Everyone is taking photos... But then what's wrong with that?

Normally there are/should be dedicated spots where pros only are allowed. All other places are for everyone. If amateur gets first best place in this shared area then it's pros issue if he is late. After all, all visitors are paying entry fee so why don't let them take some pictures? It's fair - people from street aren't allowed into pro spots.
 
GSNfan said:
A semi-famous photographer said he could not take photos in a certain event because there were 30 to 40 'amateurs' (and he used that word) in front and blocked his shots...

I found his comment really arrogant, did he expect everyone to step aside so his holiness takes his shots? What gives him more right to take picture of 'something' than the amateur with his/her camera?
Click to expand...


Had he said "they wouldn't step away so that I may take that photo better than the lot of them", then, yes, I would have thought that comment would have been arrogant.

Also, had he been the event photographer (and even more, if paid to be), I can certainly understand his frustration. Frustration is not a symptom of arrogance (afaik).

If being a waiter were a popular hobby, I'm sure that being a paid waiter at a special event and being trampled on by the others (Waiter Democracy In Action, if you will --I'd call it Waiter Anarchy In Action in this case) performing your duty as a paid waiter would be very frustrating.

That's just me.

Now, I don't know the circumstances. What is the context?
 
Last edited:
hipsterdufus said:
Not sure I agree with this. I've seen plenty of amazing photographers, whether they shoot street, art, surreal, etc. And none of them have been "discovered". None of them can make a living off from the amazing images they shoot. I have a hard time believing that it's just as easy now to make as big of an impact in photography as it was in the 1950's. No facts to back it up, but I think most photographers would agree with this statement.



I hope you're not positing this statement as a fact, but merely as an opinion. Many people find meaning in their art. Photography can produce art. Existentialism states (loosely) that it is up to the individual to find meaning in life. I don't know how photography and art can be excluded from that, if it works for someone...
Click to expand...

I agree with you, the fact that there is a lot of fish in the sea can even make big fishes overlooked. Or it will make people raise the bar on the definition of 'big'. I asked a friend a while ago about his exam. He said, 'I hope the bell (curve) will save me'. 😀
 
^ Being a successful photographer also means marketing yourself well.

As for the general topic, thus is the photography food chain.
 
When I am doing it for an assignment, to earn the bread with which I eat, darn straight I have more of a "right" than an amateur does to take a photo.

In every other circumstance no, everyone has an equal right to take a photo.

I don't object to everyone taking photos, I object to all the bad photos people take 😛

GSNfan said:
A semi-famous photographer said he could not take photos in a certain event because there were 30 to 40 'amateurs' (and he used that word) in front and blocked his shots...

I found his comment really arrogant, did he expect everyone to step aside so his holiness takes his shots? What gives him more right to take picture of 'something' than the amateur with his/her camera?
Click to expand...
 
daninjc said:
Does it makes hard to find interesting work buried under a mountain of mediocre stuff? Perhaps, but then again the internet itself is an outstanding platform for filtering, promoting and amplifying good stuff (e.g. blogs, platforms, collectives).
Click to expand...

Hm.. I think that its the opposite. Almost all photographers/images I hear about from friends, or through facebook or find because of high rating on google that are supposed to be "great" are almost always cheap, oversharpened or horrible HDR images that has no actual value or is especially good. Internet gives the power to the people, but do the majority of the people have good taste or understand photography? HELL NO. The good serious photography drowns in all amateuristic boring and "sensational" hdr photography..
And that is nothing more then sad..
The problem is not digital photography, the problem is internet.
R.I.P photography.
 
Ariefb said:
just wanna show how arrogant people can be..
Click to expand...

I know of a couple event photographers that have the "don't get in the way" policy.... and truthfully I don't find this arrogant at all. They're getting paid to deliver the goods and not a shot of someone's arm/elbow/etc...
If the images turn out awful because uncle joe's back or digicam is in the frame, it still reflects on the photog that the bride & groom paid thousands of $ for.
 
you doing it the wrong way... 🙂
find a blog/group/online magazine by someone you trust (meaning you share some aesthetical ground) and you will easily discover entire collectives of people that do amazing work - whatever your preference is. You love photojournalism? Start from MAGNUM, photo8 etc... Straight street? In-Public. You love when your eyes bleed? Find a HDR group 😀
The key is filtering, and the internet provides great resources for that. Photography has been dead for a while, long live photography...


Danlo said:
Hm.. I think that its the opposite. Almost all photographers/images I hear about from friends, or through facebook or find because of high rating on google that are supposed to be "great" are almost always cheap, oversharpened or horrible HDR images that has no actual value or is especially good. Internet gives the power to the people, but do the majority of the people have good taste or understand photography? HELL NO. The good serious photography drowns in all amateuristic boring and "sensational" hdr photography..
And that is nothing more then sad..
The problem is not digital photography, the problem is internet.
R.I.P photography.
Click to expand...
 
Damaso said:
Sorry if it doesn't sit well with you but I think it is simple civility not to try and interfere with someone who is working.
Click to expand...

That is fine as long as you work in your office, or cordoned work area. When you're in public place where everyone has the same right to be there, don't shove and push people or whine about it later... Also its usually the sheepish looking and meek poor amateur who gets pushed, not the tough guy who looks like he might fight back.
 
I don't push anyone. Most photographers I know don't push people. We do get annoyed by non professionals who try to occupy the same space we do. Is that elitist? Well yes, by definition.

Is it wrong? As I said I do think working stiffs should have priority in news situations over hobbyists. I'm sure I'm in the minority on RFF but then again I'm a working stiff (photographer).

If we are talking about a lovely sunset or a day at the beach then of course no one has priority. I'm just saying there are times when professionals should be given the courtesy to do their jobs. I think this is reasonable. If a hobbyist wants that kind of access let them put the time and training and sacrifice to earn it.

While I don't think this is true of ANYONE on this thread, there are some people out there who think a camera (the more expensive the better) puts them at the same level of HCB or Capa.

Having access to the technology does not put you on the level of all practitioners.

That's only my opinion.


GSNfan said:
That is fine as long as you work in your office, or cordoned work area. When you're in public place where everyone has the same right to be there, don't shove and push people or whine about it later... Also its usually the sheepish looking and meek poor amateur who gets pushed, not the tough guy who looks like he might fight back.
Click to expand...
 
Damaso said:
I don't push anyone. Most photographers I know don't push people. We do get annoyed by non professionals who try to occupy the same space we do. Is that elitist? Well yes, by definition.

Is it wrong? As I said I do think working stiffs should have priority in news situations over hobbyists. I'm sure I'm in the minority on RFF but then again I'm a working stiff (photographer).

If we are talking about a lovely sunset or a day at the beach then of course no one has priority. I'm just saying there are times when professionals should be given the courtesy to do their jobs. I think this is reasonable. If a hobbyist wants that kind of access let them put the time and training and sacrifice to earn it.

While I don't think this is true of ANYONE on this thread, there are some people out there who think a camera (the more expensive the better) puts them at the same level of HCB or Capa.

Having access to the technology does not put you on the level of all practitioners.

That's only my opinion.
Click to expand...

I think you're backtracking on your initial cavalier statement a bit... But even then when you say you have 'priority' to cover the news, that priority comes based on what criterion?

You're not shooting for free, you're paid by a privet organization that gets paid by advertisement and other stuff to sell those images... And how is that the basis that you have a 'priority' while another guy with a camera does not?

Lets get with the time, the days of super hero PJ with a camera who had the "right" to cover "news" is over.
 
Damaso said:
As a professional I find it offensive that someone with a mobile phone camera (or a M9 for that matter) who is a hobbyist or just wants a photo, feels they have as much right as I do when I am working and they are having fun. It devalues what I do for a living.
Click to expand...

As long as that individual with the cell phone and / or M9 is not in an area where he/she isn't supposed to be (a designated area for professionals), I can't see how you have more priority just because you make money from it. I'm not trying to be difficult, and I can see it would be highly annoying if I were in your shoes, but part of your job is dealing with getting the photo while dealing with the crowd around you I would think or getting the photo from a different viewpoint than the cell phone snapper.

As far as public getting in the way at my job, they would be trespassing since they would have to get through security and two doors that only open with badges. The same cannot be said of photography. Photojournalists have always had to deal with the public getting in the way when they are documenting the public (and not the private).
 
Last edited:
ryan:

"why are 41 photographers taking pictures of the same thing...?"

Because maybe it was a really great moment and a really great shot, and they all recognized it as such? It's happened to me. I'll see a great moment, shoot it, and then notice a photog across the room just shot the same thing I did.

And it ain't new. You know the famous Eisenstadt photo of the sailor kissing the nurse at the end of WW II? Well, there are actually TWO shots of that famous moment --one by Eisenstadt and one by a Navy photographer. His photo was shot from a different angle than Eisenstadt's shot, and never quite got the same kind of recognition....

Hey, the good and bad thing about the technology it that it makes photography more democratic. That's the way it is. We just have to live with it.
 
The point, then --I guess--, is that everybody is free to do anything, even if it's getting in the way of somebody working (whether if it's in the confines of an office or not), because otherwise complaining about it pegs you in the "I'm Holy and You're Not" category. Specially if you dare work outside of the confines of an office.

Does that sum it up pretty well?

If so, then, why, next time I go to a concert I'll get on stage and grab a microphone. Who do these elitist musicians working outside the confines of an office think they are if they complain? I won't take any of their "holier than thou" posturing. I mean, I'm doing it for free, they should thank me!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom