Dear Leica

Leica…silly, Leica. Let me tell you what people really wanted. They wanted an Epson R-D1 with some new lenses and a Leica badge.

If you spent marketing money on incorporating an EVF–instead of that goofy strip tease campaign–you could have sold them for $3,000 a pop. They’d have flown off the shelves.

Leica, I don’t get it. Are you afraid of selling volume? Are you afraid of success? Are you just out of ideas? Are you self destructive?

Really, lots of people love your products of old. You still make nice glass. And the new M is a great step in the right direction. But some of your other endeavors make us wonder. Toss these X cameras and this new mini M and try again. Please?

(This was written in response to the release of the Leica Mini M)

(P.S.  The more time passes, the more I want an R-D1…just ’cause.)

What I charge is between me and my clients–not me and other photographers.

I’m sorry, I’ve stayed silent on this too long.  I have to let it out.

There are some very valid reasons why photography is more expensive than many people imagine it to be on the surface.  I don’t think I can sum that part up any better than this article on PetaPixel by Nikki Wagner.

I understand the struggle to get by in this industry very well, and my heart goes out to my fellow photographers fighting to survive and continue to do what they love full time.  But I’m sick and tired of the incessant complaining about other photographers charging too little and ruining the business.

If Jose Villa charged $1 (one dollar) for a wedding, would the pictures automatically be shit?  No?  Why not?  Because price does not equal quality.  Not only are they not equivalent, there’s no strong correlation.

It’s absolutely part of sales to convince customers that a certain level of quality costs a certain amount of money.  But the truth is that we all decide our own prices.  As Scott Johnson points out, “If you want to be a Professional Photographer, there are absolutely NO qualifications or schooling required.”  There’s no organization that has the ability to monitor quality and/or enforce pricing standards.

A rich amateur could go out and buy better gear than I have and advertise prices well beyond what I can garner today and they don’t have to have a ton of success to be part of the industry.  If they get one wedding a year, they’re a professional photographer.  And their pictures can absolutely suck.  Though they might not.  Price isn’t tied to quality.

Likewise, a poor hobbyist can buy a bottom of the line DSLR and a gang of used lenses for under a $1k and go shoot weddings for $200 a pop.  And they just might make amazing work.  There’s nothing stopping them from doing so.

How good their work is depends on their skill set, not the price of their gear or the price they charge.  This is obvious.

And not only rich people get married.  Doesn’t everybody deserve good wedding photography, whether they’re rich or poor?

The market for photography in every part of the industry is undergoing a big shakeup.  In some ways, I see this as a good thing.  I feel like the digital revolution has raised the bar on quality, which is good for customers and bad for shitty photographers.  But the proliferation of photographers–the absolute glut–means there’s a lot more noise to signal when couples go hunting out the perfect photographer for their special day.  We have to work harder for every client and it’s increasingly difficult to stand out from the crowd.

Don’t confuse the problems our customers are having with our own.  Their problem is a stifling overabundance of options.  A shortage of good photographers isn’t an issue for customers at all today.  Sure there are more shitty photographers out there today too.  But included in the overall volume increase, is an increase in good ones too.

I still cringe at the out of focus shots in my brother’s wedding album from 2000.  The photog was a seasoned pro, shooting great gear (Pentax 67, which I had just used myself in the context of school), but…holy crap, so many OOF/motion blurred shots.  But lets not kid ourselves with the false narrative that gear doesn’t matter at all.  That same photographer today is instantly better when you give him instantaneous reviews of his images, effectively unlimited “film” and image stabilized lenses.  Modern gear really does compensate a bit for sloppy technique.  This is good for customers.  Whether it’s bad for us or not is irrelevant, since that’s just how it is.

Value is an issue of perception.  So is quality.  My brother and his wife don’t see the things I see.  As long as consistency is maintained from print to print, most people won’t notice minor color balance issues, exposure issues,  focus issues, sensor dust issues, or a million little things we know to QC for.  Often the biggest/strictest/harshest critic of a wedding photographer’s work is the photographer themselves.

The thing that matters most to clients is that they are happy.  That’s business.  You don’t get anywhere by arguing and making excuses.  Or by putting other photographers down for that matter.  At least not when you’re criticism is as out of your control as pricing.

If clients aren’t happy, they’ll go to somebody who will make them happy.  Pleasing customer is a complex thing, that certainly involves things we pride ourselves on like the beauty of our images or consistency or professionalism.  But clients also judge us on a ton of things we can probably agree they shouldn’t, like price, gender, our personal appearance, our age, our races, our accents, our religion, our sexual orientation–heck, I’ve even been asked my sign!  Just like some people are going to pick based on gender and race, some folks will have price at the top of their list.  Get over it.  That’s all you can do.

I hear this long litany of “gear is too cheap” and “photographers working for free is killing us”, but none of it is anything you can do anything about.  Lemme make you a list of strategies destined to fail:

  • complaining about what other people are doing.  That has zero weight with your clients.  Let me reiterate: your clients don’t feel the pain of your pocketbook, only their own.
  • Bitching about “fauxtographers”.  Ok, ok, it’s a favorite pastime we all share.  I’ll admit a guilty pleasure in the occasional schadenfreude of browsing PSDisasters. But that doesn’t book me any new clients.
  • Arguing with clients about their budget.  They’ll find somebody that fits their budget, no matter how big or how small.  Trust me on this one.  This is an argument you will always lose.  This is not the same as being firm on price.
  • Telling other people what to charge.  No, really, good luck with that.
  • Complaining about the abundance of cheap gear.  What’re you gonna do, run around ProPhoto with a pricing gun?  Hack Amazon?  Gear will continue to get better and cheaper and easier to use.  Getting good results will continue to require decreasing amounts of skill.  So it goes.

Now, let’s juxtapose some tactics I see potential in:

  • Look at ways to decrease overhead.  Are you farming out your post?  Do you really need to?  Do you really need new gear?
  • Look at ways to improve your output.  Are you farming out your post?  Do you really need to?  Do you really need new gear?
  • Reevaluate your prices.  Not others’ prices.  YOURS.
  • Reevaluate your work. (sounds harsh, but even the best need to) Take a long hard look at your work and ask yourself if the quality of your work justifies your prices.  Honestly compare your work and prices to whats out there.  Put yourself in the clients’ shoes.  Enlist some objective non-photographers in this process, since most of our customers are not photographers.
  • Reevaluate your marketing.  If word of mouth/print ads/social media ain’t cutting it, explore other options.  Or reevaluate what you’re doing with those options.

Now, to be clear, I feel the pain.  I feel the squeeze.  I really do.  And it’s hugely stressful, and a day doesn’t go by where I don’t have second thoughts.

So here’s where I’m coming from: I’m new to weddings as a full time business.  I’m still sorting out all the taxes and finances and I’m a humble newb at running a business.  But I’ve been in the photographic industry for 15 years now and I shot my first wedding solo seven years ago.  I have a bachelors in photography.  I know my shit.  And I know who doesn’t.  And I see a whole spectrum of folks out there with vastly different skill sets AND prices competing for the same customers.  I’m lucky to have some very talented friends, and I’ve seen some amazing work in Portland.

But the diversity of the photography market is stifling.  It’s an assault on the customer’s decision making process.  I don’t see that changing any time soon.

Often when I hear people whine and complain about how they can’t make any money, I look at their work and I keep coming back to the same thing: there’s just too little correlation between quality and price in wedding photography.  Some people charging a pittance are phenomenal.  And some of those charging the most are marginal at best.

From what I can tell, the industry has always sucked.  It has always been cutthroat.  There have always been amazing sales people with weak portfolios competing with amazing photographers that can’t sell.  Quality has been wildly all over the place, as has pricing.  Disruptive technology has always wreaked having on established markets and business models.  A long list of acronyms has eroded the technical end: C41, TTL, AMP, DSLR, ISO, APSC, m43, SDXC, P&S…the march of technology will continue.

I don’t think any of this should come as a big surprise.  There ain’t much new under the sun. The only constant is that things change.

Don’t ask “how do we stop this thing?”  Instead ask “how can I adapt?”

There are absolutely ways to address the new challenges of our field today, and I welcome any discussion on the issue.  But complaining isn’t a valid strategy.  Please, just stop.

And stop trying to tell other photographers what to charge.  That’s a discussion between a photographer and a client, and no one else.  If somebody posts a gig that you think is offering too little, just flag it.  DO NOT engage in bickering.  That is a shit fight you won’t win.

Just broke 1000

The petition to bring back a CS version of Adobe’s software just broke 1000:

http://www.change.org/petitions/adobe-systems-incorporated-eliminate-the-mandatory-creative-cloud-subscription-model

EDIT: now over 25,000 sigs.

Micah…now with more megapixels.

In case it wasn’t obvious from the previous post, yes, I recently upgraded my DX body to a D7100.  I’ll be posting some tests here and sharing any observations.

My first observation shooting stills is that AF is excellent.  It is at least a match for my D700.  That’s a good thing, considering the ordeal I went through with the D7000.  I’d say it’s even a little snappier and more precise than the D300, which I didn’t expect.

So, here’s to the future!  Which seems to have more pixels in it.  (although nothing yet has unseated my D700 for low light work!)

P1050070

D7100 comes with GH2 mode built in?!

Just picked up a D7100 yesterday and realized: “wait, this 2x crop mode is 15mp?  My GX1 is a 2x crop and about 15mp @2:3.  LET’S COMPARE!

So, I did:

D7100 w/Nikon 35mm/f2

D7100 w/Nikon 35mm/f2

GX1 w/Nikon 35mm/f2

GX1 w/Nikon 35mm/f2

The results aren’t exactly surprising.  They have pretty close to the same pixels covering the same area.  The base ISO of the GX1 is slightly higher, so shutter is slightly different, but: tripod, so who cares?  The D7100 is also slightly taller, so framing is a little off between the two, but I think you can still get the idea from what’s here.  In short, any differences are up to sloppy technique.

It’s too bad that the the crop mode on the D7100 is wonky for video (scaling issues appear to be resulting in low quality video in crop).  If Nikon figures out a fix for that, I’ll be back with a video comparison.  (Scaling wise, I can’t see why they couldn’t, since the GX1 is scaling a very similar amount of pixels to make 1080 video.)

For now, this tells me…well, nothing I couldn’t already guess.  But idle curiosity got the better of me and I had to try it.  Now you know, so you don’t have to waste time trying yourself.  (click the above images for original, unscaled versions).

P.S. for those too lazy to check the EXIF, this was at f4.

I wish.

Dear Manufacturers of m43s lenses*,
Here’s the lens I dream of for my tiny m43 cameras: a pancake tele. Something in the 100-200mm equivalent range. At least f2.8.

I own the 45mm/1.8 (90mm equiv), and it’s too bulky. I’m thinking closer to the 20mm size. The 75mm is even closer in the reach department, but it’s even bigger than the 45mm. No, I want a true pancake lens. 45mm or longer.

If you can make this happen, it would be a game changer. Truly.

*That’s at least Olympus, Panasonic, and Sigma.

Re: the Yeah Yeah Yeah’s request for sanity…

Stop discriminating against us gentle folk who don’t ruin anybody else’s good time by raising our cameras in the air for half the damn show.  They’re just too damned heavy for us to do that!

We don’t need bright flash or bright LCDs.

Boot the phones, let in the SLRs.  That’s all I’m asking.

JPEG is like Polaroid

I thought of an analogy today that I hope will help in the fight to get more people shooting raw.

JPEG : RAW :: Polaroid : Negatives

I don’t personally know any pros out there still shooting jpegs, but I know there are some old salts who just don’t “get it” when it comes to raw.  So here it is.  You wouldn’t give a client a Polaroid test shot, nor would you try to work from one.  So why would you change that behaviour in the digital realm? Continue reading

Don’t d d d don’t drop it!

It might seem conventional wisdom that a bundle of glass, no matter how robust or “pro” it may have been built, should NOT be dropped.

On pavement.

Several times.

Especially not one that weighs over three pounds and costs two grand to replace.  (even though I paid $1600 brand new–what’s up with that?!)

So over several years I’ve repeatedly dropped my most used lens, and now it’s time to repair it.  I was shooting birds on the Willamette the other day and realized that things weren’t looking sharp until f11.  Having had the lens for about seven years now, I know what a properly working specimen is capable of and this isn’t it.

I brought it to the local authorized repair shop, Associated Camera Repair (more on why that’s the only place that can get parts later), but they looked at it (for a couple weeks) and decided they couldn’t do anything for it.  The lens must just be as good as it gets.

So I took it home and this morning did a little test to prove to myself I’m not crazy (at least in this instance) and illustrate what I think to be the issue.  I think that after dropping it enough, something inside is now out of alignment.  How’d I test this?  Observe:

updownsmear

Notice the smeary-ness, and how it’s on the top edge or the bottom edge?  This is as close to the center of the frame as I could get.  This shouldn’t me asymmetrical at the edge of the frame, let alone center of the frame.

Here’s the test procedure:  The 70-200mm f/2.8 VR (v1) (oh yea, that’s the lens we’re talking about here, sorry) has a tripod mount directly on the lens, which rotates on a collar.  So all I had to do was firmly mount it on a tripod, shoot, rotate and shoot again.  AF was off between shots and VR was off.

So I’m concluding that yes, this is broken, something’s out of line, and it needs to be fixed.  Google didn’t turn up anything, so I’m going to post about my repair experience here.  I suspect that this will require a trip to Nikon USA (not excited about that!), but I’m going to try all the other local shops first.  I’ll report back here as things progress!

(about the title: I’m referencing a G Love and the Special Sauce song, which I seem to get stuck in my head whenever it’s time to bring something in for repair)