Am I good enough to apply for photography jobs?

[ironpony]

I am info filmmaking and learning but started doing stills photography while learning and sort of took it on as a hobby. But thinking maybe I should apply for jobs and gigs as one, if I am good enough. What do you think from these few examples?

 

[ironpony]

The pics were shot flat, with the contrast, sharpness, etc, turned off, but I can turn it on the future if that's better. No post work is done. The acrobats were hard to shoot cause they were moving very fast, and it's grainy cause of low light, for a fast shutter speed. And perhaps I could have framed the living room shot better, but had limited space. What do you think?

 

[Doc Bernard]

What aspect of photography do you want to do? Each area has it's own market, and they are each specialty skill sets. Me, I like photojournalism (capturing the moment and event as it happens). Others focus on headshots, others glamour shots, portraits, industrial, architecture, design, etc.........

What are your photos telling you? Do they explain or tell a story? That's what we should strive for. If you have to ask what was the reason for the picture.......then something was "off".

I see some good photos here, some that would have been better with proper framing/horizon alignment, and some fun "snapshots" but not really your best work.

Can you show us the corrected pics? Post processing is part of your job as a photog, and without that.....it's hard to judge the image if it's straight out of the camera.

 

[ironpony]

I'm game for taking pics for different types of jobs. If someone wants to shoot a wedding or sports show, or some landscape or building shots for a magazine. Things like that. As far as story goes, it would depend on the job, and then I would figure out how to tell the story, and do a shot list or something.

 

[Cosimo Bullo]

You are good enough if you think you are good enough; the market will confirm or deny this.

 

[Doc Bernard]

I will share advice I was given a long time ago. Find a photog whose work you admire, and study their photos. I look at Berman, Capa, Adams for my inspiration and study.

Telling the story afterwards is the wrong approach, at least for me. The second I trip the shutter, that photo should speak for itself and not need explanation. If I have to explain it, then I failed with that pic.


LOL, me, I am absolutely horrible at headshots and glamour shots. Same with portraits. *shudder* I tried to help a friend out by shooting for him and those pics were absolute garbage.

 

[Liam Hall]

I don't think these shots demonstrate much in the way of skill. You need more than a casual interest in photography to make it in that profession.

 

[paulears]

I take photographs, my friend is a photographer. We have the same camera. He has 'the eye', I do not. I take hundreds and get a few special ones. He takes less in quantity and has more good ones. None of this prevents anyone working as a photographer - and I guess if offered money, few people take it.

 

[Doc Bernard]

I hope you don't mind, but I am going to share pic by pic critiques. Sadly, it's something missing here on the site many times. Mind you this is just my opinion, that you can ignore at your leisure.


Pic 1: Composition is off. Your camera is not parallel with the horizon. Can be fixed in post, but you sacrifice size and field when you do that.

Pic 2: Again comp is off. You had the opportunity to balance the photo using the chairs as brackets for the photo for symmetry.

Pic 3/4: Colors are nice, but I don't see any actual composition other than you thought it was interesting. These are "snapshots".

Pic 5: I actually like this one, but could use a bit of post work. It feels washed out, and not detailed enough.

Pic 6: This is your best shot in the series. The composition is quite good. Could use a touch of post-work......but that's an easy fix.

Pic 7: Not feeling it. Background is distracting. You are too close to the subject here. Another "snapshot". Feels like a "hey, bro, do a karate move, I got a camera" kind of shot.

Pic 8: You missed a great shot by a few degrees. Had you had the entire park bench in the shot and been aligned for horizon.......I would have loved this shot.

Pic 9: Okay.....you need to learn to walk before running. These weird angles are hard enough to do as an expert.......learn to shoot instinctively with a parallel to either horizon or a vertical source first.

Pic 10: Again.......the photo is a snapshot. Foreground in the shot, BG distracting.

I am not being harsh, but trying to help by giving my honest feedback. Rather than saying "bad" or "good", I am telling you what I see. Please don't take offense.

You need to learn your equipment and take the camera off "auto". They only way to do that, is to continue to shoot, learn, read, and again......continue to shoot. But look at what your gear does while you shoot. Learn the Exposure Triad, and how it relates to your camera. And again, find a photog whose work you admire and STUDY their pics. Not just "hey I like that pic"........but "Hey how did they frame that? (And even more importantly......WHY?)" Look at the exposure and do an autopsy on it. That and shooting constantly.......that's how you get real experience.

But, right now, I don't feel you are ready to ask for pay for being a photographer, as you still need to hone some basic skills. You are getting close though. Your photos need to be self explanatory. Not having the viewer ask why the shot was taken. Sometimes there is a story, sometimes not......but you never want someone asking "why?". Make your photos personal and invest in them, and not just tripping a shutter and calling yourself a photographer. Filmmakers rail on photogs for claiming the skillset is the same. Well, as you now see, skill with a camera for film is not the same skillset for still work. They are 2 completely different animals that happen to use the same equipment.

To me, still work is so much harder than filming. You have one frame to capture the story, whereas in filming, you have a whole scene to tell the story.



And before anyone says differently..........I have ALWAYS asked for harsh critique on my stuff. I welcome it. Because it makes me a better photographer, IMO.

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

The pics were shot flat, with the contrast, sharpness, etc, turned off, but I can turn it on the future if that's better. No post work is done. The acrobats were hard to shoot cause they were moving very fast, and it's grainy cause of low light, for a fast shutter speed. And perhaps I could have framed the living room shot better, but had limited space. What do you think?

Sorry, but none of these really give me the impression you have command of the camera. In any of the genres you've take a shot in... Archetectural, Interiors, Nature, People, or Action... they at the moment are only 'snaps'.

When I was attempting to hawk my skills a photographer, especially for 'architecture/interiors' I subscribed to "Architectural Digest', and attempted to emulate shots found on the pages of that magazine. For 'action', at the time I was working out in Karate, I spent many days, much Film film, much money for processing, to get shots of kicks, sparing, etc. and perhaps 10 out of 100's were 'good action' shots. People shots... the Wife never lets an occasion go by wherein she can criticize my 'people' shots... (despite the fact that wedding couples would regularly or some number I shot at the weddings we covered... but I digress...).

In your architectural shots, every single one is 'cocked' one way or another. In fact the Swan's neck is straighter up and down, than any of the buildings...

I'll leave off for the moment... but with modern digital cameras, one could practice and see results far easier than back in the olden days... but in the case of architecture... a 4x5 with moveable lens board and back, there was the ability to avoid many of the errors you have in such shots. If you want to use a 35mm for such... learn the principles of parallel lines, parallel film planes (sensor plans) and corresponding parallel surfaces in the scene... (and there are till and shift lenses for 35mm that can be used similar to the view camera's controls...).

As for the big girl smoking a cigar... I don't mind nude big girls in the least... but I digress...


Since you like moody street scenes... here's one I shot a few years ago, just a grab shot, shutter speed was 1/10 second hand held, ISO 1600, F/4.5 for the zoom of 70mm:

More architecturally inclined...

And 'people' shots... ok, well... part of a people...

Ok, here's a real people shot... sort of...

 

[Doc Bernard]

If I might, let me show you what I am talking about, using photos from photog I admire:

Heres one from Don McCullin: http://photographync.blogspot.com/2010/07/don-mccullin-war-photographer-interview.html
There is a whole story in this one pic.


Here's one.....even out of focus.......the story and fear it shows is amazing: http://fineartamerica.com/featured/vietnam-war-us-soldier-granger.html


I aspire to be a war correspondent/photog.....so you can see my influences in what I am sharing with you here. But the message is the same. Let your pics say the words for you.

 

[ironpony]

I hope you don't mind, but I am going to share pic by pic critiques. Sadly, it's something missing here on the site many times. Mind you this is just my opinion, that you can ignore at your leisure.


Pic 1: Composition is off. Your camera is not parallel with the horizon. Can be fixed in post, but you sacrifice size and field when you do that.

Pic 2: Again comp is off. You had the opportunity to balance the photo using the chairs as brackets for the photo for symmetry.

Pic 3/4: Colors are nice, but I don't see any actual composition other than you thought it was interesting. These are "snapshots".

Pic 5: I actually like this one, but could use a bit of post work. It feels washed out, and not detailed enough.

Pic 6: This is your best shot in the series. The composition is quite good. Could use a touch of post-work......but that's an easy fix.

Pic 7: Not feeling it. Background is distracting. You are too close to the subject here. Another "snapshot". Feels like a "hey, bro, do a karate move, I got a camera" kind of shot.

Pic 8: You missed a great shot by a few degrees. Had you had the entire park bench in the shot and been aligned for horizon.......I would have loved this shot.

Pic 9: Okay.....you need to learn to walk before running. These weird angles are hard enough to do as an expert.......learn to shoot instinctively with a parallel to either horizon or a vertical source first.

Pic 10: Again.......the photo is a snapshot. Foreground in the shot, BG distracting.

I am not being harsh, but trying to help by giving my honest feedback. Rather than saying "bad" or "good", I am telling you what I see. Please don't take offense.

You need to learn your equipment and take the camera off "auto". They only way to do that, is to continue to shoot, learn, read, and again......continue to shoot. But look at what your gear does while you shoot. Learn the Exposure Triad, and how it relates to your camera. And again, find a photog whose work you admire and STUDY their pics. Not just "hey I like that pic"........but "Hey how did they frame that? (And even more importantly......WHY?)" Look at the exposure and do an autopsy on it. That and shooting constantly.......that's how you get real experience.

But, right now, I don't feel you are ready to ask for pay for being a photographer, as you still need to hone some basic skills. You are getting close though. Your photos need to be self explanatory. Not having the viewer ask why the shot was taken. Sometimes there is a story, sometimes not......but you never want someone asking "why?". Make your photos personal and invest in them, and not just tripping a shutter and calling yourself a photographer. Filmmakers rail on photogs for claiming the skillset is the same. Well, as you now see, skill with a camera for film is not the same skillset for still work. They are 2 completely different animals that happen to use the same equipment.

To me, still work is so much harder than filming. You have one frame to capture the story, whereas in filming, you have a whole scene to tell the story.



And before anyone says differently..........I have ALWAYS asked for harsh critique on my stuff. I welcome it. Because it makes me a better photographer, IMO.

Okay thanks this helps a lot. I need to work on composition. The ones that are snapshots though, I had to do fast, otherwise I would have missed it, like the martial arts guys. They were too close unfortunately and the room wasn't big enough with my 50mm lens.

I didn't have the camre on auto though. Every photo was taken on full manual settings, with the color temperature, ISO, shutter, and aperture, differently set for each pic. So what am I doing, that is giving the 'auto' impression?

I'm surprised pic #6 is my best you say, cause that was one I took in a hurry, but new what settings, I had to use to get it too look that way. As far as the pics needing post work, could you be more specific?

I have done voluntary photography for friends so far, and they keep saying I should get paying gigs, cause of how I take photos. When I do it for them though, they don't ask me to tell a story with my pics. They will ask for a pic of some buildings for example, so I give them that. Or ask for some pics of the martial artists, etc. I just give them the shots they ask for. Would paying gigs be the same way?

 

[novoluc]

What do you think?

Since you ask: don't quit your day job just yet.

L.

 

[Doc Bernard]

Ironpony, snapshots are great fun......but if you don't have the basics down as instinct......that's all they will be. Snaps for your "fun" album.....and for you to remember what you were doing that day. Snaps are meant for you, your friends, and maybe Facebook.....but not for you to use as a reference to your work as a serious photog.

Things I always have running through my head when I have the camera out:

Framing- is it wide enough? Especially if I screw up my framing. Give myself room for correction.
Subject- am I "getting it"? Do I need a different angle to make it more clear?
Camera- am I ready to get a good pic? Am I level or parallel somewhere? Am I set for the lighting at hand?
And the biggest one for me........."Why am I taking this photo?" I want my photos to mean something. I ask myself this every time I set up a shot or get ready to take a shot. The answer gives me a fast frame of reference so I can shoot accordingly. This goes back to that "one frame" story I alluded to earlier.

As to what gave me the impression you were on "auto": The Karate/action pics. They felt rushed. And when I see a "rushed" pic....... I think "auto" snapshot. Your framing was way off.......as well as composition. These kinds of photos are much better suited with a very shallow DOF. Get the foreground and BG blurred and out of focus. Make your subject the focal plane. Maybe even consider slowing the shutter down to get that motion blur (artistic license)....

But in a living room....with a broad DOF........ it don't say what you can do as photog. But it says what you can't do. Yeah....harsh. But I believe in tough love. You got promise, bro. So I ain't gonna kiss your ass. I am gonna say what I feel. Otherwise this whole post is pointless.

Look, I am not an expert photog, LOL, no where near it. Out of 2000 pics, I have maybe 2 dozen fairly decent shots.....not good odds. But with every pic......I try to make it add to those 2 dozen.

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

Look, I am not an expert photog, LOL, no where near it. Out of 2000 pics, I have maybe 2 dozen fairly decent shots.....not good odds. But with every pic......I try to make it add to those 2 dozen.

When the Wife was active in her wedding biz, we would shoot around 1500-2000 shots on a wedding (even in Film film days...), and for the 'album' cull that down to about 100. For her images that she placed in competition, perhaps 5 out of a years worth of wedding and bridal portrait shooting. For a year we would shoot about 20 weddings.

For 'correspondents'... even more in a year... for one or two 'decisive moments' in a career...

 

[Doc Bernard]

Film film days

Kinda weird discussing that these days, huh? You had one chance to get it right.....no review.......nothing. Digital has helped, but hurt the industry.

I remember taking 10 rolls to the developer praying I got a few shots worth keeping.........

 

[Doc Bernard]

If okay.....I am going to try and DL the nature pic....and put it into Lightroom for you.

Won't let me. Okay......PM incoming. And I will tell you what I did to help........LOL, just don't use my version without giving me credit, m'kay?

 

[ironpony]

Okay thanks people. Actually my friend sent some of my pics, without telling me to a magazine. They want to three pics I took. How much should I charge for something like that?

 

[paulears]

You have two choices, as a novice, amateur. You could elect to keep very quiet, and if they publish them, and they are in an article, with big exposure, ask them the going rate they pay for featured photographs. If they are in an uncommissioned, reader supplied photo area, you won't get anything other than exposure. Your friend sending them in could be taken by the newspaper as permission to publish, often (in the UK) tagged as 'image supplied'. If they want your pictures, they'll also want clearance, so there will be negotiation and clearances - so usually they will offer something, you accept. Photographers who regularly accept their assignments or provide contributions will have agreed rates. As a newbie, you don't.

My guess is they won't pay, but you may get a credit. If the photo is critical to a story, and is unique, then negotiation might work. If it's being used as a space filler, I doubt it.

 

[Spartacus]

Okay thanks people. Actually my friend sent some of my pics, without telling me to a magazine. They want to three pics I took. How much should I charge for something like that?

Can´t help you with pricing, but please post those pics here!