control of.

Up-and-coming Photographer 6 (TX):
As far as I’m concerned, while I fully understand what Brian was saying, I don’t know if I agree 100%. I also don’t really think this is about $200, but more about taking the crappy pay so many clients think they can get away with, which perpetuates the trend of paying us very little for work that is worth substantially more.

As a full-time freelance photographer fairly early in my career, I take a lot of pride in pricing correctly and practicing proper business practices. I know way too many incredible photographers without any business sense and it kills me. Understanding your market and the proper way to run a business is paramount, especially for a freelancer and especially in the “$200” market Brian speaks of.

Since I don’t have a super niche market and do a lot of different kinds of work for a lot of different clients with a lot of different budgets, generalizing my “gigs” isn’t the best way to summarize my experience, but I quote, estimate, bid and price very similarly to other colleagues in my market (hopefully). As far as I know I’m the youngest active member of my ASMP chapter and take a lot of pride in the work that I do. In saying that, I also want to price it accordingly. When I have a pricing issue, a negotiation issue or a general business issue I have several colleagues, mentors and friends at the ready that will gladly steer me in the right direction. Sure they may be competitors in a sense, as well as friends, but none of us benefit from a photographer coming into our market and undercutting our business.

With that said, we can only do so much to educate ourselves and other working professionals in our market, but not only is it extremely difficult to regulate pricing as US anti-trust laws specifically prohibit it, but it is extremely difficult to eradicate the “$200” market when so many photographers, hobbyists and the like are willing to do it for free.

Sure, there are tons of jobs that a hobbyist wouldn’t be able to match, but for every client that respects the photographer and his art/craft, and is willing to pay for it, there’s a client with swindling budget calling you up, leaving you a voicemail asking if it’s ok to use some of your photos and telling you that they cannot pay for them, but offering “exposure” instead (trust me I’ve had 2 this week already).

Have I personally turned down $200 gigs before? Sure. Have I personally said, “no thanks,” to a client that doesn’t want to pay me close to what I should be getting paid? All the time. Do I regret it? No.

I’m a struggling freelance photographer just like many out there, I’m sure. I’m not widely known, nor have I been in the industry for decades with a client list that stretches for miles, but I know the sooner I learn to value my own work and the sooner I learn to value the industry in which I work, the better my business will be, and the sooner those big jobs will start rolling in.

Internships and Labor Law

I think the government wants to make sure that people—particularly young people—are not exploited. We don’t want people to be “volunteering” their labor in a way that profits an employer. It’s an easy avenue to exploitation, even easier where there’s a suggestion that you’ll get a job at the end of it. A second policy is not to have free labor—what used to be slave labor—replacing paid and tax-paying adult labor. Without these laws, a studio owner could decide to replace a paid studio manager with a few unpaid interns, and we don’t want that: having someone drawing unemployment, or worse yet going on welfare, when he or she is willing to work.

— New York attorney Alan Koral

via PDN.

PDN 30, 2010 – New And Emerging Photographers To Watch

Congratulations to the class of 2010, read and see it (here):
Levi Brown
Alejandro Cartagena
Scott Conarroe
Sumit Dayal
Clémence de Limburg
Gratiane de Moustier
Danfung Dennis
Lauren Dukoff
Matt Eich
Matthieu Gafsou
Marcelo Gomes
Deborah Hamon
Estelle Hanania
Ben Hoffmann
Sohrab Hura
Wayne Lawrence
Brent Lewin
Eman Mohammed
Adrian Mueller
Nick Onken
Alex Prager
Thomas Prior
Ben Roberts
Anna Skladmann
Andy Spyra
Gabriele Stabile
Peter van Agtmael
Elizabeth Weinberg
Yang Yi
Reed Young

pdn30

Digital Lift-Off

Of the $368 billion marketers plan to spend this year, 32.5% will go toward digital; 30.3% to print.

via, Forbes.com.

Cool Photographer Promo Lands Serious Interest From Clients

Photographer Casey Templeton showed me some of the amazing responses he received from a promo he did recently and I thought you might want to hear more about what went into it. You can see more behind the scenes images and a video about it on his blog (here).

Templeton1

Templeton2

Here’s Casey explaining the piece:

I worked closely with Suzanne and my assistant, Rob Jefferson, starting the middle of last year to get the ball rolling. After a successful 2008 and beginning of 2009, I realized my work came mostly from word of mouth and I hadn’t done any marketing. We decided if I wanted to take my business to the next level, I needed to start marketing myself on a national level. We also knew I only had one chance to make a first impression so we had to do it right.

Rob and I met with Suzanne in her office and got a chance to see a variety of her throwback collectibles such as a Simpson’s lunch tin, figurines and print pieces which set our minds racing.

ctListThe big question was how do we fill a box with multiple items that are tied together with a common theme. Since this was going to be the first time these agencies and art buyers would have heard of me, I wanted to put in items that meant something to me and would help them to get to know me better. I started by writing a list of things I loved which could also be placed in a box.

I spent approximately $15,000 on the project between research, materials, portfolios from Lost-Luggage, assembly and shipping of the kits. A portion of this was also spent on my designer, Robb Major, that I used for every piece in the kit from the business cards to the screenprinting on the shipping box. I produced 300 promo kits and mailed 290 to a selected list of agencies, art buyers and in-house corporate groups that Suzanne and I compile using Agency Access.

The responses have been overwhelming and I am currently working on a an email blast to follow up on the delivery of the kits and start organizing meetings with various agencies that have requested to meet with me.

Here are some responses from the week they were shipped:

“As an art buyer, I get a lot of little promotional pieces. I am spoiled. BUT, yours was so well put together and well done that I stopped everything I was doing and went to your website. NOT to my suprise your work is just as thoughtful, inavative and touching as your promotional piece. I offficially have a work crush on you. Please come and see us so we can put you to work ASAP.:)”

“I just received your magic lunchbox and I gotta say it’s quite the spread. The San Cristobal just made my drive to NY tomorrow night that much better. If you’re ever in Boston for a job let me know and I’ll set you up with a portfolio review with my art producer colleagues so they can get to know you. Thank you and stay in touch.”

“Talk about getting someone’s attention. Great promo package. Fun and a great way to get your work in front of folks.”

“Thanks -for the promo package! Quite a statement. Glad you reached out. Wanted you to know that we appreciate it!”

“That was a pretty fancy promo for a recession! Thank you — and you are welcome to send email promos anytime.”

“Just received a super fun packed from you guys. Just wanted to say lots of thanks. I looked through the images in the packet, as well as your site. You guys have amazing work. Anyway, I’ll def keep you in mind for future projects, and thanks again!”

“Cool promotional box! So much so in fact that I feel compelled to use you for our next photoshoot. I have a client in ————– on March 12th. Are you available and interested? Wow, this just goes to prove the power of good advertising.”

Continued response last week:

DDB:
“This is the most amazing promo I’ve ever received in my 12 years of art buying! I truly hope to work with you soon and I hope this gets you a ton of work! Its genius!”

BBDO:
“Liked your work very much-very honest and truthful. Will def keep you in mind.”

Draft FCB:
“We want you to come and see us because this is thoughtful and your work kicks ass”

Periscope:
I LOVED the promo. I feel like I already know you, thanks!”

Templeton3

Study Shows Magazine Editors Have No Clue What Makes The Web Different

Most editors said their website and their print magazine shared a common mission. 16 per cent of respondents said their Web site’s mission involved community-building with readers. Interestingly, only 5 per cent mentioned new or unique content as integral to the site’s mission, with 96 per cent reporting the primary use of content from the print magazine online.

via Online Journalism Blog.

Ask Anything – Does a photographer need a rep and do they really get you work?

Former Art Buyers and current photography consultants Amanda Sosa Stone and Suzanne Sease have agreed to take anonymous questions from photographers and not only give their expert advice but put it out to a wide range of photographers, reps and art buyers to gather a variety of opinions. The goal with this column is to solicit honest questions and answers through anonymity.

APE:

A perennial here on the blog is the Rep/Agent question and it’s always good to do another take on it because it’s such an important topic for photographers.

Amanda and Suzanne:

We definitely feel like a rep can be a great asset, but you have to be willing to still do the dirty work and get out there. One of our favorite reps once said “A photographer once asked me ‘what have you done for me lately’ and I responded with ‘you should be asking me, what can I do to help you?’”

REP 1:

What do you require from your talent in order to create a successful partnership?
mutual respect

What do you look for in talent?
unique talent, business acumen, adaptable personalities

What really gets you upset with your talent (i.e. not growing and shooting, no marketing)?
not being a collaborative partner

Do you do your estimates for your talent?
Yes

Do you like your talent to market in conjunction with your marketing?
Yes

What are the biggest changes you are seeing in the industry?
the way companies are advertising is changing and that of course impacts photography
less emphasis on print portfolios, more online
cg and post production alter the entire realm of what is possible

Do you think print is dying?
not dying, but the emphasis is shifting and other media are taking precedence

ART PRODUCER 1:

Do you look for photographers who have a rep? Does it make a difference?
It doesn’t make a difference as long as I’m being appropriately serviced. That said, many photographers are not as versed as seasoned reps in who to contact. There is sometimes also a prestige associated with having a rep that may open doors faster.

Do you think that some reps can make or break a photographer?
I don’t think it’s “make or break” as much as it’s possible that a poor rep can, at best, not help the photographer, and at worst, damage a photographer’s reputation. It’s about “the company you keep” in this business. That doesn’t mean that photographers should play the victim: a rep cannot effectively service a photographer without essential tools. This includes a continuous stream of new, relevant work. No excuses. An effective photographer/rep partnership requires full engagement in and commitment to the relationship by both parties.

How do you feel with the talent accompanies a rep on a portfolio showing?
It’s fine either way. I know that some art directors like to meet the artists directly.

What are the biggest changes you are seeing in the industry?
Number one, it’s still not robust out there. New photographers are having a difficult time breaking into the business and I fear they will simply find other careers before the economy recovers. Two, the integration of still and moving imagery is becoming more and more prevalent. Three, the use of CGI is replacing extensive shoots, such as cars. I’m predicting a time in the not-too-distant future in which CGI-generated people will supplement or replace expensive models.

Do you think print is dying?
No, I think it is EVOLVING. We have to stop thinking of photography in terms of Print and instead think if IMAGES in terms of ASSETS. Those assets can be still or moving and can be used across a variety of media.

PHOTOGRAPHER 1:

I  have a rep and my relationship with them is like a partnership. They handle a big part of the business that I don’t have to deal with any more, and it’s all commissioned based. I don’t think that “having a rep” automatically gets you work, because ultimately it’s your portfolio of work that gets you paid work. A rep is like a channel that, gets your portfolio out there into the world for people to see. It’s still up to me as the photographer to create better work, and the brand that goes with that. I do think that having a rep will improve your chances when you break down being successful in this industry it comes down to making better images, and showing more people. In a sense you are the one that has to make better images, but a rep will help you show more people. More than that, a lot of times art buyers will use reps as resources to recommend a type of photographer. Another great thing is to be accompanied by a good roster of talent. If you are with a good rep who has great credible talent, that puts you in that status which in turn builds your credibility. If you’re a younger photographer in the game, that credibility (and the credibility of having a rep that’s been in the business vouching for you)is an asset into getting bigger jobs.

Changes in the industry?
More digital, more photographers, more market saturation + crashing economy = less jobs which means you have to be even more at the top of your game to play with the big boys.

Is print dying?
Maybe a slow death. I hope not though. There’s always something great about feeling a printed piece in your hands. Hopefully that’s enough to suffice and not let it die.

To Summarize:

Reps do get you work, but they alone can’t do it by themselves. You have to step up to the plate and bring your game. Also, you have to connect with the right rep, do your research. We have consulted with reps and photographers hiring reps. We asked the hard questions that no one wants to talk about. At the end of the day 3 things matter: Money, Creative ability and belief in work and Personal Skills (these answers apply to the following: getting an estimate request, getting the job, finding a rep, a rep showing interest in you, etc…).

Call To Action:

If you want a rep – Do your research when trying to find a rep. Go to the workbook and find reps whose roster of talent speaks to you the most (visually). Then ask a client (with whom you have great relations with) if they could recommend a rep to you that meshes with your style and personality.

If you want more insight from Amanda and Suzanne you can contact them directly (here and here) or tune in once a week or so for more of “Ask Anything.” Amanda and Suzanne review your comments for 2 days, and then they are off researching next week’s question.

The Value Of A News Photograph

I received this question from a reader:

Hey Rob,

I hope this finds you well.

Look I have a question that might be interesting for the other photographers following your blog.

The other day I was on on 6th ave when I saw smoke coming out of a building. I pointed my G9 to it to zoom in to see better, and BOOM, big explosion which lasted about 2 seconds. I got one shot of the actual explosion.

I immediately phoned a contact at the NYTimes and they said they wanted the low res for the website + the high res for the newspaper the next day. Because I had been talking with them for a while, we agreed on me giving them exclusivity on the pics and them signing me in as freelance. This was all done 15 minutes after the explosion.

In the following minutes, many newspapers and TV stations who had seen my picture on the NYTimes website starting going through every media they could (even my husband’s facebook) to reach me to buy it. Of course I had signed with the NYTimes so I went along the lines of the exclusivity agreement.

Should I have reacted differently?

What do you do in this kind of situation when time is precious? Who do you call? Can you impose your price and non exclusivity on the NYTimes and others?

People told me I could have made an awful lot of money with this and it’s not that I regret but I’d like to know what the reality is.

Thanks,

[Redacted]

I emailed David Burnett to gather his thoughts on the situation and here’s what he had to say:

There was certainly a time when New York, with its many daily papers, and many more magazines, would have offered the enterprising photographer a reasonable sum for their photographs. As competition narrowed, so did the chances of having your picture bid up by interested parties, and reflecting a greater value for the picture.

There certainly is a chance that some major (i.e. catastrophic) event could fetch something extraordinary but these days the big money seems to be paid for celebrity coverage far more than what was once considered “news.” That said, it’s generally not a good idea to simply make a deal with one publication, as you thereby immediately close off other opportunities. The excitement and panache of that “page one on the Times” picture wears off quickly, if you have sacrificed future earning power of the photo for an exclusive deal as you mentioned. In a city like New York you should expect to be paid more for the exclusivity, and if that additional money isn’t forthcoming, there is nothing to be gained by giving up those rights.

The one exception to that would be an iron-clad deal which enabled you to let the first company syndicate the work on your behalf, and that your share of secondary sales would be at minimum, 50% of the gross of each sale (not the “net.”) Truthfully, if you are not experienced in these matters you’re better off making a deal with–-my real first recommendation–-an agency which would syndicate the work. There are fewer agencies than ever, and the overall atmosphere is far less fulsome that it once was for ‘scoops’ but for the right picture at the right time, money will come in. And you need someone to guide you, or take over that work. Again, 50% or so from the gross would be reasonable. Both sides, the agency and the photographer are in the deal together at 50-50 and if there is money to be made both will have the incentive to push the work. Once other outlets see something published in a major publication (i.e. the NY Times) there would naturally be a rush to get that image for themselves.

I have been a founder/partner for 34 years with Contact Press Images, and we often take special cases like this-–scoops which essentially come in off the street. The advantage to an agency (Contact, Polaris, Redux… etc.) is that their main business is in syndicating material, and you would do better than merely getting a small check and having your material tied up. TO be sure, most pictures do not fall into the category of ‘scoop’ but when you find one, do not just give it away.

Magnum’s Turnaround Business Plan

ArtInfo.com has a little more depth on the sale of the Magnum print archive worth an estimated $100 million to Michael Dell’s MSD Capital. A couple bits from Magnum’s managing director Mark Lubell reveal that he “developed a three-year ‘turnaround business plan’ to move the co-op away from the revenue streams it had traditionally relied on. And that, “Magnum’s 51 members and 13 estates voted for the plan unanimously.” (story here)

Although he declined to go in to detail about how the company plans to use the proceeds from the sale of its archive, Lubell says that some money will go toward a Web initiative that will give photographers a platform to distribute content. Funds will also be devoted to helping photographers reach field destinations for stories and see them through long-term — the kind of journalism that was once Magnum’s bread and butter. For instance, photographers will be sent to Haiti over the next 12 to 18 months to document the nation’s effort to rebuild. After the initial tragedy subsides, “everyone leaves,” Lubell says, and because the aftermath isn’t headline news, coverage of continuing crises typically aren’t “funded in traditional media circles.”

I’d heard rumors in the past that the members fully understood that if Magnum were to have a future they would have to forge it without the help of magazines and newspapers. It looks like we’re about to watch that plan unfold.

It’s interesting to contemplate how in-depth coverage came to be packaged with junk and now that people can get their junk without their depth the numbers don’t seem to support that kind of thing anymore. I like the idea that when people say stories need to be shorter Magnum could do the opposite and make them longer than ever before. That’s the kind of thinking that will lead to a solution at some point. Some of my favorite moments working at a magazine have been getting shoots back from photojournalists. No one can tell a story, capture defining moment, thrive under duress and deliver the goods like they do. I can’t imagine a world without them.

magnumfrontpage

What Is England?

The first installment to the excellent What Is England? project curated by Stuart Pilkington is up (here). The project is the sister of the 50 states project (here) both are intended to paint a picture of a country and its states through photography. Both are excellent sources for finding photographers to hire and represent the kinds of things the internet is awesome for.

WhatIsEngland

they don’t even know what they want, and they’re not even willing to pay for it

People want everything now, they wanted it two days ago, and they don’t even know what they want, and they’re not even willing to pay for it, that’s what’s happening more often than not!

So I came to the conclusion, middle of last year, I said, “you know what, I’m done chasing, I’m done panicking, I’m moving to a place that’s right for me and my community, for people that understand my work, and I want to inspire people to get out and freakin go see what’s out there.”

Danny Zapalac, via Too Much Chocolate.

Vincent Laforet Goes Beyond The Still

I was talking with Vincent Laforet about the contest he’s working on with Vimeo and Canon called “Beyond The Still” (here) and I decided to take the opportunity to interview him about his own transition from newspaper photographer to Hollywood commercial director. I was as big a skeptic as any when Vincent released “Reverie,” the first short photographed with a 5D that read more like a cologne commercial, but the list of elite DP’s who’ve volunteered to judge this contest has me believing people are really embracing the new technology and running with it. I give it up to Vincent for being on the tip of the spear with where this is headed and bringing his professionalism and sense of community with him.

APE: How long ago did you move to LA?

I moved in June of last year. With my wife newborn daughter and 5 year old son.

APE: Are you a filmmaker now?

I would call myself a commercial director slash photographer slash DP.

APE: How much photography are you doing now?

I’d say 30% at most, all commercial. I’ve had 2 editorial assignments in the last 16 months. Michael Jackson’s funeral and Obama’s Inauguration.

APE: Tell me about reinventing yourself. You were a big editorial photographer, you shot the summer Olympics in China and worked for the NY Times. You got started as a newspaper photographer right?

Sure, I got my start when I was 15 working for photo agencies such as Gamma and Sigma in France then the US. Then wire services in the US and then I worked for the NY Times for 6 years. So, yes I was an editorial guy through and through until roughly 4 years ago when I decided to jump into commercial photography.

Then about a year and a half ago the Canon 5D MKII came out and I was able to get my hands on it. That was probably the most important career-changing self funded shoot that I will likely ever do.

APE: You basically chucked everything and live in Hollywood now?

Well, I live in Manhattan Beach which is a bit of a different spot than Hollywood is, and I’m not looking to become a feature film director, but I am working as a commercial director.

APE: Way back when was this a part of your career path? Was this a goal of yours?

Film was always a part of my past. My father was a set photographer and my biological father was a director who filmed Emmanuel.

APE: Ok, so it’s in your blood.

I guess you could say that it’s always been in my blood. I could have gone to film school or journalism school – I got into Tisch at NYU and USC but for some reason I chose journalism and chose to pursue a degree in print journalism at the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University.

APE: Because, you’re like all kids and you do the opposite of your parents.

I wanted to tell true stories and discover the world for real, that’s what the draw was and that’s why I fell into photojournalism. I saw the way people were treated in the commercial/film and that was a bit of a turnoff back then.

APE: Right, you wanted to find your own identity and voice. Do you have formal training as Cinematographer, Director or Producer?

I didn’t go to school for it but I’ve been managing my business and setting up shoots since I was 15 years old. I paid my way through college and have always been focused on that kind of minutia. The hardest part about going into filmmaking for me was learning the difference between cinema lighting versus photography lighting or continuous light versus strobes – many of the principles are the same – but the equipment is very different. The 4 years of commercial photography experience and the almost 20 years of editorial photography helped better prepare me for the production issues and taught me how to frame an image and work on larger productions. Had I jumped straight from editorial into film I probably would have fallen flat on my face.

APE: I ask because I think a lot of people in the news photography business may be looking to reinvent themselves and you’ve done it. You told me you’re as busy as you’ve ever been.

I’ve never been this busy – and frankly I hate saying that publicly because I think it sounds obnoxious – especially given that the economy is still recovering. That being said it’s true, I think it’s a combination of the economy starting to revive and I think there are fewer photographers out there now who’ve made it through the last year and a half. Also, being, as you said, “on the tip of the spear of this technology” likely plays a big factor as well. Many of jobs coming in are looking to maximize the benefits of this new technology. Clients are looking for new ways to pull off a high quality end product – with budgets that have of course been impacted by the economic change we just went through. The new technology is allowing us to bridge that gap.

APE: Yeah, they’re all going “ok, who can we hire to shoot the DSLR video for us?”

It’s been a very interesting few years – Shane Hurlbut (DP for Terminator Salvation), Rodney Charters (DP for 24), Phillip Bloom (Director/DP in the UK) and I have fallen to the forefront of being the pioneers for the new technology. I think we were simply the early adopters who really put a lot of time and energy into making HDDSLR filmmaking work – we’re all put a lot of time into making this new breed of cameras come close to performing the same things that one would expect from a motion picture camera.

APE: What’s the terminology someone would use if they’re looking to hire an expert with the new technology? “We need…”

They would likely say that they need someone who’s an expert in the new hybrid Canon cameras – or HDDSLRs. Or they simply refer to he Canon 5D MKII, 1D MKIV, or 7D cameras directly.

APE: And why do they need an expert in the first place?

Because these cameras are not built to do what they want them to do. I’ve spent a year and a half now with some of the top camera operators and manufacturers in Hollywood building a system around this camera that basically allows it to do what you would do with a professional cinema camera.

APE: You’ve basically turned it into a regular movie camera. And what’s the advantage of using this over a movie camera? Cost?

Compared to RED camera for example, an HDSLR production can come in at half to a third of the price. Because of the weight of the camera, it’s sensitivity to light, and the support systems– you don’t need as large of a crew and it’s also significantly faster to set up and take down (again related to weight and size). And, it can look better in certain instances. These cameras shoot on a full frame sensor and they are astonishing in low light. Nothing comes close to it in low light. Another key factor is that these cameras can better take advantage of available light like few other cameras can – this means that you don’t necessarily have to bring in cube trucks full of lighting equipment in some instances – and obviously lighting is not only a big line item in any budget – it also contributes to more than a 1/3 of production day in terms of pre-lighting etc. That being said – and this is important: there is no substitute for good lighting! These HDSLRS just allow you to get away with a LOT more.

APE: Yeah, so you’re basically nocturnal now?

(laughs) You don’t want to take these cameras out to shoot bright sunny days, that’s where the Red camera will destroy the HDSLRs. But, indoors, offices, in difficult lighting the camera excels. So much so I have a 26 year steady cam operator/DP/Director, who has shot the same location we shot with this camera on “Nocturne” with this camera as he did with a high end Hollywood productions and it looks better – it looks better because it’s real. He was literally shocked when he saw the results. With no lighting. To reiterate – if the natural light is great – you can get away with murder. If the light is bad, it’s bad period. What these cameras allow you to do is to shoot in much lower levels of light – light that you once thought was impossible to shoot in. It does not turn bad light into good light.

APE: So, the technicians are probably really buzzing about the camera and word is spreading like wildfire through the industry?

This camera is not the the be all end all of cameras. There are some clear problems with it. But, besides the problems people are still gravitating to it. I can’t tell you how many commercials I see on TV that have been shot at least partly with a 5D.

APE: Let’s talk about this contest you’re doing. The first round of winners was announced on Saturday. You’ve got an incredible group of judges. How did you get DP from Titanic and the Producer of Star Wars to be a judge in the contest?

They’re all people I’ve met in the last year and a half.

APE: That’s got to be a huge turn-on to entering the contest. So, what’s the idea behind doing the contest in 7 segments?

I didn’t want to do just another film contest. There are so many of them. I wanted to try and not only leverage the new technology but also the power of social media and creative media over the web. Having people participate across the country in creating a film that has 7 chapters with interconnecting images. Who knows where it’s going. I have no idea what the final film will be like.

APE: Yeah, that’s going to be cool. Note: Anyone who’s interested in entering there’s 6 more chapters you can enter. See and vote on 5 finalists for chapter 1 (here).

APE: How does the future look for still photographers shooting the hybrid cameras?

I think we’re all going to have a very interesting next few years as still photographers. I think there’s tremendous potential for people out there who have an open mind. Not everyone needs to be a born-filmmaker. I’m not worried about photographers making transitions into video, or their unique version of how stills can transform into video. The only thing that worries me is that publications have a lot to figure out. The time it takes to pre-produce, shoot, and edit video is easily 2 to 4 times more time consuming as a still photography shoot. The gear involved is also significantly more expensive as well. And right now I don’t know that publications are ready to help defray any of those costs. In fact it seems that they want photographers to shoot both stills and video, for the same price. And, that’s not going to be sustainable for anyone, for more than the first assignment.

Once the photographer and even the editor, sees how much work is involved, I hope they will find a way to re-adjust. This clearly won’t be easy given the economy of print… but it’s something that needs to be discussed thoroughly. While you can’t expect photographers (or want them to) produce Hollywood quality pieces, you can’t forget that the audience is used to seeing Hollywood quality work on their television, so we need to make sure that we produce something that is either unique enough or at least good enough to hold their attention. One thing that will never change: people will always gravitate towards original and/or quality content.

Our Industry Talks A Lot About Ideas.

But at the same time, we have allowed the emphasis, the value, and the fundamental business model of our industry today, to shift away from ideas and to focus predominantly on execution.

A lot of lip service is paid to the value of ideas, but agencies are often primarily regarded as executioners and, in that regard, purely as suppliers. In the future, suppliers will be valued less and less and squeezed more and more. It is idea generators who will be most valued – because “ideaspeople” create the greatest value, across every industry sector, not just our own.

via scott goodson’s writings .

Ethan Hill On Photographing Roger Ebert

A reader asked if I would query photographer Ethan Hill about his recent shoot of Roger Ebert for Esquire. You can read the story on the Esquire website (here) and Roger’s reaction on his blog (here). I asked Ethan to describe the assignment, preparation and shoot:

It was a lucky set of circumstances that I was able to do this shoot at all. I had a slow year last year like just about everyone did and had embarked on what was for me a pretty aggressive promo campaign to try to generate some new work. I think it was the right combination of timing and subject matter of the images on the mailer that I was able to do this shoot.

The difference between the portrait of Roger and most of the other editorial stories I get to work on was the obvious level of sensitivity that was required to how Roger and his wife would feel about having cameras in their home. I had a long conversation with my editor about what Esquire was looking for in getting out of the portrait and also a long conversation with the writer. Chris [writer] had spent two days with Roger and was able to describe the layout of the house, what the rooms looked like that Roger spends most of his time in, what some of his daily work routine’s are….descriptions of things that would be possible picture ideas. It was obvious to me that Chris had a great amount of admiration and love for Roger, and had come away from meeting him a changed man himself. The best stories you get to work on do that to you. What was different about this shoot was that I got to have such an in depth conversation with the writer prior to the shoot, and the feeling of care and protection that he has for Roger, the desire that the shoot with a photographer he’s never worked with before go smoothly was palpable. I personally find that level of admiration for ones subjects infectious. I already loved Roger….I’d watched his program with Gene Siskel on TV when I was a kid….but both Chris’ and Michael’s [my editor] enthusiasm just made me want to do this better than usual.

As far as just the nuts and bolts go…a date was set with the editor. After having the conversation with Chris I had a list of specific things to look at [for example, the library, the office, the living room, etc.] when I arrived at the house. I had a brief conversation with Roger’s wife on the phone about a week before the shoot was going to happen just to address any concerns that she might have. The shoot itself was done like any other shoot I’d do. I’ll look around and put a list together that I approve with the person I’m photographing. I find the list a helpful thing to do because it serves as a map for the day everyone involved knows EXACTLY how the shoot will go. I set up a shot with my assistant standing in place, and then I’ll go and get the person who is the subject of the piece to step in front of the camera. I’m slow on the set up but fast when I actually shoot, so I find it helpful on a day where there are many set ups [I think we did 5 with Roger] to try to leave people be as much as possible so that they can get their own work done while I set up the next shot. It allows you to stay and shoot longer and not have your subjects get irritated with you.

The pictures are only as good as the elusive dance of a subjects willingness to give something intimate and meaningful of themselves, and a photographers ability to recognize that at that very moment a gift is being given to them. Roger is undoubtedly a very generous person. It’s strange to me to think about being in Chicago in December, and drinking coffee with Roger and his wife, and the snow that had started early that morning that would make us miss the flight back home that we were meant to be on that same nite. This one in particular just felt like a personal shoot, something I was working on in collaboration with Roger, Chris, and Michael. Then the story runs and it takes on a life of it’s own….Rogers fans get to hear from him again and people have opinions and it becomes much bigger than that quiet snowy afternoon. I just feel really lucky that I got to be a part of this.

Ebert-hill