all-digital prosumer, but thinking about freelancing.
hedgehog
trying to get some freelance work, ideally not weddings since that's
just far too much of an emotional landmine when just starting out, but
i'd probably take what i could get.
I've done a weee bit of freelancing previously, mostly for this italian
magazine called Amica (think italian vogue), but that was largely a
fluke thing, since i think they were having some kind of low-fi,
michael gondry craze over there last year.
my question to the group is really more an attempt to prove or disprove
the level of anxiety i've got towards the whole thing (lucky you). I'm
that "jack of all, master of none" sort of guy, and I'm fairly
convinced I don't really have the equipment or workflow to pull it off,
but lately i've been looking at what other folks are doing, and it
seems like maybe i'm blowing it out of proportion.
Here's what my current setup and workflow looks like:
Pentax *ist DS with 2 1gb cards, shooting in RAW.
Lenses:
18-75mm f/3.5 (kit)
100-300mm f/4.5 quantaray tele, autofocus
Pentax 50mm f/1.4 prime, autofocus
currently don't have a decent macro as the quantaray isn't terribly
good in that arena, though i'm aiming to get the pentax A* Macro 200mm
f/4 at some point.
laptop w/ card reader for extra storage, though looking at the epson
p-2000 down the road.
printer: epson r1800.
backup camera: a shitty sony mavica with a ton of minidiscs.
workflow / setup: photoshop CS2 with about ten years experience, adobe
bridge to handle the raw stuff, though often i do a quick preview in
picassa, since it handles .PEF and it's free, vs. acdesee's weird $80
markup to stick the word "photo" in the description and make the GUI
black.
I never save changes i make to the RAWs, preferring to save out any
changes as PSD, and thinking of the RAWs as negatives. unbeknownst to
me it's apparently fairly common practice?
the digital darkroom in question is an XP box with a gig of ram and a
p4, though i'm really itching to try apeture when i can afford that and
a mac mini to run it with.
I really don't have the budget for something higher-end like a Nikon
d2x or a Canon 1d* in the remotely near future, though I've had plenty
of people talk about so-and-so who's a photographer using something
like a Nikon d70 as their primary camera.
So here's the questions I'm fretting over:
1] is the *ist DS going to really be enough as a primary camera for the
time being? It never seems to be even remotely as crisp as most of the
pro stuff I see online. I'm always trying to shoot at < 800 speedwise
and try and favor as low an apeture as i can get away with, but the
result constantly keeps screaming "prosumer", and I can't figure out if
i should just be investing in new lenses, or giving up on the fact i've
now blown way too much money on a camera that is always going to say
amateur all over it.
2] Is shooting strictly in RAW really just overkill for totally anal
purists who're way too into ansel adams and the like? I've always
relied on photoshop as a crutch to hide the fact i'm really not a very
good photographer, so the more images i can shoot per card the merrier,
but I've always felt like anything but lossless was going to be
miserable. Then I was watching the promo for apeture, and some bigshot
sports photographer was talking about how he shooting in raw might be a
possibility now that the overhead is less in the software. sure, sports
guys need to be able to take LOTS, but this really threw me off, as i'd
just kind of taken it as bible truth that all pros shoot RAW.
Is there anything else (advice, gear, etc) you'd reccoment? I know
sooooo much of this is contingent on what kind of work i'm doing, so
I'm trying to think as general purpose as possible until a niche comes
and whacks me on the head.
thanks to anyone who's taken the time to read what's farrrr too long a
post for usenet to not be a flame, heh.
p.s.... many of the older ones aren't shot with the current pentax, but
you can see a gallery of personal and travel photos at:
http://www.awayfromkeyboard.com/
thanks,
-adam
Eddie
First off I'd say you are far too hard on yourself. If I were a doctor (and
I'm not), I'd say you were probably suffering from depression! I also think
you are probably Cancerian or at the very least a water sign, sounds crazy I
know, but what I recognise in you I also see in myself, and I have suffered
depression in the past. I may be way offline here but only you'll know that?
I hope there's someone here that can give you a better answer than me, but
my own advice is simply to go for it, you've nothing to lose.
P.S. was I right with being Cancerian?
P.P.S. All your images open up the same page?
Good luck,
Edd
--
Eddie Campbell
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Miles From Nowhere Limited
www.MilesFromNowhere.co.uk
www.stores.ebay.co.uk/MFN-Digital-Cameras
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"hedgehog" <ad...@awayfromkeyboard.com> wrote in message
news:1140650976.6...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Randall Ainsworth
hedgehog <ad...@awayfromkeyboard.com> wrote:
> 1] is the *ist DS going to really be enough as a primary camera for the
> time being? It never seems to be even remotely as crisp as most of the
> pro stuff I see online. I'm always trying to shoot at < 800 speedwise
> and try and favor as low an apeture as i can get away with, but the
> result constantly keeps screaming "prosumer", and I can't figure out if
> i should just be investing in new lenses, or giving up on the fact i've
> now blown way too much money on a camera that is always going to say
> amateur all over it.
It's not about the "stuff."
> 2] Is shooting strictly in RAW really just overkill for totally anal
> purists who're way too into ansel adams and the like? I've always
> relied on photoshop as a crutch to hide the fact i'm really not a very
> good photographer, so the more images i can shoot per card the merrier,
> but I've always felt like anything but lossless was going to be
> miserable. Then I was watching the promo for apeture, and some bigshot
> sports photographer was talking about how he shooting in raw might be a
> possibility now that the overhead is less in the software. sure, sports
> guys need to be able to take LOTS, but this really threw me off, as i'd
> just kind of taken it as bible truth that all pros shoot RAW.
>
> Is there anything else (advice, gear, etc) you'd reccoment? I know
> sooooo much of this is contingent on what kind of work i'm doing, so
> I'm trying to think as general purpose as possible until a niche comes
> and whacks me on the head.
>
> thanks to anyone who's taken the time to read what's farrrr too long a
> post for usenet to not be a flame, heh.
There's no magic in the box.
hedgehog
hedgehog
as a "pro" anything (11 years of web coding and i still don't call
myself a programmer, etc), i got over bein miserable back in the
brooding teen years. ;]
as for the hard-on-self thing...i guess i figure respect where respect
is due for all the folks that have come before and put way more time,
effort and passion in than i have. "payin' the dues" and all that :]
p.s. / p.p.s:
1] pisces.
2] you can click on each image to get to the next one. it's like a big
storybook kinda thing.
Paul Furman
http://www.awayfromkeyboard.com/430.html
http://www.awayfromkeyboard.com/383.html
...the opening page looks much more hideous than most of the actual
content <g>.
RAW is not overkill and since you are a photoshop geek you can really
take advantage of that. You can spend time to be more careful in the
field or in the darkroom (or both) and that time will pay off. I started
using a special sharpening batch action thingy that gets great result
for web presentation, email if curious.
The *ist should be fine. That's not really different than any other
'basic' dSLR. I'm drooling over a D200 but it's not crucial. For
equiptment I think lenses are more important than the camera and should
take more budget. 200mm macro might be too long for a crop frame dSLR.
OTOH you might outgrow the Pentax so maybe wait to invest in lenses &
get a closeup-lens/diopter screw-on to explore macro with (that's what I
did). Some of your pictures do have technical problems, learn to fix
those before blowing money if budget is tight. Most do not have
problems, many are very clever and creative and well done.
http://www.awayfromkeyboard.com/378.html
I've got an R1800 too, what kind of paper do you use? I'm pretty new
with it.
--
Paul Furman
http://www.edgehill.net/1
Bay Natives
http://www.baynatives.com
Beach Bum
news:1140650976.6...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> trying to get some freelance work, ideally not weddings since that's
> just far too much of an emotional landmine when just starting out, but
> i'd probably take what i could get.
You're photos and other artwork kick ass - your stuff should be hanging in a
gallery. I'm serious. Put a portfolio together and starting knocking on
gallery doors. I bet you'd be making money soon enough.
It took me a while, but I got through your entire site. What's with the
questions? Are you doing a survey? :)
As for the workflow - I wouldn't sweat it - you'd pick up your own style
soon enough. It's just a learning process like anything else - no matter
what you read or prepare for, it'll be different than what you expect,
right?
> Is there anything else (advice, gear, etc) you'd reccoment? I know
> sooooo much of this is contingent on what kind of work i'm doing, so
> I'm trying to think as general purpose as possible until a niche comes
> and whacks me on the head.
You've got the talent - just go do it.
Cheers!
--
Mark
Photos, Ideas & Opinions
http://www.marklauter.com/gallery
hedgehog
Paul Furman
hedgehog wrote:
> mailed :]
hedgehog
outlet --with text and more music files and whatnot--, but the photos
really just started dominating, and the poll things just kind of stick
out awkwardly. one of those "oh any day now i'll get to cleaning it all
out" kinda things :P
workflow-wise i think i just dislike the way bridge works, where the
thumb always displays the last processed effect and applies it to all
thumbs. i've tried saving a "don't process anything" process and
forcing it to always use that, but it seems to constantly forget. and
it's insanely slow. it'd be nice to see some kind of digital lightboard
where you can spread favorites out and really look at stuff too --
hence the interest in apple-apeture.
much thanks for the encouragement, and glad you like...there's a bunch
of random stuff over at http://www.lespritdelescalier.com as well if
you're interested, though that's 50% blog.
Ben
Really nice photos Adam, some of them are really outstanding. I think
the survey questions are pretty funny. Breaks it up a bit.
The only thing negative I would say is that you seem to manipulate the
color a lot. Some of the pictures you reduce the saturation, some you
increase it. Most of the time it looks really good. But some of them
are just way oversaturated or just look too overprocessed. But the
overwhelming majority of the shots look very good.
How do you like the *ist ds? I seriously considered it but ended up
going for the Nikon D50. Now I am feeling the pain with lens prices :)
UC
Randall Ainsworth
<uraniumc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Nitwit...
Well, that was rather rude. I thought of being more direct and
to-the-point, but then thought...who gives a shit. There are plenty of
morons out there who think they're professional photographers.
UC
Yup.
NickL
I am going to respond to this thread later on as I am in a very similar
situation but actually starting to make some decent money out of
freelancing alongside my day job already... I will be back later with a
fuller response.
Nick
UC
We can hardly wait....
hedgehog
that, such is the pain of the web.
currently i have a three-monitor setup, the center flatscreen being the
one i color manage and fuss with, and then the left and right ones are
a bit too bright and a bit too dark, respectively. it gives a vague
sense of figuring out how it's all going to look on other monitors, but
saturation values can be a bit trickier :/
the DS is great so far, though i find the auto-focus gets really
confused and slow a bit easy. the nice bit is the sensors still go off
in manual mode, so much of the time i'll manually focus and just let
the LEDs on the viewfinder lemmie know when i'm right.
i recently ditched the surveys in the past few days -- i think my
fiancee thought they came off a bit sophmoric -- though i did replace
them with goofy pictures of gorrila suits and other such stuff until i
can figure out somethin' to break it up some more. ah well :P
thanks for the .02 :]
hedgehog
professional photographer? i don't even refer to myself as a
photographer at all.
i think my concern about "the stuff" isn't because i think it will make
anyone a "better" photographer (which is highly contingent on opinion
anyway), but because you've got stock folks who won't take anything <
8mp.
most of the time if i learn even the smallest amount regarding a topic,
it only illustrates how little i know. i'm always wary of anyone
claiming ownership or absolute knowledge of a subject or field.
not meant as a flame, not trying to troll, but surely it's
acknowledgeable that in nearly every online community, and on nearly
every topic, there's some twit that's been doing x for about a week and
thinks they're ready to "go pro", and there's the disgruntled jaded
regulars that think they know everything and resent the imagined
liquidation of the field because of the newbies.
doesn't it get a bit old and cliche after awhile?
hedgehog
the second, just for saying that.
BD
UC - you're good at being a pr!ck - this you've proved time and
again... Will you post links to your work so we can see if you're
_just_ a pr!ck or a liar to boot? ;)
UC
No, just a prick.
nasca...@nascar.com
I see you seem to be able to talk the talk, and belittle everyone
else. Well let's see some of your work and see if you are able to walk
the walk as well. Somehow I doubt you can.
On 25 Feb 2006 13:35:18 -0800, "UC" <uraniumc...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
BD
Exactly - I figure he's either a bitter old man, or a failed
photographer who wishes he had talent. Either way - he sucks. And
probably loves the negative attention.
I read once that 'professional' photography is one half
talent/skill/equipment, and one half marketing. I gotta wonder how far
a pissy git like UC could possibly get in pitching himself to a
potential client. I'd recoil in horror, if his people skills in real
life are anything like his Usenet persona would suggest.
UC
me that I am not a pro.
I have all the knowledge and talent I need, and probably much more than
I need.
I have worked professionally, but not as an independent pro. I worked
doing audio-visual, commercial, and industrial photography, for
agencies and commercial studios.
Suffice it to say I hated almost every minute of it.
BD
Doing the work for / answering to others, you mean...
I can see that.
UC
BD wrote:
> >I hated almost every minute of it.
>
> Doing the work for / answering to others, you mean...
>
Well, did you ever photograph large appliances? Refrigerators, stoves,
etc.? Ever have the light box counter-weight crash down on you because
the equipment was not set up right, and almost kill you? (I had added
some tape to the bar holfding the box to increase the friction, but
someone removed it, and the head slipped off, unbalancing the thing.)
Ever work in an un-airconditioned warehouse in the summer?
Yes, answering to idiots...
> I can see that.
Marcel Meijer
person like you. It will be far better off in the hands of a person with
people skills, who doesn't see it as groveling but as building relations,
because that is after all what we are selling, relations, photography is
just a by product, but that is the part you don't get.
That is why there is so much shitty photographers out there making it, they
know what they are selling. As long as people like you choose to hide your
talent behind a shitty personality this will continue to happen and you can
moan and groan about it as much as you want it is not going to change.
By the way what is your story with the uranium committee?
BD
So... why punish everyone else, then? So you had a shitty time of it -
there have been countless people who you've slagged for no reason in
here, and THEY weren't the idiots you had to answer to when a
counterweight almost smacked you - if it turns out that the reason you
slagged them was not because of what they said, but because you feel
you've been karmically shafted, and feel compelled to take it out on
the world... then don't you think you should... maybe ... get over it?
Your call, though.
UC
photography...but it was one of the worst. Do you have any idea how
heavy those lead balls are?
The strobe head had been slipping off for some time. I put some tape
around the shaft it was attached to, so friction would hold it. One
member of the owner's family took it off...
When the head fell off, the whole thing became unbalanced. It crashed
down narrowly missing my head, and the ball put a big hole in a stove.
UC
Marcel Meijer wrote:
> It's a shame UC that so much knowlege and talent should go to waste on a
> person like you.
I agree. I'm sick of it. I should be the one before whom people grovel.
> It will be far better off in the hands of a person with
> people skills, who doesn't see it as groveling but as building relations,
> because that is after all what we are selling, relations, photography is
> just a by product, but that is the part you don't get.
I have done enough grovelling in my day to equal the entire ppulation
of slaves in ancient Rome.
> That is why there is so much shitty photographers out there making it, they
> know what they are selling.
And the clientelle don't know any better....
> As long as people like you choose to hide your
> talent behind a shitty personality this will continue to happen and you can
> moan and groan about it as much as you want it is not going to change.
>
> By the way what is your story with the uranium committee?
I read a book about the Manahatten Project last year. I liked the name.
http://www.childrenofthemanhattanproject.org/HISTORY/H-04a.htm
UC
Marcel Meijer wrote:
>
> By the way what is your story with the uranium committee?
http://www.atomicarchive.com/History/mp/p2s1.shtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_Committee
http://www.mbe.doe.gov/me70/manhattan/uranium_research.htm
But there's nother one!
and another one!
hedgehog
anyway, and that's more than fine by me, but since you've graced my
thread with your personal situation, here's my .02 of advice. feel free
to bin it and flame away.
ego and jadedness makes people lazy and uncreative, regardless of any
prior accomplishment. there is always something new to learn.
additionally, being talented in your field doesn't make you a superior
human being in comparison to others. it makes you accomplished in one
thing.
excellence in a skill is admired, but excellence in a skill, and the
humility and willingness to empathetically help others is far more
revered.
finding that you're tired of taking risks, of sticking your neck out
there or *trying* doesn't make anyone better at anything. feeling that
you've paid your dues and that you're owed a break doesn't make anyone
better at anything. and if you know anything about anything -regardless
of your field- you know that there's always more to learn. no one ever
perfects a thing, an idea. i don't think they should aim to: it's
hubris that ultimately cripples one's efforts, even if they are better
than everyone else's.
'experts' often have a difficult time seeing the forest for the trees.
i reccomend designing a poster and asking for a critique in
alt.typography to get an idea of what i mean.
when people are stupid or careless, it's still ultimately your
challenge. you can either continue to rise and meet challenges, or get
off the pot.
i'm reasonably certain you didn't fly out of your mother's vagina
snapping shots of the doctor.
UC
To whom was this monument of prose addressed?
hedgehog
thread with his satre hell-is-other-people schtick :]
hedgehog
thread with his satre hell-is-other-people routine :]
UC
hedgehog wrote:
> to the rather moody cliche usenet personality that's hijacked the
> thread with his satre hell-is-other-people schtick :]
I await your next missive with unbridled anticipation...
hedgehog
unlike some people i have more productive things to entertain me in
life than griefing an internet newsgroup all afternoon.