I’ve run quite a few sporting event photos over the years but I’ve never really contemplated what goes into making one so I decided to join a friend shooting a week long sports event. My initial reaction after the first couple days is… ARE YOU FNG KIDDING ME. Where the hell did all these people with cameras come from? I shit you not, I saw soccer moms with 600mm Canon lenses. What the hell are you going to do with those photos? Put them in your scrapbook? There were literally thousands of people shooting pictures of every single person, place or thing you could imagine. I guess I’ve spent all my time sending people to events and buying stock photos but never attending to see what goes down. You photographers can certainly put up with a lot.

After my initial shock with the camera toting public I realized half these people are actually sporting press credentials representing all kinds of magazines, newspapers and even blogs. I’m all for shooting original pictures but if everyone is standing in the exact same spot shooting the exact same thing I’m not so sure I see the point.

The bottom line is, access is everything, which is not really news to anyone but reinforces the idea that bringing your personal vision to photography is the key to making it.

Recommended Posts

55 Comments

  1. Haaaaa, if the editors had to put up with what the fotogs do. Everyone wonders why day rates have stayed the same. If the editors had to do it there would be a revolt over the day rates….

  2. “that bringing your personal vision to photography is the key to making it”

    Can you please create a post every Monday, say, just with this one line. That would then also save me some time; when people ask me what they have to do to get a show or how to get a book deal etc. I could just point them to your post(s).

  3. OK, remove the first “that”, of course. My bad.

  4. @1: “If the editors had to do it there would be a revolt over the day rates”

    What an ironic thing to say. Why didn’t the photographers revolt over the day rates?

    I used to shoot sports for a living: cycling mostly. I went to all the big events, always under assignment. It was good for a time, then it became a waste of my time. Cycling used to be a fairly niche market, and so there were a handful of photographers who regularly worked the events. One could actually earn a living. But then Getty showed up and that was that. The regular photographers panicked and started giving work away for free as favors because they feared for their jobs. Residual sales went out the window because advertisers, gear manufacturers and teams started expecting imagery for free, and the photographers gave it to them. They still do.

    Photographers only have themselves to blame.

  5. what about you rob? granted the access you have been privy to over these years- have you been temped to break out of the editor role and bring your camera?

    i’ve seen your shots before. FKNA good shit. how did you decide to pursue one aspect and not the other.

  6. so rob, let’s see some of your selects! ;-) don’t tell me you did not shoot anything!

  7. you’re not kidding about soccer moms. theyre insane. i worked at a camera shop in a very rich part of town and it was baffling to see these mothers/fathers dropping thousands on lenses bigger than the trophies their kids won.

  8. Thanks for posting this and for seeing the side of how photogs work sporting events and all of the crap that goes with it.
    Shooting college or pro sports with all of the photogs, officials, coaches, players, alumni or random people who are glorified rich cheerleaders, camera pointers (video crews), dish holders make the sidelines at a game a very crowded place to work all. Its good to hear that an editor has seen the light and realize that there is more to it than what was previously thought. Thanks for posting!

  9. I realize it’s annoying to see your territory get crowded, but what’s really wrong with “soccer moms” having nice cameras and lenses? Should they suffer with point and shoots just because they’re soccer moms? Or are they supposed to buy photos if they want them? How do you know they aren’t serious about photography?

  10. I used to shoot a lot of cycling events as well, and gave it up years ago. My experiences were similar to Jean-Marie @ 4. The thing was, the access wasn’t usually very difficult to get, and with all the magazines and web sites posting stuff all the time, digital cameras, and Photoshop, it was easy for everyone to see what sold, and replicate it well enough to be usable. It just drove the value down, down, and down some more.

    Of course there’s still a market for great work. It’s just that the market is really small, and the number of photographers is really large.

    Not that I’m complaining. If others want to work their asses off and give away their work, so be it. I just didn’t want to work that hard for that little money. Oh well, it is what it is…

  11. “The regular photographers panicked and started giving work away for free as favors because they feared for their jobs. “Residual sales went out the window because advertisers, gear manufacturers and teams started expecting imagery for free, and the photographers gave it to them. They still do.”

    Cycling isn’t the only sport where the phenomenon is happening. The surf industry is a cesspool of idiots who have bought a 5D, a 600mm lens, and learned to turn their camera to automatic (I’m convinced they don’t even know what an f stop is). With the onset of digital (and this isn’t a digital slamming post), photography became accessible to a lot of people that never would have stood a chance before, right? But you probably already knew that. Furthermore, these autopilot monkeys don’t have a clue about legit rates, usage, or anything else about the industry, and are more interested in getting a shot published with their name on it than getting paid fairly (or upholding industry standards). The pay scale (or what little of one there was in the surf photog world) turned even more to dust, and the rest is history. Many companies are now paying pennies for images that used to cost a respectable amount, laughing all the way to the bank, I’m sure.

    I wish I could say surfing was the only venue where this happens outside of cycling, but I’d probably be wrong if I did.
    Sure am I glad I’m not part of that downward spiral.

  12. I’d say a similar situation is happening in small-venue music photography. But for me it’s working both ways.

    (Please bare with this minor life story)

    I used to be one of two or three shooters in my small little city shooting live music photography. With film, there were only so many people willing to put in the time and effort of developing and then scanning or printing. And in these small venues, getting two or three killer frames per roll was lucky! The cost of film and developing was a barrier to most people, and then the time to learn your craft with only two or three frames per roll coming back on the money kept the rest at bay. I’d see a new guy at a gig and I’d know I most likely would not see him again after two or three more shows once he realized how much effort my “Hobbie” took. I could shoot three local shows a month, and my photos would end up on all the bands’ websites, in at least two of the bands’ media packages, and possible one of the three Bands’ latest CD.

    Now, in the “Bad” sense there are so many people with entry level SLRs at gigs (Rebel XTI’s and Nikon D40’s must be able to breed on there own, I don’t think either company actually makes that many cameras) it’s crazy! They flood the market with pictures, and thanks to digital they don’t give up after three gigs. Not only that, the pictures are pretty good, not pro most of the time, but very usable. Ninety Percent of these people are already friends with a member of the band or bands, and all they care about is getting “published” in some way, so they give away there stuff for free. Now I do the same with up and coming bands, but only for online pictures, never for print, and only if I think I can get a Promo shoot out of it, which is my main source of income from music photography. The problem is, is that since the market is so diluted, it’s very hard to get your name out there credit wise. Even the local magazines are becoming lax at including credits, since most of the kids don’t know their rights.

    But on to the “Good” sense: With much tougher competition for “publishing” space I have been forced into shooting more (always a good thing for lazy people like me) and thinking more strategically. I have formed links with venues directly in order to gain greater access, since just carrying an SLR will not get one into the green room like it did in days of yore. I also have set up a website (my link, minus the first word) for just my gig photography, and I up-date it regularly so that people visit it if they missed a show ans so that bands check it automatically. Hell, I’ve been slacking in the last two weeks since APE’s love of Livebooks inspired me to finish my own (HTML only) portfolio, and I have bands bugging ME for photos which I have not posted yet. This is nice.

    I am also starting to see that the saturation the of music photography market is leading to a more aware public. The average person sees so many good photos now days, that the public is starting to recognize the difference between GOOD photography and GREAT photography. Bands are starting to come to me when they all ready had some promos shot, but they did not like the quality, or because they want something different, which never used to happen. So on one hand there are a ton of new shooters now, but on the other, the people who used to get by just because they put in the time and effort are being forced out be people who are still putting time and effort, but also have “real” talent.

    Now I just hope I fit the later category.

  13. Keeney is right on. It is shocking how many “surf photographers” there are these days. I don’t get it, the cost of equipment is still outrageous yet every big swell or contest I see a million 600mm lenses on the beach. In the good old days of Velvia you had to be on you shit, especially from the water. 36 frames that’s all you got before you had to swim all the way in and get pounded and then do it again. Now you just put a 16 gig card in there and you can shoot for hours. I try to shoot water as much as possible because the numbers are smaller but this year the numbers are growing exponentially. I heard Hawaii was just stupid. They didn’t even have a good winter.

    Now competition is great and it nice to see young new talent. I am all for that. We all had to begin at some time the problem (which has been talked about) is that some of these newbie’s business practices are wrong. Making it very hard to earn a respectable living.

    Rob I am working on a project…just because I am curious where all these photographers came from and why. I started interviewing surf photographers, who they are, why are they shooting, who are they shooting for, and how did they afford their 600mm lens and mark III. It should be a great project!!!
    Maybe when I get some good quotes I’ll send some over!!!

  14. So how the hell do you get a presspass for a blog? I’ve got to learn this little trick. I’ll be shooting everywhere. How long do you think it will be before they catch on to this one?

    One more thing, there may be hundreds of people with cameras, but very few that have the instincts to shoot sports or the tenacity to show up hours early and be the last one to leave before they shut off the lights. Go check out http://www.daveblackphotography.com and see what a legendary sports photographer can do that a soccer mom can’t. You’ll see why he still collects a pretty good paycheck.

    Jeff

  15. 600mm of crappy photography…

  16. So are you at the Tour of California?

  17. Here are a couple of quotes from you that you might want to consider:
    Sometimes photographers take an “I could have done that” attitude when it comes to talent in this industry, but honestly, you can’t. think Soccer Moms.

    and this one you specifically called Bullshit:

    “Not long ago, the qualifications to be a freelance photographer were to own an expensive camera and possess the technical knowledge to manipulate shutter speeds and aperture settings in order to take good pictures. Although commercial quality images are still captured by professional photographers, the advent of inexpensive, sophisticated digital cameras along with new innovations on the web are allowing anyone who can push a button to earn a little extra cash.

    These amateur photographers are snapping pictures of the multitude of objects and locales they encounter in their daily activities. The service they are providing as a whole is to photograph everything and every place on earth – a task so immense that all of the world’s professional photographers together could not possibly achieve.
    Welcome to your world….

  18. I think this post can be extended to any kind of “event” but in particular music shows. One of the reasons I rarely shoot them anymore is due to lack of access – just think if a football team only allowed photographers to take pics of the first three downs. And didn’t allow any flash and then turned the stadium lights down but only for those first few minutes. That’s what’s happened to music photography.

    I’ve also been surprised the last few times I went to shoot bands. I’ve been doing it for many years and have published books of my rock images yet I’m often restricted the same (though not always thank god) as some hipster with a p&s who happens to know the promoter etc etc. Often I question what these people are doing there other than getting in the way and annoying the musicians.

    Not sure if anyone caught the NY Times piece a while back about shooting bands and how the music industry has set such draconian rules and restrictions. Stevie Wonder was limiting photographers to the first 10 seconds!!! Why even bother showing up is what I would ask myself.

  19. Everyone’s a photographer.

    Why not?

  20. This post is a clear reminder of why I love living and photographing in Alaska. Few things turn off my desire to photograph like standing amongst a sea of other photographers. I guess I like to imagine my images are unique not only because of my perspective, but also the subjects I’m able to choose.

    I had to share my home surf break with another photographer once this winter, it was a little awkward but I managed somehow. Certainly makes things feel different for a few reasons.

    Alaska has it’s sports situations like Rob mentioned, but here at least it’s something more interesting – brown bears and bald eagles chasing fish with the background roar of digital cameras owned by those mysterious folk who obviously have more money than I but surely don’t earn it from their photographs. These people must be why so many good photographers get into teaching, that’s probably where the money is waiting huh?

  21. Great point – “… bringing your personal vision to photography is the key to making it.”

    Thank you from a long-term lurker who loves photography, but knows his artistic vision won’t feed his family. (Fortunately, I enjoy the day job that pays well and supports the “lens” habit.)

  22. They’re not soccer moms. They’re dentists – every freaking one of ’em.

    You have got to hand it to the dentistry profession. Great hours, great pay – and they all seem to want to be photographers on the side.

  23. …representing all kinds of magazines, newspapers and even blogs …but if everyone is standing in the exact same spot shooting the exact same thing I’m not so sure I see the point

    OVERCOVERAGE

    Concert photographers have it pretty bad now — 1 song, no flash, standing next to many other photogs in the same place.

    http://www.sziget2007.com/vt/view.php?id=day6/chkchkchk.mov

  24. @Rory .. How very very true! I certainly remember going to big-name gigs in NYC with a big lens and a bag full of film and they let me in. Only once was I challenged. Now I have to apply months in advance to even get considered for guestlist let alone being able to take a camera in..

  25. I’ll admit to having my fingers in more than just the photography pie. (Most of my income comes from graphic design and web development.) But one of the best bits of advice I’ve ever gotten was to be good at design and excellent at business.

    For more on this topic, see Ken’s provocative essay…

    http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/go-pro.htm

    I guarantee that it will raise your blood pressure.

  26. oh come on… a Ken Rockwell link?

    that guy could not be a bigger hack

    why must every good photo blog eventually be invaded by hobbyists and youth sports photographers

  27. When working professionally (now a much happier amateur) as a newspaper photog I always hating working jobs in packs. Been going to a few election events this round and it brings back that nausea. I don’t like to see the sausage being made.

  28. To the 2 guys that claimed they used to make a living shooting cycling before the industry starting not paying, etc….you guys must have sucked, I have been primarily a cycling photographer for 3 years and between racing images and commercial work in that industry I make a great living and have met some great friends in that business.

  29. Anon, good for you. I wasn’t complaining and I’m happy you make a good living photographing cycling. I know there are some that do. Sterling Lawrence is a good example. Furthermore, if you read my comment, I didn’t say I made my living photographing cycling events. It was never my primary source of income. Commercial and other types of editorial photography was, and still is my primary source of income.

    But hey, I’m glad to help you feel superior…

    It’s apparent you don’t actually read the posts since you mis-read #25 as well. The point of the link to Ken Rockwell was, as was stated, “to raise your blood pressure”…

  30. Ya gotta love that panoramic pic of the rock festival in Hungary. Half the photographers look like fish out of water, just hanging out not quite sure what to do. Makes me not ever want to shoot a festival again (or the sausage factory as one put it above).

    I remember one time in my youth at a Nirvana gig this kid kept getting in my way even though he wasn’t shooting any pics (and he had a nicer camera than me!). I asked him to move to the side if he wasn’t actually going to shoot. He got all miffed and said he was saving his last frame (this was pre-digital mind you) for the band trashing their instruments. I think I said something not so nice and then they never did trash their gear that night.

    A lot of (young) photographers think that you wait for just the right moment. It can happen that way but best to shoot INTO and AROUND the moment as what you envision may never happen or you may not be warmed up if it does. That pic of the festival reminded me of that.

  31. Rob-You’ve got to go “private” too…
    keep up the good work and try not to get to annoyed by the “PILFs” (photographers I’d like to fuck). I don’t mean you Rob, I mean the soccer mons dentists. I know you’re a family man and all…..

  32. “Photographers only have themselves to blame”
    You are SO right Jean-Marie!
    I am on a few photographer list serves and there are complaints all the time about photographers giving it all away.
    However, things are changing. The “revolt” started with EP about 7 years ago. And now throught APAnet, and others, photographers are learning that business and shooting go hand in hand. I’ve seen a huge change. There will still be those who give things away. But as Rob said, it’s the vision of the photographer that will help him/her survive.
    Thanks for a Great blog Rob!!

    Keith

  33. This quote pretty much sums up the photo editor industry:

    “I guess I’ve spent all my time sending people to events and buying stock photos but never attending to see what goes down. “

  34. What’s your point? Photo editors are not photographers. That’s my point.

  35. my goal is to never been seen in one of those canon ads that showcases the pack of photographers
    talk about boring and generic photos

  36. @25… Martha, thanks for that link to Ken Rockwell! Killer stuff!

    My favourite line, “Photography is not a profession, although most photographers behave professionally.”

  37. Now I have to apply months in advance to even get considered for guestlist let alone being able to take a camera in..

    I shoot an average of 300 bands/year and other than really large festivals have never had to apply to shoot a show months in advance. Maybe a week.

    Re: concert photography and everyone & their dog being allowed in the pit, if they’re really not supposed to be there and are in your way, assert yourself and speak up (nicely). Most are too intimidated to talk back and will get out of the way. And if that doesn’t work, a professional will find a way to get creative and get the shots they need. Of course, this still doesn’t solve the problem of bands/labels using their shitty photos over quality because they’re free! ;)

  38. Having sat next to a bloke called David Ashdown on the sidelines I can report that there is a lot more than just kit and location to photographing sport – particularly ball sports which dont run as set pieces

    Obviously technology is closing the gap but has not bridged it IMO

  39. @30
    the name is sterling lorence…not Lawrence.

  40. Do 7 jeans cost a mint because they’re lined with gold? No — they cost a mint because of the label.

    At the events I shoot, there are usually dozens of other photographers carting professional quality gear around, but I’m often the only one with stage access, and the only one whose photos get used and remembered.

    I don’t get the gigs by undercutting the other photographers — they’re willing to shoot for free! I’ll wager there are even photographers in the crowd who are better than I am at photography. In a crowd of 3,500, the chances are pretty decent there are a few good shooters. I get the gigs because I’ve built a name for myself, and I’ve developed relationships with the people calling the shots.

    It’s not just about photography. It’s about networking, branding, and creating mutual value. The photographers who know that are the ones who manage to get paid, even when there is a sea of glass covering the show.

    There are photo buyers out there who are only shopping on price. If you’re strategy is to be the guy trying to under-bid the competition, you’re going to bid yourself out of a job. If your strategy is to be the best — the top dog that everybody turns to when they want to get serious about their photo buying, you have to have skills that extend way beyond the camera lens.

  41. one note to the concert guys:
    “he who uses flash is afraid.”

    and being friendly helps a lot.

  42. @41. Eric: Bravo. That’s how it works now. Good comment.

  43. If you want to see an interesting progression of how sports photography has changed since Getty and digital, just check out the back issues of Sports Shooter:

    http://www.sportsshooter.com/archive.html?start=1

    Their message boards probably have more threads about over-photographed, under-paid events than almost any other topic.

    The attitudes of sports photographers are also interesting. They seem to be either the nicest people in the world, or complete jerks. Needless to say, the burnout rate is high.

    Any time I shoot sports, which is rare these days, I really do wonder how anyone makes a living at it.

  44. @bernd gruber: I use flash in almost all my nightlife photography. It’s not about the tools or your technique — it’s about getting good results. You think your clients care whether you use flash or available light? No way! All they care about is whether or not it looks good.

    The only real differences between flash and available light is that most people suck at using flash effectively, and you wind up spending more money on flashes, or more money on lenses, respectively.

    Some venues and bands have “no flash” rules. When I encounter those rules, I don’t turn tail and run, I negotiate. I work with the stage designers to mount flashes to lighting trusses so they act just with the lighting design, only I can light things up when I need to, rather than try to get lucky and hope the action I want to capture happens to coincide with some good light. I’ve made friends with the local lighting / stage design companies. They know me, so I’m not some no-name stranger superclamping to their gear. ;)

    The ability to negotiate and get what you need is what separates the pros with real access from the bloggers with photo passes who have to deal with crazy photography restrictions.

    I’ve never had to go without flash when I needed it, and the only time I have encountered the three song / 15 minute rule was shooting Paul Oakenfold, and even then I could keep shooting throughout the set — I just had to do it from off the stage. Want the photo restrictions lifted for you with major headliners? Get to know the performers, their publicists, the venue, the stage staff… be *the* official photographer, and get hooked up with staff status — not just a photo pass.

    You can do it. Get yourself into a position of power with your great photography skills, then work on your people skills and negotiation to secure the access you need to offer value well above and beyond what the free shooters can offer. That’s how to win when everybody in the audience has a camera.

    I ran into another local nightlife photography at the last big event I shot. He said to me, “still working for free, huh?” I told him, “I don’t work for free.” I don’t think he believes me. Now you know my secret. Put it to good use.

  45. @music shooters: I agree with Eric, it’s not what photographers like, it’s what the people/clients like.

    I’m in the reveres situation as Eric in some ways, in that everyone else shooting locally relies on their (one camera!?) flashes and can’t shoot in available light worth a dam. I got my self the position as house photographer at one of the best venues in the city since they have a very low-lighting set up and I can handle it. I get access to all the best bands that come through and unlimited stage and green room roaming.

    And I use flash when it is needed, I just keep it off the dam camera 80% of the time. Radio triggers or built-in CLS are an edge I have ‘cus other shooters are not doing there research.

  46. @ 34.

    Or “I’m a photo editor because I could never make it as a photographer.”

  47. feel better?

    moron.

  48. @ 45/Eric – Seriously? If you can’t get great photos with stage lighting at a fairly big show (even small shows) without having to use flash, there’s something wrong. THAT is what separates the pros from the amateurs.

  49. I recently shot the Union Square Street Sessions, a snowboard event in the middle of NYC at night. Within the media credentialed section there were more point and shoots than pro cameras, a line of elinchroms / pocketwizard’ed off cam strobes the length of one side of the event and a massive TV camera boom crane that swung over the heads of the media area. Add to the fact that inevitably more “photographers” will literally jostle each other / stand in front of each other / cross pw channels to drain competitors flashes / etc. and you’ve got an exhausting four hours.. need new batts, need to use the bathroom or grab some necessity? You’ve get to leave the media area and push your way through 1000s of people shoulder to shoulder against the barriers. That angle from the top floor of Barnes and Noble looks like a killer angle and unique view.. until you find out one of th event sponsors rented the entire top floor and is allowing only their ONE filmer into the space. Dang, I just stood in front of a couple of spectators who are pissed my camera is in their view.. I get a drink thrown at me.. sweet. None of this is uncommon, I’ve dealt with all of these situations multiple times. Factor all that in and I’m happy to get out of most events with all my gear and my health.

  50. @Carrie: I appreciate the sentiment, but for me, using flash is a matter of style and taste. I’m perfectly capable of shooting in low light. I just like the contrast and color saturation I get with lower ISO settings, and I like the freedom to design my own light setups. I also like the wider usable zoom range on my slower kit lens. It’s wider on the bottom end and more telephoto on the top end than 2.8 zooms that cost many times more.

    Seriously, it’s not about tools or techniques — it’s about results, and doing what you need to do to get those results. Pros get results, and get paid for them.

    Everything else is just details — and they don’t mean much. I don’t think you NEED flash to get great results… hell, I’m a fan of Todd Owyoung (IShootShows.com), and he uses available light most of the time, and makes it work. GREAT! That’s part of what makes his style what it is.

    Incidentally, I think your shots are great, even if you do let the stage designer set up your lights for you… ;)

  51. @eric.. while this drifts off quite a lot.. you said exactly what i said, just in more words. be friendly and a superclamp will go anywhere. mine have seen lots of odd – and so called impossible – places.
    and as soon as people dont recognize a flash in a picture as a flash, it aint no flash no more. it becomes light.

  52. I went to the Xgames last summer… It was Bananas. Seriously Hundreds of photographers….

  53. i’ll never forget the day when I walked up to the 120 meter ski jump during the 2002 winter olympics and sat down next to SI’s Peter Read Miller with my graflex super d and put in a polaroid………..his look………………PRICELESS!


Comments are closed for this article!