Wednesday, April 7, 2010

Professional vs Amateur Photographers

There is a lot of buzz in the professional photography world about part time photographers taking work away from professionals. There has always been an element of amateurs and wanna be's selling their work for a fraction of the professional's price. It's easy for someone who has a full time career and doesn't rely on photography for a living to do this.  The amateur might not have thought out a business model to figure out what they would need to charge to make a living and keep up with equipment, liability insurance, etc...  so they could devote full time to their art instead of just being able to do it when they have time. Many amateurs also might not understand the value of their work. Editors and photo buyers are quick to take advantage of this. This saves the photo buyers money but undercuts the professional's living. Some amateur photographers are quite good and sometimes the photo buyer just doesn't see the value in what their usual professional photographer gives them. (All photography on this blog is copyrighted to Sherwood Cox. Please contact Sherwood for proper licensing.)

As a professional photographer I strive to always make sure my clients receive photography with value. I also take steps to protect the value of their investment. I do this by creating photography the uninitiated or inexperienced usually will not and cannot provide with their experience level, time constraints and capital invested in their hobby. I also try to set myself apart from other professionals with my own unique style. I make sure to copyright and protect the copyright of the photographs I create on assignment. Another way I protect the value of my clients investment is to make sure any others who might also want to license the use of them pay a more expensive stock rate for the work if they did not participate in the original assignment. I would hate for one of my clients to think they had to pay for something when someone else got it for free or paid less.

My clients usually hire me for photographs to help them market themselves and show their work in design awards. Whenever another party wants to license any of the photos they need to contact me for acquiring this. Sometimes editors want to use tthe photos for editorials. Sometimes the building owner wants to use some of the photos for PR or personal use. Sometimes manufacturers want to use them in their advertising. Whatever their need I try to make sure the architect isn't put in the middle. Other parties usually contact the architect who hired the photographer because they see the photographs on their website or the architects show the photos around to show pride in their work. I always tell my clients to pass on any requests they receive to me so they don't have to negotiate the third party's fees to license the photos. I'm sure my clients have enough to do for themselves without having to negotiate for another business.

After shooting a recent assignment for one of  my clients I received an e-mail from a lighting manufacturer in Italy who wanted to use one of the shots on their website and in their print catalogue. They wanted to license the photo for a photo credit. Since it's hard to fill up my car or grocery shop with a photo credit I politely gave them an offer. After all a for profit company who is using photography to help them make a profit should have an advertising budget. They countered with a much lower offer and said they only pay this much for photography and wanted unlimited use. I countered with my best offer according to their intended use with limitations. I never heard from them again. After looking at their website I saw they had professional studio photography of their different models of lights. They also had photography of installations of their products. Some looked professional but most looked amateurish and some looked like they were taken with cellphones. I guess this is where they were looking to use this picture along with their international catalogue. I would have accepted a smaller fee for a small picture practically lost on their website but I couldn't let them print internationally distributed catalogues with my work for almost nothing. Good stock photography isn't cheap. Try licensing a photo from Getty Images. I do love the lighting and installation which Williams & Blackstock Architects did but I couldn't bring myself to give away my work. I think it has more value than that.

The amateur photographer has turned photography into a commodity for some buyers. But this is an art form not a commodity. Just as the architect carefully and artfully creates usable space that can be a delight to the senses so should the architectural photographer spend the same time and care in photographing the space in a unique and dramatic way. A single well done and carefully prepared photograph from an experienced and motivated professional with a passion for architectural photography can do much more to get attention than a plethora of quickly done pictures from the inexperienced or unmotivated. This is what brings value to assignment photography. Quality not quantity.


See you next time were I'll show how much work goes into a shot like this...

No comments:

Post a Comment