How Much Are We Worth? By John Leezer, ASC

Ryan Patrick O'Hara

Ryan Patrick O'Hara

Veteran

How Much Are We Worth?

In these days of specializing, human endeavor tends toward many vocations, but for convenience let us consider only four general divisions: professional men, mechanics, merchants, and artists. A man is a mechanic because he seems best fitted for that kind of work. If he paints beautiful pictures, makes wonderful photographs, or has won fame because of his work in marble, we call him an artist. The motion picture photographer belongs to this class of workers.

He knows considerable about other lines of work, but he spends the most time at the thing he likes best and is so classified. He is not only classified as an artist, but he must be one in every sense of the word-- first, last and all the time. The bigger the man, inside, I mean, the greater artist will he be, but an artist is not an artist unless he can express himself. A man says he is a farmer. How do we know? Another may say he is an architect. How shall we know? If a man be an artist, he as already, by some such medium as the brush, lens or chisel, proven it. Those who can afford to give expression to their artistic sense, solely for the pleasure they derive, are few. Compensation is a wonderful incentive to artistic expression. So the question naturally arises, what are the efforts of an artist worth?

Values are supposed to be determined by supply and demand. If you have talent to sell or real estate or a goat, it is worth what you can get for it. The man with brains offers them for sale in the open market and they are sold to the highest bidder. No one is going to pay a portrait photographer fifty dollars for a dozen 8x10s unless he thinks they are worth it-- at least, not many. If the portrait artist is satisfied that the photographs are worth fifty-dollars, but is unable to get it, is he justified in reducing the price? Before we decide, whether he is or not let us go a little farther into the matter.

We must not forget that we are discussing the class of human beings called artists. The artist does not sit or stand at a machine all day long, turning out a part of a shoe, a hat or a watch. Such an operator puts no part of himself into what he produces. The machine does it; he is a machine man, but what you see on the canvas, one the photo mount, or in the marble, is a part of the man or woman whose work it is.

The Indian believes that something has gone from him into his photograph, otherwise it would not look like him, so we recognize the artist in his work, because of the personality stamped upon it. We know it is a Remington without seeing the name. This comparison between the mechanic and the artist has been made to demonstrate how little they have in common that would indicate what their labor is worth. The wages of the mechanic are determined by comparison. His wage is standard at so much per hour. The compensation of the artist on the other hand is not arrived at by comparison. Even the work of the modern painters varies in price. Some portrait photographers get ten, fifteen, and twenty dollars per print. But is the artist justified in taking less than he thinks his product is worth? There is, to our mind, but one answer. He is not.

It may be well to consider at this time one or two conclusions we have arrived at concerning the producer. The pictures he exhibits give us a good idea of what he demands in photography, and it varies considerably. Most producers get what they want in stories, directors, actors and photographers so, if a producer employs an artist to photograph his productions, it must be because he wants that kind of photography. What other conclusion can we come to? The producers represent the open market in which the artist-photographer offers his services. There are not so many producers as there were at one time, but that is no reason why the photographer should take less for his labor than he thinks it is worth.

Loyalty is a good word so far as words go, but there must be some difference of opinion as to what the word means, in the motion picture industry in any event. To my way of thinking loyalty begets loyalty, or should, but try as hard as I may I am unable to recall even one instance when loyalty ever got the best of a dollar. You may know of cases where it has. I hope you do, but I don't. Loyalty for loyalty's sake is a wonderful virtue, but extremely rare.

Reports indicate that the industry as grown wonderfully in the past ten years. What caused it? Stories, acting, and directing? It would be very discouraging indeed to think that there had been no improvement in these three important departments, but the quiet, unassuming, conscientious artist-photographer is in the main most responsible for the high plane of usefulness the motion picture has reached. But have you heard him making any noise about it? You could not, even with the most sensitive receiving apparatus the wireless expert has yet devised.

What is the most important thing about any structure? The foundation, of course. What is the foundation of this business? Photography! On the whole, I should say that the photographer bears a rather important relation to the industry, but what compensation has he had? Usually the more important or responsible position the greater the compensation. The following ratio is a fair example of real conditions. Directors' salary, 600; Star, 1,000; Photographer 250. No matter what conditions, the ratio remains the same.

The motion picture photographer, as well as any other artist, must decide what he will ask for his labor. If he can not get it or, in other words, if the law of supply and demand does not operate to his advantage, he can take up something else until such a time as he may conscientiously work as an artist again. So far as we know there may be rag pickers who cannot afford to paint pictures.
Click to expand...

An interesting article written by John Leezer, ASC...





... 90 years, six months ago.



Some of his words echo as true today, as they did before. I found it very cool when I came across this article from an American Cinematographer magazine from March 1922.
 
Last edited:
My favorite quote:

"The Indian believes that something has gone from him into his photograph, otherwise it would not look like him, so we recognize the artist in his work, because of the personality stamped upon it. We know it is a Remington without seeing the name." -John Leezer, A.S.C.

I love this quote. I too, can see the soul of the cinematographer and the director trapped within the frame as I watch films by masters of their craft.
 
Last edited:
"Loyalty is a good word so far as words go, but there must be some difference of opinion as to what the word means, in the motion picture industry in any event. To my way of thinking loyalty begets loyalty, or should, but try as hard as I may I am unable to recall even one instance when loyalty ever got the best of a dollar. You may know of cases where it has. I hope you do, but I don't. Loyalty for loyalty's sake is a wonderful virtue, but extremely rare."

Another great excerpt from the article.
 
this is fantastic.

Thank you for posting this.

I'm very intrigued by your AC collection, I've never read that magazine, but love everything I've seen from it.

Do you subscribe to it currently online at all? Any opinion on that subscription option? I'm more interested in the back issues than anything
 
homestar_kevin said:
this is fantastic.

Thank you for posting this.

I'm very intrigued by your AC collection, I've never read that magazine, but love everything I've seen from it.

Do you subscribe to it currently online at all? Any opinion on that subscription option? I'm more interested in the back issues than anything
Click to expand...

I'm actually a huge fan of having it in print. Love the feel of the actual pages, and having it lay around on my camera cart during productions. However, that said, whenever American Cinematographer gets their digital versions into a finalized and proven app format, I'll likely do both. But you better believe I'll be a print subscriber until I die or until they don't offer it anymore.

In fact I get two copies of every issue. One to put in my collection and the other to carry with me to set, through airports, and in life. That one gets bent, wrinkled, used and loved. The other one gets put into the reference library for preservation and future reference.

Also regarding back-issues... between DVXuser folk and myself... I'm working with the AC staff, over at the clubhouse, on bringing about (or intigrating) the ability to buy digital backissues beyond just the year 2005 and onward issues currently offered. Someday, hopefully not too long from now, there will be either a separate app or an integrated function to a current app that will allow for digital backissues. Don't expect them all at once, however, as it will most likely be a rolling release of popular issues and then eventually to all of them. I can't say much more than that. Just know that American Cinematographer is very interested in eventually offering vintage back issues for download and I'll be pushing that bus all the way to the finish line. I've been at it for over a year already so don't expect this to hit the app store anytime soon. You'll hear it here first when there is something to announce, you can believe that.


bill totolo said:
Great post, Ryan. Thank you for sharing.
Click to expand...

I'd love to post more, but there is so much of it and I have to literally re-type everything everytime! haha. More will come, slowly but surely.
 
Last edited:
Where did you source all your back catalog?

Any recommendations? I've seen quite a bit on ebay, but looking at those listings makes your complete collection all the more impressive

I'm definitely with you on the tactile pleasures of print
 
I'd love to post more, but there is so much of it and I have to literally re-type everything everytime! haha. More will come, slowly but surely.[/QUOTE]

Would it be possible to scan an article and host it on something like Flickr where we could enlarge, and view it, or Dropbox where we could access a public folder and download it?

The idea of you spending your time manually typing these out is very much appreciated but I know you could be doing other things. Thank you for your effort.
 
Picasso was sitting in a cafe in Paris, and an admirer asked him to sketch him something on a napkin. He politely agreed, and quickly drew something. He handed to the admirer and said, " That will be one million dollars." The admirer protested, "But it only took you 30 seconds to draw that!" Picasso replied, "No, it took me 40 years."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top