Let’s see what kind of photo editor skills Rob has, 2500+ images to get through.

http://www.33-13.com

http://www.nearandfar.wordpress.com
Photo 2 for contest
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3092/2378915867_46053b1512_o.jpg

It would be cool to have aphotoeditor social gathering/networking(photographers, editors,art buyers etc.) event. One in NYC and one in LA. Food for thought….Sorry didn’t mean to hijack the thread….Thanks again!!!

In a slideshow it is hard with single images from different photographers, it breaks up fast, or requires a ton of editing to get the right people next to each other. two from each helps the flow.

I think a few people are submitting two-ups, nice part about that is that it will break up the flow within the frame and help keep things moving. A constant series of horizontal singles would be deadly.

…well you said photographers should consider giving work away for free, nice to see you will be plowing through 2000+images FOR FREE:)

welcome to the club…

you will pick ONE slide from TWO submissions. A spread is ok.

sorry I had it confused.

The width would be 1024 and the height 768 total.

2 slides.

This is about your brand and it is about one man’s (Rob H.) attempt to level the playing field and come up with some real quality images at this point in time in our industry. It costs nothing, very well might mean nothing. Lets say Mr Canon 5D gets a slot in the final presentation. The market will determine his viability as a professional. Seems to me it is all about what you have done before sending Rob your two images. Past as prologue. Does your book and website reflect a consistency and a common thread running through your work? Have you got what you need to back it up? Rob’s choices have nothing to do with that.

As Andrew Hetherington states on Jackanory, there is going to be a lot of shite – that’s photo contests for you. As stated on AH’s blog – you think the CA panel will see any lesser volume of crapola?. What Rob edits into the final presentation will be something (in his opinion – he is the only judge) quite the opposite. Rob’s experiment is a noble one – I am in.

-AP

This may be possible… if you’re using it as a stock site, or to find new work.

However, I think most people use it for different reasons: Either as a personal photo-dump or as a place to put ALL their photographs publicly.

For me, even though I don’t do it for a living, I often get asked to shoot events: A friend’s fashion show; a music event; my little sister’s birthday party; etc. Where do I put the pictures when they are done? Flickr. Then the link to the set can go out everywhere.

My art, commercial, works in progress, it’s all up there. But it’s not a portfolio. My website is more like a portfolio (though I still think of it as a personal site). If someone finds something on flickr they really like, I think the best thing for the photographer to have done is to make sure it’s part of a set and make sure that set is part of a collection.

The collections should be well named, and the sets should be well edited, by series, by date, whatever. But the overall photostream works just as well if it is all inclusive… because every person viewing a flickr account is looking for something different.

My editor at a magazine is looking for the outtakes from a particular shoot to see if we had one where so and so was looking a certain way, or a picture they could use of one of the assistants for a bio, and my sister is looking through for pictures of her birthday party. If I geared it entirely towards getting work in the industry, then the MAJORITY of people looking at it would miss out.

I don’t send magazines my flickr site, so if they’re looking there that’s an added resource for them, not one I take for granted.

Overall, I think it’s cool that editors are more and more aware of it, of course.

You guys just keep whistling into the wind, and throwing that salt over your shoulder. Imagine if the subject of this photo shoot was a celebrity, a minor, a wife of a lawyer, or knew a lawyer. I hope you don’t own your home, or anything of value.

Good luck in those business practices!

http://tinyurl.com/2c9ao6

You are completely right. It is about creativity and not insurance, etc. I want to hire the person who has creative work and does whatever it takes to get the job done, someone who is passionate and will work with me.

One thing that interests me about this flickr group – is no one pays to get in. When I look at a source book, I understand what it takes to have an advertisement printed. This might be an excellent place to expose new talent who are one step away from making it big (and affording a source book ad!). PDN 30 and other contests are another great resource too.

I am interested to look at the flickr group! Good luck to all.

Tell that to this student who produced this piece on mental illness in America’s prisons. I’d say it’s easily above what most seasoned photographers are producing.

Very haunting piece –
http://www.indepth.jennackerman.com/

Do you remember being young and stupid? How about daring and creative? There are many, many folks who began by flying blind and then had to get smart quick.

You are correct about photography being a business, and photographers who don’t wise up to this fact drop away quickly. In fact, its a great filter.

However your “Do you have a workman’s comp policy in place” as a minimum bar for entry suggests that you are “disconnected” from the free wheeling, undisciplined, wildly creative, stupidly smart nature of photographers.

Its all about the work. If art directors or art buyers want to hire untested talent, they certainly have the ability to offer some guidance on the minimum liability insurance policies of their agency. It can be a risky move for sure, but giant rewards (and sometimes huge disaster) are built on risk.

Just before last Christmas I entered an “open” competition from a high profile respected photo organization in the UK. For them it was something important, I think they would have got hundreds of applicants – it was advertised for months. I knew I wouldn’t stand a chance but made an effort with the application in the knowledge that at least their are introduced to my work. I just received a letter stating that not only was I not chosen, but no one else was either. Really I seriously doubt that the submissions lacked quality, they may have not fitted what they want to achieve, but then why have an “open” situation if your not prepared to be “open” and find reasons to give opportunities and not put blocks in the way and or so subjectify everything you cant see the wood for the trees.

Now to generalize sites like FLICKR is a little unfair. Yes I know it is a Crapshoot. Yes there are people out there who do not know the difference between a Portrait and a Snapshot.
But there is some high quality out there ( Patrick Shaw and Donald McPherson come to mind).

My point is this: The dark ages of photography is over. It has now left the flat iron district in NYC and has become easily and readily accessible to everyone. I think we should celebrate the fact that photography is now being recognized as an art form more than ever! And with people like Rob out there who are not afraid to use and embrace new ways of thinking, it gives us hope.
Stop being a buzz kill.
C-