I’m sorry but doing all the web promotion is a work that simply sucks no matter if you do it yourself or if you are the intern who has to do it.

I have a longing for the old times where cooking coffee the whole day was the worst scenario for an intern or assitent. now we are all condemned to use the isolated communication tools and on top of that brainwashed to think it is “cool”.

yeah and lookig at all of it on a screen ain’t so cool either –

I’m of to a real bookstore…

Lots of interesting info, but you have to listen carefully. Things like how they choose projects and photographers, and how they handle shoots. They may be a good fit for some APE readers.

The Adbase interviews are mind numbing (same questions asked), but do contain some gems of info. They run about 20-25 minuets. They may be worth a look.

Cool work of Mr Zuckerman

Shooting anything on a solid background is taking it out of it’s natural habitat. That is the point. That is what makes those images so graphic, so visually interesting. Isolating the subject so completely is what allows the viewer to study it in a new way, without any distractions. This makes the photographer’s ability to both capture a moment and to pick that moment out of many very similar looking frames that much more important.

Anytime anything is done involving animals in captivity, there are going to be accusations of exploitation.

In this instance, I think it’s a little like saying Anne Geddes exploits babies. And if any of those people think that might also be true, perhaps they could consider redirecting some of their energies.

1. This is not the forum for such a debate.
2. I don’t really have time because I’m about to enjoy some delicious baked salmon for my late lunch.

“Gen 1:26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

When I watch the video I didn’t treatment the harmed any of th birds, especially since the handlers were involved. The offer mare care and protect for the animals than the average person. God Bless Andrew for using the creativity God has given him.

I assure you there are PETA members who don’t find it funny at all.

I never said I didn’t like the images. And I’m certainly not saying they are crap. But looking at it from a marketing perspective the concept seems problematic and controversial to me.

Of the universe of people who might spend money on a coffee-table book about birds, wildlife photographers (or people who buy gifts for them) and environmentalists are probably high on the list. Both of those communities have cause to cry, well, foul over shots done in a studio.

I was simply wondering how this work might be received. Granted John James Audubon killed, and dismembered, literally thousands of birds to create his “Birds of America” folio. But those were different times. I can see accusations that this work was both cruel (forcing birds to perform for the camera) and disingenuous (white seamless isn’t a natural habitat). Hence I wonder what impact that might have on sales.

C’mon man, honestly?

With all the crap out there, this is the work you’ve chosen to disesteem?

I wonder how these books are going to be received by real nature photographers (i.e., the guys that go trudging up mountains and through jungles to photograph wildlife in its natural habitat). I also wonder if PETA might weigh in. There does seem to be an element of exploitation here.

Otherwise, nothing wrong with having a marketing plan.