No doubt the need for images and multi media will grow and the one who can produce it all and tell the story, linking it all back to him ,taking advantage of SEOs will rule the next wave.

the main factor in driving people’s attention to the internet is the fact that it’s content is free (mostly, still). as it becomes more and more bombarded by ads and pay walls go up, there will mostly likely be a shift and people will refuse to pay for digital when they can have the real, physical object for a similar amount – even if it is shit. it took newsday $650 million dollars to get 35 subscribers in 3 months. is that the new economic model we’ve been waiting for?

I’ve been using a tablet ultra mobile PC for a while, and I (nearly) always have to carry a separate keyboard. Microsoft had this concept with the Samsung Q1, having a full PC with touch sensitive screen and designed to work without a keyboard. They sold the keyboard as an optional extra. In the end though, you miss out on so much of the functionality of a laptop if you don’t have a keyboard, that they ended up supplying the keyboard as standard.

Nice looking gadget, but it’s an awfully unwieldy thing to carry round on the off-chance that you want to read a magazine. Just try typing a few emails on it and you will soon go back to your laptop.

Let’s have a closer look and break this down.

First, I don’t believe an argument can be won. Even if one party shows errs in the others statements or reasoning, they still do damage to that person face (pride). However, both of us have chosen to remain anonymous, so the value in this discussion is not our own egos, but as a forum to others in the industry. Unfortunately this is an off topic tangent, and has very little relation to the thread topic, though it is still significant.

In the original statement of yours -which I quoted- you did not come out and *directly* state that the photographer should be responsible for “costs”. I took it as an “implication” from you, hence my response. Passion and making a healthy living is not a dichotomy. They go hand in hand. A creative artist will need financial health to be of benefit to this industry.

I’m not sure why you bring up the “free market”. Possibly you’ve had this discussion before and this was part of your defense? Personally I believe in regulated capitalism but don’t believe a free market exists. Often when I see “free market” brought into a discussion it is by someone arguing for minimum wages or lower. Supply & demand, etc. Generally this becomes ‘my way or the highway’. But possibly you associate free market with capitalism, and just used the term out of habit.

The question isn’t whether “we are all going to get paid”, it is the ‘rate of return’ (ROI). Is it worth an image makers time and energy to undertake a project? Creative artists don’t value or price their work based on your budget. These rates are not arbitrarily set. They are based on what it takes to run a profitable business, and how the individual values their own time. It’s not up to an art buyer or account exec to determine what a creative artists time is worth. By earning a healthy return a creative artist can then manage their lives better, the client benefits. If a photographer changed their fees capriciously to fit every project, they would immediately lose respect, and perceived value for their services/brand. After all we work in a very subjective industry.

If your budget is one third of the photographers fee, maybe someone is expecting something for nothing. There are no free lunches. The client or agency may have expectations which are out of line with reality. Since the media buys almost always dwarf creative fees, maybe there is some room for change on that end – instead of externalizing the cost onto the image maker.

I’m all for developing and maintaining relationships. I suggest if you want a discount or freebie, the time to ask for it is not with a new image maker. Pick someone whom you’ve already developed a relationship, commissioned half a dozen or more projects. Most of us will be happy to help under those circumstances. In fact many of the agencies in other areas of the world often pick up projects with smaller clients with the intent to have full control over creative – the goal being to win awards. These projects often have smaller budgets and image makers will often contribute.

On the other hand, anyone that has not had a lowball -”this would be good for you”- offer has not been in the business very long. Usually this offer is the carrot on a stick with (unfulfilled) promises attached. Do the job for cheap and we’ll remember you when the cherry projects with big budgets come around. Of course the lowball photographer is never considered for those better projects. His/her brand has been damaged or diminished by working cheap. If you want a discount, let’s shoot the first nine projects at full rate, I’ll throw in the tenth as a courtesy :)

There is a reason the irony of this piece hits home so well:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2a8TRSgzZY

Please pardon any typos or less than graceful phrases, I’m running to a meeting.

Cool toy, but everyone has to own one. Not a problem with the ipod since you can get one for under $100.

what i would do is make a table that i can roll and stick into a tube. the technology is already there. if i am an office worker, white collar is the market segment who buys magazines, it is a pain in the ass to carry a laptop and a tablet on my business trip or commute to the office.

if no rolling capacity ready yet, then much thinner is needed.

video? ha! animation, video, and multimedia some kid in his parent’s garage is building right this very moment that will wipe everything out in 5 years.

evolving on a day to day basis is the new medium. murphy’s law is a joke now. gone. transcended in the blink of an eye. those of us who become adept ad adjusting and change on a weekly basis will be the ones charging the higher fees when the market settles.

so, my karma is I got a cheaper apartment, cut down on my fancy toys, cut my budgetst across, cut all my costs radically, so i can survive the mayhem and still keep working toward developing out of being a rookie photographer.

you work with what you are given. lock your horns, and move forward by focusing the energy on opportunities. and for those clients who are just way below my value. a smile and an excuse that i am booked. cause they’ll come around again with good budgets.

The fees are lower because ad revenue is lower, and there are more of us vying for a piece of the *much* smaller pie. simple idea. simple assessment. what are we going to do about it? whine?

diversifying is my way of surviving while the industry resets its Teutonic plates. And I am a rookie photographer, mind you. isnt that what the old-timers had to do to survive when they were starting out or when things were tough?

so, i knock the doors of every possible client who needs photos that i can think of in my local market, i negotiate as best as i can with the lower fees, never give away more rights that the job deserves (because buyers are lumping rights grabbing under the same excuse), shoot whatever pays my bills for the time being (while doing a lot more personal work of the kind of work I would love to be doing (editorial & commercially) so I can keep evolving and learning and getting better, and ransack the new world before us so i can anticipate and figure out and get ready for what will be the future next year, and keep myself sane and productive and happy while things get better.

dinosaurs do not change.

mammals do.

I don’t buy a print newspaper nowadays because I’m not going to read 90% of it. I’ve already got my news from free content on the web, or from the radio. I’m not interested in the sport section. And most days, I’m not interested in their specialist features (fashion, interior design, etc) And likewise I’m not going to pay to download the whole New York Times.

However, I will pay (a micro amount) to download specific articles that are of interest.

This is where it could get interesting – and could breathe life back into photojournalism, photography and video. Imagine a good old fashioned photo-essay (think Picture Post or Life) delivered to an iPad for say, 25c. If it’s downloaded 10,000 times that’s $2,500 for the author(s)……

Not only that… remember, now you’re also going to have to do video along with your stills. Oh, they might give you a couple hundred more dollars for it… but as anyone who’s dealt with even small amounts of video knows, it will take up a lot of storage space, resources, and most importantly time. And just like with digital and digital fees photographers will take very little (or nothing) because hey, “it doesn’t cost anything anyway.”

Hmm, that sounded like cynicism and Conan hates cynicism… he’s right, it doesn’t get you anywhere, so I’ll stop now.

The iPad does have that big sexy display but now I’ll have to protect it. With some sort of satchel or mini messenger bag? iPad iPurse ? Where do I put it, how do I carry it? Seems destined to hit the ground sooner than later.

It needs to be held. Set it on a table and it just lies there, flat. Awkward when you are trying to eat and surf the web. Put a laptop on a table and you can have ten people watching your slideshow or video, hands free. This thing commands serious physical attention. Can’t even think about texting while driving, instant death.

My iphone is true portability, my laptop is a true portable workhorse.
Is it just me or is there something so not appealing about the word iPad.

I agree with you that you need to consider the bigger picture and the long run. If you did not read my interview with Rob about Good News in Photography check it out.

http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2010/01/13/good-news-in-photography/

I think it is inline with your thinking and comments.

http://www.fsc.org/

A bigger loss of forest is do to mining and to increase agricultural land usage. Just on the mining aspect, coal is still the widest used generating mechanism for electricity. So recharging all those devices indirectly burns more an more coal.

I feel the real challenge will be to the TV. How soon Hulu and boxee get an app out will be telling.

Lets have a contest and guess which TV/ Movie will have one in an actors hand first.

Plus:

I have hundreds of pdfs that I would love to read, and now I can. Also, I can have this open as I work on my mac and read the manuals, help files and online tutorials.

For photos:

When we see raw image processing on this watch out.

Notice no real talk of iLIfe for iPad? That is definitely coming. At this point is more of a consumer device then a producer device. That will change.

And I want to create photo/image apps for this device. From intervalometers, lens focusing, realtime color correction on set, to active intelligence gathering using wifi/ bluetooth of how my lights/strobes/camera(s) are talking to each other. Getting a metadata steam that can be used/ called back replayed or sent out to an agency.

laurence

I often wonder about this. All our digital technology is laden with heavy metals, rare earth minerals, and a hell of a lot of plastic and aluminum. I’m not at all convinced that the net toll on the environment is greater than when we printed magazines and processed film. Especially when you think about replacing all this stuff every two years.

But will the current trend of online tabloid style news websites prevail? With online newspapers gaining cash through clicks to new pages (where there’s more advertising space) I’ve noticed a lot of sensationalist article headlines screaming ‘click me’ that are clearly just for revenue. I can’t see how the tablet will change this. All I can say is I hope that quality news sources do emerge in new formats that don’t cave into the easy cash of sensationalism.

I also agree that I won’t be sorry to say good by to the stacks of newspapers and magazines. Thats gazillions of trees saved and gazillions of not so nice chemical inks diverted from production. Don’t get me wrong, it’s not that I’m against printing, but I’m against printing stuff that is disposable. If you want to print wall art or a book, that’s great because they’ll have a long life. Of course there’ll be big environmental impacts from all these new electronics being produced, I’d love to see life-cycle comparisons of the impacts of the new medias versus the old!

The pixel peeper forums are already bitching that it can’t run PhotoShop. :-) Oh well !

Who ever thought they would have an electronic ping pong table that you can play on your t.v.??

I don’t think I’ve ever hired someone without a website.
It’s the easiest and most fundamental way to show your work to potential clients. If you don’t have a website, you better have a rep that is showing your work. If you don’t have either, I just don’t think your taking your job seriously. As far as experience goes, I hire a couple people a year that only have editorial experience and want to break into advertising. But, they don’t get those jobs on one or two great images, I need to see a whole portfolio of great shots to have the confidence to give them a job.

Of course great products will almost always sell. And they sell better with an Apple logo.

And yes, talent is in the eye of the beholder. But it helps to have an awesome retoucher!