RE: Vs: Manners ( Was: Fairy pics)
I wouldn't sweat it. As you'll see often on the Web, and this list is no exception, people who are absolutely pedantic about 'netiquette' sometimes pay little attention to plain and simple courtesy. You do not post more than many others on this list, and you are certainly not offensive. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of petit miam Sent: April 17, 2001 11:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Vs: Manners ( Was: Fairy pics) That is all I will say on this subject unless someone manages to get me really riled up and I just can't help it. Jody. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Vs: Manners ( Was: Fairy pics)
Thankyou Chris and others for your support. I have to reply to this message. Sorry if it goes over my Raimo-set quota of one a week. Actually some of us on this list have a job to go to. I am working about 55-65 hours a week. This means I do not get the chance to check my email hourly or even daily. I do not even have a computer at home until a few days time when my brand-new one arrives. I try and check about every 3-5 days. There are a lot of topics come through during that time. I certainly do not comment on all available topics, only the relatively few that interest me, or where I have knowledge (for example French swearwords) to contribute. I am not going to apologise for this. I am sure I have many supporters on this view, and I don't feel I have done anything wrong. That is all I will say on this subject unless someone manages to get me really riled up and I just can't help it. Jody. > Hi, Raimo. Two things: (1) If you're not happy with > the number of posts > from Jody, why not tell her that directly instead of > getting mad at her > without teling her (or us) why? At least that way > we'd know why you were > upset. And (2) I don't get the impression that Jody > posts a lot to the > list. I can think of at least 20 people (myself > included) who post more > than she does. Perhaps it only seems that way > because we post more or > less regularly, while she only checks her mail > periodically, by the look > of it. She'll go a while without posting and then > reply to a week's worth > of messages, so she tends to send several in a row > instead of spacing them > out. But I don't think the sheer number of posts is > greater. > > chris __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Shooting for pay (was re: Fairy Pics)
AFAIK, there is only one place in my town (Charlotte, North Carolina, USA) that still does b&w. They charge $13 for an 8x10. Let's see $13 cost minus $5 net equals negative $8 profit. These are customers you don't need. --Tom Aaron Reynolds wrote: > > Harry Baughman wrote: > > > > yes . she a few days ago and said she found someone to do it. > > Feel lucky: if they don't want to pay your exceptionally reasonable fee, > they won't want to pay for decent printing, either. A friend of mine > doing a wedding just last week got an e-mail from the client, who had > decided that her print prices were too high, that $5 each CDN for HAND > MADE CUSTOM B&W PRINTS was far too much since she could take them to > Wal-Mart and get them printed for 99 cents each. And this is after my > photographic friend has discounted her hand made print price from $10 to > $5 as a wedding present to them...that's what you get by lowballin' it. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: Re: (Was: Fairy pics) (no sexual innuendo)
Tom R wrote: "Of course, if you get a bad rep, you will have a hard time, especially in a small town." My point exactly! But things seem to be going ok so far! ;-) fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Shooting for pay (was re: Fairy Pics)
Aaron Reynolds wrote: > > Harry Baughman wrote: > > > > yes . she a few days ago and said she found someone to do it. > > Feel lucky: if they don't want to pay your exceptionally reasonable fee, > they won't want to pay for decent printing, either. A friend of mine > doing a wedding just last week got an e-mail from the client, who had > decided that her print prices were too high, that $5 each CDN for HAND > MADE CUSTOM B&W PRINTS was far too much since she could take them to > Wal-Mart and get them printed for 99 cents each. And this is after my > photographic friend has discounted her hand made print price from $10 to > $5 as a wedding present to them...that's what you get by lowballin' it. > I hate that crap. tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Shooting for pay (was re: Fairy Pics)
Harry Baughman wrote: > > yes . she a few days ago and said she found someone to do it. Feel lucky: if they don't want to pay your exceptionally reasonable fee, they won't want to pay for decent printing, either. A friend of mine doing a wedding just last week got an e-mail from the client, who had decided that her print prices were too high, that $5 each CDN for HAND MADE CUSTOM B&W PRINTS was far too much since she could take them to Wal-Mart and get them printed for 99 cents each. And this is after my photographic friend has discounted her hand made print price from $10 to $5 as a wedding present to them...that's what you get by lowballin' it. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Vs: Manners ( Was: Fairy pics)
Hi, With the greatest of respect to all parties involved, perhaps it is now time to take this dispute off-list, if it must be continued at all. I don't wish to choose sides here (although I do have an opinion as to who "started it", and who may rightly feel aggrieved), and I also understand the desire to "get in the last word", but surely nothing more is to be gained by continuing this in the public view. IMHO, everyone has now had an opportunity to put in their two cents, so nothing constructive can be further accomplished here. Thank you for your understanding. regards, frank Tanya & Russell Mayer wrote: > Raimo wrote: > > "OK, Lasse, I admit that was a bit over the top - but I do not like half of > the PDML bandwith being used by one poster - reminds me of one Gregory long > time ago..." > > Raimo, why is it that you have chosen to attack Jody and not myself? If you > had been observing PDML over the past week or so, you would have noticed > that the majority of postings have been by ME or about questions that I hav > asked or in regards to topics that were posted, yep, by little 'ole ME. So > much so, that I even apologised to the PDML on-list at one point for taking > up so much bandwidth... a point btw, that nobody else seems to mind. > > " It really is not mandatory to reply to each and every mail..." > > This is called common courtesy Raimo, a skill that you do not appear to > have mastered, but one which seemingly come naturally to Jody. > > "When you call me "an asshole and a coward"..." > > He is telling the truth > > One more thing that it may pay for you to consider is the fact that Jody, > myself and a number of other posters are in the SOUTHERN Hemisphere. We do > not receive the digest/postings during our work hours as many of you > northerners do. The emails pile up in our inboxes while we are SLEEPING, so > it makes sense for us to read them during the day and then post responses to > them chronologically. I have noticed (as you would have if you had OPENED > YOUR EYES), that frequently Jody, myself, Rob Studdert and a number of > others who post from Australia and New Zealand follow a similar pattern, and > will go for 2-3 digests (I subscribe to the digested form of PDML) without > posting any responses and then post a "bulk" number of responses to those > topics that they are involved with or interested in, one after the other > > "All the best!" > > Is this a joke, considering what you have been posting lately? > > fairy. > > PS I suspect that somebody is suffering male PMS. > > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Vs: Manners ( Was: Fairy pics)
Raimo wrote: "OK, Lasse, I admit that was a bit over the top - but I do not like half of the PDML bandwith being used by one poster - reminds me of one Gregory long time ago..." Raimo, why is it that you have chosen to attack Jody and not myself? If you had been observing PDML over the past week or so, you would have noticed that the majority of postings have been by ME or about questions that I hav asked or in regards to topics that were posted, yep, by little 'ole ME. So much so, that I even apologised to the PDML on-list at one point for taking up so much bandwidth... a point btw, that nobody else seems to mind. " It really is not mandatory to reply to each and every mail..." This is called common courtesy Raimo, a skill that you do not appear to have mastered, but one which seemingly come naturally to Jody. "When you call me "an asshole and a coward"..." He is telling the truth One more thing that it may pay for you to consider is the fact that Jody, myself and a number of other posters are in the SOUTHERN Hemisphere. We do not receive the digest/postings during our work hours as many of you northerners do. The emails pile up in our inboxes while we are SLEEPING, so it makes sense for us to read them during the day and then post responses to them chronologically. I have noticed (as you would have if you had OPENED YOUR EYES), that frequently Jody, myself, Rob Studdert and a number of others who post from Australia and New Zealand follow a similar pattern, and will go for 2-3 digests (I subscribe to the digested form of PDML) without posting any responses and then post a "bulk" number of responses to those topics that they are involved with or interested in, one after the other "All the best!" Is this a joke, considering what you have been posting lately? fairy. PS I suspect that somebody is suffering male PMS. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Vs: Fairy pics
Lasse, if you are worried about language, you´d do well to check you own. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Lasse Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 15. huhtikuuta 2001 14:47 Aihe: Re: Fairy pics >Raimo K. wrote: > >>This is absolutely the best mail from you. Do it! Maybe you´ll bother some other >list afterwards. > >Now what kind of language is that!? You should be ashamed of yourself! >This is against any protocol of civil manners for list participation. >Assholes like you is what's bothering lists. >(And it's not petite miam's camera that should be dropped off a cliff...) > >Lasse > > >All the best! >Raimo >-Alkuperäinen viesti- >Lähettäjä: petit miam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Päivä: 15. huhtikuuta 2001 11:41 >Aihe: Re: Fairy pics > > >>Think it's time to drop my MZ-30 off a cliff ;) >> >> > > >- >This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, >go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to >visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . > > >- >This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, >go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to >visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . > - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Vs: Manners ( Was: Fairy pics)
OK, Lasse, I admit that was a bit over the top - but I do not like half of the PDML bandwith being used by one poster - reminds me of one Gregory long time ago. It really is not mandatory to reply to each and every mail. When you call me "an asshole and a coward" I take it to be just a Swedish form of courtesy. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Lasse Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 15. huhtikuuta 2001 18:37 Aihe: Manners ( Was: Fairy pics) >Hi Paul, > >I appreciate your effort in trying to find a reasonable explanation for Raimos post >(and of course nothing below is intended as an argument with you.) > >I doubt though that any attempt at humor was involved. >There was even another post by Raimo attacking Jody: >(Subject: Vs: Direct from Chasseur d'Images) >"Just how small is this French "petit" compared to the English counterpart? Looks >like it is so small as not to have any meaningful content - but it seems that they >are everywhere." > >If there was a misunderstanding or confusion on Raimo's part, the responsibility for >it is solely with Raimo and it's up to him to offer an explanation. >And irrelevant of what he meant (which to me looks pretty obvious) his post w a s >grossly offending. >Telling another perfectly civil and good natured PDML member to go bother some other >list and indicating his/hers posts have no meaningful content is completely >unacceptable behaviour from a PDML member. >Raimo was being an asshole and a coward in taking such a cheap shot at Jody and he >ows her a public apology, no matter the reason for his posts. >(I doubt he is a man enough to apologize though, but he is most welcome to prove me >wrong.) > >(Thanks for the holiday greetings Paul, a happy one to you too.) > >Lasse >- - - - - - - - >Hi Lasse, >I almost responded to this post as well, because I thought it was very >mean spiritied. But I suspect that Raimo misinterpreted something or was >trying to be humorous. I don't think he meant to offend Jody, who is >always very civil and responsible. He may have confused her with someone >else who was writing under the same topic head and was quite >contentious. In any case, I think this was a misunderstanding, and >neither Raimo nor Jody should take any offense at what was said. To all >who celebrate a holiday today, have a happy one. >Paul Stenquist > >Lasse Karlsson wrote: >> >> Raimo K. wrote: >> >> >This is absolutely the best mail from you. Do it! Maybe you´ll bother some other >list afterwards. >> >> Now what kind of language is that!? You should be ashamed of yourself! >> This is against any protocol of civil manners for list participation. >> Assholes like you is what's bothering lists. >> (And it's not petite miam's camera that should be dropped off a cliff...) >> >> Lasse >> >> All the best! >> Raimo >> -Alkuperäinen viesti- >> Lähettäjä: petit miam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Päivä: 15. huhtikuuta 2001 11:41 >> Aihe: Re: Fairy pics >> >> >Think it's time to drop my MZ-30 off a cliff ;) >> > > - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
Thankyou for sticking up for me. Some people just can't take a joke. > Raimo K. wrote: > > >This is absolutely the best mail from you. Do it! > Maybe you´ll bother some other list afterwards. > > Now what kind of language is that!? You should be > ashamed of yourself! > This is against any protocol of civil manners for > list participation. > Assholes like you is what's bothering lists. > (And it's not petite miam's camera that should be > dropped off a cliff...) __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Manners ( Was: Fairy pics)
Well, I'm man enough to say I am sorry all this is happening, and I am glad that for onece, I didn't start it. HAR William Robb - Original Message - From: "Lasse Karlsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: April 15, 2001 10:29 AM Subject: Manners ( Was: Fairy pics) > Hi Paul, > > I appreciate your effort in trying to find a reasonable explanation for Raimos post (and of course nothing below is intended as an argument with you.) > > I doubt though that any attempt at humor was involved. > There was even another post by Raimo attacking Jody: > (Subject: Vs: Direct from Chasseur d'Images) > "Just how small is this French "petit" compared to the English counterpart? Looks like it is so small as not to have any meaningful content - but it seems that they are everywhere." > > If there was a misunderstanding or confusion on Raimo's part, the responsibility for it is solely with Raimo and it's up to him to offer an explanation. > And irrelevant of what he meant (which to me looks pretty obvious) his post w a s grossly offending. > Telling another perfectly civil and good natured PDML member to go bother some other list and indicating his/hers posts have no meaningful content is completely unacceptable behaviour from a PDML member. > Raimo was being an asshole and a coward in taking such a cheap shot at Jody and he ows her a public apology, no matter the reason for his posts. > (I doubt he is a man enough to apologize though, but he is most welcome to prove me wrong.) > > (Thanks for the holiday greetings Paul, a happy one to you too.) > > Lasse > - - - - - - - - > Hi Lasse, > I almost responded to this post as well, because I thought it was very > mean spiritied. But I suspect that Raimo misinterpreted something or was > trying to be humorous. I don't think he meant to offend Jody, who is > always very civil and responsible. He may have confused her with someone > else who was writing under the same topic head and was quite > contentious. In any case, I think this was a misunderstanding, and > neither Raimo nor Jody should take any offense at what was said. To all > who celebrate a holiday today, have a happy one. > Paul Stenquist > > Lasse Karlsson wrote: > > > > Raimo K. wrote: > > > > >This is absolutely the best mail from you. Do it! Maybe you´ll bother some other list afterwards. > > > > Now what kind of language is that!? You should be ashamed of yourself! > > This is against any protocol of civil manners for list participation. > > Assholes like you is what's bothering lists. > > (And it's not petite miam's camera that should be dropped off a cliff...) > > > > Lasse > > > > All the best! > > Raimo > > -Alkuperäinen viesti- > > Lähettäjä: petit miam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Päivä: 15. huhtikuuta 2001 11:41 > > Aihe: Re: Fairy pics > > > > >Think it's time to drop my MZ-30 off a cliff ;) > > > > > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . > > - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Manners ( Was: Fairy pics)
Hi Paul, I appreciate your effort in trying to find a reasonable explanation for Raimos post (and of course nothing below is intended as an argument with you.) I doubt though that any attempt at humor was involved. There was even another post by Raimo attacking Jody: (Subject: Vs: Direct from Chasseur d'Images) "Just how small is this French "petit" compared to the English counterpart? Looks like it is so small as not to have any meaningful content - but it seems that they are everywhere." If there was a misunderstanding or confusion on Raimo's part, the responsibility for it is solely with Raimo and it's up to him to offer an explanation. And irrelevant of what he meant (which to me looks pretty obvious) his post w a s grossly offending. Telling another perfectly civil and good natured PDML member to go bother some other list and indicating his/hers posts have no meaningful content is completely unacceptable behaviour from a PDML member. Raimo was being an asshole and a coward in taking such a cheap shot at Jody and he ows her a public apology, no matter the reason for his posts. (I doubt he is a man enough to apologize though, but he is most welcome to prove me wrong.) (Thanks for the holiday greetings Paul, a happy one to you too.) Lasse - - - - - - - - Hi Lasse, I almost responded to this post as well, because I thought it was very mean spiritied. But I suspect that Raimo misinterpreted something or was trying to be humorous. I don't think he meant to offend Jody, who is always very civil and responsible. He may have confused her with someone else who was writing under the same topic head and was quite contentious. In any case, I think this was a misunderstanding, and neither Raimo nor Jody should take any offense at what was said. To all who celebrate a holiday today, have a happy one. Paul Stenquist Lasse Karlsson wrote: > > Raimo K. wrote: > > >This is absolutely the best mail from you. Do it! Maybe you´ll bother some other >list afterwards. > > Now what kind of language is that!? You should be ashamed of yourself! > This is against any protocol of civil manners for list participation. > Assholes like you is what's bothering lists. > (And it's not petite miam's camera that should be dropped off a cliff...) > > Lasse > > All the best! > Raimo > -Alkuperäinen viesti- > Lähettäjä: petit miam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Päivä: 15. huhtikuuta 2001 11:41 > Aihe: Re: Fairy pics > > >Think it's time to drop my MZ-30 off a cliff ;) > > - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
Hi Lasse, I almost responded to this post as well, because I thought it was very mean spiritied. But I suspect that Raimo misinterpreted something or was trying to be humorous. I don't think he meant to offend Jody, who is always very civil and responsible. He may have confused her with someone else who was writing under the same topic head and was quite contentious. In any case, I think this was a misunderstanding, and neither Raimo nor Jody should take any offense at what was said. To all who celebrate a holiday today, have a happy one. Paul Stenquist Lasse Karlsson wrote: > > Raimo K. wrote: > > >This is absolutely the best mail from you. Do it! Maybe you´ll bother some other >list afterwards. > > Now what kind of language is that!? You should be ashamed of yourself! > This is against any protocol of civil manners for list participation. > Assholes like you is what's bothering lists. > (And it's not petite miam's camera that should be dropped off a cliff...) > > Lasse > > All the best! > Raimo > -Alkuperäinen viesti- > Lähettäjä: petit miam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Päivä: 15. huhtikuuta 2001 11:41 > Aihe: Re: Fairy pics > > >Think it's time to drop my MZ-30 off a cliff ;) > > > > > > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . > > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
Raimo K. wrote: >This is absolutely the best mail from you. Do it! Maybe you´ll bother some other list >afterwards. Now what kind of language is that!? You should be ashamed of yourself! This is against any protocol of civil manners for list participation. Assholes like you is what's bothering lists. (And it's not petite miam's camera that should be dropped off a cliff...) Lasse All the best! Raimo -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: petit miam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 15. huhtikuuta 2001 11:41 Aihe: Re: Fairy pics >Think it's time to drop my MZ-30 off a cliff ;) > > - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: (Was: Fairy pics) (no sexual innuendo)
petit miam wrote: > ... Fairy needs to create a name for herself > first, and she's not going to do that if she is > charging more than people are willing to pay for > photos by a relative unknown. Once she has a > reputation for quality, she can start charging a bit > more. Nah - by then she will just have a reputation for low prices and will be making little money dealing w/ cheap-ass folks constantly nit-picking for even more price breaks. Better to start at "full value" and see what happens. - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Vs: Fairy pics
This is absolutely the best mail from you. Do it! Maybe you´ll bother some other list afterwards. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: petit miam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 15. huhtikuuta 2001 11:41 Aihe: Re: Fairy pics >Think it's time to drop my MZ-30 off a cliff ;) > > - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: (Was: Fairy pics) (no sexual innuendo)
Having no experience in charging for photography. I think the discount on the first job is a good idea to start with. Fairy needs to create a name for herself first, and she's not going to do that if she is charging more than people are willing to pay for photos by a relative unknown. Once she has a reputation for quality, she can start charging a bit more. Jody. __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
Think it's time to drop my MZ-30 off a cliff ;) > No, seriously though, I have had many offers since > the PZ-1P for assistance > to becoming "re-enabled", ranging from clearcut > donations, to extremely > cheap offers of sales, to outright "you can borrow > this for as long as you > like"... So thankyou to everyone who did this (or > even thought of doing > it), you are all very generous and I must say, > TRUSTING people - > particularly the PDML'er who did send me his ME > Super in good faith that I > would pay him "when I can afford it"... > > fairy. __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
Tanya's Australian, so it's "mum". > > I think sometimes it takes a special kind of > masochist to work > > with children. > Called a "mom", if I have the vernacular correct. > :-) __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Shooting for pay (was re: Fairy Pics)
Harry Baughman wrote: > yes . she a few days ago and said she found someone to do it. Your lucky day :^) as in my earlier post, I would have done a non-complicated roll of 24 in such a situation - but they would need to also foot the film & processing costs. Roughly $2/frame shot w/ 4x6 proofs only. At least $50 must find it's way into my pocket from a shoot like this. They are buying my skills, knowledge and equipment. Of course, this shouldn't take more than ~1/2hr or so and the distance is short. As you learned, these are usually someone wanting something "on the cheap". I don't get too much of this sort of thing but an example is in my portraits section of my website URL'ed in the .sig below. Go to the "People Who Have Stood Still for Lens" part and look for the "anti-glamour senior portrait" of Katherine. The fringe benefits of this shoot were that it was also much fun and Mom ordered quite a good number of reprints of about 6 different frames. Bill - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Shooting for pay (was re: Fairy Pics)
yes . she a few days ago and said she found someone to do it. Harry B. wrote: > Since this message concerns pricing work i would like some thoughts on > this situation. i was ask to take some photos of two children ages 7 and > 5. i said i would since i like taking photos of kids. i would have had > to travel about 2 miles to the location , use one roll of film , have > it processed and would have given her all the photos taken for $50.00 > . was i asking to much? Definitely not. Had you asked the double amount you still would have been cheap. So what happened to the shoot? Did she decline your offer? Lasse - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Shooting for pay (was re: Fairy Pics)
Harry B. wrote: > Since this message concerns pricing work i would like some thoughts on > this situation. i was ask to take some photos of two children ages 7 and > 5. i said i would since i like taking photos of kids. i would have had > to travel about 2 miles to the location , use one roll of film , have > it processed and would have given her all the photos taken for $50.00 > . was i asking to much? Definitely not. Had you asked the double amount you still would have been cheap. So what happened to the shoot? Did she decline your offer? Lasse - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
Just remember, a living wage is just a little bit more than you make. "Provencher, Paul M." wrote: > Suffice to say that it shouldn't take 20 years... But real life does demand > an income that keeps up with your lifestyle (I may have that backwards :-). > Paul M. Provencher > (ppro) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Super Takumar-Zoom 1:4.5/70~150 with SMC? Yes! (Was a thread-drifted RE: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz)
Paul, that one has nice coatings for sure. I`d say it`s multi-coated. There`s just something about those colors, they are beautiful. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California - Original Message - From: "Provencher, Paul M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 12:08 PM Subject: RE: Super Takumar-Zoom 1:4.5/70~150 with SMC? Yes! (Was a thread-drifted RE: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz) > FWIW here is one on eBay that is most likely SMC - check the coating colors > and S/N - > http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1229939152 > I have noticed that the S/N is placed differently on the beauty ring with > the two SMC versions (and this one shown here) - (S/N following the lens > name) vs. the one I had that was not SMC (S/N then lens name) > > Paul M. Provencher > (ppro) > > > -Original Message- > From: Provencher, Paul M. > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 4:05 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: Super Takumar-Zoom 1:4.5/70~150 with SMC? Yes! (Was a > thread-drifted RE: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz) > > > The Super Takumar-Zoom 1:4.5/70~150 (S/N 4391349) was for many years "just" > a Super Takumar with traditional Super Takumar coatings. But according to > Gerjan van Oosten in "The Ultimate Asahi Pentax Screw Mount Guide > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/907653702X/diecastpro > Asahi first used the SMC coating on the Super Takumar-Zoom 1:4.5/70~150. > > I had a much earlier version with regular coating (light amber). See: > http://whitemetal.com/pentax/st_70~150_45/index.htm > > This one here is definitely SMC'd. I have another that is a little earlier > than this one (serial number is a couple thousand lower) and the coating is > also SMC. It's too bad this lens is so large - it really is quite nice in > spite of that, and with SMC, I expect it will be very usable. I will try to > put images up on my site when I can - right now I am behind on two deadlines > for Krause and a book deadline besides. Pay first then play! > > The other one I have needs to have a sticky diaphragm taken care of. It is > unmarked and still quite smooth other than the diaphragm, has no tripod > ring, hood, case, caps OR attachment lens. So it will probably be sold > fairly cheaply (I have sold the plain ST's in complete working order for > between $100-$150) > > Paul M. Provencher > (ppro) > > > -Original Message- > From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 3:04 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz > .etc > > (ppro) > > > > happy as a pig in with my "new" ST 70~150 (late SMC version!) > > - > > > > They actually put out a "late" SMC coated version > of the ST 70-150 zoom??, never seen nor heard > of that one. > JCO > > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . > > - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Super Takumar-Zoom 1:4.5/70~150 with SMC? Yes! (Was a thread-drifted RE: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz)
FWIW here is one on eBay that is most likely SMC - check the coating colors and S/N - http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1229939152 I have noticed that the S/N is placed differently on the beauty ring with the two SMC versions (and this one shown here) - (S/N following the lens name) vs. the one I had that was not SMC (S/N then lens name) Paul M. Provencher (ppro) -Original Message- From: Provencher, Paul M. Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 4:05 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Super Takumar-Zoom 1:4.5/70~150 with SMC? Yes! (Was a thread-drifted RE: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz) The Super Takumar-Zoom 1:4.5/70~150 (S/N 4391349) was for many years "just" a Super Takumar with traditional Super Takumar coatings. But according to Gerjan van Oosten in "The Ultimate Asahi Pentax Screw Mount Guide http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/907653702X/diecastpro Asahi first used the SMC coating on the Super Takumar-Zoom 1:4.5/70~150. I had a much earlier version with regular coating (light amber). See: http://whitemetal.com/pentax/st_70~150_45/index.htm This one here is definitely SMC'd. I have another that is a little earlier than this one (serial number is a couple thousand lower) and the coating is also SMC. It's too bad this lens is so large - it really is quite nice in spite of that, and with SMC, I expect it will be very usable. I will try to put images up on my site when I can - right now I am behind on two deadlines for Krause and a book deadline besides. Pay first then play! The other one I have needs to have a sticky diaphragm taken care of. It is unmarked and still quite smooth other than the diaphragm, has no tripod ring, hood, case, caps OR attachment lens. So it will probably be sold fairly cheaply (I have sold the plain ST's in complete working order for between $100-$150) Paul M. Provencher (ppro) -Original Message- From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 3:04 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz .etc > (ppro) > > happy as a pig in with my "new" ST 70~150 (late SMC version!) > - > They actually put out a "late" SMC coated version of the ST 70-150 zoom??, never seen nor heard of that one. JCO - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: e: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz
And now I've caused a new thread because I left the "R" out of "Re" in the subject line. Is there no end to my self-inflicted public humiliation? Let's see: Two Paul S's, each a writer who dashes off quick messages full of typos, then apologizes. We might as well confess, Paul: Yes, dear reader, we are conspiring to confuse you. -- PAUL STENQUIST <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: e: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pretty lame defense, I suppose, for one who earns his living as a technical writer... Ironically, I earn my living as a writer as well. I think that my frequent e-mail typos are the result of a general reluctance to actually "work" at writing when I'm dashing off something for the list. I figure most of you are smart enough to figure out what I meant to say, except for those occasions when what I meant to say makes such little sense that no one could possibly comprehend it even if it were error free :-) Paul Stenquist Paul Franklin Stregevsky - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: e: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Pretty lame defense, I suppose, for one who earns his living as a technical > writer... Ironically, I earn my living as a writer as well. I think that my frequent e-mail typos are the result of a general reluctance to actually "work" at writing when I'm dashing off something for the list. I figure most of you are smart enough to figure out what I meant to say, except for those occasions when what I meant to say makes such little sense that no one could possibly comprehend it even if it were error free :-) Paul Stenquist - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
Actually, it's not eBay economics. It's the bidders, and sellers(wherever they are from) that cause all of the anomalies. As eBay says, they are only a venue. Like a public highway, they aren't responsible for the actions and decisions of the drivers of the vehicles that use it. Trash or treasure is all in the opinion of the individual. When you have millions of individuals involved, there's no guarantee things will go the way that you think they should. Len --- > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 8:40 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics > > > David, > > The only way to get a Super Program in black is to get a > Super A. Those are > scarce in the States, and some Americans will pay a premium > to get one. KEH > charges more for the Super A than they charge for an SP in the same > condition. > > > "David P. Chernicoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > A broken SP body went for $104, > but I had only 1 bidder for a working SP body with 50mm f1.4 and MEII > winder, all in excellent shape, which went for $195. FWIW, > the same setup, > with a Super A rather than a SP, and the body not in as nice > shape and a 50 > f1.7, went for a BIN of $275. I just don't understand ebay > economics rant> > > David< > > > Paul Franklin Stregevsky - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
David, The only way to get a Super Program in black is to get a Super A. Those are scarce in the States, and some Americans will pay a premium to get one. KEH charges more for the Super A than they charge for an SP in the same condition. "David P. Chernicoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: A broken SP body went for $104, but I had only 1 bidder for a working SP body with 50mm f1.4 and MEII winder, all in excellent shape, which went for $195. FWIW, the same setup, with a Super A rather than a SP, and the body not in as nice shape and a 50 f1.7, went for a BIN of $275. I just don't understand ebay economics David< Paul Franklin Stregevsky - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: RE: Fairy pics
Agreed Begin Original Message From: "Provencher, Paul M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 11:27:34 -0400 To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: Fairy pics I disagree to some extent, but my opinion might come off a little arrogant so bear with me... I do admit that when you take money to do a job for a client, you have to please them. And if you happen *not* to be very well known, regarded, etc, you may have to do work in a style that pleases your client but not yourself. Then photography indeed gets to be a little bit too much like work. On the other hand, if you cultivate a style, produce a recognizable body of work, and make yourself happy, you might starve happily. But if you have lodged yourself in a place where your style and body of work appeals to people who pay money to get it, you have the best of both worlds. This balance may be hard to strike in pure commercial work, but it goes to the question put forth here about "good clients" and how to recognize them. If you are working toward working full time as a photographer, but still have gainful employment in another place, don't take those jobs that would spoil your enjoyment of the craft. Don't shoot those shots that offend your taste or cramp your style. You may not reach your goal, but more people have, than one might imagine. I am sure that even those who are hired to "be themselves" from time to time shoot things they'd rather not. But by and large I think most truly great photographers regularly put their soul into their work. Paul M. Provencher (ppro) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . End Original Message Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: RE: Fairy pics
I shoot pictures at many local horse shows not only for the riders at our barn but of others to sell at a meager profit.I to have many compliments re the sharpness of colour from my Pentax's(and i'm sure Kodak has something to add also). Dave Begin Original Message From: "Matamoros, Cesar A." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 13:54:52 -0400 To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: Fairy pics I guess it takes all kinds in this world. One salesman at my photo store constantly shows me his pictures. He takes good shots and I make sure to let him know which ones are great and then point out some things he can do to correct others. A lot of times they are action shots and I tell him that he just has to keep certain things in mind in terms of timing and composition, not so much the technical aspect. I know he appreciates my inputs both good and bad. I cannot see how anything can be gained by just pointing out the negatives - I agree with Tom's note on this point. On a Pentax note, he is considering getting rid of his Minolta gear. Especially after we both spent some time photographing a rugby tourney a while back. He noted how everyone raved about my photos. Beyond the timing and composition, he noticed the color saturation and sharpness of my shots. César Matamoros II Panama City, Florida > From: tom [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Tanya & Russell Mayer wrote: > > > > I have this guy here in town (yep, the one hour guy again,) who > > constantly looks at my stuff and picks it to pieces without ever having > > anything nice to say, > > This guy is obviously an ass. > > tv > - > - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . End Original Message Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: (Was: Fairy pics) (sexual innuendo removed)
The suggestion to visit websites and Sears and J.C. Penney was intended to get her to look at the full range of pricing and packages being offered. In doing so, she can see where she fits into the range. Rarely can someone set their prices without knowing what others are doing, and she must be fully aware of the competition. Keeping in mind the locale in which she will be working, of course. You can't charge 90210 prices if you live in 62221. :) You don't get much business setting your prices too high before you establish a reputation. I'd set my prices at the going rate for my community and then increase them when the referrals started rolling in. Referrals usually mean your customers' friends saw and liked your work The magic/art/creativity of your work will get you the name recognition you need to be successful but it doesn't come overnight, except in very rare cases of fantastic talent. From the few samples I've seen, so far, I'd say she has some talent, which can be developed, but there's a lot of work to be done and dues to be paid before she can expect to command top dollar. Len --- > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Tom Rittenhouse > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 4:50 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: (Was: Fairy pics) (sexual innuendo removed) > > > You are right her work is only worth what people are > willing to > pay for it. However comparing her work to Sears and > JC Penny's > is what we are advising her not to do. Respect is very > important > in how the public views your work. > > You are aware, are you not, that most of us telling > her not to > low ball her work are, or have been, professional > photographers? > We have been there done that, and paid the price of learning > what > we are telling her. > > Your photography is worth what you think it is, > Tanya's is worth > a decent living. Of course she can not charge New York (or > Sidney) > prices where she is, but she does not need to be a > scab either. > --Tom > > > "Paris, Leonard" wrote: > > > > Norm, > > > > What she is worth is what the customers are willing > to pay for her work, not > > what she (or we, for that matter) think that she is worth. > > > > There are lots of child photography studios with > web sites that have prices. > > There are also lots of stores, like Sears and JC > Penney, that do child > > portraits. I'd suggest that she look 'em up, price > her work accordingly, > > keeping her local market in mind, and set up a rate > schedule for each type > > of job (or package) she intends to offer. Then, > she needs to get the word > > out, advertise in other words. Put her best work > into a portfolio that she > > can show and see how it goes. It's not going to > happen over night. > > > > Len > > --- > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Norman Baugher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 8:39 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: > Fairy pics) > > > > > > > > > It just sounded like everyone was trying to > suggest to Tanya different > > > methods she can use to keep lowballing her prices > instead of > > > encouraging her > > > to charge what she's worth and doing so with a > clear conscience. > > > Norm - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: RE: Fairy pics
For my 1995 wedding, the wedding pro wanted something like $2000. Well, we're talking about a wedding comprising about 15 total people, counting the bride, groom, and their families. That was too rich for my blood. Not being aware that my request might be a big deal, I also asked whether I could have, or buy, the negatives, He said, "After 3 years, you can buy them from me for $150.00." His thinking, correctly I suppose, was that few couples would be patient enough to wait three years to make reprints. Well, on to Plan B: I approached an aspiring young photographer--age 17--and asked her to photograph the wedding for expenses plus $150. We would get a good rate, and she would get some experience for her portfolio. She was delighted by the offer but informed us, with regret, that she had an academic test to take that Sunday morning. On to Plan C: A friend told us of a woman who worked at a mall-based portrait studio who freelanced. The woman agreed to shoot our wedding for $250 plus expenses; I can't recall who came up with the $250, but the "plus expenses" was definitely my suggestion. "May I have the prints on Photo CD?" I asked. Certainly, she replied. (Picture CD had not yet been invented.) When she delivered the contact prints, she lent us the negatives so that we could order as many reprints as we liked, at any size we liked, bypassing her completely. The only constraint was that we would have to use a local lab so the negs couldn't get lost in the mail. We used a Kodak lab. The job took three months, because we ordered many of the frames in several sizes, and one of those sizes was 8 by 12, apparently an unusual request. Each size required a new "run" through the system. When the prints finally came back, we showed them to our photographer and returned the negatives. As a "tip" of sorts, I presented her with a video, taken by a friend of ours, that documented the photographer's entire outdoor portrait shoot of the bride, groom, and family. She was delighted, explaining that she had never been privileged to see herself at work. She planned to use our video to show others that she could work well with people. Tanya, you might consider doing the same. I was not out to deny anyone a living. I didn't begrudge the fee asked by the "real" wedding pro; I just couldn't afford him, and the small ceremony didn't warrant it. Our photographer used a 35mm SLR. I had led her to understand that flash would be unacceptable, so she came prepared to shoot in available light. But when the rabbi corrected me, "Of course, she can use flash," I quickly informed her, and she came with 200-speed film and an auxiliary flash mounted on a bracket. My only disappointment was that she did not use an auxiliary battery to quick-charge her flash, and hence she missed one or two nice shots while waiting for her flash to charge. "Tanya Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: O M G, now THAT is an insult to ANY photographer. To date, I have been considering (because they have all been paying for their own film/processing) my keeping the negs as my form of "payment" as I think that they are my most necessary learning tool. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT: Re: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics)
On Thu, 12 Apr 2001 09:33:32 -0700, John Francis wrote: > Bernie "I just sold some of my SLEC holdings for billions" Ecclestone > started off as a used car dealer. Actually, I think he started off as spawn of Satan, then got a promotion to car dealer. :-) TTYL, DougF PS. He is undoubtedly one of the most arrogant, cussedest people I've ever had the misfortune of encountering. But that's probably why F1 the business is thriving ... sometimes it takes a real hardcase to get the job done. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: (Was: Fairy pics) (sexual innuendo removed)
You are right her work is only worth what people are willing to pay for it. However comparing her work to Sears and JC Penny's is what we are advising her not to do. Respect is very important in how the public views your work. You are aware, are you not, that most of us telling her not to low ball her work are, or have been, professional photographers? We have been there done that, and paid the price of learning what we are telling her. Your photography is worth what you think it is, Tanya's is worth a decent living. Of course she can not charge New York (or Sidney) prices where she is, but she does not need to be a scab either. --Tom "Paris, Leonard" wrote: > > Norm, > > What she is worth is what the customers are willing to pay for her work, not > what she (or we, for that matter) think that she is worth. > > There are lots of child photography studios with web sites that have prices. > There are also lots of stores, like Sears and JC Penney, that do child > portraits. I'd suggest that she look 'em up, price her work accordingly, > keeping her local market in mind, and set up a rate schedule for each type > of job (or package) she intends to offer. Then, she needs to get the word > out, advertise in other words. Put her best work into a portfolio that she > can show and see how it goes. It's not going to happen over night. > > Len > --- > > > -Original Message- > > From: Norman Baugher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 8:39 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics) > > > > > > It just sounded like everyone was trying to suggest to Tanya different > > methods she can use to keep lowballing her prices instead of > > encouraging her > > to charge what she's worth and doing so with a clear conscience. > > Norm > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Super Takumar-Zoom 1:4.5/70~150 with SMC? Yes! (Was a thread-drifted RE: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz)
The Super Takumar-Zoom 1:4.5/70~150 (S/N 4391349) was for many years "just" a Super Takumar with traditional Super Takumar coatings. But according to Gerjan van Oosten in "The Ultimate Asahi Pentax Screw Mount Guide http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/907653702X/diecastpro Asahi first used the SMC coating on the Super Takumar-Zoom 1:4.5/70~150. I had a much earlier version with regular coating (light amber). See: http://whitemetal.com/pentax/st_70~150_45/index.htm This one here is definitely SMC'd. I have another that is a little earlier than this one (serial number is a couple thousand lower) and the coating is also SMC. It's too bad this lens is so large - it really is quite nice in spite of that, and with SMC, I expect it will be very usable. I will try to put images up on my site when I can - right now I am behind on two deadlines for Krause and a book deadline besides. Pay first then play! The other one I have needs to have a sticky diaphragm taken care of. It is unmarked and still quite smooth other than the diaphragm, has no tripod ring, hood, case, caps OR attachment lens. So it will probably be sold fairly cheaply (I have sold the plain ST's in complete working order for between $100-$150) Paul M. Provencher (ppro) -Original Message- From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 3:04 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz .etc > (ppro) > > happy as a pig in with my "new" ST 70~150 (late SMC version!) > - > They actually put out a "late" SMC coated version of the ST 70-150 zoom??, never seen nor heard of that one. JCO - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz
Todd wrote: > Of course, as photographers we instantly see this kind of stuff, but when > Joe Sixpack picks up the brochure, does he see it or even care? He may not be aware, I agree - but he can tell the difference even if he's unaware that he is doing so. Succinct, non-jarring photos will be absorbed well, whereas mediocre ones will be noticed and identified as such - even by Joe Q. The brochure is the means of portraying an establishment's nature and it's state of "classiness", for lack of a better word. It is a "total image" of the establishment, often looked through far from the property. It doesn't cost any less to have poor photos printed in your brochure order than it does for good ones. The printing costs for large runs tend to minimize a $1000 cost differential in image sources. > The purpose of the brochure is to sell you a hotel room, so does bad photos > in the brochure sell less than excellent photos - if it makes no difference > then why fork out the cash? Because it does! If they are already decided to use your hotel, all is fine - no need for them to even see ad materials! But- when approaching your town and leafing through the vast arrays of ads and brochures of places to stay when they get there, you want them to look at *yours* from the many racked up in competition for their eyes! The "Motel 6 Crowd" will always pick the low-end on arrival anyway. > Keep in mind also a bad picture to us may seem like a really good > one to Joe Sixpack and his zoom P&S camera The management must cater to more than Joe Q. Most of these places make a good deal of their income from small conventions, meetings, retreats and the like. It is important to put forth a top-notch image to attract these large accounts. - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Provencher, Paul M. > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 1:31 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: Fairy pics/Photo Bizz > > > Thanks for the running commentary - glad to see I make sense to someone. > Must be the common thread of that M42 mount... > > Paul M. Provencher > (ppro) > > happy as a pig in with my "new" ST 70~150 (late SMC version!) > - > They actually put out a "late" SMC coated version of the ST 70-150 zoom??, never seen nor heard of that one. JCO - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics)
tom wrote: > > One more thing...I've had several people tell me that discounting makes > you appear, ah, cheap. As in used-car dealer cheap (sorry dad). Bernie "I just sold some of my SLEC holdings for billions" Ecclestone started off as a used car dealer. -- John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Silicon Graphics, Inc. (650)933-82952011 N. Shoreline Blvd. MS 43U-991 (650)932-0828 (Fax) Mountain View, CA 94043-1389 Hello. My name is Darth Vader. I am your father. Prepare to die. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Fairy pics
I disagree to some extent, but my opinion might come off a little arrogant so bear with me... I do admit that when you take money to do a job for a client, you have to please them. And if you happen *not* to be very well known, regarded, etc, you may have to do work in a style that pleases your client but not yourself. Then photography indeed gets to be a little bit too much like work. On the other hand, if you cultivate a style, produce a recognizable body of work, and make yourself happy, you might starve happily. But if you have lodged yourself in a place where your style and body of work appeals to people who pay money to get it, you have the best of both worlds. This balance may be hard to strike in pure commercial work, but it goes to the question put forth here about "good clients" and how to recognize them. If you are working toward working full time as a photographer, but still have gainful employment in another place, don't take those jobs that would spoil your enjoyment of the craft. Don't shoot those shots that offend your taste or cramp your style. You may not reach your goal, but more people have, than one might imagine. I am sure that even those who are hired to "be themselves" from time to time shoot things they'd rather not. But by and large I think most truly great photographers regularly put their soul into their work. Paul M. Provencher (ppro) - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics)
One more thing...I've had several people tell me that discounting makes you appear, ah, cheap. As in used-car dealer cheap (sorry dad). It was suggested to me that instead of trying to lower or discount prices in order to sign people up, I should offer freebies or incentives. So, to encourage people to get their print orders back to me more quickly, I tell them they can have a few extra 8x10's if they order within a month of receiving the proofs. Just throwing the idea out there, I'm no business guru. tv Norman Baugher wrote: > > It just sounded like everyone was trying to suggest to Tanya different > methods she can use to keep lowballing her prices instead of encouraging her > to charge what she's worth and doing so with a clear conscience. > Norm > > Rob Brigham wrote: > > > Well if its pedantic you want: > > > > OK we are not explicitly talking studio - anything in life that you pay > > for can have a discount applied under whatever regime you like. > > > > 'First job gets a discount' was just one suggestion, everyone knows that > > discounts are discretionary, subject to change over time, and only > > necessarily applicable in one instance. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Norman Baugher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 12 April 2001 13:29 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics) > > > > 1) we are not talking studio, and it wasn't mentioned in that context > > 2) the above quotes do not sound like "first job gets a discount" > > > - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Fairy pics
Hi, I am jumping in late but just wanted to reinforce what some folks said. When I studied photography, one of our instructors told us that, assuming technical competence and good business behavior, and of course getting the shots, it is a bad idea to undervalue your work, even from the beginning. I took it to heart but it wasn't for a year or so before I had to put his advice into practice. I found an insurance company that bought stock photos for a publication. I sent several photos on speculation for their review, after requesting and receiving their terms and guidelines. I was very pleased that they decided to use one of my shots for a color cover. It was a photo taken at night of a firefighter outlined by a burning grainery. To make a long story short, the check arrived and it was significantly less than the terms and guidelines promised. If it had been a couple dollars short I might have let it go. But they were several hundred dollars short so I called the person who had bought the work and called him on it. I politely and patiently referred him to the terms and guidelines and asked if there was some reason they hadn't stuck to it. No, the terms were right, he said. So I said, how about sending the rest of the money then? To which he replied (and this is almost a quote) "OK, it's not my money anyway". Right - it was my money. The check came and I cashed it and I have never looked back. I get requests from people to use my work. If they want to pay my going rates, and they are happy with "non-exclusive, one-time publication" rights. we do business. If they want to outright own the work or want it for free, we end our conversation without doing business. I have learned that people will pay what you expect them to pay, especially if your photography "works" for them. I suspect you have gotten over seeing your name in print, so it should be pretty easy to say "No" if you aren't getting compensation that meets your needs. And don't set the bar too low. My Mom drives me crazy because she sells her work (pottery, paintings, hand-painted books) for the cost of materials "to make more". She's in it for the fun, which is, I suppose, her choice. But she could buy so much more materials if she charged more. Also, people tend to place a value on your work that at least comes up to the value YOU place on it. If you are giving it away, people (in general) will not respect it as much if you haven't put a price on it that speaks to the quality. Sure, I am a capitalist, but I think the Fairy pics are great. You should mark them up enough to cover your time, and a little more to offset the cost of throwing cameras and tripods down cliffs (so to speak) :-) ppro - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: (Was: Fairy pics) (sexual innuendo removed)
Now that's good advice. Norm "Paris, Leonard" wrote: > Norm, > > What she is worth is what the customers are willing to pay for her work, not > what she (or we, for that matter) think that she is worth. > > There are lots of child photography studios with web sites that have prices. > There are also lots of stores, like Sears and JC Penney, that do child > portraits. I'd suggest that she look 'em up, price her work accordingly, > keeping her local market in mind, and set up a rate schedule for each type > of job (or package) she intends to offer. Then, she needs to get the word > out, advertise in other words. Put her best work into a portfolio that she > can show and see how it goes. It's not going to happen over night. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: (Was: Fairy pics) (sexual innuendo removed)
Norm, What she is worth is what the customers are willing to pay for her work, not what she (or we, for that matter) think that she is worth. There are lots of child photography studios with web sites that have prices. There are also lots of stores, like Sears and JC Penney, that do child portraits. I'd suggest that she look 'em up, price her work accordingly, keeping her local market in mind, and set up a rate schedule for each type of job (or package) she intends to offer. Then, she needs to get the word out, advertise in other words. Put her best work into a portfolio that she can show and see how it goes. It's not going to happen over night. Len --- > -Original Message- > From: Norman Baugher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 8:39 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics) > > > It just sounded like everyone was trying to suggest to Tanya different > methods she can use to keep lowballing her prices instead of > encouraging her > to charge what she's worth and doing so with a clear conscience. > Norm - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics)
It just sounded like everyone was trying to suggest to Tanya different methods she can use to keep lowballing her prices instead of encouraging her to charge what she's worth and doing so with a clear conscience. Norm Rob Brigham wrote: > Well if its pedantic you want: > > OK we are not explicitly talking studio - anything in life that you pay > for can have a discount applied under whatever regime you like. > > 'First job gets a discount' was just one suggestion, everyone knows that > discounts are discretionary, subject to change over time, and only > necessarily applicable in one instance. > > -Original Message- > From: Norman Baugher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 12 April 2001 13:29 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics) > > 1) we are not talking studio, and it wasn't mentioned in that context > 2) the above quotes do not sound like "first job gets a discount" > - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: RE: Fairy pics
Bucky wrote: > Don't believe a word Bill says; we're all filthy rotten pigs up here in the > frozen wastelands. Speak for yourself! I have a woman who does my laundry, so that makes me a clean, freshly-scented pig. And if she ever reads this, I'll probably be back to doing my own laundry. And in the hospital. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics)
Well if its pedantic you want: OK we are not explicitly talking studio - anything in life that you pay for can have a discount applied under whatever regime you like. 'First job gets a discount' was just one suggestion, everyone knows that discounts are discretionary, subject to change over time, and only necessarily applicable in one instance. -Original Message- From: Norman Baugher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 April 2001 13:29 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics) 1) we are not talking studio, and it wasn't mentioned in that context 2) the above quotes do not sound like "first job gets a discount" Norm - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics)
"My rate is usually $XXX, but seeing as who you are, I'll give you a
discount of $XXX."
"Also, as Rob says, discounts can easily be removed especially when you get
busier and are doing more work."
1) we are not talking studio, and it wasn't mentioned in that context
2) the above quotes do not sound like "first job gets a discount"
Norm
Rob Brigham wrote:
> So its not a successful business model to discount a first job, or to
> say have a free sitting, and one free 10x8, but pay for any others you
> want?
>
> Funny how 99% of studios in the UK survive then?
>
> Who said anything about 'Reversing a discount' anyway? What we said was
> give them a discount off the first job. They still keep the discount on
> that job, they just dont get it on the next job. Call it an
> introductory discount or something like that. This way, they more
> likely to understand that the next job is full price (ie no discount)
> than they are to understand that your rate has just doubled!
>
> Rob Brigham
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Norman Baugher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 12 April 2001 12:30
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics)
>
> I think that, respectfully, is a load of crap. You're still making
> excuses
> to charge less because you don't have the confidence to charge what you
> are
> worth. If I applied that philosophy to business, I'd be BK... Reversing
> a
> discount? That's absolutely nuts. Once you drop your shorts in business,
> it's not very easy to pull them back up... ("I was just being nice on
> the
> first job, now I'm going to stick it to you!" - "Great, I love doing
> business with you!") If you are going to shoot for money, apply a
> successful
> business model or you're just going to f-up the market for everyone else
> before you go out of business yourself.
> Norm
>
> Andy Harbin wrote:
>
> > This sounds like a really good approach to this. "My rate is usually
> > $XXX, but seeing as who you are, I'll give you a discount of $XXX."
> > This way you increase the 'value' of your work (for both you and the
> > client), but don't charge a rate that you are not currently
> comfortable
> > with. Also, as Rob says, discounts can easily be removed especially
> > when you get busier and are doing more work.
> >
> > Great idea Rob!
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, Peter Smith wrote: > That's your choice Tanya but I think use of the word "fairy" in your > business name may associate you too strongly with children's portraiture. Why? Not all the fairies are Peter Pan's companions. M.K. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics)
So its not a successful business model to discount a first job, or to
say have a free sitting, and one free 10x8, but pay for any others you
want?
Funny how 99% of studios in the UK survive then?
Who said anything about 'Reversing a discount' anyway? What we said was
give them a discount off the first job. They still keep the discount on
that job, they just dont get it on the next job. Call it an
introductory discount or something like that. This way, they more
likely to understand that the next job is full price (ie no discount)
than they are to understand that your rate has just doubled!
Rob Brigham
-Original Message-
From: Norman Baugher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 12 April 2001 12:30
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics)
I think that, respectfully, is a load of crap. You're still making
excuses
to charge less because you don't have the confidence to charge what you
are
worth. If I applied that philosophy to business, I'd be BK... Reversing
a
discount? That's absolutely nuts. Once you drop your shorts in business,
it's not very easy to pull them back up... ("I was just being nice on
the
first job, now I'm going to stick it to you!" - "Great, I love doing
business with you!") If you are going to shoot for money, apply a
successful
business model or you're just going to f-up the market for everyone else
before you go out of business yourself.
Norm
Andy Harbin wrote:
> This sounds like a really good approach to this. "My rate is usually
> $XXX, but seeing as who you are, I'll give you a discount of $XXX."
> This way you increase the 'value' of your work (for both you and the
> client), but don't charge a rate that you are not currently
comfortable
> with. Also, as Rob says, discounts can easily be removed especially
> when you get busier and are doing more work.
>
> Great idea Rob!
>
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics)
On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, Lasse Karlsson wrote: > You also wrote in another post: > >A bit off topic, but thought you might be interested to know that; a) it is > so hot here that I am wearing a sarong with the air con blaring at me > > Now, you > just > stop > right there... I thought that sarong comment would bring you out of the woodwork, Lasse. *L* :) chris - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Fairy pics
Tom C wrote: "You know it's rather interesting... I detect that our group has become somewhat protective and mother-hennish about one of our new members." This is kind of ironic, as anybody who knows me in day to day life always looks at me as the "mothering" one and also one who is extremely "protective" of those I consider to be my friends. I am surprised that you have been able to detect my "accent" though (this is amusing to me, as it is you guys that I consider to have the "accent"), I guess maybe my spelling of "arse" gave it away. (Not exactly a "lady-like" word to use though...) "I don't know if it's because she has a delightful writing style replete with foreign accent, if it's because she's shown a few photos of herself (OK, how many times did each of you guys go back to her page about the roll of Fuji running through the camera in about 15 seconds..." Ok, so enough, "feathering fairy's ego". In a bid to get this back on topic and before I am aprehended by the band-width police, I will post some more shots of myself in a sec, but they do HAVE a Pentax-related purpose, as you will soon see. (And they are also really crappy photos to boot...) "I hope her husband is not too jealous though. He sounds like a pretty nice guy." BTW, my hubby is a reeeally nice guy, that is why I married him! He comes home today for 4 days over Easter,so I will disappear for the next few days, just in case you all wondered where I went, I at least owe him a few days of my attentions...Oh, yeah, and he's an extremely jealous guy, but an incredibly selfless one at that, and would never dream of coming between me and my new found "passion" (photography). As such, he is happy for me to communicate with whomever, whenever I need to in a bid to learn what I need to...(especially if it might make us some money in the long-run, hehe. He DOESN'T like me working for "peanuts"...hmmm, sounds kind of like you guys really...) fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
What are you wearing tonight? (Was: Fairy pics)
Tanya wrote: > 8. You guys are a great bunch of people who will give me a good swift kick > up the bum when I need it... Hey, I want to be counted as one of that bunch too... So...a late welcome to the list Tanya, from Stockholm, Sweden, where everybody's waiting for spring to really burst out. (Yes, sorry to hear about what happened to your PZ, but, as others already have said, it was better than hearing you reporting "Yeah, I saved my camera! Pity though about the kid bumping down hill...") You also wrote: >but I feel truly guilty that I am taking up > so much bandwidth with this Don't worry, very much of the advice that you are getting will be of interest to many other members as well. That's one of the great assets of lists like this. Although I agree with what have been said to you about not selling yourself too cheap I think I really can relate to what you're saying about the aspects of living/working in a small town. There simply are some inherent obstacles in being a local without an established reputation. In Swedish there is also a saying, something like "You'll never become a prophet in your home town" (if it's of Biblical origin you may have a version of it.) Just to add a little: Even if you do choose to do some work for a cheap price, you can always explain to your clients that your usual or future rates will be higher. Make sure you only show them the good stuff, never downgrade your own work, no matter how insecure you may feel about it at times. And never give away your negatives. All your copyrights are in there, for one thing. (Well they actually are with you anyway, but without access to the negs they may be a whole lot more difficult to control.) You also wrote in another post: >A bit off topic, but thought you might be interested to know that; a) it is so hot here that I am wearing a sarong with the air con blaring at me Now, you just stop right there... :-) Lasse, once believed to have joined the Pentax list in order to pick up girls... - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Fairy pics
Oops, almost forgot, David also said: "Who would have lent you an LX body until you were back on your metaphorical feet, if you lived a tad closer." Remember what I said earlier about the internet "closing geographical boundaries"? *wink* No, seriously though, I have had many offers since the PZ-1P for assistance to becoming "re-enabled", ranging from clearcut donations, to extremely cheap offers of sales, to outright "you can borrow this for as long as you like"... So thankyou to everyone who did this (or even thought of doing it), you are all very generous and I must say, TRUSTING people - particularly the PDML'er who did send me his ME Super in good faith that I would pay him "when I can afford it"... fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: Re: Fairy pics
David Chernicoff wrote: "The mild ones are the stories about customers who come in to complain that the color photocopy enlargements they did themselves of the 5x7 they bought (not wanting to spring for 8x10) doesn't look good." I really don't think I want to hear about the not-so-mild to hot stories It is stories like these that remind me what a sad, sad world it is that we occupy... It also brings up the point of copyright that I wanted to ask about. I am guessing that in light of my "transition" into the world of child portraiture, I should at least "invest" in some sort of mechanism for marking my shots with copyright information. Can you guys offer suggestions as to the best way to do this? ie. a sticker/stamp on the back etc? And how should this information be phrased? What information should be included? I'd better look into some sort of "business name" too, perhaps I'll call it "Fairygirl's Frames". hehe... fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Subject: RE: Fairy pics
Tanya, that's sweet of you to say, but I forgot to mention the part where I cordially invited them to pound sand. Don't believe a word Bill says; we're all filthy rotten pigs up here in the frozen wastelands. "HAR" Mike Vancovuer, Canada -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tanya & Russell Mayer Sent: April 11, 2001 6:20 PM To: Pentax Discussion List Subject: Subject: RE: Fairy pics O M G, now THAT is an insult to ANY photographer. To date, I have been considering (because they have all been paying for their own film/processing) my keeping the negs as my form of "payment" as I think that they are my most necessary learning tool. I can't say that I would have been as polite as you in this situation, Bucky...you are to be commended for having such self control! fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
While there are people here that may complain that this thread is OT. The fact that there are so many replies indicates that we find it interesting. Besides old farts like me just love to give advice, especially to someone who may listen. --Tom Tanya & Russell Mayer wrote: > > Doug Brewer wrote: > > "Actually, Rob Brigham deserves thanks for providing a link to Derek's site" > > Oops, sorry, Roband thanks... > > Ok, so Doug also wrote heaps more in a very lengthy, detailed response. > But, here's the thing, I am kind of feeling a little guilty that my "quest > for enlightenment" has seemingly dominated most of the postings over the > past few days. Of course, I appreciate and have read and considered all of > your responses at great length, but I feel truly guilty that I am taking up > so much bandwidth with this and also that I can barely keep up with > responding to you all individually. I have three more PDML digests that I > have yet to even look at and just don't know how I can possibly respond to > you all in the manner that you deserve for spending so much time and energy > with me on this topic. > > So, in summary, here is what I have learnt so far: > > 1. I am being both inconsiderate and unjust to other local photographers by > charging too low a price. > > 2. I am effectively "cutting my own throat" as far as any future earnings > are concerned by charging too low a price. > > 3. I am (apparently?!?) capable of producing a product that is both > marketable and worthy of paying good money for. > > 4. I am a whore!?! ;-) > > 5. I may have to compromise my artistic integrity at some point if I wish > to "please" all of my clients. (This is something I am very uncomfortable > with and would probably choose to turn down a client's business before > having to do this). > > 6. I have a knack for still life and baby photos. > > 7. I am a "sharp cookie" (I always thought that the phrase was "smart > cookie", but, we are a bit "backwards" down here in Aus.) > > 8. You guys are a great bunch of people who will give me a good swift kick > up the bum when I need it... > > Thanks again for all your advice everyone, and also in advance to those who > have offered suggestions in the three digests that I am about to read > ;-) > > fairy. > > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: Re: Fairy pics
Tom V wrote: "This guy is obviously an ass." True, I agree that he is, but he is also a rich one who is making lots of $$$ from this town by being just that BTW, I have FINALLY gotten through reading/replying to all of the digestsI am yet to respond to those who communicated to me off-list, however, I think it is time to give me kids a bit of attention. You "kids" can have me back in a couple of hours when the other two go down for their naps Thanks again to EVERYBODY who gave advice, a response or told of a personal experience with respect to my questions. Be ware, I will be asking some stuff about copyright a bit later on... :-) fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: RE: Fairy pics
Bucky wrote: "I resolved to give them enlargements as a wedding gift, and made an album of 4x6 proofs for them to look over, not telling them that any they chose would be presents (partly as a test, to be honest, since they had made no mention of paying me for my materials). I just suggested that they look my copies over and let me know which ones they wanted me to print for them. They said, "Well why not save yourself the trouble and just give us the negatives?" I picked my jaw up off the ground and suggested that I wanted to keep the negs in controlled conditions (a sleeve in a binder in my drawer)." O M G, now THAT is an insult to ANY photographer. To date, I have been considering (because they have all been paying for their own film/processing) my keeping the negs as my form of "payment" as I think that they are my most necessary learning tool. I can't say that I would have been as polite as you in this situation, Bucky...you are to be commended for having such self control! fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: RE: Fairy pics
- Original Message - From: "Tanya & Russell Mayer" Subject: Subject: RE: Fairy pics I can't say that I would have > been as polite as you in this situation, Bucky...you are to be commended for > having such self control! > > fairy. Like me, Bucky is a true Canadian. Never rude. Always polite. HAR William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
Tanya - One business issue to remember -If you think a too high price is keeping customers away, you can always have a sale. If you've built a base on cheap prices, you'll lose a lot of them when you try to raise the price to what you're worth. A good friend of mine and his brother have a photo studio in a moderately affluent area near me. You'd be amazed (though I doubt anyone else on the list would, given the responses you've gotten) at the horror stories he tells me about customers and prints and prices. The mild ones are the stories about customers who come in to complain that the color photocopy enlargements they did themselves of the 5x7 they bought (not wanting to spring for 8x10) doesn't look good. David< Who would have lent you an LX body until you were back on your metaphorical feet, if you lived a tad closer. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
Big Eating Grin - Original Message - From: "Tanya & Russell Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Discussion List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 6:57 PM Subject: Subject: Re: Fairy pics > Doug Franklin wrote: > > "Called a "mom", if I have the vernacular correct. :-)...No, the rest of us > can't mask out the noise they make like you can." > > Too true! My two are standing at my door (child-proof gate that they can't > get passed) screaming at me as we speakh, silence IS golden > > BTW, what does "" mean? > > fairy. > > > > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: Re: Fairy pics
Treena Harp wrote: "Sadly, this attitude applies no matter what skill you possess. I'm a skilled and experienced seamstress, but I utterly refuse to sew for other people. I tried to out of the goodness of my heart for friends, but when I did, suddenly I was treated as a servant -- they wanted EVERYTHING for free, were hypercritical of everything I did and were totally ungrateful no matter how good the finished product was. This goes for my other hobbies, too, photography included. I believe most people truly don't appreciate things that don't cost them anything. I say no because I'd rather have them experience a couple of moments of annoyance with me, than do it and possibly lose a friendship over it." I have done the exact same thing (as far as designing an making clothes for friends go), Treena, and when you put it in this context, it truly makes me realise the point that everybody has been making about this whole thing. In fact, at the moment I am fixing a zipper in my friends "favourite pants" and my machine broke down. She is phoning me everyday saying stuff like "are you every going to finish them?" and "how long can it take just to change a zip". Of course, she has never once offered to help pay for the repairs to my machine which would of course, have them fixed much faster I guess it is the same for photography, people DO always seem to appreciate something that they have had to pay for more than something they've been given (not so with me though)... The wedding stories that you guys posted are also testament to this... fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
Tanya & Russell Mayer wrote: > > However, (now please don't attack me for being naive or over-sensitive > here), as most of you know, I have alot of stuff posted on Photo.net. NONE > of my stuff has ever received a critique rating of above 4 or 5 on that > site, I have this guy here in town (yep, the one hour guy again,) who > constantly looks at my stuff and picks it to pieces without ever having > anything nice to say, This guy is obviously an ass. tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Fairy pics
Ken Archer wrote: "Do you really want to be known as the woman here in town that takes great pictures, gives great service and she is CHEAP?" Ken, I am not sure why it was your comment in particular that hit home with me, but I just had something else come to mind; on many occasions, I have had people say to me (about many things, not just photography) "geez, that is s expensive, but it's worth the money". I guess this is the point that you guys are all trying to make to me here, and that this is the way I should be thinking. I just need to gain the confidence and the trust in myself to believe that what I am doing IS "worth the money". Hopefully, in time this will come. However, (now please don't attack me for being naive or over-sensitive here), as most of you know, I have alot of stuff posted on Photo.net. NONE of my stuff has ever received a critique rating of above 4 or 5 on that site, I have this guy here in town (yep, the one hour guy again,) who constantly looks at my stuff and picks it to pieces without ever having anything nice to say, and I also have a good friend in Toronto who is s talented and yet living on the bones of his arse cause he can't get any work. I am entering some competitions later this month (locally/regionally) and I am hoping that should I find any success with these, it will be a little reassurance that I do have "what it takes". I know, I know, I shouldn't rely on these sort of things for determining my "market value" (hehe, sorry, that was a really bad joke from Temptation Island if any of you watched it), but I just need to be sure that I can stand out from others in my own right. Parents are easy to please, as long as their kids look good, they don't care about the technical stuff, but I just want to be sure that I am doing at least some of the technical stuff correctly too. I haven't had anyone teach me anything or "mentor" me face to face, I have learnt everything I know from books and the internet over the passed 9 months or so, and I guess this is where I get my insecurities from. Sorry, rambling, yet again fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Fairy pics
Doug F wrote: "The two have radically different audiences, success criteria, and control principles. If they ever meet, it's dumb luck at worst and serendipity at best. The odds are that they never meet. The best scenario I can imagine is where they meet only at the cash register. That way, you're "art" stays pure and your bank account stays full. :-)" Exactly Doug. It is a merger that I am really putting a lot of effort into making work. If it ever comes to a point where I have to sacrifice my creative control or my artistic input to please a "client" or to make some money, lets just say that this whole thing will once again become a hobby. I really love what I am doing and I know too many pro photographers who have warned me against becoming "pro" because the love of what you are doing fast becomes overshadowed by the need to please the customer and by how much they are paying you. I can say right now that this won't be happening to me, no-way, no-how Integrity is much more important to me than $$$. Basically, I only want to earn enough so that my poor hubby doesn't have to work an entire week just to buy me a certain lens or flash that I feel I "need"... fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Fairy pics
Whoa! Boy have I opened a can of worms with this oneI guess what I have achieved with this thread has been the most valuable thing that I needed to learn. I think that what I really needed prior to embarking on this venture was a bit of a confidence boost or a reassurance that what I am doing is worth paying for. My one hour lab "friend" picks my stuff to pieces when I show it to him, saying that I have used too little depth of field, or that the kids ear is in focus more than his nose, or that a flower isn't placed quite correctly (which pisses me off cause I know I have better composition skills than him, if nothing else). I guess when it comes down to it, as many of you have pointed out, if there are a couple of slight technical errors in the shots, it doesn't really matter providing that the parents of the kids are happy with what they've been given. So far, I have shot four separate families (none of whom I charged anything except film and processing) as well as my own kids a zillion times, and on each of these occasions, the parents have been overjoyed with the results. I guess that this reaction is what I should be basing my "rates" on, rather than what I personally feel that I am "worth" or what some one hour photo guy (albeit with many more years of experience than I) says... To start with William (Bill) Robb, who said: "Tanya, I am going to tell you exactly what I think, in my typical understated, respectful and polite manner. If you are easily offended, or your kids are reading, hit delete now. Otherwise, there is a reply interspersed below" hehe, my kids are only 3 and 16 months, the three year old knows the letters "W" (for Woolworths) and "M" (for Mummy) and "K" (for Keegan, his brother), so unless you communicate with only these three letters, I feel that you are pretty safe...Oh, and I am NOT easily offended, far from it, in fact "Bullshit. I went and had a look at the stuff you put up on that website. You have a marvelous eye, and obvious rapport with your subjects. I have been working commercially for nearly 30 years, and I still get my shit in a knot before a lot of jobs. This doesn't mean I am going to sell myself cheap. If I am going to be a whore, by gumm, I am going to be an expensive one. Shoot yer three rolls of film, that is your insurance. Don't be a cheap whore, you won't get respected for it, and when you want to graduate to being a high class whore, no one will be willing to pay you for it. I have seen it happen before in my under populated part of the world. Since you ae giving more, charge more. People will only value your work as much as you do." Of course I understand your point here, and I love your terminology (you'd be right at home in Australia! lol!). I too am concernced that it would be difficult to increase my prices later on (especially with return "customers"), but again I don't want to appear to be "full of myself" by charging top dollar. OMG, I can't even begin to imagine what people (such as my 1 hour photo lab chum) would say "she's charging what? but she only picked up a camera for the first time 9 months ago!". Also, you must remember that this is a VERY small town, with SMALL minded people, with very small pockets. If I were in Sydney, I wouldn't bat an eyelid, and would charge the most that I possibly could, but seeing as I do have to live here "Yup, fer sure. More horse poopie. I do my best portraits with a wooden camera and a 20 year old lens. Latest technology doesn't matter for crap with portaiture." I don't really mean "latest" technology, I just feel that I could provide a more reliable and professional service if I at least owned a decent lightmeter, a variety of lighting choices (at present I have two choices - with reflector or without reflector, oh, and RTF on my MZ-50 and PZ-20) I also really miss the DOF preview that was on my PZ-1P and which none of my current bodies have. "If you are offering something unique that they aren't offering, it doesn't matter how many of them there are. The portrait trade is about personalities, the pictures themselves are a secondary item. If the personalities work, the pictures work." I do agree with this statement completely. It will be the entire "basis" of my business. I am a people person, I am a people photographer, I have an in built ability to read body language and to understand what it is that people want and expect. I know that I have a knack for dealing with kids in particular (I had this prior to my ever becoming a mum), and it is this knack and my "gift" for communication and being "approachable" that I hope to bring me to a level above those around me who I consider to be my "competition". For me, the consideration of personalities IS secondary, it is something that I don't need to think about because it comes very natural to me. My way of thinking is to suit my pictures TO the personality and this is the trait that hope people will come to know me for. "Does
RE: Re[2]: Fairy pics
It's sound practice, but these are cousins, and I just didn't think they'd pull a trick like that. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bob Walkden Sent: April 11, 2001 3:33 PM To: Bucky Subject: Re[2]: Fairy pics Hi, in future why not stamp the word 'Proof' in red on the front of the proofs, and your name & contact details on the back? --- Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Wednesday, April 11, 2001, 10:15:58 PM, you wrote: [...] > They took the proofs, saying they'd get back to me soon, and I haven't heard > from them since. That was August of 2000. > Live and learn. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
Tom Rittenhouse wrote: > > The only time you are charging too much is when you can not get > customers at that price. Of course, if that's the cheapest price in town, you don't want those customers anyway. > Another thing to think of is that in my experience people who > look only for price are > never satisfied. There is no way you can make them happy. Exactly. Good post. You listening Tanya? tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
Hi, Tanya, Tanya & Russell Mayer wrote: > The mother of the little fairy in the shots I posted earlier > said to me that the thing that really > "got" her about the shots I took was that they have so much "heart", and > that I went to great lengths to consider the > child's and the parents beliefs, personality etc and to cater specifically > to those things rather than just > saying "smile" and then "that's a wrap!". Well, Tanya, this is what you are selling. Not what you don't have, or can't do, but a service that is valuable to your customers. If a guy with years of experience and lots or equipment produces mediocre pictures and your produce pictures that have the verve your customers are looking for which is the more valuable product? You are not selling your experience. You are not selling your equipment. You are not selling your studio. What you are selling is your ability to make a picture that satisfies your customer, from your quote of one of your customers that is more than satisfactory. You should be paid for what you provide. Now there is an economic reality factor involved. No one is likely to pay you much more than they can get the same product for. The competitor you mention is booked up weeks in advance. What is it worth to your customers to not have to wait those weeks? He produces mediocre work. What is it worth to your customers to get more sensitive and insightful photos? The only time you are charging too much is when you can not get customers at that price. Another thing to think of is that in my experience people who look only for price are never satisfied. There is no way you can make them happy. Whereas people who expect to pay a fair price have realistic expectations. The expect to get what they pay for, and nothing else. Years back I tried to get jobs based on my making about $10 and hour, the jobs I got were nothing but a pain. I raised my expectations to $100/hr by bidding on a job I didn't really want. I got the job. The client was happy. They recommended me to other clients. Their most reveling comment about my bid was, "That's reasonable. Not cheap, but reasonable." If I had bid my usual cheap price I would not have gotten the job, they would have figured I was only worth what I was asking. That is, not much. --Tom - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re[2]: Fairy pics
Hi, in future why not stamp the word 'Proof' in red on the front of the proofs, and your name & contact details on the back? --- Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Wednesday, April 11, 2001, 10:15:58 PM, you wrote: [...] > They took the proofs, saying they'd get back to me soon, and I haven't heard > from them since. That was August of 2000. > Live and learn. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
Peter Smith wrote: > I did it and got lots of praise for the results around the office. Not once > was I even offered the cost of film and processing let alone thanked. My > view was that a token thanks such as a bottle of Scotch might have been a > reasonable gesture. Today my fairyizing client called to find out what I drink, because two of the big prints we worked on together were selected to hang at the PPO (that's Professional Photographers of Ontario, a division of PPoC, Professional Photographers of Canada) convention over the weekend, and both scored over 80 in judging. This is after I billed her hundreds of dollars before the prints just for the work. Good clients are worth the effort, bad clients really are not. The hard part is determining which they are. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Fairy pics
I did a similar thing for my wife's cousin's marriage. They asked me to
travel about the ceremony and take what the photogs missed. The "real"
photogs were a couple of very beautiful women with N
N-something-or-others and Metz flashes who professed to shoot in a
"photojournalistic" style. It turns out what they actually produced were
lots of small group shots where the bottom 55% of the frame was taken up
with the people's torsos (hips to heads) and the top 45% was airspace, lots
of shots with random tilts of the frame, and lots of indoor shots with heavy
front strobe and distant backdrops, so that the tuxes faded into the general
blackness of the undrexposed background. They were NOT pleased. They
expressed delight with my work ("we should have hired YOU!"), partly because
I treated the opportunity as one to proctice taking interesting,
unconventinal shots that were often directed at areas of the ceremony where
the main action was not.
I resolved to give them enlargements as a wedding gift, and made an album of
4x6 proofs for them to look over, not telling them that any they chose would
be presents (partly as a test, to be honest, since they had made no mention
of paying me for my materials). I just suggested that they look my copies
over and let me know which ones they wanted me to print for them. They
said, "Well why not save yourself the trouble and just give us the
negatives?" I picked my jaw up off the ground and suggested that I wanted
to keep the negs in controlled conditions (a sleeve in a binder in my
drawer).
They took the proofs, saying they'd get back to me soon, and I haven't heard
from them since. That was August of 2000.
Live and learn.
Mike
Vancouver, Canada
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of aimcompute
Sent: April 11, 2001 12:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Fairy pics
Yep 100%. I shot a wedding for friends and spent upwards of $400 on film
and processing. They also had a pro wedding photographer. The pro shot the
wedding party and entrance to the church. I shot the actual ceremony and
the reception (and piggybacked on the pro earlier).
I was extremely happy with the results and was pretty sure they were at
least as good as the pro's proofs, given what I had seen from a former
wedding using the same photog. The bride & groom loved them.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
Yep 100%. I shot a wedding for friends and spent upwards of $400 on film and processing. They also had a pro wedding photographer. The pro shot the wedding party and entrance to the church. I shot the actual ceremony and the reception (and piggybacked on the pro earlier). I was extremely happy with the results and was pretty sure they were at least as good as the pro's proofs, given what I had seen from a former wedding using the same photog. The bride & groom loved them. The parents somehow acted a little ho-hum, even though they were the ones that asked me to do this. I provided my services because we were friends of the family. To this day I don't really know if they 1) expected better, 2) just weren't the type that get excited over photos, or 3) were simply tired after the exhausting days leading up to the wedding. I suspect 2 &3, plus the fact they wouldn't have realized how much I had invested emotionally. To be fair, they did offer to pay me in advance for materials & for the processing. I turned it down because I figured it was my gift. In retrospect, they might have been more excited had they the feeling of purchasing something, versus being given something. The same goes for computer skills. Of course because I'm a software developer, friends think I should know EVERYTHING about computers and why their PC does not work right, and what DLL's they've got hosed up, and should come over and fix it or figure it out over the phone. Well I don't, and it got to the point that I was contemplating listing them my hourly rate. Many of these folks were employed in various fields, an engineer, a carpet cleaner. I wouldn't think of inviting my carpet cleaner friend to come to my house and clean my carpets for free, because it was his expertise (and I doubt he would). Now I "just don't know", "it could be about anything and would probably take hours to figure out". I suppose the same can be said for photography. If your friends view you like a pro, you should probably charge like a pro. If things go bad, then don't charge or reshoot if possible. Tom C From: "Treena Harp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sadly, this attitude applies no matter what skill you possess. I'm a skilled > and experienced seamstress, but I utterly refuse to sew for other people. I > tried to out of the goodness of my heart for friends, but when I did, > suddenly I was treated as a servant -- they wanted EVERYTHING for free, were > hypercritical of everything I did and were totally ungrateful no matter how > good the finished product was. This goes for my other hobbies, too, > photography included. I believe most people truly don't appreciate things > that don't cost them anything. I say no because I'd rather have them > experience a couple of moments of annoyance with me, than do it and possibly > lose a friendship over it. > > > > > I was asked (didn't offer) some years ago to shoot a wedding for a > colleague > > at work. I said I would do it but didn't negotiate a fee because I was > > willing as an amateur to do it at cost. > > > > I did it and got lots of praise for the results around the office. Not > once > > was I even offered the cost of film and processing let alone thanked. My > > view was that a token thanks such as a bottle of Scotch might have been a > > reasonable gesture. > > > > Peter > > - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
Sadly, this attitude applies no matter what skill you possess. I'm a skilled and experienced seamstress, but I utterly refuse to sew for other people. I tried to out of the goodness of my heart for friends, but when I did, suddenly I was treated as a servant -- they wanted EVERYTHING for free, were hypercritical of everything I did and were totally ungrateful no matter how good the finished product was. This goes for my other hobbies, too, photography included. I believe most people truly don't appreciate things that don't cost them anything. I say no because I'd rather have them experience a couple of moments of annoyance with me, than do it and possibly lose a friendship over it. > > I was asked (didn't offer) some years ago to shoot a wedding for a colleague > at work. I said I would do it but didn't negotiate a fee because I was > willing as an amateur to do it at cost. > > I did it and got lots of praise for the results around the office. Not once > was I even offered the cost of film and processing let alone thanked. My > view was that a token thanks such as a bottle of Scotch might have been a > reasonable gesture. > > Peter > > > > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . > - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
An opposite experience I had. And also to address the previous thread about
being amateur and using older gear. I shot a wedding last year just for fun, it
was my oldest friend's wedding. They are not short of cash (read very wealthy)
and hired the best photog in town. Hassies, assistants, the full hit. I used my
ME Super w/50 and 135Ms. They ordered the obligatory shots from the pro
(comments="they were all right") and "ordered" about 200 prints from mine. I
spent 2 days in the darkroom and delivered them as a wedding present. The
embarrassing praise was more than enough pay back. I had phone calls from their
relatives around the US thanking me and complimenting me. So, don't think you
should undervalue your work for the idiotic reasons Bill addressed in his usual,
diplomatic style :-)
Norm
Peter Smith wrote:
> Aaron Reynolds wrote:
>
> > I have too many friends who don't ask for enough up front for weddings
> > and the like, and then when faced with demands from the client for cheap
> > prints or the like ("Twelve dollars for an 8x10? I can get one done at
> > Wal-Mart for six!"), they find themselves not making any money, or worse
> > still, losing money.
>
> I was asked (didn't offer) some years ago to shoot a wedding for a colleague
> at work. I said I would do it but didn't negotiate a fee because I was
> willing as an amateur to do it at cost.
>
> I did it and got lots of praise for the results around the office. Not once
> was I even offered the cost of film and processing let alone thanked. My
> view was that a token thanks such as a bottle of Scotch might have been a
> reasonable gesture.
>
> Peter
>
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Fairy pics
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
> I have too many friends who don't ask for enough up front for weddings
> and the like, and then when faced with demands from the client for cheap
> prints or the like ("Twelve dollars for an 8x10? I can get one done at
> Wal-Mart for six!"), they find themselves not making any money, or worse
> still, losing money.
I was asked (didn't offer) some years ago to shoot a wedding for a colleague
at work. I said I would do it but didn't negotiate a fee because I was
willing as an amateur to do it at cost.
I did it and got lots of praise for the results around the office. Not once
was I even offered the cost of film and processing let alone thanked. My
view was that a token thanks such as a bottle of Scotch might have been a
reasonable gesture.
Peter
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
You just don't know me very well yet. I think someone coined the term "dirty ol man" after they met me ;-) William Robb wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Ken Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Guess I should have waited with my response. I think I just > found a kindred soul. > > You are much more polite > William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
- Original Message - From: "Ken Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: April 11, 2001 2:24 AM Subject: Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics > Guess I should have waited with my response. I think I just found a > kindred soul. You are much more polite William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
A couple of comments:
As to selling yourself cheap, don't do it! First, you won't get the
respect that you deserve for your work, and second, how will you finance
that new PZ-1p body you need now that the last one took a tumble at $100
per shoot? I've done cheap work before (and I continue to do it on
occassion) under very specific circumstances: the people involved really
couldn't afford more, the gig was fun, and I wanted to be involved in
the resulting project for one reason or another. I find myself working
cheap for bands that I really enjoy going to see anyways and who I'd
like to think have a shot at going somewhere. I'm currently working
cheap on a web based project that could metamorph into a print based
project, with some people who I very much respect and admire and whose
work I'd like my own work to be associated with.
As to cheesy commercialization, I charge exorbitant fees to a couple of
local pros to "fairyize" their pics, which are posed studio shots,
mostly of children, featuring fanciful costumes and sets. Most of my
fairyizing is judicious use of the median tool in Photoshop, with some
other stuff blended in. I charge a lot because this work takes me a lot
of time (and my fee is hourly), and also because it's...uh...well...
It makes me feel quite the cheese when I'm doing it, but I have to get
right into it, otherwise the effect won't be right. I think my point is
that if you're going to be cheesy, throw your whole self into it, and be
cheesy with all of your might!
I have too many friends who don't ask for enough up front for weddings
and the like, and then when faced with demands from the client for cheap
prints or the like ("Twelve dollars for an 8x10? I can get one done at
Wal-Mart for six!"), they find themselves not making any money, or worse
still, losing money. Clients who are unwilling to pay for good film,
good processing or good printing are not worth having. I had someone
try to convince me to shoot a wedding on Kirkland film, because it would
shave $100 off of the materials cost, and as soon as they did that, I
knew that they would never in a million years pay for enlargements (and
they'd probably expect to be given the negs, too), so I declined their
wedding. Stuff like that is not worth the hassle.
-Aaron
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
William Robb wrote: > You still don't believe me? Look at all the photofinishing > complaints generated on this list. You think companies like > Wal-Mart have done photographers any favours by making > photofinishing a low profit game? What do you think suffered > when the cost of a roll of photo processing fell to a quarter of > what it was 15 years ago? Amen. Wal-Mart, Loblaws and Costco have destroyed quality consumer photofinishing as we know it, because no one can compete with them AND offer a quality final product AND make money. Just because someone else lowballs, why do you have to lowball? And especially when you think their work is bad! If their work is bad, you should certainly be charging MORE. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 18:40:15 -0800, Bill D. Casselberry wrote: > <...> like low-cost favors to certain artsy-type > and dancer friends on low budgets. !8^D Particularly to the spectacularly attractive and under-clad. :-) TTYL, DougF - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 15:55:48 -0500, Treena Harp wrote: > I think sometimes it takes a special kind of masochist to work > with children. Called a "mom", if I have the vernacular correct. :-) TTYL, DougF PS. No, the rest of us can't mask out the noise they make like you can. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: Re: Fairy pics
John Francis wrote: "Sounds pretty darn cheap to me! By the time you work out an hourly rate (accounting for *all* the time you are there, waiting for kids to be ready), and adding processing, preparation and book-keeping time, you're probably working at below minimum wage, and with no allowance towards the cost of your equipment." William Robb wrote: I think you are selling yourself WAY to cheaply. You should be charging that much per hour, not per shoot. Guys, my husband agrees with you all 110%, and so do I to an extent. However, there are many other factors that I must consider here. These include but are NOT limited to the following; 1. First and foremost, my lack of experience. Despite being given the gift of an "eye" for photography and generally for "what looks good", I still have a lot to learn technically, and as I said before, I still don't trust myself enough to be sure that I will get ANY good shots out of 3 rolls, albeit 10 good shots from one roll. Therefore, I feel that I must offer somebody who is willing to pay me at least 3 rolls to ensure that they get enough shots to fulfill their needs. 2. My lack of equipment. I cannot possibly expect people to pay me good money when I can't offer them the "best" technology and procedures around. (I mean, I don't even have a flash that works properly and I don't even have a hand held light meter (and wouldn't know how to use one if I did), I have to rely completely on TTL) 3. Lots of competition. Due to the fact that this is such a small town, my competition is many and varied. There are frequent travelling setups (like Pixifoto etc) who come through town. In fact there were two lots here just last week. There are also at least 4 or 5 local "pro" photographers who have the experience and equipment that I don't, and most of who also work in the few minilabs in town so don't have to pay for ANY processing costs and very little for film. One such guy that I know quite well charges only $150 per session for a "studio" sitting (plain grey backdrop, softbox/strobe lighting), for about 1-2 rolls of film with all of the 4x6 prints given to the customer. He has over 15 years experience (about 15 times what I have), all of the latest equipment and still only charges this much. He also manages the Kodak minilab and has no processing/film costs so puts the 100 bucks straight into his pocket. On average, he spends about half an hour with each "client" to "achieve" the shots that they want. I personally find his portrait work boring and uninspirational (he is an incredibly talented landscape photographer though), and feel that he charges too much (particularly because I know that it doesn't cost him anything and he spends so little time and energy with the people), but he still gets many "clients" and his weekends are booked up for months in advance. So, somehow, if I am to make a go of this, I need to compete with people like this guy. The only way I know how, (because I don't have the experience or the equipment), is to try and offer better "value for money" which in this case means, larger prints, more prints, more time and energy spent with the kids. The mother of the little fairy in the shots I posted earlier said to me that the thing that really "got" her about the shots I took was that they have so much "heart", and that I went to great lengths to consider the child's and the parents beliefs, personality etc and to cater specifically to those things rather than just saying "smile" and then "that's a wrap!". 4. Because I am only learning here, I consider that being paid "below minimum wage" is not really an issue. I am hoping that with this approach, "my time will come" one day, and I will reap the rewards then by having the experience to be able to charge top dollar for a service that I consider to be first class. As I said before, my husband disagrees strongly with this, particularly as I spend alot of time while I am not shooting preparing, designing and sewing, backdrops, costumes, props etc and he feels that people don't appreciate all of the effort that I put in. But, as I said, I believe that "my time will come" and that alot of effort put in now will result in hopefully, one day, me becoming somebody whose talents are highly sought after (not at all ambitious, am I?). And besides, how could I possibly sleep at night knowing that I had overcharged somebody when I know that there are others in town that could do a "better" job than I can. Bill D. Casselberry wrote: "I had just read Tanya's original post and was about to say the same. This sounds almost a give-away. Most destructive to gainful employment is the double 6x8 prints. Not only are they surely more expensive than 4x6 *PROOFS!* - they are most likely sizable enough that enlargment orders will be the exception, rather than the rule." I understand this Bill, but I see it like this - it costs me au$14.95 for a set of doubles of 4x6 prints from a roll of 24. It
Re: Fairy pics
John Francis wrote: > Tanya wrote: > > I have decided at this stage to charge au$200 per session . . . > > I do not put a "limit" on my shooting time, . . . > > In doing it this way, my costs are about au$20 for film, au$90 for > > processing. I will make about au$100 per shoot . . . > Sounds pretty darn cheap to me! By the time you work out an hourly > rate (accounting for *all* the time you are there, waiting for kids > to be ready), and adding processing, preparation and book-keeping time, > you're probably working at below minimum wage, and with no allowance > towards the cost of your equipment. I had just read Tanya's original post and was about to say the same. This sounds almost a give-away. Most destructive to gainful employment is the double 6x8 prints. Not only are they surely more expensive than 4x6 *PROOFS!* - they are most likely sizable enough that enlargment orders will be the exception, rather than the rule. In essence, you are giving them full sets of final prints at cost. Have double 4x6's and keep one set as reference for re-orders and enlargments! There will likely be but a handful which *the client* particularly cares for, so why spend all that money for big prints of all frames? I only do a little of this sort of "personal" photograhy as there are so many low-ball hacks here that all *most* "clients" consider is their cost. When I do do this kind of thing, it is usually more for friends, than "Joe Public". My "rule of thumb" is US$50 for a roll of 24 and $75 for 36 - plus film & process costs. I am there to do the *photograhy* using whatever the proper lense/technique/film etc may be, and deal with the processor. It is up to them to know what they basicly want and be prepared to be photographed without undue waste of time. Generally the desired photo can be achieved in one roll and rather quickly. If they do want enough things done that time involvement overtakes profit - I discuss additional money or other benefits for that degree of time involvement. as example: a neighbor lady wanted some shots of her Rottweilers a few months ago. I was safely outside the enclosure with my tripod and 85,105, 135 & 200mm lenses and the SuperProgram/Winder. Thirty minutes later, I was on the way to the processor w/ a check for $50. I returned the next day with a set of 4x6's (I put them into one of those free WalMart photobooks which I always scoop up from the 2nd hand stores new for cheap ;^) and collected the costs. She was very pleased with the shots. A few were blurred from subject motion, the majority were quite respectable and four were very good all around. Even so - not really "scale wages", at that. I do have a soft spot for people who seek me out and often "overdo it" for what I end up with financially, though. I *am guilty* of using up all my profit margin shooting by slides of beautiful Gypsy Dancing Girls when I was covering our local Renaissance (?) Faire last spring and other non- business-like practices like low-cost favors to certain artsy-type and dancer friends on low budgets. !8^D Bill - Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
- Original Message - From: "Tanya & Russell Mayer Subject: Fairy pics I think you are selling yourself WAY to cheaply. You should be charging that much per hour, not per shoot. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
Tanya & Russell Mayer wrote: > > I have decided at this stage to charge au$200 per session . . . > I do not put a "limit" on my shooting time, . . . > In doing it this way, my costs are about au$20 for film, au$90 for > processing. I will make about au$100 per shoot . . . Sounds pretty darn cheap to me! By the time you work out an hourly rate (accounting for *all* the time you are there, waiting for kids to be ready), and adding processing, preparation and book-keeping time, you're probably working at below minimum wage, and with no allowance towards the cost of your equipment. -- John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Silicon Graphics, Inc. (650)933-82952011 N. Shoreline Blvd. MS 43U-991 (650)932-0828 (Fax) Mountain View, CA 94043-1389 Hello. My name is Darth Vader. I am your father. Prepare to die. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy pics
Fairy wrote: > My first love is fashion, however, lack of > resources and also lack of a qualified teacher is very impeding where > fashion is concerned, so I may have to just resign myself to viewing all of > the pretty models in the pretty dresses in the expensive magazines... > fairy. > Ya got a tripod and a remote shutter release? :-) Tom - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Fairy pics
Firstly, thanks Doug for the link and for taking the time to make such a detailed response to my questions. There are some cute ideas on that web page, however, I differ slightly with my view of how to shoot kids than these guys do, as I am planning to only shoot children with available light and predominantly in natural rather than studio type settings (at least that's the plan for now, we'll see how long it lasts for!). I am really aiming for candid expressions and poses here. You said: "1.) If your friend with the two daughters showed the shots off at school and the other mums want to hire you to do the same for =their= kids, that means they want you to DO THE SAME FOR THEIR KIDS. They want you to do the same poses, the same expressions, the =same=. Mums often pay a lot of lip service to having "different" portraits done of their kids, but most of them actually fear anything that will make the kids appear different." I have actually thought about this myself and adopted that very same view. I am thinking that all of these women will want me to shoot all of their kids so that the end results are very similar to what the were originally shown. I can only hope that this won't happen and that I can truly cater each shoot specifically to the personality of each child. Doug also said: "2.) When you hung those wings on the kids, you already jumped over the cheesy line, so it's too late for that particular dilemma." I disagree with this one Doug. The family of the little "fairy" girl is almost bordering on being "hippy". ie they are extremely New Age (hence her Dad's veggie patch that she was sitting in etc). They are "for" all things natural and to do with nature. It is for this reason that we chose to dress her as a "flower fairy" - to try and keep within their ideas and beliefs. She is also a very inquisitive, curious and very "cheeky" little girl and we thought that this would be a great way to show off those attributes. It wasn't simply a case of "hanging a pair of wings on her" to make her look cute. For example, if I were to photograph a little girl of the same age whose parents were much more traditional and straight-laced in their beliefs, I would perhaps have her sitting in her room playing quietly with some toys or reading a book etc. I fully intend to cater each shoot specifically to the child and his/her family's personalities and beliefs, so to avoid the "cheese" factor. Oh, and I REFUSE to sit any kids in picnic baskets or surround them with teddy bears - uuugh! how unnatural is that?!? "3.) There's Business, and there's Art. Rarely do they wind up in the same county, much less on the same shoot. Look at it this way: When you did your friend's little girls, it was probably as a sort of practice, like, "Hey, I need to do some fairy photos, mind if I borrow the girls?" In that situation, the girls are models, there to prop up your Photographs. This is your Art. Now, when the other mums want you to shoot their kids, those kids go from being models, or props, to being Subjects. Notice the shift. Now the photo has to be built to support the subject. This is Business." I do of course understand this, and this my exact view. I do not however, wish to compromise my creative input and would never go so far as to shooting something that I didn't like just to please a "client" or in this case, the kids' parents. Thus, my approach to use a context for each kid that will bring out their true personality and nature and beliefs ie. "support the subject" (to please the parents) while at the same time injecting my own interpretation of how to do this ie. "prop up my photographs" (eg. in this case, putting on the fairy wings.). I must say though, that I didn't at any time say to this lady "I need to do some fairy pics do you mind if I borrow your girls". I instead thought "who do I know that has a little girl who has the personality to be a "flower fairy", and who's parents would view this in a personal context, and who would like some nice shots of their girls?" BTW, the parents also paid for all film, processing and my petrol money (they live over 2 hours away), in exchange for me taking those shots. I viewed in this instance, my payment as being able to keep the negs, which I see as my major learning tool in all of this. "4.) Charge real money. Decide what your prices are and stick with them. If you give your work away, you'll get a rep as a "cheap" photog, and nobody will want to pay you a fair price later." I have decided at this stage to charge au$200 per session (extra for petrol if there is travel involved). This includes 3 rolls of film (their choice of colour, b&w or a combination), "double&q
Re: Fairy pics
Tanya, You're right to ask these questions of yourself as you are presented with your first opportunity to make a few dollars through photography. I'm going to make a few observations, not to discourage you, but to hopefully enlighten you. 1.) If your friend with the two daughters showed the shots off at school and the other mums want to hire you to do the same for =their= kids, that means they want you to DO THE SAME FOR THEIR KIDS. They want you to do the same poses, the same expressions, the =same=. Mums often pay a lot of lip service to having "different" portraits done of their kids, but most of them actually fear anything that will make the kids appear different. 2.) When you hung those wings on the kids, you already jumped over the cheesy line, so it's too late for that particular dilemma. 3.) There's Business, and there's Art. Rarely do they wind up in the same county, much less on the same shoot. Look at it this way: When you did your friend's little girls, it was probably as a sort of practice, like, "Hey, I need to do some fairy photos, mind if I borrow the girls?" In that situation, the girls are models, there to prop up your Photographs. This is your Art. Now, when the other mums want you to shoot their kids, those kids go from being models, or props, to being Subjects. Notice the shift. Now the photo has to be built to support the subject. This is Business. 4.) Charge real money. Decide what your prices are and stick with them. If you give your work away, you'll get a rep as a "cheap" photog, and nobody will want to pay you a fair price later. 5.)It's harder than Anne Geddes makes it look. Doug "been there, done that, still paying the back taxes" Brewer - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: Re: Fairy Pics...
Paul Stenquist wrote; "Hi Fairy, Some beautiful pictures here. I particularly love the BW of the grouped flowers, the flower toppling over in the vase, and the baby on the cloud. (I guess I'm a softy.) Many other good shots as well. Nice work. Paul" Thanks for taking the time to view my pics and to comment, Paul. Ths shots that you mentioned are my favourites too. It is actually quite interesting as the b&w shot of the tulips is quite possibly my MOST favourite pic I have ever shot, and yet it doesn't tend to draw the attention that the colour ones do. I just love the contrast and the way the light falls on the top of the flowers. Speaking of light, I forgot to mention that EVERYTHING on that page was shot with only available light (I only own one flash - a crappy Achiever 630AF, that doesn't seem to work properly - always seems to overexpose everything so I rarely use it). The first group of shots on that page (the still lifes) are about a month old now, but I have left them there as collectively, they are still my all time favourites. I am glad that you enjoyed viewing them and thanks again for commenting. BTW, for anyone who is interested, I just had a phone call from the mum of the two little girls that I shot on the weekend (the little girl dressed as a fairy is the sister of the one with the coloured flowers around her). She was so overjoyed with the results. She called me a "legend!". Anyways, apparently she took them to the childrens day care centre this afternoon and now has a list of at least 10 other mums that want me to perform some sort of magic with their kids. Of course, I am extremely excited by this prospect (I may actually be able to make some money to buy the new flash that I need and a decent printeranother PZ-1P would be nice too...) but at the same time am also extremely nervous at the idea. I mean, this could turn into a very large volume of work, and what if the shots I did this past weekend were just a fluke and I end up stuffing up big time with the next lo t? Then my name would be mud in a very small town where I have suddenly been placed at celebrity status just cause I managed to make this lady's little girls look cute on film (they already look extremely cute in real life). Also, I am a little worried that I will run short of ideas to make each shoot as individual to the child as possible. I don't want to become like these supermarket jobs such as Pixifotos where they do the same setup with each kid regardless of their personality, take 10 shots (all of them smiling or laughing) and then say, "next" I also don't want to be denigrated to doing cheesy and gimmicky setups with the kids, I'd like to keep them as natural as possible while still adding some element of creativity and fun into the shots. Ok, so I know I am rambling, so I'll shut it now, but any advice from others who have shot alot of family/portraits/kids would be greatly appreciated. fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Fairy Pics...
Hi Fairy, Some beautiful pictures here. I particularly love the BW of the grouped flowers, the flower toppling over in the vase, and the baby on the cloud. (I guess I'm a softy.) Many other good shots as well. Nice work. Paul Tanya & Russell Mayer wrote: > > Hi all, well, I have had an incredibly busy past couple of days, I have been > shooting my butt off (no crass remarks, thanks! ;-) ) > > So I wanted to show you all what I have been up to. The following link will > take you to my "newest stuff" folder on Photo.net. The stuff shot this past > weekend begins with and includes the landscape shots. > > http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=108928 > > So, these are my first instalment in the "Fairygirl's Fairy Pics" > archive Anybody else got some fairy pics? > > One more thing, a while back, somebody was asking about various softener > type filters and I suggested the use of pantihose over the lens. Well, to > show the effect, here are two examples. The first is with the stocking (I > used white and just tied it straight over my lens), the second is without. > Basically, it just reduces the contrast, and almost "dulls" the shot to an > extent, but I like the effect, particularly when used in a context such as > "fairy" type pics. Oh yeah, here are the links: > > With stocking - > > http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=199151&size=lg > > Without - > > http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=199152&size=lg > > Both shots taken same camera (PZ-20), same lens (SMC -FA 35-80mm zoom that > came with my PZ-20), same film (TCN 400) same exposure (f4, 1/90 sec), > within about 30 seconds of each other. > > BTW, I made the costume (wings, headpiece, tutu, wand) earlier on that > morningaren't I clever! hehe. Gonna make some adult wings tonight, I'll > post the results... > > Anyways, lemme know what you all think... > > Oh, yeah, what do you all think of the sunset/landscape shots? They were my > first ever attempt at landscapes, I asked the lab to do as little colour > adjustment as possible and this was the result. I love the colours > (composition leaves a lot to be desired, I know...), but I think they are ok > for a first attempt Shot with Reala 100 by the way. > > Thanks in advance, and please enjoy... > > fairy. > > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Fairy Pics...
Hi all, well, I have had an incredibly busy past couple of days, I have been shooting my butt off (no crass remarks, thanks! ;-) ) So I wanted to show you all what I have been up to. The following link will take you to my "newest stuff" folder on Photo.net. The stuff shot this past weekend begins with and includes the landscape shots. http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=108928 So, these are my first instalment in the "Fairygirl's Fairy Pics" archive.... Anybody else got some fairy pics? One more thing, a while back, somebody was asking about various softener type filters and I suggested the use of pantihose over the lens. Well, to show the effect, here are two examples. The first is with the stocking (I used white and just tied it straight over my lens), the second is without. Basically, it just reduces the contrast, and almost "dulls" the shot to an extent, but I like the effect, particularly when used in a context such as "fairy" type pics. Oh yeah, here are the links: With stocking - http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=199151&size=lg Without - http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=199152&size=lg Both shots taken same camera (PZ-20), same lens (SMC -FA 35-80mm zoom that came with my PZ-20), same film (TCN 400) same exposure (f4, 1/90 sec), within about 30 seconds of each other. BTW, I made the costume (wings, headpiece, tutu, wand) earlier on that morningaren't I clever! hehe. Gonna make some adult wings tonight, I'll post the results... Anyways, lemme know what you all think... Oh, yeah, what do you all think of the sunset/landscape shots? They were my first ever attempt at landscapes, I asked the lab to do as little colour adjustment as possible and this was the result. I love the colours (composition leaves a lot to be desired, I know...), but I think they are ok for a first attempt Shot with Reala 100 by the way. Thanks in advance, and please enjoy... fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
