Photographers - getting value from paid shoots

Tim Forest said

wow, noisy room

to keep it clean can we make a few distinctions?

A photographer = someone who makes his/her living taking photographs

A model = someone who makes his/her living being photographed

you can, if you want to make it spicy, define someone who makes a good living, which, for the sake of argument I'll peg at an MP's salary of £ 91,000. Hands up all the REAL photographers in the room

Anyone else? well that's a grey area isn't it. Are you a plumber with a camera? A wannabe living off a family fund, generous partner, comfortable job with plenty of spare time? Here it gets interesting. And as this thread proves, the debate gets furious because the stakes are so low (to paraphrase Henry Kissinger). Is the only tide mark pride and vanity? Does the blinding light of commerce and fickle attention arouse some deeper and more sinister emotion? Is your work valid because you got paid a few quid? Trust me, real photographers (see above) are laughing at you.

PP is an entertainment, a diversion, like readers wives or the Sunday Sport. No one is making a reputation here, if anything, you're throwing a hand grenade into your market value (why do so many togs conceal their identities?) look around you, tits and bums, there's not much to be proud of. The huge mass of PP photographers are living vicariously off the skills and talents of a few dozen extraordinarily accomplished photographers with incredible eyes, who grace this mostly tawdry mess with something special. I know, I'm only here to marvel at the pre-during-and post production professionalism of a bunch of individuals who just floor me with their talent and generosity. These guys, hell, I'd do TFP to be in a room with some of them. Inspiration pure and simple (you know who you are guys)

 I'm a snapper,  I don't want to be paid. I don't care. That's not interesting to me at all. And it shouldn't be to you either, if what you want to do is make better photographs (which usually happens with better, paid for, models) then make better photographs and share them, but FFS don't get petty, it makes you look small. If you've got a great shot 50% of that is the talent in front of your camera, (or in my case 90% is the talent in front of my camera, I've never got a clue, it's always the model that saves it). So pay him/her and feel blessed. 

Very few of us get to turn our passion for cars/fishing/darts into TV stardom and huge cash prizes, and very few of us are prepared to take the risk and make the commitment to do it.

Soooo don't bitch about TFP, just pay the model, say thank you, be gracious, feel pleased with the FPI if you have the chops and you get one, (I have a few, and heavens knows why, my model photography is shite) so move on, keep making snaps, you never know, if it makes you happy you might even win a few more plumbing jobs, 'cause people like to be around happy people.

In the immortal zen words of Purple port ""Take a look and give it some love."

PP is indeed an entertainment but I don't see the comparison with Readers' Wives (does that still exist?) or The Sunday Sport. I do look around and there is a great deal to be proud of.

Unfocussed Mike said

Unfocussed Mike said

Tim Forest said

wow, noisy room

to keep it clean can we make a few distinctions?

A photographer = someone who makes his/her living taking photographs

A model = someone who makes his/her living being photographed

No.

Extend this out: are you saying that people aren't gardeners unless they do it for a living, artists unless they get paid?

Aren't really in a band unless they have quit their day job

Aren't guitarists unless it's their living

Aren't teachers unless it's their salary

etc.

It's nonsensical.

no, literally, it's what it is.

you work in a camera shop, you're in retail.

you lay bricks, you're a bricklayer

you do surgery, you're a surgeon

that's not nonsense it's literally what it is. Why is that hard to understand?

priceb61 said

Tim Forest said

wow, noisy room

to keep it clean can we make a few distinctions?

A photographer = someone who makes his/her living taking photographs

A model = someone who makes his/her living being photographed

you can, if you want to make it spicy, define someone who makes a good living, which, for the sake of argument I'll peg at an MP's salary of £ 91,000. Hands up all the REAL photographers in the room

Anyone else? well that's a grey area isn't it. Are you a plumber with a camera? A wannabe living off a family fund, generous partner, comfortable job with plenty of spare time? Here it gets interesting. And as this thread proves, the debate gets furious because the stakes are so low (to paraphrase Henry Kissinger). Is the only tide mark pride and vanity? Does the blinding light of commerce and fickle attention arouse some deeper and more sinister emotion? Is your work valid because you got paid a few quid? Trust me, real photographers (see above) are laughing at you.

PP is an entertainment, a diversion, like readers wives or the Sunday Sport. No one is making a reputation here, if anything, you're throwing a hand grenade into your market value (why do so many togs conceal their identities?) look around you, tits and bums, there's not much to be proud of. The huge mass of PP photographers are living vicariously off the skills and talents of a few dozen extraordinarily accomplished photographers with incredible eyes, who grace this mostly tawdry mess with something special. I know, I'm only here to marvel at the pre-during-and post production professionalism of a bunch of individuals who just floor me with their talent and generosity. These guys, hell, I'd do TFP to be in a room with some of them. Inspiration pure and simple (you know who you are guys)

 I'm a snapper,  I don't want to be paid. I don't care. That's not interesting to me at all. And it shouldn't be to you either, if what you want to do is make better photographs (which usually happens with better, paid for, models) then make better photographs and share them, but FFS don't get petty, it makes you look small. If you've got a great shot 50% of that is the talent in front of your camera, (or in my case 90% is the talent in front of my camera, I've never got a clue, it's always the model that saves it). So pay him/her and feel blessed. 

Very few of us get to turn our passion for cars/fishing/darts into TV stardom and huge cash prizes, and very few of us are prepared to take the risk and make the commitment to do it.

Soooo don't bitch about TFP, just pay the model, say thank you, be gracious, feel pleased with the FPI if you have the chops and you get one, (I have a few, and heavens knows why, my model photography is shite) so move on, keep making snaps, you never know, if it makes you happy you might even win a few more plumbing jobs, 'cause people like to be around happy people.

In the immortal zen words of Purple port ""Take a look and give it some love."

PP is indeed an entertainment but I don't see the comparison with Readers' Wives (does that still exist?) or The Sunday Sport. I do look around and there is a great deal to be proud of.

yup. exactly what I just said, some immense talent on PP

Tim Forest said

Unfocussed Mike said

Unfocussed Mike said

Tim Forest said

wow, noisy room

to keep it clean can we make a few distinctions?

A photographer = someone who makes his/her living taking photographs

A model = someone who makes his/her living being photographed

No.

Extend this out: are you saying that people aren't gardeners unless they do it for a living, artists unless they get paid?

Aren't really in a band unless they have quit their day job

Aren't guitarists unless it's their living

Aren't teachers unless it's their salary

etc.

It's nonsensical.

no, literally, it's what it is.

you work in a camera shop, you're in retail.

you lay bricks, you're a bricklayer

you do surgery, you're a surgeon

that's not nonsense it's literally what it is. Why is that hard to understand?

Because it's just your opinion not a fact

Tim Forest saidno, literally, it's what it is.

you work in a camera shop, you're in retail.

you lay bricks, you're a bricklayer

you do surgery, you're a surgeon

that's not nonsense it's literally what it is. Why is that hard to understand?

So you spend your time improving your photography only to never call yourself a photographer?

Artists aren't artists unless they sell their work enough to live on it? Really? Are you sure about this? Henry Darger was never a living artist? Vivian Maier was never a living photographer? Musicians in bands aren't musicians unless they are making a living at it?

And you're setting a salary threshold before it really really counts?

It's just rude, polemic trolling without a basis in history.

(As is suggesting that every model here is engaging in something no different to Reader's Wives. Get a grip.)

The "real photographers are laughing at you" bit is questionable if not snarky projection. People don't generally laugh at people for not making money at the things they love and are identifiable for. I know some professional musicians who do it for their job who will tell you that their musical heroes -- their role model musicians -- are amateurs they know. I certainly know professional photographers whose role models are photographers who possibly never sold more than a handful of prints.

Indeed if you have to make a "living" at it then Van Gogh wasn't an artist when he was alive. Because he sold in the low tens and was poor his entire life. Did he become an artist ever? If he never really got any of the money?

Edited by Unfocussed Mike

Paul Gerrard said

So my question to all photographers who are regularly paying models for shoots is how do you feel you're getting your money's worth from it? 

Yes. I don't want to go down the "dumb question, if I didn't I wouldn't pay" route - let's just say that answer is available. 

What other days out can I have that cost as little as photo shoot? I just went shopping and 3 of us decided we'd have lunch out. It cost the same as two hours time with a model, and frankly I'd rather stay home make a sandwich and spend the money on a shoot.  

I've done a few shoots in the last year using hotel rooms - just over £200 for 6-8 hours in a suite at a London hotel via Day use, so why cut corners on the model ? I spent a grand on the last lens I bought, why not point it at the best content (model) I can ? Not only is the shoot itself fun, but I do enjoy editing to get to the final result so I'm paying for half a day of model-time and getting a whole weekend's worth of entertainment.

On the flip side if I shot TF I'd be trading £40 to pay a model for an hour for an hour of my time shooting content for her, and four hours editing it. 5 hours of my time is worth more than that (if I take a day off it costs me a hell of a lot more than £8 per hour).  Granted my views are slanted by having a fairly well paid job and little free time but to me models aren't especially expensive. 

Allesandro B said

Tim Forest said

Unfocussed Mike said

Unfocussed Mike said

Tim Forest said

wow, noisy room

to keep it clean can we make a few distinctions?

A photographer = someone who makes his/her living taking photographs

A model = someone who makes his/her living being photographed

No.

Extend this out: are you saying that people aren't gardeners unless they do it for a living, artists unless they get paid?

Aren't really in a band unless they have quit their day job

Aren't guitarists unless it's their living

Aren't teachers unless it's their salary

etc.

It's nonsensical.

no, literally, it's what it is.

you work in a camera shop, you're in retail.

you lay bricks, you're a bricklayer

you do surgery, you're a surgeon

that's not nonsense it's literally what it is. Why is that hard to understand?

Because it's just your opinion not a fact

everyone, as the old adage goes, is entitle to their own opinion. No one is entitled to their own facts.

If you have 'photographer' in your passport, you're probably a photographer. Otherwise, an amateur (not such a bad thing), or, more broadly 'a person who uses a camera to make photographs'

Tim Forest said

If you have 'photographer' in your passport, you're probably a photographer. Otherwise, an amateur (not such a bad thing), or, more broadly 'a person who uses a camera to make photographs'

An amateur what?

By this definition, nobody who won Olympic gold before 1988 was an athlete. Daley Thompson was just someone good at wearing shoes to go running, or throwing lightweight metal poles, etc.

Edited by Unfocussed Mike

As it is some time since I earned the majority of my income from photography, it is a revelation from this thread that I am no longer a photographer. The Royal Photographic Society thinks otherwise, but what do they know.

Tim Forest said

A photographer = someone who makes his/her living taking photographs

A model = someone who makes his/her living being photographed

you can, if you want to make it spicy, define someone who makes a good living, which, for the sake of argument I'll peg at an MP's salary of £ 91,000. Hands up all the REAL photographers in the room

"A photographer = someone who makes his/her living taking photographs" 

Nonsense.

My day rate for the few days a year that I do (specialist medical) photography is £2,000. That excludes any expenses. Nobody ever complains.
That's also why I can't afford to take time off work to shoot TF.

Beats most photography day rates in the UK.
https://www.bark.com/en/gb/photographer/photographer-prices/

Some photographers make their living taking photos. Its irrelevant.

 Some great photographers fund their photography by ding something else for a living.

Even in the time-honoured tradition of PP threads going randomly off-topic, this one is rather special ...

JonC said

As it is some time since I earned the majority of my income from photography, it is a revelation from this thread that I am no longer a photographer. The Royal Photographic Society thinks otherwise, but what do they know.

Indeed. The Royal Photographic Society needs to move with the times.

I think he means *brickographer* someone that lays bricks for a living but is actually a photographer

JonC said

As it is some time since I earned the majority of my income from photography, it is a revelation from this thread that I am no longer a photographer. The Royal Photographic Society thinks otherwise, but what do they know.

Spare a thought for photographers who get paid to work for the Sunday Sport. Every day is a Kafkaesque waking nightmare crisis of identity.

(I mean it probably is, but not for this reason)

Edited by Unfocussed Mike

Tim Forest said

Allesandro B said

Tim Forest said

Unfocussed Mike said

Unfocussed Mike said

Tim Forest said

wow, noisy room

to keep it clean can we make a few distinctions?

A photographer = someone who makes his/her living taking photographs

A model = someone who makes his/her living being photographed

No.

Extend this out: are you saying that people aren't gardeners unless they do it for a living, artists unless they get paid?

Aren't really in a band unless they have quit their day job

Aren't guitarists unless it's their living

Aren't teachers unless it's their salary

etc.

It's nonsensical.

no, literally, it's what it is.

you work in a camera shop, you're in retail.

you lay bricks, you're a bricklayer

you do surgery, you're a surgeon

that's not nonsense it's literally what it is. Why is that hard to understand?

Because it's just your opinion not a fact

everyone, as the old adage goes, is entitle to their own opinion. No one is entitled to their own facts.

If you have 'photographer' in your passport, you're probably a photographer. Otherwise, an amateur (not such a bad thing), or, more broadly 'a person who uses a camera to make photographs'

You might actually want to check what's on your passport...