Saturday, March 21, 2009

What goes wrong on photoshoots

I was reading here about troubles on location shoots...
I have one better...

I used to do a bit of fashion photography and I had one client who produced a catalogue every year. On one shoot we were in a tropical garden (Crystal Gardens. Doesn't exist any more. I think it got turned into a casino....). Anyway, there were a half dozen or so female models, the client, me and my assistant. As I was composing a shot, I backed into a light stand and tore the seat out of my jeans. I had backup cameras, backup lights, but no backup pants. And for those of you that don't know the meaning of commando, lets just say it was not a dignified position. But the show must go on. We finished the shoot, and after the catalogue was produced I am sure a lot of people wondered why all the models has such laughter in their eyes...

Sunday, March 8, 2009

15 minutes of 1000 fans

I just read TOP's discussion of 1000 True Fans. I agree with John Scalzi's comments, by the time you can get "1000 true fans" you already have a (untrue?) fanbase well in excess of 1000, or even more likely, 100,000.
I probably have close to 1000 people who enjoy my photography, and maybe even follow what I am doing on this blog, my home website, or my deviant art page. From all these people, I have no "true fans". I haven't made a cent directly from these sites (yet...) But do I resent this? Not at all, in fact I think it is very cool that some people like what I am doing. It lets me show off what I am doing. It gives me an outlet for my creativity.
The concept of subscribers paying a yearly fee is very much a d
ouble edged sword. If you are being paid to produce work, you are expected to produce work of the same type and caliber as your previous work. Experimentation becomes much more dangerous.
To illustrate what I think this means, I will use two successful Canadian photographers as examples.
Freeman Patterson has always been an inspiration for me. In my view, he has stayed true to his "artistic vision" (for want of a better term). He does make his living from photography and design, but he still pushes his personal envelope. I hope I am not putting words in his mouth, but I see him as enjoying photography first and foremost. The money and business are secondary. If no one else enjoyed his vision (blatantly impossible, his photography is amazing...) I think he would still be out crawling through grass taking photos of spider webs...
Another talented photographer who I will not mention by name, uses photography as a means to an end. I was at a lecture of his once, right after the release of another of his books. He was recounting a story of a cab ride between interviews. He suddenly asked the cabbie to stop. He stepped out of the car and took a photo. When he got back in the cabbie asked him if he got a good shot. His reply was along the lines of "Not really, but someone will buy it."
I am not saying one of these approaches is better than the other. One stresses "success" as an artist, the other, financial success.
The "1000 True Fans" strategy encourages the second approach. You are producing work for a financial end. Your motiv
ation is to please your existing clientèle because they have already paid you. I think most portrait and commercial photographers already subscribe to this model. Most studios I know have a base of repeat customers that make up a large part of their income.
I guess the bottom line is, What is most important to you? Money or freedom? It is very difficult to have both...

This reminds me of an old joke:
A man approaches a hot dog vendor and notices there are two prices for hot dogs.
"what is the difference?" asks the hungry man.

"If you choose the less expensive hot dog, I mutter "cheapskate" under my breath."


If you send me $100 a year, I promise I will produce more work. However if you don't send $100, I will still produce the same artwork, I will ju
st mutter "cheapskate" under my breath...



.