An Open Letter to People Who Write Open Letters

Sometimes we get stuck in the mire of our own making. Thank goodness we can find a pump around to dredge us out of the muck.

Sometimes we get stuck in the mire of our own making. Thank goodness we can find a pump around to dredge us out of the muck.

Last week an open letter dispute erupted on social media. That could be said of just about any week on social media, but this time it was about a photographer and a band who wanted to use a photograph.

I found myself intrigued but after reading both letters I felt more confused and chagrined at the situation than angry. It was a minor tempest in a teapot… one of those very small kids teapots because, let’s face it, not too many people even care about such things as this.

The photographer fired off a note after being contacted by the band for the free use of an image in a book they were doing.

Enter fireworks.

The photographer’s letter was one of outrage, demanding to be paid for the use of his photograph and he makes a very cogent point. Without being paid, we can not continue to make images for bands or anyone for that matter. It is what we do, and as such it should garner more respect.

The band fired back with claims that it is too expensive to create a photobook if they are going to pay royalties to every image. As well, they figured that since they already purchased the photograph, they believed they should be able to use it.

Sigh.

Let’s look at some realities:

The band:

“Any refusal of permission would be respectfully accepted and no further questions asked.”
— Garbage in open letter to Pat Pope.

A photobook with 200 photographs in it; at $350 per license, that comes to $70,000. The band claims that is too expensive for them to spend to do a book. They are most probably right. By the time you figure printing and shipping and distribution and design and copywriting and incidentals, the books are going to be very, very expensive. And then the price has to double at the bookstores so the stores can make money. Could be a run of 7000 books could cost $40 a piece. That comes to $280,000 upfront for the band. The $40 book then has to have a retail price of $80 a piece to allow for it to be sold… breaking even for the band.

I have written books that are sold in major bookstores so I can speak from experience when I say NO photobook for $80 is going to sell out quickly… if at all. If the print run was a thousand books, it could sell out in a year or so. But it would also be around $125 per book… so maybe all bets are off.

End game: The band is right.

It is too expensive to produce if the royalties are to be paid. Perhaps they should figure out a sponsorship or move on. It is a cold fact of life that many things we want to do are simply too expensive to do.

That is NOT a value judgement, it is a simple fact of business.

Or find photographers who will give you pictures for use without a royalty… which is what they were doing.

I think the band learned that because they previously purchased a license, it does not hold over to any future uses.

They also learned that a simple request, made in good faith could unleash a shit-storm that would drag their name through the mud. I guess that is a good lesson for us all. The social media mobs are unforgiving and – really – not very bright. They react the same way the immensely base Piranha do… form a gang and destroy.

The photographer:

“I’m a firm believer that musicians and artists deserve to be paid for their work. I’ll sign any petition that’s out there supporting that concept, and even when I choose to stream rather than buy, I’m one of the fans of your band that will pay for a premium service because I think you should be paid. That’s my point of view. Is it yours? When you think about artists being paid, does that include photographers? Do you think “content providers”, whatever the hell that means, deserve to be paid for their work, or is that a special category for musicians? If I want to release a music album, can I use your music in it if I give you a “proper credit”?”
— Pat Pope in open letter to band Garbage.

Wow. That is quite an angry response to a simple request.

I think it could have been handled another way. Going public without even contacting the band was, in my opinion, a little cheesy. But I am willing to cut some slack because we have all become a bit tense over big names using our shit for free. It isn’t right.

But neither is focusing your anger on the wrong perpetrators.

Being angry at the band, who simply asked, was misguided and off base. Of course they wanted to use it for free. We all want free stuff and we ask for it when we can. No harm. A simple “No, it would need to be licensed first” would have seemed more professional to me.

Nothing wrong with saying no. NO. It is easy… try it. “No.”

See. Easy.

However, the real problem makers in this whole debacle were never singled out for his ire, his rage, his being really perturbed. The perpetrators who caused this entire calamity were even pointed out by the band. They were identified and STILL no words of scathing indignation was turned toward them.

Who were they?

“We were so grateful and delighted to learn that most of the photographers were happy for their images to be seen in conjunction with the telling of our story.”
— Garbage in response to Pat Pope

If you want to be mad at someone, just read the credits in the book when it comes out. Be mad at those who complied, not with those that requested. Being mad at someone who genuinely asked for permission first is – well – it’s offputting to me.

And since so many others said YES, that could signal that the majority indeed support the free use (whether it is right or wrong is not the point here). Be mad at them, if you like.

Or maybe choose not be be mad at all. Perhaps the photographers saw fit to have their images in the book for reasons we may never know. Or should know. Or even have a right to know. It is their property to do with what they want.

My story is not your story… don’t try to write the paragraphs your way.

The real conundrum is where the line gets crossed between supporting one another and exploiting one another. It is not a fine line, it is wide and gray and sometimes hard to see. But it is there.

All in all it was great fun for the mobs… but it held little out for those of us who are wanting to get a little more serious about the dialog that needs to happen regarding usage of IP.

Until that happens… rock on, dudes (and dudettes).

 

A Few Words on that “Unphotoshopped Cindy Crawford Photo” Crap

A few days ago, this was making big news online… wow. Imagine Cindy Crawford having the guts to go public in a photograph that was un-retouched in Photoshop.

Yeah… wow. Big F’n Deal.

Of course she did that for two decades and more. You know that, right?

Of this I can speak firmly. We didn’t have Photoshop in the 40’s. 50’s. 60’s, 70’s, 80’s, 90’s. At the beginning of the 2000’s it was being used a bit more, until we arrive at today where the non-use of it seems to be big news.

Here is Cindy, circa 1980’s. NO Photoshop.

crawford

(Christy Brinkley, 80’s) (Christy Turlington, 80’s) (Elle MacPherson, 80’s) (Tyra Banks, 80’s) – NO PHOTOSHOP


For people who have NO sense of history, how it all became. They gotta 5DMKIII and LIFE STARTS NOW.

Crap.

We will look at the insincerity of the photograph of Cindy in a moment, but first a history lesson.

We made the photographs using skills in lighting. LIGHTING. L I G H T I N G.
We had a cadre of amazing MakeUp Artists, Stylists, Lighting Assistants… all focused on making the image – perfect. Cause there was no ‘fixing’ them later.

Imagine that.

We made prints lovingly and by hand in dark, smelly rooms that perhaps robbed us of a few years of longevity.

Those prints were lovingly delivered to magazines where they were sent for halftone scans. (No, they did not have banks of ‘retouchers’ to ‘airbrush’ each editorial image. Anyone who tells you that was never there, and making that shit up. DIDN’T HAPPEN.)

We also shot this magic stuff called “Transparency” film… a ‘slide’ by another name. The image was what it was. If you blew exposure by a 1/3 stop, it was there for all the world to see in the transparency. If you missed focus you ended up with what we would technically call a ‘soft image’… no amount of work at the scanning houses was going to fix it. And many ‘soft’ images made it into print… because ART.

Find a few 80’s / 90’s Vogue, W, Italian Vogue (my favorite), Bazaar or other fashion magazines. Find a few early issues of People, Time, Life, Look, – hey – find a magazine printed before 2003 – ANYGDAM one. NO. PHOTOSHOP.

PHOTOGRAPHY done right by craftspeople and artists and damned skilled creators. Guess what we never said? “Fix it in Photoshop” – cause we. like, didn’t know what that meant in 1987.

So now someone wants you all to believe that PHOTOSHOP is the magic beans of photography. Well, it isn’t.

Light is.

Which brings us to the current image of Cindy…

B9uP_e7IEAAcx-i

… and why I call BS on it.

Light.

This shot of Crawford was LIT to show her “flaws”. It was PURPOSELY created to show texture and line and the signs of age. It is NOT simply un-retouched, it is, in fact, ENHANCED through the lighting.

If you brought a model who looked like this to any decent photographer, they could choose to mitigate with lighting (soft non-directional ambient, or large scrim, plenty of fill) or enhance with small, single light source MEANT to bring out any ‘imperfections’ the woman may have.

(NOTE: Before we get pulled into one of those lameass discussions of what ‘beauty’ is, let’s not go there. My belief is that Crawford was and will always be a stunning woman. Age is not a digression in her appeal. Beauty comes in all sizes, shapes, and ages. I stopped shooting fashion BECAUSE I grew weary of shooting 17 year old ‘babies’ who were meant to personify ‘all women’. This whole thing may be a cause-celeb for a lot of folks. I walked away from a solid business because of my beliefs. Beauty if NOT made in Photoshop… and all of my subjects are beautiful to me, no matter who and how old they are.)

However, this image is supposed to be a rally point for the “anti-photoshop” groups, and those for whom the cause of the moment is so awesomely cool, man, they just have to be, like, involved… #trending#badphotographsrockcausetrendingsaysso….

Is this a ‘bad’ photograph of Cindy Crawford. No, of course not. It is as perfect as the photographer CHOSE it to be. The photographer CHOSE a single lightsource with no fill to enhance every line/wrinkle/and skin anomaly that was possible.

But to champion it as a shot of Cindy being brave and shooting without Photoshop leaves that part of the equation, the most important part – LIGHTING – out.

So is the idea that Cindy is brave for not being Photoshopped? That’s no big deal. She has done that before.
Or is it that she ‘risks’ showing off some flaws of age? Well, she CHOSE that when she chose to be shot with this light… so shouldn’t it really be “Cindy Crawford shows us what a beautiful woman looks like with the passage of time”? Cause why would you light her like this and then Photoshop it… That would be stupid.

(Yes, I know… but I don’t want to go there… so stop it. Stop it now… heh)

Where do I fall on the Photoshop or No-Photoshop line. I use Pshop basically the way I used a darkroom. I strive to get it as right in the camera as I possibly can. It is in my photographic DNA, I suppose.

But I also don’t give a rats tushie what others do. I have no dog in this hunt, and usually find such discussions and ‘side taking’ utterly boring and useless.

So “Shop” away if you want. Or not.

But don’t peddle a prepared and purposely lit shot to show ‘flaws’ and expect me to believe that nothing else could be done but Photoshop. That is a lie… there is something we call…

Lighting.


Of course the disservice it does to the amazing photographers of that time… from David Bailey, to Watson, Elgort, Demarchelier, Lindbergh, Ritts, VonUnwerth, Roversi and more… just terrible.

We have an art form that doesn’t even acknowledge its past, but chooses to be led by people who do not have the best interests of photography at their hearts, but the quest for immediate fame and more “likes”… pathetic.

 

Trends to Watch in 2015

iPhoneFun-May-2011-708

Trends I am noticing:

Social Media Thinning.
Photographers are becoming more selective in where and how they spend their time in social media. This is a good thing. Not every SM platform is right for you and what you do.Facebook may be find for consumer shooters, but for commercial it is pretty much a bust. Some photographers have built huge groups but watched those numbers tumble after FB’s recent algorithms that force paying for views. Not worth it at this point, I believe. Flickr is more and more irrelevant. Not sure why, but it simply is.If you want to blog, but have not started one at this point, I would suggest Tumblr. Absolutely the place to be for photographers. Whether you post an image only or an image and brief text or a set of images, the people who visit there are more infused with clients than FB and G+. In short, it is where to be seen.Instagram is very important as well. Especially for editorial and commercial shooters. Clients love Instagram… you should love places that get your work in front of prospective clients.

Vine may be a perfect platform for small, BTS videos and other random personality driven videos.

One of the most important, and often overlooked platform is Behance. Stories, sets, complete shoots, process… all work well on Behance for photographers. More clients there than on any other platform. Be there NOW.

Content Driven Websites.
Instead of the usual ‘here are my photos’ websites that photographers have used for over a decade or more, we are seeing content within and new frameworks to help inspire contacts.Vanessa Rees blogsite is a prime example.Yes, it is important to show the work, but it is becoming even more important to show the brand – the personality – and the depth of the photographers offering. Get more engagement by being more engaged.

Personal Brand.
More and more important as we find more and more platforms that need our attention to gain others attention. Without a strong personal brand, being remembered becomes more challenging. Just as rock stars, authors, actors and others in the public eye create branded personalities, so should photographers. it is absolutely important.

Behance. Be there.
Yes, it is so important I am mentioning it twice.

Wider variety of lighting.
No more “I only shoot ____ for my lighting”, photographers are expanding into all sorts of lighting choices for all sorts of images. The “natural light only” or “storbist” approach is feeling a bit thin. It is more important to use the right light for the vision you want than it is to adhere to some sort of ‘mantra’. The waning interest in compartmentalizing the production is a good thing, and there will be a stronger emphasis on the image than on the production.

One word:
Film. Yeah, it is an old technique, but it is a unique technique that is becoming very boutique in its approach and interest. I will not say you MUST shoot film, only that you consider some other forms of image making that can set you apart… (brand?).

Smaller, more targeted lists.
We pared down over the last decade, now we will see micro list marketing, where ultraniched workwill be marketed tomuch smaller groups of potential buyers.Let’s say you have a targeted list of 500 magazines. It may be time to narrow those lists to different approaches or images to be sent. 500 names is not a lot versus back in the 90’s when lists of 3500+ were normal. But the way that media works today may make it more important to separate out the different magazines into segments… and perhaps you end up with a list of 250, one of 150 and one that is only 100 names.Smaller, more agile and specifically focused marketing.

More geographical freedom.
Live where you want, work where ever the work takes you. Shoot globally and regionally. Mobility gives us more freedom. And where you live helps establish a bit of your ‘brand’ as well.

Gear will be less of a factor this year.
More emphasis on the images and creating work that sells will be the focus of much photographic press. Gear will always be a big draw for many photographers, but for those who are working toward creating a unique brand or vision it will take less and less gear to create the work they want. Technology is leading the way to less need for gear and more need for vision. I notice that so many more articles are featuring the work of photographers with hardly any mention of gear or technology.

Fees will begin to rise again. I see little signs of it here and there… and the need for excellence is finally beginningto be seen by the clients who NEED to know this stuff. With the focus on brand that is replacing a lot of traditional advertising there is more of an emphasis on photography and how visualsare being used in the marketing. This trend will continue throughout this year and the next and will end up affecting design and ad agencies as much as photographers and illustrators.Uniquely crafted imagery, with the ability to show the brand in ways that engage the public will replace the single page ‘Ad’ in periodicals. This will become a sea change. I believe it will be a sea change in the industry and could end up benefitting photographers more than we can see at this point.

For those of you who are simply struggling to stay up with all that is going on, pare down. Simplify and focus.

There are a lot of other trends out there that we should be looking at. Neil Patel has a list of marketing trends that will affect all of us. Spend a few minutes with his list and see what you think about the changing shape of marketing – especially online marketing.

Some cool books to consider:

What If The Problem Is That You Suck?

yousuck

Photo of the author by Mike Eller

Even More Advice for the Aspiring Professional Photographer.

These days a lot of people seem to be offering advice in the area of becoming a full time professional photographer. Some of those folks like Greg Heisler, Jay Meisel, Gail Mooney and others have long careers and great inspirational advice for those who are beginning the journey.

Others, whose names I won’t mention, and hosts of FB, G+, and Flickr shooters want you to know that the life sucks, the cameras suck, the business sucks, and the whole idea of being a professional photographer is a total pile of crap – and it sucks, of course.

Count me among those in the first group, with some cautious understanding of where those in the negative group are coming from.

Let’s face some cold facts.

Being self-employed is not for everyone. The challenges of self discipline, fear of the unknown, difficult self motivation and a desire to not eat macaroni and cheese for every meal for a year is daunting to a lot of people. And it doesn’t make any difference if the self employed person is going into graphic design, plumbing or photography.

Being a professional photographer is not for everyone either. On top of the challenges of self employment, there is also a huge disconnect between what people think that world consists of and the actual world of pro photography itself. Huge.

Let me be perfectly clear here; I am not referring to wedding, maternity, ‘senior’ and family portrait photography. That is not a world I am expert in, nor do I really care all that much about. While it is most certainly similar in a few areas, the differences are vastly so in the aesthetic and the end use of the images.

I am only commenting on commercial photography and its many adjunct genres: architectural, editorial, food, fashion, product and travel. This is photography used for commerce – both directly and indirectly. Think of it as B2B photography – not B2C.

I know most of my readers are in this group, and I have a sizable contingent of those who do both commercial and B2C. In smaller markets shooting some consumer work may be a necessity for a commercial photographer, and some photographers love both sides of the business, so that is cool too! Freedom of choice works for me.

I have had the honor to work with a lot of emerging photographers and watched them grow from full time other job folks to full time photographer folks. Over at Project52Pros that is what we are all about.

In over 40 years of professionalismI have seen amazing success stories, and I have known some spectacular crash and burn scenarios as well. In most cases, the causes and reasons were the same for both. I have spoken with photographers who were crashing and instantly known why… some things are obvious. And the reasons are very much the same for most who are failing.

I would like to address some of these more obvious challenges and offer some solutions. Hold on, this may sting a bit.

To those of you who are struggling making the jump, here is some free, unsolicited advice.

Perhaps it is not the market, maybe you just suck.

C’mon… that could be it, right? I mean, other people are working and some are working their asses off. And you aren’t, and you don’t know why. Maybe you haven’t spent enough time making images, or building a book, or building a list or building a goddamn business! (It is important to understand that every photographer once sucked. Every damned one of them. The successful ones figure out how to not suck.)

No one who ever picked up a camera was guaranteed to be a phenomenal photographer with clients dripping gold infusions into their wallets with every snap. Most of the ones we see shooting the really cool stuff, the assignments we all want to get busted their asses to get there. They found ways to not suck.

To get over the suckiness that may be holding you back, let’s look at a few glaring challenges (traits) that those who are struggling usually exhibit.

  1. You suck at shooting enough pictures to make a difference.
    Getting a camera for Christmas and business cards for Easter may be a quick jump into the abyss of thinking it is the market failed you when actually you still suck. Make sure you are ready, and are able to make images that are amazing before you put yourself out there. This is very important.
  2. Your photographs suck.
    The images that you think are ‘good enough’ actually still suck. If you are measuring your work against others, make sure you pick high enough up the ol’ totem pole to make that comparison worth it. Being ‘better’ than the 1 ½ year shooter down the road may not be enough to make a difference to the people in your town and make them want to hire you. Only excellence moves on.
  3. Your marketing sucks.
    Recently I read a painful article from someone who was honestly hurting and was chastising all the other photographers he/she saw as crushing him/her with lowball pricing. Problem was, the author’s website totally sucked, there was no marketing message, the logo/presentation was amateurish and silly and the images were – well – meh. Not bad, not great… just… images.
  4. Your presentation sucks.
    Does your Website look like it was made in 1995 with a quick refresh in late 2000? You may have a problem convincing anyone that you are worth hiring. This is a competitive, creative world where PRESENTATION is an absolutely huge part of the equation. If you don’t know what good design is, why would I trust you to do good photography? They are hand in hand.
  5. Your list sucks.
    Your list… you do have a list, right? Right? If you do not have a list of people who could hire you, you are not really in business, you are playing like being in business. And that can be very painful. Of course playing at it is fun, but when reality catches up please don’t write a whining “I was crushed by the $200 Craigslist Shooters” post. It is embarrassing, it really is.
  6. Your client outreach sucks.
    No one knows you exist. I want you to reach out and touch a prospective client three times a day… that’s it. Just three times. If you do that, you will find success will follow (unless your work really does suck) and if you do more, it will come faster. MOST photographers do not market themselves to a targeted list. Waiting for the phone to ring from people who don’t even know you friggin’ exist is a fools game, ya know.
  7. Your portfolio sucks.
    You know, the portfolio that hasn’t seen a new image in 4 months or longer, has no current work in it, and totally misrepresents your new style and vision. The portfolio that has no personal work, tired old client crap and some nekkid chicks in the ‘aurt’ section will sink any photographer… fast. Get serious and get to work on the port.
  8. Your brand sucks.
    Not your logo, the one that you got from Fiverr… that totally rocks next to the fact that you have no personal look, never return phone calls, have no coherent message, no visual style and are late with every shoot. Seriously – next to that disaster, the $5 logo has it really going on, man.
  9. Your gear sucks.
    No, wait… I am not talking about the gear itself, I am talking about the way you hold it up as a substitute for the work. Owning a fancy camera with all the bells and whistles only requires a good credit score, not a quality image score. Using all your money to acquire the newest pixel machine may make you a hit on G+, but it will do nothing but suck your assets from doing something important to help your business. Gear Acquisiton Syndrome will suck the viability out of any emerging shooter.
  10. You suck.
    You are the type of person who sees everyone else as a threat or a competitor. You work against yourself in order to feel more powerful when comparing yourself to others… which you do at every opportunity. You treat other photographers and beginners as something less than human and have nothing but disdain for their wanting to be a photographer… like you. And instead of addressing the challenges of the business, you choose instead to ridicule the successful, and demonize the competition.

So here is a thought… do it this way and skip the sucking part:

Shoot photographs as often as you can, and get those images critiqued by people IN the business, not buddies or Flickr followers. Find art directors, graphic designers, other photographers (who aren’t total douchebags) to give you honest direction on that work.

Work to make sure your marketing is up to the level it needs to be. If you do not know, get some other eyes on it. Knowing eyes. Being a great photographer does not automatically make you a great marketer.

Or designer. Your presentation must be professional, clean and perfect. Websites do not have to be expensive to work beautifully, but they do have to have a sense of style.

Get a list. Put one together yourself from magazines, local business papers, contacts and referrals. Then use that list and start to market to them with email, direct mail, and personal phone calls. Don’t like personal phone calls? Who cares… suck it up and do it. Reach out personally to at least three of your contacts per day with either a phone call, email or some other marketing piece.

Make sure your portfolio is kept up. New photographs (see one above), personal projects, BTS shots and more can help you stay fresh in the eyes of art directors, photo editors and art buyers.

Make sure your brand is doing its job, and remember that there is no more powerful reminder of your brand than you, in all you do in your business, and how you present your work, and yourself to the world.

Spend the least amount that you can on gear that sits around waiting to be used. Shoot more, acquire less. Use your assets for creating stunning work, in awesome locations, and add cool new shots to your book instead of a new lens to the bag. (There may be a time when your accountant says, “Hey, you gotta spend some money this quarter….” That is when you grab that lens. If you actually, you know, NEED it.)

And above all, don’t suck. Be a mentor, be a friend, be a helpful person to those who are starting out just as you are. Be positive in your speaking and dealing with others and never give in to despair, and negativity although it may be difficult when you are having another macaroni and cheese dinner.

Success is not an overnight roadtrip, and failing to understand that journey and its ups and downs, forks in the road and challenges can be the greatest obstacle in front of you.

Know that it is an obstacle that can be overcome by hard work, careful attention to detail, knowing what you don’t know, and keeping the gaze forward will help deliver you to the ranks of professional photography. And, believe me, it is still a blast and a thrill to be shooting gigs for a living… no matter what anyone else tells you.

Oh, and try a little Tabasco on that macaroni and cheese. The additional spice breaks the monotony… trust me, I know.

My name is Don Giannatti and I have, on many occasions, sucked at photography. I overcame those times when I sucked, and had periods where I didn’t suck. I have had a 40 year career in this business that has been punctuated by thrilling highs and devastating lows. The challenge is to get back up after being knocked down, understanding that in order to be knocked that far down you must have sucked at something. And then you fix it. Don’t whine about it, or the competition, or the market, or the economy, just fix the damn thing and stop sucking.

You can find me at

www.dongiannatti.com

www.project52Pros.com

www.dongiannattiphotography.com

On Twitter and Instagram I am wizwow.

I suck at social media.

NOTE:

Thanks to PetaPixel for republishing the article.

petapixel-page

The article was also picked up by OnGoingPro. Thanks Hillary.

ongooingpro

The Internet Changed The Proposition of Value: Here is How to Fight Back

“Where photographers can succeed is if they abandon the consumers and editorial world who has been over-run by these value perception changes, and instead turn towards the same brands that still pay developers premium salaries for exclusive solutions. As Paul Melcher wrote those brands will drive the future of pay-to-play professional photography in the next decade, feeding photographers who successfully reinvent themselves.”

Jan Klier, photographer, NYC

AWESOME Opportunity to be Exploited! Wow!

AWESOME Opportunity to be Exploited! Wow!

Crowdsourcing… that is the new name for spec work, but worse than spec work this involves an outlay by the ones being expected to be used for nothing.

FORMER ADVOCATE OF PROFESSIONAL PHOTOGRAPHERS, Photo District News and Rangefinder have decided it is a great idea to have people send them money.

I mean, hell yeah… I like that. I would love to have people send me money.

Oh, you have to send some of your work in too… at $20 a pop. Seriously?

You are going to pay them for the opportunity to be turned down – and of course they keep the cash.

I wonder if they would consider it a good idea to crowdsource the editors?
I wonder if they would consider it a good idea to crowdsource the art directors?
I wonder if they would consider it a good idea to crowdsource the writers?
I wonder if they would consider it a good idea to crowdsource the advertisers?
I wonder if they would consider it a good idea to crowdsource the printing?
I wonder if they would consider it a good idea to crowdsource the distribution?

Yeah, I guess those would be bad ideas for – you know – a photography magazine.

But hotdamn boyhowdy it is a SUPER IDEA to crowdsource the photography – and get PAID to do so – which is the whole fkn point of the magazine to begin with.

What does this tell us about the people at these magazines that they feel they should be paid to look at the product they promote? Shouldn’t discovering new talent BE the reason for the magazine?

Or is it simply too much work to seek it out on their own. (Hey, there’s this thing called the internet, and you can find all… oh, never mind.)

Or perhaps it is those thousands of twenty dollar bills flooding in with the images. And we KNOW the images will get looked at, right? Right?

I am saddened and angry about this. it is wrong on so many levels I can’t even believe it.

Betrayed is the word that comes to mind.

And no, I won’t link it… you wanna enter, there’s this place called google and… oh never mind.

APPENDED BELOW:

The above is snarky… yeah, I can be snarky.

But instead of criticizing without constructive ideas, let me add this.

A Photo Editor (Rob Haggard) does this every week. His wonderful “Art Producers Speak” series presents new and exciting photographers suggested by art buyers in agencies.

FLAK does it too. They take submissions for their online site here.

So does Jorge Colberg at his Conscientious site.

Many online EZines also feature work of upcoming photographers. Sites like C-Heads and LadyGunn have plenty of emerging talent on display.

Some of these magazines have submission fees as well, but nowhere near the steep ‘pay-to-play’ fees of this proposed publication.

In these days of photographers being taken for granted, downisized fees, challenging market conditions and rising costs, it is very disheartening to see one of our own go this way. PDN and Rangefinder are publications that know what it is like for photographers out there. We should be able to turn to them for support, and call on them to be an ally.

“Crowdsourcing” is simply another word for “Spec” work. Something both magazines have taken a stance against. Something which most photographers consider working for free. Or worse when expected to pay for the opportunity to even get considered.

What would happen if ad agencies asked for a submission fee? Or magazines… want to see an AD with your book? Pull out your Mastercard.

Is that what we want this business to turn into? A feeding frenzy of self annihilation?

I sure hope not… but time will tell.