Anyone a professional photographer?

[Miss Kelly]

I want to be! I need to get a portfolio together. I really have not done anything in a professional setting. I am more a nature photographer but want to go to portraits.

I've been thinking about putting a portfolio together too. I guess it would be appropriate to have both an online and print portfolio?

 

[blackjackdelta]

I have done film for a zillion years and went to Brook's back in the 60's and I am just now going to digital. The digital world is different than the film world, but there still are basic concepts that need to be followed. Once I get my new equipment I still am to have to practice,practice,practice to get every piece of the digital craft correct. I think sometimes people want everything perfect with out taking the time do perfect what you want to do. A degree and the classes are all nice, it is the experience that makes the difference. AND you need to have fun with it, otherwise why waste your time.

Jack

 

[minniemoms]

Thought I would jump in here, I just read the post. I am a mother of 6, close to my 50's, and have taken pictures of my children for years. I agree with previous posts, that you should take classes, however, as someone else pointed out, you can take classes forever as a good friend of mine has, years & Years, and still doesn't have an eye for it. 7 years ago I started reading books on portraits, and said I can do that. Well, 7 years later I belong to PPA, and WPPI, I have gone to workshops yearly. I LOVE to do that, you learn so much about what you want to specialize in. I do weddings, about 15 a year, Many high school seniors. I DO NOT advertise, and I am as busy as I can be. Which every year gets busier and busier. I am now to the point where I do almost all total strangers, all word of mouth. I am so busy now, that it is very hard to keep up. I think the best thing to do is practice practice practice. But it is funny the more I learn, the more I realize I still have so much to learn. I am always learning, you can and should never stop. I shot with a Hasselblad for years, and now am strictly digital. I love what I do. I love working with people, and I love brides, they are so much fun. And I beg to differ with who said you can't shoot weddings with available light. Yes you can, you just have to know how. MOst of my ceremony weddings won't allow flashes during the ceremony. YOu have to adjust for it. I also shoot alot of sports, basketball, football, wrestling, lots of practice on all my kids. But I am finally to the spot where I am making money, and what is even better, I am able to keep buying new camera's and lenses when better ones come out, and still pay all my bills and pocket some too. Weddings are very stressful. I know lots of people who can NOT handle it. YOu blow it, and you ruin the whole day. You can NOT get it back. But good luck with your career choice. I am a wife and mom first, and a photographer second. And I love it..

 

[ducklite]

There's a huge difference between shooting weddings with available light and shooting rock bands with available light.

Weddings--you bring a tripod and your subjects are fairly stationary, and the light doesn't change in source or lumens. I agree, you don't "need" a flash, but proper use of one (where allowed) will greatly enhance your photo's.

Rock bands--no tripod, subjects run, jump, and change direction like a barrel of puppies (and so does the lighting for that matter), and at the same time you're dodging crowd surfers coming over barricade feet first at your head.

I'm not saying doing weddings is bad. All the more power to you if you enjoy it. But you can not compare shooting a rock band to shooting a wedding. They are like comparing shooting a sloth and a jaguar on the move--right towards your face.

Anne

 

[Muushka]

I just had to join in.....

I have loved photography forever, and am thinking of getting into "petography", people's pets. So, whatcha think, any future in shooting pets (figuratively of course )? I don't need to make a lot of money at it, and I would love to donate a portion to SPCA or other shelters in our area. Just tossing the idea around....

 

[ducklite]

I just had to join in.....

I have loved photography forever, and am thinking of getting into "petography", people's pets. So, whatcha think, any future in shooting pets (figuratively of course )? I don't need to make a lot of money at it, and I would love to donate a portion to SPCA or other shelters in our area. Just tossing the idea around....

I know three professional pet photographers. One is knowledgeable about her camera, but has no eye for composition, and only takes posed shots. One has a good eye for composition and expertise with her camera in both posed and candid shots. The last can shoot posed and has great photoshop skills, which she uses on most of her photo's.

I've had the first two shoot my animals in the part. The one I did once, never again, it simply wasn't worth the cost--I could have done better work myself. The other actually came to me and asked if she could use my pets as subjects for some magazine and calendar work she was doing. In turn, she made a donation to the animal shelter of my choice.

So yes, there's money to be made at it.

Anne

 

[PhotobearSam]

I'm not saying doing weddings is bad. All the more power to you if you enjoy it. But you can not compare shooting a rock band to shooting a wedding. They are like comparing shooting a sloth and a jaguar on the move--right towards your face.

I don't think this is a fair statement...I think both require different skills, not that one is better than the other. I shot a lot of wedding (most) with available light only until the reception and not once did I ever use a tripod and my assistant only used a tripod in the back of the church for wide shots.

What I think you forget that in shooting weddings, you have a ton of things on your mind, the shot list, the wedding party names, dodging the videographer's shot and his lighting, 100's of poses, losing the light, ruining the Bride's day if she is not happy with the photos, getting DRUNK uncle Buck to stand straight and stop talking, pinning on flowers on the men, trying to be in the shadows but still be in the moment, catching the once in a lifetime moments that only come once like the KISS, how long your day is (mine were shoots of 12 to 15 hrs) and so on and so on...but on the other hand, I don't think I could stand in a Mosh pit for more than 10 seconds without earplugs and take photos.
It's like comparing a sprint to a marathon, both have their merits.

I think it takes a lot of skill to do what you do...I know it does. I shot a private concert for Duran Duran a few years ago with a press pass and I have covered a LOT of hockey games and I know about moving targets with only available light. Did I find any of these assignments hard...Sure, all of them...Are any harder than others?...Sure some weddings were hard, some hockey games were too...Duran Duran was really easy because I was a huge fan. Would I have thought the same thing if it were Green Day...Maybe not.

What I am saying is I will never assume that any photographer out there has an easy job. I once worked as an assistant for a professional FOOD photographer and I thought it was harder than anything else i have ever done but he swore up and down that he could never do a wedding and admired me for it. I thought it would be easy because FOOD DOES NOT MOVE but boy was I wrong...

I think each type of Photography has it's tough points and a wedding photographer has a difficult job mentally as well. I am sure that if you like what you do you would not find it hard because you love it.

I don't know if I could do Pet photography...I don't even have many great shots of my cats but I am sure that it must be a hard job...Just like I don't do children often as I find 2 hours of Children photos are harder on me than a whole wedding...LOL

Muushka, I think there may be some $$$ to Pet Photography as I know lots of people who treat their pets better than their children...LOL

As for others thinking of going pro, the best thing you can do to see if you have it, is to get some of your photographs together and bring it to a photography instructor or a pro in the field you want to go into and let them take a look and give you some constructive critisism. It's a good start. Then you can figure out if it is for you. You might even land a job as an assistant if they think you are good.

 

[ducklite]

I don't think this is a fair statement...I think both require different skills, not that one is better than the other. I shot a lot of wedding (most) with available light only until the reception and not once did I ever use a tripod and my assistant only used a tripod in the back of the church for wide shots.

What I think you forget that in shooting weddings, you have a ton of things on your mind, the shot list, the wedding party names, dodging the videographer's shot and his lighting, 100's of poses, losing the light, ruining the Bride's day if she is not happy with the photos, getting DRUNK uncle Buck to stand straight and stop talking, pinning on flowers on the men, trying to be in the shadows but still be in the moment, catching the once in a lifetime moments that only come once like the KISS, how long your day is (mine were shoots of 12 to 15 hrs) and so on and so on...but on the other hand, I don't think I could stand in a Mosh pit for more than 10 seconds without earplugs and take photos.

I think it takes a lot of skill to do what you do...I know it does. I shot a private concert for Duran Duran a few years ago with a press pass and I have covered a LOT of hockey games and I know about moving targets with only available light. Did I find any of these assignments hard...Sure, all of them...Are any harder than others?...Sure some weddings were hard, some hockey games were too...Duran Duran was really easy because I was a huge fan. Would I have thought the same thing if it were Green Day...Maybe not.

What I am saying is I will never assume that any photographer out there has an easy job. I once worked as an assistant for a professional FOOD photographer and I thought it was harder than anything else i have ever done but he swore up and down that he could never do a wedding and admired me for it. I thought it would be easy because FOOD DOES NOT MOVE but boy was I wrong...

I think each type of Photography has it's tough points and a wedding photographer has a difficult job mentally as well. I am sure that if you like what you do you would not find it hard because you love it.

I don't know if I could do Pet photography...I don't even have many great shots of my cats but I am sure that it must be a hard job...Just like I don't do children often as I find 2 hours of Children photos are harder on me than a whole wedding...LOL

Muushka, I think there may be some $$$ to Pet Photography as I know lots of people who treat their pets better than their children...LOL

As for others thinking of going pro, the best thing you can do to see if you have it, is to get some of your photographs together and bring it to a photography instructor or a pro in the field you want to go into and let them take a look and give you some constructive critisism. It's a good start. Then you can figure out if it is for you. You might even land a job as an assistant if they think you are good.

My comments were more to address the issue of available light. I still say it's easier to shoot a wedding with available light because your subjects are not moving, and the light is not changing. I think you will more than agree on that.

Yes, some of my concerts are only 2-3 hours--although because you only get the first three songs, there's a lot of hurry up and wait--talk about not having a second chance--you get 6-10 minutes to get what you need, and often you'll have some artsy-fartsy LD who likes to leave the strobe on for one of the songs and a freak of a singer who likes to perform the first song in the dark. So two songs are useless. And then you've got the LD's who bath the entire stage in red wide floods. At least with weddings you've got a decent source of incandescent or natural light, you can set your white balance, and you don't need to worry about the scene going dark just as you press the shutter. And I don't always get to pick and choose the shows I cover--hence I got to shoot two *lovely* bands last month, "Scum of the Earth" and "Bloodsimple". I got out of Taste of Chaos tour by conveniently being out of town that weekend.

Some shows are all day events. I've got one coming up April 29 & 30. As of right now I think there are 11 bands announced for each day. It will be 14 hour days--from 10 am until midnight, not counting travel time, in the heat, no a/c, no catered meal, nothing. You just suck it up in the dirt. I make mud in the shower when I get home from one of those.

I'm sure there are trying points to any type of photography. But to tell me that shooting a wedding using available light is harder than shooting a concert using available light, no way, I"m just not buying it. There are no variables there.

And don't begin to talk to me about drunks and fist fights unless you'd like me to begin posting my photo collection of vomit. (Yes, I've actually caught a few chuckers mid spew...sorry to gross you all out.)

I guess I'm just a little sensitive because I'm being told I'm not a pro because I don't have a formal education. Well, being trained "on the job" by two guys who shoot for the top international music magazines might not be "formal" training, but it's better than anything ANY college or photography school could EVER DREAM of teaching me. And as I've said, I have gotten PAID for my work. My work (usually 8-12 photo's) is published every single month in a music magazine that I'm on staff for. I also have been published in other publications on a free-lance basis. I think I've earned the RIGHT to call myself a pro, and not be degraded by my peers for lack of a useless (to me) peice of paper.

Anne

 

[PhotobearSam]

I am sure that there are exceptions as you seem to be. I know that your photography skills sound good and you are making money at it. You also seem like you have a good grasp at the basics because I am sure you worked hard at getting where you are.

I am not saying you are not a pro...I admitted to my mistake a while back.

I know you are a pro...sorry again if I offended you. I can't seem to make my point. I KNOW YOU ARE A PRO...

I know that you are the exception of someone going for it and making it...Good work. You seem to be very successful at it...

What I don't get is that you are making assumptions that other work is easier. As I said, I had made that mistake with the FOOD photography and I was wrong. I also think that Architechtural photography would be very hard. As for available light...I am sure it is very hard to shoot a concert...As I said before, I have done it but it's not for me.

But to me, you are sounding like my PIECE of Paper is useless...Maybe I am being sensitive also...This is what I hate about typing an answer rather than talking to a person. You would have know I was sorry many posts ago. I respect your line of work and as I said, I don't think one type of photography is harder than the next, just different.

 

[Muushka]

Thanks for the feedback Ann and PBSam, very helpful .

Now, can't we all just ! You guys are all great .

 

[minniemoms]

Different strokes for different folks. I hope that Ducklite didn't think I was saying that her work was easy, NOT at all. I know how hard that is. My DD has gone to a few concerts, just using her p/s and she has taken awesome pictures with it. I don't see how, they aren't fast enough, but she loves doing that type of photography. She hates posing people at weddings. She will help me doing the photojournalistic pics, but she hates to be the upfront person handling it all. But I thank photobear Sam, for defending me. I felt like I was sorry I even posted here, I just thought maybe I could be an inspiration to someone, who could start a very good career later in life. If someone had told me at 30, that when I was in my late 40's I would be a highly sucessful wedding photographer, I wouldn't have believed it. But I think that is what makes us all so special, is we aren't all locked into the same thing. I know I wouldn't want to do loud concerts,I think it is wonderful that you do. I wouldn't want to do pets either. I love doing sports photography too. Talk about having to be fast. Trying to get a good shot of a basketball player running full force down the court, and keeping on him, and in focus, and getting the shot?? It is very difficult. But I think it is a challenge to try and master the technique. I shoot sports for fun. Football is tricky too. Lighting on football fields at night, running fast and trying to catch that special play. But my DH does the sports he can read the plays better than I can, since he used to play them. I do the people. I guess I am a people person. So good luck to all on this board. Just don't give up the dreams, I continue to amaze myself at all I am accomplishing at near 50, I hope to be doing this for a least another 15 years. I hope I haven't upset you ducklite, it was never my intention. Good luck with your concerts.
Judy

 

[Miss Kelly]

I just wanted to Thank you all again for the wonderful advice. I have really appreciated it. (I hope I didn't start a debate? )

 

[Kelly Grannell]

There's a huge difference between shooting weddings with available light and shooting rock bands with available light.

Weddings--you bring a tripod and your subjects are fairly stationary, and the light doesn't change in source or lumens. I agree, you don't "need" a flash, but proper use of one (where allowed) will greatly enhance your photo's.

Rock bands--no tripod, subjects run, jump, and change direction like a barrel of puppies (and so does the lighting for that matter), and at the same time you're dodging crowd surfers coming over barricade feet first at your head.

I'm not saying doing weddings is bad. All the more power to you if you enjoy it. But you can not compare shooting a rock band to shooting a wedding. They are like comparing shooting a sloth and a jaguar on the move--right towards your face.

Anne

Sorry Ducklite, from all the wedding pics I took, there is not a single moment (other than the outdoor family group shots) that requires tripod. The "first dance" and all other dances are actually a pain in the you know where because the DJ usually think it's cool too keep changing the lighting on the couples dancing.

Also, although I haven't taken anywhere as many live-band shots in my careers, from about a dozen gigs I had, I was always invited for their rehearsals so I know which angle/timing/lighting I have to 'anticipate', and there is always enough room (about 4 to 5 feet from the surrounding edge of the stage) for me to run around. Of course our type of concerts may be different. The concerts includes Vanessa Mae, Bond, Chrisye, Casiopea and Rod Stewart where the audience are not allowed to be anywhere near the stage. I'm just surprised that the people who hired you didn't give you the access of their rehearsals and made you mixed in with the crowds. That's dangerous and I salute you for that.

Regardless, you are right, taking concert pictures are much more exciting, but days (sometimes weeks) of preparations just for one evening of concert drives me nuts (and that's why in the end I concentrate more on weddings)

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Dave Koz and Patti Austin by Kelly Grannell

 

[DebºoºS]

................ It's NOT just about knowing how to set the camera to get the photo's you want. It's also having the intuitin to capture the perfect moment, and that's something that no school can teach......[/QUOTE}

I was a pro photog in my pre-child years. The late nights and irratic schedule took a pass to motherhood. My specialty was celeb non studio, houses in/out for catalogues and newspaper. I was introduced to it all by a very good celeb friend who liked my shots. They would call and tell me the location. Might be a club, concert, party whatever. They would review the shots and select which ones would be planted & which to keep. Did one wedding and hated it. Never again. I had the luxury of not needing the $$ and could pick and chose. I always suggest to newbies not to quit their day job.

 

[DebºoºS]

I just wanted to Thank you all again for the wonderful advice. I have really appreciated it. (I hope I didn't start a debate? )

That's what's so great about the DISers here. They can debate film vs digital, camera brands, action vs still, lighting, f-stops, editing whatever else has been debated here. We all learn from each others opinions. Creative people by nature have strong feelings.
I started out using Nikons 35mm no AF Moved to digital Nikons (except one Sony Mavica) but still go back to film. I like taking nature shots now no more pics of houses from helicopters or staying up late because some celeb is having a party. I go out in my garden and play. The only thing moving is the wind. DSs are taking up the cameras now. They each have manual 35mm & digitals.
No one should back off on their opinions (not that anyone has here) because in the end we all love the same thing.
Making great shots and helping other DISers make great shots!
Sounds like a DIS love fest
Grab your camera

 

[ducklite]

Also, although I haven't taken anywhere as many live-band shots in my careers, from about a dozen gigs I had, I was always invited for their rehearsals so I know which angle/timing/lighting I have to 'anticipate', and there is always enough room (about 4 to 5 feet from the surrounding edge of the stage) for me to run around. Of course our type of concerts may be different. The concerts includes Vanessa Mae, Bond, Chrisye, Casiopea and Rod Stewart where the audience are not allowed to be anywhere near the stage. I'm just surprised that the people who hired you didn't give you the access of their rehearsals and made you mixed in with the crowds. That's dangerous and I salute you for that.

Most of what I photograph is hard rock and heavy metal. There is "usually" a photopit, the area between the stage and the barricade that the security guys stand in. But crowd surfers surf right over that barricade. Most of the time the security guys are cool and trying to watch your back, but when there's 14 bodies in the air and eight security guys, you have to have eyes in the back of your head as well. Except at House of Blues, I have to leave the photopit between bands, which means fighting my way through the crowd after the first three songs of the set to get to a safe place in the back of the room. These guys don't do "rehearsals", they do "sound check" which doesn't entail running lights--they just have the house lights on. The support acts are often "throw and go."

For those who would like a visual:

This is what I had to fight my way through from the barricade area in front of the stage back to where I took this photo from. And you can see the bodies in the air--I have to always be on the lookout for feet coming at my head while I'm shooting. What looks to be an empty spot in the far left of the crowd is actually a mosh pit of about 200 people.

Regardless, you are right, taking concert pictures are much more exciting, but days (sometimes weeks) of preparations just for one evening of concert drives me nuts (and that's why in the end I concentrate more on weddings)

There is a lot of prep time for some shows, that's for sure. I can spend as much time dealing with getting credentials as a wedding photographer can spend getting lists and talking to brides.

Last night I shot The Veronica's and October Fall at a little dive downtown. No photopit, a stage the size of a postage stamp, and 200 ear splitting 14 years olds screaming. Better than a mosh pit though, at least ear plugs drown most of it out LOL! I had to get a little creative, and found a spot in the balcony, played around a bit with the speedlight, and did what I could. But with 80 kidlets with digital P&S's using flash that was going off constantly, I still ended up with more than a few totally washed out shots.

Oh, and want to hear about the rat that chased me down the sidewalk while I was walking to the club from the parking deck? I'll need years of therapy to get over that one...

Anne

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Oh, and want to hear about the rat that chased me down the sidewalk while I was walking to the club from the parking deck? I'll need years of therapy to get over that one...

Anne

Mickey Mouse stalking you? I want to hear about THAT!

 

[outstandinfarmer]

I dated one for 2 1/2 years. I learned a lot from him and I think I take pretty good pictures now. I don't really enjoy it though. I miss him taking all of the pictures.

 

[pyrxtc]

Well, I don't know that I would call myself a professional photographer just yet but I am definately an Amateur working my way up. I do get small amount (for now) for what I do and am working on getting more clients. I have done some yearbook portraits and family photo's. I love doing children's portraits. I work with posing but also do a lot of fun stuff. I do only "on location" shoots as I do not have a studio. here are a few examples of my work.

This first one was a few years ago