For Customers

Film Festival Madness

1 Comment

If nothing else, the Toronto Film festival serves as an example of how not to run an event. You might think that going into its 35th year, the film festival would know how to properly run a media event. But you’d be wrong.

Make no mistake, the primary function of the festival is for movie producers, actors and directors to get publicity for their projects, and for distributors to find buyers for their movies. To help do this, they need media exposure. The reason they come to Toronto is the huge media coverage. The film festival itself acknowledges the importance of this media coverage when it says the festival wouldn’t happen without media attendance.

Where to start?
Continue reading →

Defining Professional

No Comments

We’re all amateurs. It’s just that some of us are more professional about it than others.

– George Carlin, comedian

 

Professional photographer: Earns a living from photography. Consistently produces quality pictures to suit their customers’ needs. Stands behind their work and takes responsibility for their actions.

Amateur photographer: Has another day job. Produces pictures to please themselves. Has nothing at stake and nothing to lose.

 

Professionals are predictable. Amateurs are not.

An amateur practices until they get it right. A professional practices until they can’t get it wrong.

An amateur might know how to fix mistakes. A professional knows how to avoid them.

An amateur has to be good once-in-a-while. A professional has to be good every time.

An amateur is judged by their best photo. A professional is judged by their worst.

People don’t expect much from an amateur but they expect everything from a professional.

 

If you think it’s expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur.

– Nathan Gilkarov, economist and philosopher

 

Media handout photo quality

No Comments

Earlier today, I was looking at some media handout pictures from a movie distributor which is looking to get publicity for an upcoming release:

• The pictures had no captions, no names and no IPTC data. You have to guess who the people are and what/where/when is happening.

• Photos were overexposed by about two stops and had far too much contrast. (EXIF data showed that the pictures were shot on an amateur camera using an auto-exposure mode).

• Pictures were out-of-focus.

Continue reading →

A sporting chance

No Comments

One type of photography I do is shooting sports events for the corporate sponsors. These sponsors usually want good action pictures with their logo visible in the photo. These pictures are often used in corporate literature, corporate web sites and media handouts.
Continue reading →

By the value

No Comments

Of course the list of prices in the previous post, By the pound, is meaningless. No one sells a house by the pound, no one buys a car by the pound.

A house is priced on the subjective value of its location, the quality of design and workmanship that went into the house and the cost to build.

A car is priced on the subjective value of its brand, the quality of design and workmanship that went into the car and the cost to build.

Yet some people expect photographers to price their services by the hour or by the picture rather than by the value of the photography plus the quality of workmanship and the cost of production.

When some businesses search for a corporate photographer, why do they shop price first, value second? The only products sold by weight or volume are commodities like fruit, vegetables and gasoline. Almost everything else is sold by value.

A can of Campbell’s vegetable soup is 99¢ while the “no name” brand of vegetable soup is 60¢. Which soup would you buy?

After tasting the thin, watery, no name soup, you’d either go back to the higher-priced soup because it has more value, (i.e. better taste and more enjoyable), or you’d lower your standards and stay with the cheaper product to save money.

It’s the same deal with photography. A business has to decide whether to lower its standards and use cheap photography, or go with higher-priced professional photography because of its higher value.

 

By The Pound

No Comments

Just for comparison sake, here’s the approximate cost per pound, (Canadian dollars, taxes not included), of a few items:

Nikon D3X camera: $2,828

Apple iPhone (base model): $2,200

Nikon D3S camera: $1,818

Nikon 24mm f1.4 lens: $1,527

Nikon 300mm F2.8 lens: $869

Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 lens: $847

Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 lens: $622

MacBook Pro 15″ laptop (base model): $330

Mac Pro desktop computer (base model): $75

Think Tank Airport Security roller case: $38

Porsche Boxster (base model): $18

House in Toronto: $1.06 (1600 sq ft., freestanding, single-storey brick house including foundation. Assuming $340,000 and 320,000 lbs )

House in Toronto: $0.71 (2200 sq ft., freestanding, two-storey brick house including foundation. Assuming $425,000 and 600,000 lbs.)

 

Don’t even mention the cost of medium format cameras and digital backs:

Phase One 645DF camera + P45 back + 80mm lens: $5,206 per pound

F-35 Lightning II fighter jet: $4,780 per pound

 

Now do you have to ask why photographers charge so much?

 

css.php