what makes a pro ?
bill jones
First you need to define what a PRO is. Is a pro someone who gets paid
for taking pictures? If so then the guy that takes those horrible
school pictures is a pro !!!!! I don't think so. For the sake of this
thread, a pro is someone who consistently produces publishable
pictures.
A pro has thrown away more shots then most of will ever take.
A pro knows his equipment and doesn't care about yours.
A pro always has a camera with him, He (not gender specific) composes
everything he looks at. Even with the camera in the bag.
He always knows where the light is and how to use it.
A pro doesn't waste time taking 'bad' shots if he knows he has time to
take a good one.
A pro will take a bad shot if he knows he doesn't have time to take a
good one, It might be turned into a good shot in the darkroom.
Ansel Adams preached zones, I'm not sure his camera ability was the
greatest, but he really understood the darkroom.
A pro knows when to use fill in flash.
A pro knows how to minimize the distractions surounding the subject.
A pro know f stops, shutter speeds and depth of field.
This weekend I was at my childrens soccor games, three in a row so the
light changed over a three and a half hour period. Started a nine am
with a bright and low sun. Shadows where intense. Now I'm not going to
bore you with snap shots of my kids standing there with there fingers
close to their noses. The point is that I sat in my lounging chair and
watched the parents take pictures.
I sat at the side/end of the field with the sun directly behind me and
moved a little every game as the sun moved up and to my left.
Absolutly the best place to be to either take movies or snap shots.
Not a single person came to where I was (and yes, I had bathed before
going) to take any pictures. They all ran along the side lines
pointing towards the sun. EVERY picture that was taken would either
have the sun behind their kid or it would be an intense side light.
SHADOWS everywhere.
There wasn't a telephoto lens in sight, there wasn't a single picture
taken that would be a keeper except to the parent who thinks anything
with their kid in it is great.
Do you think you're any good ? Take a little test. Take a picture of a
white egg on a white background and produce a stunning B&W image.
Creative Digital Imagery
next generation photography
Try it, you might like it!
Russ
? - not sure I see the point in this particular item
Why don't you pony up some web space and have an egg shooting contest?
"bill jones" <nos...@bxbweb.com> wrote in message
news:rmqrqtcbpvsrhkffk...@4ax.com...
bill jones
wrote:
>A pro knows his equipment and doesn't care about yours.
>
>? - not sure I see the point in this particular item
>
A pro is more interested in taking pictures then talking equipment.
>
>
>Why don't you pony up some web space and have an egg shooting contest?
>
>
You're on. How about the images resized to around 640x480. Email them
with the specifics and I'll post them.
Tony Porczyk
> First you need to define what a PRO is. Is a pro someone who gets
> paid for taking pictures?
Yep.
> If so then the guy that takes those horrible school pictures is a
> pro !!!!! I don't think so.
But he is. Just because he is not very good, does not change the fact
that he is a pro. Car mechanics are good and bad, teachers are good and
bad, so? Why should a photographer be any different. Perhaps you should
just divide them into "good pro" and "bad pro"?
> For the sake of this thread, a pro is someone who consistently
> produces publishable pictures.
Nah. Ever heard of "health professionals"? You think they are all good?
BTW, why does it matter (how we define a "pro")?
t.
Jack
Dictionary generally defines "participating for gain or livelihood in an
activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs". Using the term
as a noun pertains to one engages in a persuit or activity professionally.
The term, as used as a noun, has been around since the year 1811.
Most often, debates over very simple definitions take place when the sides
aren't aware of generally accepted definitions.
Such debates rage on this newsgroup frequently by persons who seem to define
"professional" as relating to a their own sense of quality.
The long and short of it is, if we choose to ignore accepted definitions,
then communications are not nearly as pleasant as they could otherwise be.
"bill jones" <nos...@bxbweb.com> wrote in message
news:rmqrqtcbpvsrhkffk...@4ax.com...
>
Jeff Drabble
wrote:
(This is not directed at you, Tony, but is a general observation.)
I think a major issue is missed here. If you were to say that only
haute cuisine restaurants were professional and worthwhile, you would
probably say that McDonald's is not professional and no good. The
point is that the market has a broad spread. Some people actually
want McDonald's and are happy with the service and price at that
level, so that means McDonald's is providing a professional,
public-pleasing service and doing it in a manner that suits its
clients.
Same goes for your school photographer: he is providing a service at a
level and price which suits the clients. It matters not one jot
whether he is the equal of Henri Cartier-Bresson, as he is providing a
professional service to a market which values his efforts. It's a
matter of "horses for courses": if he shot beautifully posed and lit
shots of school kids, they probably couldn't afford the result.
Shooting at a level the market calls for does not make anyone a "bad
pro". It is just as possible to have a "good pro" school photographer
as it is to have a "bad pro" fashion photographer.
Jeff Drabble
Dick Weld
I work with are more than delighted to talk about their equipment...your
equipment...any equipment.
Many professionals achieve excellent and consistent results, by repeating
over and over what has worked for them in the past. I'm sure you've seen
them set lighting ratios by the strings on the lights. Can they produce
a dynamite photo? Absolutely. But successful portrait photographers...
even the best of them... are primarily good salesmen.
<"Do you think you're any good ? Take a little test. Take a picture of a
<white egg on a white background and produce a stunning B&W image."
Now take that picture with a large format camera, develop your own
negative in PMK Pyro, and print a 16" x 20" on fibre-based paper!!
fl...@nospamnospam.com
>....mercy snip
You'd be the last person I'd hire ;)
How's that for a Pro ?
Tony Porczyk
> I think a major issue is missed here. If you were to say that only
> haute cuisine restaurants were professional and worthwhile, you
> would probably say that McDonald's is not professional and no good.
> The point is that the market has a broad spread.
Thanks, Jeff. You pretty much verbalized my argument in fewer words, and
made it simple and to the point.
> It is just as possible to have a "good pro" school photographer as
> it is to have a "bad pro" fashion photographer.
Indeed.
t.
Tony Spadaro
Then you go on to blather for a few paragraphs about what YOU think is the
proper way for YOUR pro to act.
Then you go one to brag about how pro YOU are compared to the amateur
parents because you brought a whole pile of equipment to shoot snaps at a
children's soccer game.
Then you wonder why people call you an overstuffed prig.
I not only know I'm good, I know a whole hell of a lot of pros who would
find your laundry list of virtues patently rediculous.
--
http://home.nc.rr.com/tspadaro/
The Camera-ist's Manifesto
a Radical approach to photography.
Or thrill to sights you've never seen before all that often
Chapel Hill artist Tony Spadaro's Home page
http://tspadaro.homestead.com/Home.html
"bill jones" <nos...@bxbweb.com> wrote in message
news:rmqrqtcbpvsrhkffk...@4ax.com...
>
Tony Spadaro
<fl...@nospamnospam.com> wrote in message
news:3bb1aa61...@127.0.0.1...
> That's the best answer I've seen.
Don Stauffer
something for pay. It can also mean a member of a profession, which is
even harder to define, but frequently means something like independent
contractor.
That said, I think the division between pro and amateur should NEVER be
taken to indicate quality of the result. I know serious amateurs who
exhibit in salons who are far better than any professional photographer
I know. Why don't they go professional? Maybe because they already
have a profession, in some cases making more money than they would as a
photographer.
I also do not think the term should be applied to equipment. I know
professional photographers, who, to maximize their profits, use the
cheapest equipment that will do the job. I know well-off amateurs who
spend a fortune for their equipment.
--
Don Stauffer in Minnesota
stau...@usfamily.net
webpage- http://www.usfamily.net/web/stauffer
Rick Matthews
>
> First you need to define what a PRO is. Is a pro someone who gets paid
> for taking pictures? If so then the guy that takes those horrible
> school pictures is a pro !!!!! I don't think so. For the sake of this
> thread, a pro is someone who consistently produces publishable
> pictures.
<snip>
> I sat at the side/end of the field with the sun directly behind me and
> moved a little every game as the sun moved up and to my left.
> Absolutly the best place to be to either take movies or snap shots.
Having the sun behind you is great for recording information, but
it tends to result in rather flat images.
> Not a single person came to where I was (and yes, I had bathed before
> going) to take any pictures. They all ran along the side lines
> pointing towards the sun. EVERY picture that was taken would either
> have the sun behind their kid or it would be an intense side light.
> SHADOWS everywhere.
Intense side light? Shadows? I call that time of day and that angle the
magical hour. Perhaps the other parents were chuckling at the
guy behind the goal slavishly following the maxim for novices of
keeping the sun behing you. If they were using film, they
would have found it easier to retain both highlight and shadow
detail than you would have using digital.
> Do you think you're any good ? Take a little test. Take a picture of a
> white egg on a white background and produce a stunning B&W image.
I notice that you used side lighting here. With light behind you,
the photo would have been pretty boring.
--
Rick Matthews matt...@wfu.edu
Department of Physics http://www.wfu.edu/~matthews
Wake Forest University 336-758-5340 (Voice)
Winston-Salem, NC 27109-7507 336-758-6142 (FAX)
USA
bill jones
<tspa...@ncmaps.rr.com> wrote:
>First you define pro as whatever YOU want it to be
>
>Then you go on to blather for a few paragraphs about what YOU think is the
>proper way for YOUR pro to act.
>
Gee Tony, I spoke my opinion, of course since you also have one, I
guess mine is worthless.
>Then you go one to brag about how pro YOU are compared to the amateur
>parents because you brought a whole pile of equipment to shoot snaps at a
>children's soccer game.
>
I don't believe I said I took a single picture, and I also don't
believe I said anything about my equipment. I did say I didn't see a
single telephoto lens and I did say that I didn't see a single person
give the light any concideration.
>Then you wonder why people call you an overstuffed prig.
Probably because I drink to much good beer. But so far I haven't seen
any posts to that effect.
But more to the point of your statement, I don't believe I said I
wondered anything. Is it your habit of responding without including
any quotes to back up your rambles ?
>
>I not only know I'm good, I know a whole hell of a lot of pros who would
>find your laundry list of virtues patently rediculous.
I'm waiting for your egg.
bill jones
Creative Digital Imagery
bill jones
wrote:
>
>> I sat at the side/end of the field with the sun directly behind me and
>> moved a little every game as the sun moved up and to my left.
>> Absolutly the best place to be to either take movies or snap shots.
>
>Having the sun behind you is great for recording information, but
>it tends to result in rather flat images.
>
Ageed, I'm not saying that the sun behind you is perfect, I was
talking about trying to get a picture of little Johnny that you could
actualy tell it was him. Personally I love shadows, but there is a
time and place for them.
>> Not a single person came to where I was (and yes, I had bathed before
>> going) to take any pictures. They all ran along the side lines
>> pointing towards the sun. EVERY picture that was taken would either
>> have the sun behind their kid or it would be an intense side light.
>> SHADOWS everywhere.
>
>Intense side light? Shadows? I call that time of day and that angle the
>magical hour. Perhaps the other parents were chuckling at the
>guy behind the goal slavishly following the maxim for novices of
>keeping the sun behing you. If they were using film, they
>would have found it easier to retain both highlight and shadow
>detail than you would have using digital.
>
Same as above. If I want a snapshot of my kid then I want to be able
to tell who it is.
>> Do you think you're any good ? Take a little test. Take a picture of a
>> white egg on a white background and produce a stunning B&W image.
>
>I notice that you used side lighting here. With light behind you,
>the photo would have been pretty boring.
I'm beginning to believe you missed my point. I'm not trying to
preach, I'm just trying to get at least one person to think. If I can
succed in that then I'm happy.
Believe me, I try to listen and learn from others. Constructive
critisism and advice is most welcome and the day I stop listening and
thinking about how to do it better will hopefully be a long time
coming.
Don Coon
our Engineers before I retired. They insisted that their titles "Engineer"
be capitalized since they were professionals and electricians, carpenters,
etc. were not : ) Really! in all publications!
As I recall prostitution is called the oldest "profession" on earth. Sorry
couldn't resist.
A professional "Retiree" : )
bill jones
wrote:
>This whole discussion reminds me of absurdities I experienced working with
>our Engineers before I retired. They insisted that their titles "Engineer"
>be capitalized since they were professionals and electricians, carpenters,
>etc. were not : ) Really! in all publications!
>
Yes it is absurb, but I wanted to see some sort of discussion that
wasn't about how better my camera is then your camera, wasn't about
satan, wasn't about angels and wasn't about wtc.
>As I recall prostitution is called the oldest "profession" on earth. Sorry
>couldn't resist.
>
Shouldn't that have been Prostitution ? :-)
>
>A professional "Retiree" : )
Don Coon
> On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 12:56:17 -0400, "Don Coon" <coo...@home.com>
> wrote:
>
> >This whole discussion reminds me of absurdities I experienced working
with
> >our Engineers before I retired. They insisted that their titles
"Engineer"
> >be capitalized since they were professionals and electricians,
carpenters,
> >etc. were not : ) Really! in all publications!
> >
>
> Yes it is absurb, but I wanted to see some sort of discussion that
> wasn't about how better my camera is then your camera, wasn't about
> satan, wasn't about angels and wasn't about wtc.
>
>
> >As I recall prostitution is called the oldest "profession" on earth.
Sorry
> >couldn't resist.
> >
> Shouldn't that have been Prostitution ? :-)
All depends how "professional" her equipment looks? : )
Tony Spadaro
you've been getting.
--
http://home.nc.rr.com/tspadaro/
The Camera-ist's Manifesto
a Radical approach to photography.
Or thrill to sights you've never seen before all that often
Chapel Hill artist Tony Spadaro's Home page
http://tspadaro.homestead.com/Home.html
"bill jones" <nos...@bxbweb.com> wrote in message
news:31kuqtomapsl5tnv5...@4ax.com...
Tony Spadaro
wounded fawn. Sorry Ace. You are still a prig and a snob and a fool.
I would hire a school photographer, or a wedding photographer, or any
other professional photographers long before I'd touch a stuck up wannabee
with a barge pole.
What would a shot of an egg prove? Anyone who can operate a light meter,
and a lot of people who cannot are perfectly capable of producing white on
white. Come back when you can show me a full portfolio of professional
shots -- in your chosen specialty. And they all better look as good or
better than all the other professional portfolios available on the web and
Much better than the portfolios of any school photographer, since you seem
to think they are beneath your contempt.
I will be away for a bit. When I come back I expect to see this portfolio
site, along with testimonials from all the clients who will never hire
anyone but you in future, and a collection of tearsheets from all your many
publications. This is the only way you can convince me you are not a
complete fraud --- but you will still be an overstuffed prig, no matter how
good you are.
The FIRST quality of a professional is a professional attitude. Without
that you will fail.
--
http://home.nc.rr.com/tspadaro/
The Camera-ist's Manifesto
a Radical approach to photography.
Or thrill to sights you've never seen before all that often
Chapel Hill artist Tony Spadaro's Home page
http://tspadaro.homestead.com/Home.html
"bill jones" <nos...@bxbweb.com> wrote in message
news:ljiuqtcfihbc2k0ce...@4ax.com...
bill jones
riled up. I'm not going to play your little 'sod' 'moron' games you
play. See I have read some of your 79 posts, most of which are about
politics, not digital photography.
Please feel free to flame me back, but rest assured I'm not playing
your childish and pompish game.
So far the only one around here that seems to have a great opinion of
Tony Sparado is Tony Sparado.
I guess there isn't room in a good manifesto for a little egg :-)
BTW. I never said I was a professional photographer, and I never
solicited business. I am a professional though, and that's why this
little farce is over.
bill jones
On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 17:44:06 GMT, "Tony Spadaro"
<tspa...@ncmaps.rr.com> wrote:
> You seem to think you can convince me you are not a prig by acting like a
>wounded fawn. Sorry Ace. You are still a prig and a snob and a fool.
> I would hire a school photographer, or a wedding photographer, or any
>other professional photographers long before I'd touch a stuck up wannabee
>with a barge pole.
> What would a shot of an egg prove? Anyone who can operate a light meter,
>and a lot of people who cannot are perfectly capable of producing white on
>white. Come back when you can show me a full portfolio of professional
>shots -- in your chosen specialty. And they all better look as good or
>better than all the other professional portfolios available on the web and
>Much better than the portfolios of any school photographer, since you seem
>to think they are beneath your contempt.
> I will be away for a bit. When I come back I expect to see this portfolio
>site, along with testimonials from all the clients who will never hire
>anyone but you in future, and a collection of tearsheets from all your many
>publications. This is the only way you can convince me you are not a
>complete fraud --- but you will still be an overstuffed prig, no matter how
>good you are.
> The FIRST quality of a professional is a professional attitude. Without
>that you will fail.
Creative Digital Imagery
Davey
your problem with that?
Professional means "I make money at it." Period. In any field of
discussion, that's all "pro" means.
"bill jones" <nos...@bxbweb.com> wrote in message
news:rmqrqtcbpvsrhkffk...@4ax.com...
St. Marc the Perpetually Amused
"Davey" <D...@G.com> wrote in message news:OYMr7.5743$f5.377303@news...
> But dude, the guy who takes those horrible school pictures IS a pro.
What's
> your problem with that?
>
> Professional means "I make money at it." Period. In any field of
> discussion, that's all "pro" means.
>
Actually, to a lawyer, "professional" means "someone who can be sued for
malpractice." *grin* This isn't as cynical as it looks at first glance:
malpractice can only be proved by testimony from another professional in the
same field. By this definition, there's no such thing as a "professional"
photographer, because photography isn't a profession, but an occupation.You
can sue a photographer for taking bad pictures, and even if he gets fifty
other photographers to say they were good pictures, it's irrelevant. If you
sue a doctor for malpractice, you have to find another doctor to swear that
it *was* malpractice.
If you think that's bad, you should see the class where we have to learn to
strain at gnats and pass camels through needles' eyes. See "the rule of the
fertile octogenarian" for further study.
St. Marc
bill jones
>But dude, the guy who takes those horrible school pictures IS a pro. What's
>your problem with that?
>
>Professional means "I make money at it." Period. In any field of
>discussion, that's all "pro" means.
>
>
>
Good point. That probably includes bartering as well. So now if I add
up all things I've been paid to do and bartered to do in the past 54
years that makes me a professional professional.
BTW, I used to take horrible dance recital pictures, lots of money for
setting up a backdrop, a couple of umbrellas and taking good notes. No
art there, just good money.
I should have said 'what makes a good photographer', oh well, live and
learn. But then I would have been accused of dissing anyone who
pressed a shutter release (photographer) and anyone who could be
judged 'good' by any definition.
Bill Funk
>But dude, the guy who takes those horrible school pictures IS a pro. What's
>your problem with that?
>
>Professional means "I make money at it." Period. In any field of
>discussion, that's all "pro" means.
Maybe one of Bill's school photos came out really bad?
--
Bill Funk
http://www.users.qwest.net/~bfunk33/
Tony Spadaro
You have indeed hit close to home. I am not a professional photographer
as I never have made enough income off photography to consider myself
professional. I do know a fair number of hard working pros who do not shoot
for publication, and never have nor have ever wanted to. You might try some
portrait, wedding, or school work sometime - You will do a lousy job at it
unless you learn something about treating people with the respect they are
due. In fact I doubt you would get hired by anyplace that took the time to
interview you for the job. Even technically, I doubt you could just walk in
and start shooting without training - no matter how superiour you think your
abilities may be.
Somewhere between asses like you with your lamebrained definitions of what
is a professional and the other idiots trying to find out what the pros use
because they are convinced new stuff will make them good photographs there
are the guys in the middle who would just like to improve their pictures -
they are the non-poseurs, who are interested in photography as a hobby (and
occasional a profession) rather than as a way to impress the neighbours.
Those are the people who find my manifesto interesting. I average about 5
emails a day from them.
I don't post much on the digital forum as I don't own digital cameras -
I read more than I post here - it's a form of learning - you might try it.
If you want to read my posts you will have to go to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
where I post a lot of good solid advice - all without assinine definitions
of what makes a pro, or who's more pro, or why anyone who isn't working for
publication isn't a pro, or my pro can beat up your pro.
I'm glad you took the time to read the Manifesto - it may teach you
something about photography - especially if you read the books on the book
list. Add a few lessons in humility and a bit of a refresher in respecting
others even if they don't do things exactly to your specifications and you
might eventually become less of a prig.
No there is little egg in the manifesto or in al of my galleries. I don't
eat eggs. There is at least one high key portrait - and after all that is
what you egg exercise is about - high key right? Or don't you even know? If
I walked into any photo studio, with my egg on white picture and said "hire
me", the laughter would ring for hours. On the other hand my portfolios have
gotten me offers of jobs when I wasn't applying for work --- To put it in
simple words
ANYONE CAN COME UP WITH ONE GOOD PHOTOGRAPH. WITHOUT PROOF THAT YOUR WORK
HAS DEPTH YOU AIN'T GOIN' ANYWHERE, ACE.
I assume you don't have a portfolio, as you seem to have elided that
part of my post. I don't know if you looked at my picture website, but give
it a glance later. It will give you an idea of the depth of material a real
photographer has -- even one who never has been a professional. Until you
can show that kind of depth, perhaps you are not in a position to attack
working photographers as "non-pros".
--
http://home.nc.rr.com/tspadaro/
The Camera-ist's Manifesto
a Radical approach to photography.
Or thrill to sights you've never seen before all that often
Chapel Hill artist Tony Spadaro's Home page
http://tspadaro.homestead.com/Home.html
"bill jones" <nos...@bxbweb.com> wrote in message
news:uk2vqtsdlnbhkgrmj...@4ax.com...
bill jones
<tspa...@ncmaps.rr.com> wrote:
>
> ANYONE CAN COME UP WITH ONE GOOD PHOTOGRAPH. WITHOUT PROOF THAT YOUR WORK
>HAS DEPTH YOU AIN'T GOIN' ANYWHERE, ACE.
I've been to your site. I did it by opening my eyes and looking at
your by line. To bad you didn't look at mine.
You have some really good stuff there. Some I don't care for, but
that's a matter of taste.
You talk about manners, please re read your stuff.
And yes, I am a professional. I make my living writing code for such
low lifes as Intel, Sharp and Tektronix.
I happen to enjoy photography and am trying to help beginners take
something other then a snap shot of their dog. If that a crime then
I'm guilty.
So ACE, if you think you've been somewhere, guess again.
Defcon1
him "F.......racist rednecks..." and it is normally capitalized...to
imitate screaming...
"bill jones" <nos...@bxbweb.com> wrote in message
news:uk2vqtsdlnbhkgrmj...@4ax.com...
Defcon1
reference to...your embarrasing yourself.
"Tony Spadaro" <tspa...@ncmaps.rr.com> wrote in message
news:MrOr7.44468$4W6.9...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com...
Defcon1
profession...photograpers for pay should properly be called commercial
photographers...
"Davey" <D...@G.com> wrote in message news:OYMr7.5743$f5.377303@news...
Tony Spadaro
--
http://home.nc.rr.com/tspadaro/
The Camera-ist's Manifesto
a Radical approach to photography.
Or thrill to sights you've never seen before all that often
Chapel Hill artist Tony Spadaro's Home page
http://tspadaro.homestead.com/Home.html
"Defcon1" <Def...@URichmond.edu> wrote in message
news:_TPr7.36054$N3.52...@news1.rdc1.va.home.com...
Tony Spadaro
spewing such bilge, the natural reaction is to show him the same sort of
respect. I treated him with all the respect he showed to professional
photographers and enthusiastic soccar parents and to anyone with an iota of
common sense. It's that simple.
--
http://home.nc.rr.com/tspadaro/
The Camera-ist's Manifesto
a Radical approach to photography.
Or thrill to sights you've never seen before all that often
Chapel Hill artist Tony Spadaro's Home page
http://tspadaro.homestead.com/Home.html
"Defcon1" <Def...@URichmond.edu> wrote in message
news:sVPr7.36055$N3.52...@news1.rdc1.va.home.com...
Jeff Drabble
<tspa...@ncmaps.rr.com> wrote:
Tony, did I read that you don't have a digital camera: is it your
intention buy one? What would be required in their to development to
send you to the retailers?
Jeff Drabble
Tony Spadaro
mount SLR.
I'm not much for rangefinders, etc -- never have been able to see much
through them. I am now both nearsighted and farsighted so using the LCD on
the back is a real PITA - I would have to hold the camera at arms length. I
want to be able to not change my work habits --getting old, you know.
Actually I've almost made the jump a couple times anyway. If I start
teaching again in any larger way I will immediately buy a fairly cheap
digicam as a teaching tool. The thought of being able to go from lesson to
print critique in ten minutes very much appeals to me - And it could be
viewed a lot faster with a laptop computer. Even passing the camera back and
forth to look at the pictures on the LCD strikes me as a lot better than
waiting as much as several days to see the results.
I have friends who still show the student films they made back in
college. These were major productions for them, using roll after roll of
very expensive 16mm B/W film, and having it processed, recording the sound
and stripping it in, etc etc etc.
You can see the strain on the budget as you watch the movie: shots that
run 20 seconds longer than they should, shots that were under-exposed but
not so badly you had to discard the film, sound that is off by just a little
bit, or sound with dropouts, etc. 20 years later kids were learning how to
shoot movies on videotape, and the quality of cinemaphotography has taken a
great leap forward. Digital is the next step in this. It's going to create a
lot of very very competent photographers. I won't say they will all be
great, but they will know thier stuff sooner and better than those of us
who had to learn while waiting as much as a couple weeks for feedback
Even if one's final goal is an image on film (and I'm probably a member
of the penultimate generation to even have that goal) digital is the way to
learn.
--
http://home.nc.rr.com/tspadaro/
The Camera-ist's Manifesto
a Radical approach to photography.
Or thrill to sights you've never seen before all that often
Chapel Hill artist Tony Spadaro's Home page
http://tspadaro.homestead.com/Home.html
"Jeff Drabble" <jef...@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:0ovvqtkebfqrv89s9...@4ax.com...
fl...@nospamnospam.com
<disc...@templeoferis.org> wrote:
>If you think that's bad, you should see the class where we have to learn to
>strain at gnats and pass camels through needles' eyes. See "the rule of the
>fertile octogenarian" for further study.
>
>St. Marc
>
passing camels through needles' eyes is remarkably easy ;)
Davey
You are indeed a pro photographer! And you're probably better than you'll
admit. But there are many incompetent doctors, lawyers, babysitters and
photographers in the world....and a lot of excellent ones.
'Pro' should mean 'good'...I sure wish it did!
D
"bill jones" <nos...@bxbweb.com> wrote in message
news:sh8vqtgtirvmn7frh...@4ax.com...
bill jones
Thanks for the compliment, sounds better then a lot of the other stuff
being said about me :-)
Going to submit an egg?
>Hi Bill,
>You are indeed a pro photographer! And you're probably better than you'll
>admit. But there are many incompetent doctors, lawyers, babysitters and
>photographers in the world....and a lot of excellent ones.
>
>'Pro' should mean 'good'...I sure wish it did!
>
>D
>
>
Tony Spadaro
--
http://home.nc.rr.com/tspadaro/
The Camera-ist's Manifesto
a Radical approach to photography.
Or thrill to sights you've never seen before all that often
Chapel Hill artist Tony Spadaro's Home page
http://tspadaro.homestead.com/Home.html
"bill jones" <nos...@bxbweb.com> wrote in message
news:5afvqtcp6idae7a1q...@4ax.com...
Jeff Drabble
bill jones
I've tried to be nice but like all infants, it's a waste of time when
a troll is on a rampage.
You say you're a teacher. brother I wouldn't let you teach my dog how
to take a dump. You say your an artist, only if you think so.
You say your site is a portfolio, only if 20 pictures dating back 30
years counts, and your links don't even work.
Your nocturnal collection, art, I don't think so, it looks more like
an obsession with vampires and whores, I could take a bunch of out of
focus stuff and claim it's art as well. Only I have more pride then
that.
Your picture of shoveling snow, it's great, who took it?
Tony, you are a joke, and a bad one at that.
On Tue, 25 Sep 2001 18:45:00 GMT, "Tony Spadaro"
<tspa...@ncmaps.rr.com> wrote:
> Of course I saw your site. If you wish to call that a portfolio you may.
Creative Digital Imagery
bill jones
<tspa...@ncmaps.rr.com> wrote:
Tony the TROLL, where you get off being the spokesman of most
photographers, Speak for yourself but don't insult people with talent.
> When you meet a man who insults the intelligence of most photographers by
>spewing such bilge, the natural reaction is to show him the same sort of
>respect. I treated him with all the respect he showed to professional
>photographers and enthusiastic soccar parents and to anyone with an iota of
>common sense. It's that simple.
Creative Digital Imagery
Tony Spadaro
--
http://home.nc.rr.com/tspadaro/
The Camera-ist's Manifesto
a Radical approach to photography.
Or thrill to sights you've never seen before all that often
Chapel Hill artist Tony Spadaro's Home page
http://tspadaro.homestead.com/Home.html
"bill jones" <nos...@bxbweb.com> wrote in message
news:rpr1rt006k6vtbnfa...@4ax.com...
bill jones
<tspa...@ncmaps.rr.com> wrote:
I haven't either.
>I don't insult people with talent.
Creative Digital Imagery
Tony Spadaro
argument - that was you ace. I guess that makes me the anti-troll.
I don't much care if you like my pictures - everyone to his own taste.
I've shown and I've sold, so apparently some people don't agree with you,
and since my definition of an artist is one who is called an artist by
others, I am therefore an artist.
I don't think you have the vaguest idea what makes a photograph. You do
have an ability to focus and you can get the exposure right --- why those
are the very abilities of those School Photographer you consider so much
beneath you! They of course also have to work with sometimes intractable
children trying to draw something out besides resentment and boredom. So
they still have the harder job.
Your pictures show no sign that you have ever heard of composition, and
they do not convey any idea of an event or a personality. I'll take the
Vampires and Whores any day --- or night for that matter. You do have a good
sense of colour - which puts you ahead of some.
You can work on composition, there is a "books on composition" list at
the Manifesto. For subject and personality, take a look in the library for
books by photographers like Brassai, Cartier-Bresson, David Plowden, Eve
Arnold, Walker Evans, Art Wolfe, etc. There are many many photographers out
there who's work can give you some idea of what it's all about. If you have
a good library check out the painters too - there are far too many to even
start a list. Don't worry about the How2 books as they are usually strictly
technical and that is not your problem - although the ones on lighting can
show you a better way to light an egg on a white background - that is after
all the first lesson in lighting 101 and has been done to death.
Then go forth, find a subject and make it live in two dimensions. Repeat
until it begins to gel.
After that I'll be glad to give you lessons.
--
http://home.nc.rr.com/tspadaro/
The Camera-ist's Manifesto
a Radical approach to photography.
Or thrill to sights you've never seen before all that often
Chapel Hill artist Tony Spadaro's Home page
http://tspadaro.homestead.com/Home.html
"bill jones" <nos...@bxbweb.com> wrote in message
news:0sq1rt0i3enpk8tsb...@4ax.com...
bill jones
<tspa...@ncmaps.rr.com> wrote:
Tony, you have done more in your pathetic little way to make my point
then your little mind will ever know. For that I thank you.
> I believe the definition of troll is one who starts a thread to cause an
>argument - that was you ace. I guess that makes me the anti-troll.
> I don't much care if you like my pictures - everyone to his own taste.
>I've shown and I've sold, so apparently some people don't agree with you,
>and since my definition of an artist is one who is called an artist by
>others, I am therefore an artist.
Your mother doesn't count. I think I am, therefore I am. Geez, sounds
like a line from the moody blues.
> I don't think you have the vaguest idea what makes a photograph. You do
>have an ability to focus and you can get the exposure right --- why those
>are the very abilities of those School Photographer you consider so much
>beneath you! They of course also have to work with sometimes intractable
>children trying to draw something out besides resentment and boredom. So
>they still have the harder job.
I too have taken 'school pictures' Have you? I know the talent, or
lack of it takes to parade one child after another in front of a lens.
That doesn't make school photographers untalented, it just makes
school pictures a commodity.
> Your pictures show no sign that you have ever heard of composition, and
>they do not convey any idea of an event or a personality. I'll take the
>Vampires and Whores any day --- or night for that matter. You do have a good
>sense of colour - which puts you ahead of some.
Thanks for the compliment, I'm still waiting for your egg, Next weeks
assignment will be beer. Think you're up to it ? Or just more prattle.
> You can work on composition, there is a "books on composition" list at
>the Manifesto.
The definition of a manifesto is a political satement, or an AD. WE
know what your manifesto is, you state it on your home page. 'Im for
sale'.
>For subject and personality, take a look in the library for
>books by photographers like Brassai, Cartier-Bresson, David Plowden, Eve
>Arnold, Walker Evans, Art Wolfe, etc. There are many many photographers out
>there who's work can give you some idea of what it's all about. If you have
>a good library check out the painters too - there are far too many to even
>start a list. Don't worry about the How2 books as they are usually strictly
>technical and that is not your problem - although the ones on lighting can
>show you a better way to light an egg on a white background - that is after
>all the first lesson in lighting 101 and has been done to death.
You want to expore art, try the works of Frida Kahlo or Diego Riviera,
or are they before your time. Or don't you like eyebrows.
Many have never had the chance to explore lighting 101. Why do you
feel it's beneath you?
> Then go forth, find a subject and make it live in two dimensions. Repeat
>until it begins to gel.
> After that I'll be glad to give you lessons.
AFTER you teach my dog.
I thank the school photographers/teachers that taught me, They had
talent, and they had the ability to teach. They where real.
Prig
bill jones
Funk) wrote:
No, it was the dance recital pictures that I took that where bad,and
worst part was the obsene money I made doing it.
Let me clarify, I said school pictures can be taken by anyone that can
press a shutter and has good business skills.
I didn't say that school picture 'takers' didn't have any talent. I'm
sure a lot of them are talented, but have decided that they needed to
make a living as well. And, yes I do understand the need of feeding
the family.
It's just a question of sematics. Even black and white photograpghy is
based on a grey scale, not BLACK or WHITE.
If what I said was a TRUTH then there would never been a reply.
But then again, how do you find a TRUTH if you don't pose or ask the
questions, and many times a question can only be asked by making a
statement !
>On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 20:46:38 GMT, "Davey" <D...@G.com> wrote:
>
>>But dude, the guy who takes those horrible school pictures IS a pro. What's
>>your problem with that?
>>
>>Professional means "I make money at it." Period. In any field of
>>discussion, that's all "pro" means.
>
>Maybe one of Bill's school photos came out really bad?
Creative Digital Imagery
Tony Spadaro
your own attempts at it though, you don't have the people skills necessary.
School pictures are indeed a commodity, as are wedding pictures, family
portraits, pet portraits, combined family and pet portraits, and pictures of
politicians at news conferences, or celebrities wafting slightly tipsy from
nightclubs, or almost every type of shot - rare and lucky is the
professional who gets to shoot the occasional picture that is not merely a
commodity. Frank Capa, Chim, and Cartier-Bresson come to mind. Your library
will probably have a book on Magnum, or of Life magazine famous photos. You
can look them up.
I don't drink beer either.
I'm glad to hear you know the names of two painters - there are a few more
out there too. I am particularly fond of the ashcan school but can and do
appreciate people with eyebrows - Modigliani had a way with eyebrows, as did
Renoir.
I don't feel that lighting 101 is beneath me, I've taught it. I simply said
you should be able to find a better way to light your egg in many books on
lighting - top light makes it look like (to reverse a cliche) a bald man.
You wouldn't top light a bald man would you? Do try to remember the egg is
just an exercise - the goal is to shoot people or products - which are not
so simple as eggs.
There is no place on any of my websites that states I am for sale. If you
want a print of one of my photos - I'll sell you one, but I'm not for sale.
If you have a project I find interesting I might be convinced to shoot it
for you, but I doubt you have a project I would find interesting.
I'm glad I helped you see the light. You were pretty down on school
photographers when you started this thread and now you seem to find them
pretty good guys. I always did too, along with wedding photographers,
newspaper photographers, portrait photographers, and all sorts of amateur
photographers. We're a talented and resourceful bunch. You should hang out
with us sometime and you'll learn something.
--
http://home.nc.rr.com/tspadaro/
The Camera-ist's Manifesto
a Radical approach to photography.
Or thrill to sights you've never seen before all that often
Chapel Hill artist Tony Spadaro's Home page
http://tspadaro.homestead.com/Home.html
"bill jones" <nos...@bxbweb.com> wrote in message
news:a1b2rts917ak9hq65...@4ax.com...
Bill Funk
wrote:
>On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 22:29:16 GMT, bfu...@koala.m6.net.invalid (Bill
>Funk) wrote:
>
>
>No, it was the dance recital pictures that I took that where bad,and
>worst part was the obsene money I made doing it.
>
>Let me clarify, I said school pictures can be taken by anyone that can
>press a shutter and has good business skills.
>
>I didn't say that school picture 'takers' didn't have any talent. I'm
>sure a lot of them are talented, but have decided that they needed to
>make a living as well. And, yes I do understand the need of feeding
>the family.
Actually, you said they aren't pros.
>
>It's just a question of sematics. Even black and white photograpghy is
>based on a grey scale, not BLACK or WHITE.
>
>If what I said was a TRUTH then there would never been a reply.
>
>But then again, how do you find a TRUTH if you don't pose or ask the
>questions, and many times a question can only be asked by making a
>statement !
Making a statement is one thing.
Discarding the standard definition of something, and proceding to make
your own definition, then basing your following statements on that
made-up definition is bound to get you a lot of static.
If you've been around as much as you think you have, you knew that,
and did it anyway.
That's not how you find TRUTH.
>
>
>>On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 20:46:38 GMT, "Davey" <D...@G.com> wrote:
>>
>>>But dude, the guy who takes those horrible school pictures IS a pro. What's
>>>your problem with that?
>>>
>>>Professional means "I make money at it." Period. In any field of
>>>discussion, that's all "pro" means.
>>
>>Maybe one of Bill's school photos came out really bad?
>
>Creative Digital Imagery
>next generation photography
>
>http://www.bxbweb.com
>
>Try it, you might like it!
--
Bill Funk
http://www.users.qwest.net/~bfunk33/