|
jackpot posted:I'm trying not to laugh, but 170mm and still that far away 200 according to the EXIF, and that's on a 50D, so that's like 320 in 35mm terms.
|
#
?
May 7, 2010 05:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:18 |
|
|
Shot New Found Glory and We the Kings tonight with a rented 16-35L and had a hell of a time. drat I need to stick to local shows Ian and Chad of New Found Glory  On the fence about this photo, can't decide if I like it or hate it. It's a cool shot but not really all that great 
pr0digal fucked around with this message at 06:44 on May 7, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2010 06:40
|
|
|
HPL posted:200 according to the EXIF, and that's on a 50D, so that's like 320 in 35mm terms. I'd just laugh if this happened to me. "Sweet, just let me pull out my 70-300. I'll shoot wide-open at f/5.6, that's plenty fast enough for an event like this."
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2010 14:44
|
|
|
Shot Tegan & Sara tonight. Drinking before the gig + confusion about the schedule meant that I missed the first song and went running through the crowd into the photo pit and darted around like a drunk maniac with my camera for the two songs I had left .I did give my spare tickets to a nice lesbian couple who kept buying me drinks. It turns out if you're drunk and you have a good camera it's very easy to make new friends. Hooray! It also turns out if you're drunk you forget about putting any thought into composing anything properly.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2010 16:29
|
|
|
jackpot posted:I must have been looking at one of the other photos from that set. To be honest, 5.6 would have been fine at this show. Big arena concerts like this have great light. Around 1250 or 1600 that 70-300 would have been better than my 70-200 2.8 last night. My friend from another paper had a 400 5.6L he was using and was able to bring good shots.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2010 16:34
|
|
|
I'm hoping to shoot Metallica this coming October, and by the sounds of it I'm going to need a 400mm lens because of their stupid stage setup  Wolfmother did a secret show in their (and my!) hometown Brisbane on Saturday night, to a crowd of 200 people with less than 24 hours notice. I managed to snag a shooters spot (only shooter besides the bands' shooter) and stood front row for 2 and a half hours while they played. It was free reign; flash allowed, AF assist beams, shoot as long as you want; no barriers and heaps of close range point and shoot cameras though, which made for a challenge. Great fun though, and good results. The set is about half black and white, half colour, because my flash ran out of batteries about halfway through the show. I filled up two 8GB cards over the time as well, using a 5D Mark 2 with a 70-200 f/4 and a Tokina 11-16 f/2.8   caught someone elses p+s flash on this one, which made cool lookin' shadows an poo poo  full set with obligatory horrible socials here - http://www.fasterlouder.com.au/gallery/15948/Wolfmother.htm
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2010 10:24
|
|
|
I, Butthole posted:I'm hoping to shoot Metallica this coming October, and by the sounds of it I'm going to need a 400mm lens because of their stupid stage setup I've shot them twice, as recent as last fall and needed nothing of the sort. The last show was in the round and photographers had full access to everywhere around the outside of the stage. The issue was the stage was HUGE. You could get winded doing a lap around that thing. It was hard to follow them around, but not impossible.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2010 13:39
|
|
|
Finally got all my photos from New Found Glory edited. The ones from We The Kings didn't come out as good. 1. Ian the bassist  2. Chad from the crowd (thank you 85mm f/1.8)  3. Chad mid-air. It was backlit to hell hence why it is so dark  click for larger and for flickr
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2010 20:49
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:Finally got all my photos from New Found Glory edited. The ones from We The Kings didn't come out as good. Oh god, where is his leg
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2010 23:18
|
|
|
dunkman and I got to shoot our first event via actual photo passes *cough*freeshow*cough* on Saturday: The Crystal Method, which turned out to be "two fat old guys". Was pretty cool, except for the overzealous bouncers standing around telling us not to take pictures of anything.   Link to the full set on our site: http://photos.tfatf.com/#/album/b8c91g/
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2010 00:39
|
|
|
I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but when I see a band without taking my camera along I usually end up standing a bit further back in the crowd and I'm surrounded by people taking photos of the bands with their phone/their point and shoots set to auto and it drives me crazy. Why do they bother? All they get is a blur of colour or the back of people's heads. I shouldn't let it ruin my evening, but fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 04:06
|
|
|
dreggory posted:dunkman and I got to shoot our first event via actual photo passes *cough*freeshow*cough* on Saturday: The Crystal Method, which turned out to be "two fat old guys". Was pretty cool, except for the overzealous bouncers standing around telling us not to take pictures of anything. I have shot the Crystal Method before. They are definitely in their forties. Not really my type of music but not bad I guess.  edit: photo too large
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 04:14
|
|
|
psylent posted:I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but when I see a band without taking my camera along I usually end up standing a bit further back in the crowd and I'm surrounded by people taking photos of the bands with their phone/their point and shoots set to auto and it drives me crazy. I feel ya. It used to bug the crap out of me. I just wanted to go shake them. What's even funnier is when we see someone in public with their phone open and their wallpaper is one of those terribly taken cell phone concert photos. I just laugh it off now. I also find it amusing at bigger shows when there are people 100 feet away or so taking photos with a point and shoot and the flash is on.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 13:28
|
|
|
Snapped this at a jazz fest: I can't decide if I want to attempt to sell it to the band or not. They're primarily a trio of sax players, but the bassist was the only one with some stage presence. Opinions/critique?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 14:53
|
|
|
Gryi posted:Snapped this at a jazz fest: Not to be a dick, the photo is decent, but I think the odds of selling a photo to a random unheard of band is pretty slim.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 15:33
|
|
|
No, I understand, that was the exact reason I can't decide whether or not to attempt to sell it. 
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 15:34
|
|
|
Gryi posted:No, I understand, that was the exact reason I can't decide whether or not to attempt to sell it. I mean its nothing lost if you ask them and they say no. As a professional though I see the only way to make any real money is to get paid to actually shoot the show, not trying to sell photos after the fact.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 15:35
|
|
|
psylent posted:Why do they bother? All they get is a blur of colour or the back of people's heads. I shouldn't let it ruin my evening, but fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck. Bojanglesworth posted:I mean its nothing lost if you ask them and they say no. As a professional though I see the only way to make any real money is to get paid to actually shoot the show, not trying to sell photos after the fact.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 16:26
|
|
|
jackpot posted:Eh, they do it because it's their own shot and it says "I was there." I mean I could download some great live shots of my favorite bands, but I like my own better because they're my own; it's the same thing, just (hopefully) different degrees of talent. If I were in the band, though, all those flashes going off would drive me loving nuts. I have actually had people contact me after the fact like "um can you take that photo off your site because Im married and…"
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 16:51
|
|
|
Bojanglesworth posted:I have actually had people contact me after the fact like "um can you take that photo off your site because Im married and…"  nice.See, everyone bitches about how it's harder than ever to make money in photography these days, but really they're just not applying themselves. Blackmail never goes out of style.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 18:32
|
|
|
Bojanglesworth posted:Not to be a dick, the photo is decent, but I think the odds of selling a photo to a random unheard of band is pretty slim. I usually give my photos away with a watermark for unlimited use, with an option to purchase rights for the pictures minus a watermark. I'm hoping to build up a name and when band's need promo shots they'll think of me. Failing that it's also great networking to get my band shows, which was originally the point of photography anyway, I just happened to like it way more than I thought I would.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 19:03
|
|
|
AtomicManiac posted:I usually give my photos away with a watermark for unlimited use, with an option to purchase rights for the pictures minus a watermark. I'm hoping to build up a name and when band's need promo shots they'll think of me. This is pretty much the best angle to take with it. No matter who the band is if you came to them and said, hey I have this one photo of you, you should buy it, they're going to tell you to gently caress off. It's pretty rare for bands to buy photos unless they already had the idea in their head that they wanted photos for something. So buying one shot of one player in the band is pretty much not going to happen. Also as far as selling photos goes, way more photos are bought by magazines than bands anyways.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 19:57
|
|
|
Group photos are consistently the most popular among bands, I find. They end up getting used on posters, myspace and Facebook a lot. That's why you should always make an effort to get at least one shot with as many band members in it as possible. And never ignore the drummer. There are plenty of bands out there where the drummer is the guy that handles all the media stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 20:05
|
|
|
HPL posted:Group photos are consistently the most popular among bands, I find. They end up getting used on posters, myspace and Facebook a lot. That's why you should always make an effort to get at least one shot with as many band members in it as possible. And never ignore the drummer. There are plenty of bands out there where the drummer is the guy that handles all the media stuff. Yes, all of this too. Every band I've been friends with has specifically asked me to try to get a bunch of them in photos at a time. And getting good drummer photos is key. They're so forgotten about. Drummers eat up when they actually get a good photo. They tend to be the biggest "hams" if they know you're shooting them too.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2010 21:18
|
|
|
HPL posted:Group photos are consistently the most popular among bands, I find. They end up getting used on posters, myspace and Facebook a lot. That's why you should always make an effort to get at least one shot with as many band members in it as possible. And never ignore the drummer. There are plenty of bands out there where the drummer is the guy that handles all the media stuff. hahaha thats funny because two bands I know personally have the drummer handling all photo, graphic design, merch and anything that has to do with money. Here are some promo photos I have done that are pretty much exclusively for myspace. Its a quick and easy way to make $300 or so, Just message local bands on myspace to drum up some business.  
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 04:26
|
|
|
Bojanglesworth posted:hahaha thats funny because two bands I know personally have the drummer handling all photo, graphic design, merch and anything that has to do with money. Here are some promo photos I have done that are pretty much exclusively for myspace. Its a quick and easy way to make $300 or so, Just message local bands on myspace to drum up some business. What do you charge per shot, and what's the scene like? I think the going rate around here is ~$50 for a few group shots and some individual shots. One photographer charges $100, but she does really nice work, that's heavily processed and really well thought out.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 06:08
|
|
|
AtomicManiac posted:What do you charge per shot, and what's the scene like? I think the going rate around here is ~$50 for a few group shots and some individual shots. One photographer charges $100, but she does really nice work, that's heavily processed and really well thought out. Do you mean whats the music scene where I live, or what type of scene do I shoot them in? The music scene is pretty decent, I mean its not the type of music I like but there are about a million screamo bands in my area. I normally charge a band between $150 and $300 depending on a few different criteria (if I have shot them before, if I have to travel, if they don't seem like jerkoff's that will waste a ton of time) we generally start at my house in my home studio, shoot a handful of photos of each member, then venture out somewhere to shoot some group stuff. I am a firm believer in charging what you believe you are worth, if others agree you will never have a problem making money, if not than you work on your skills (or your prices) until it works out. I have had some people say that I charge too much to shoot, but I have never had someone tell me that my photos aren't worth the money. I really don't mean to sound pretentious at all because I am far from it. $50 is really low honestly, I mean I don't really see the point in charging at all at that point. Unless they are a hobby photographer who is just shooting for fun and $50 is a nice treat for doing something for a friends band I cant really see a professional making ends meet this way. Sorry that was such a rant
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 06:48
|
|
|
I'd like to give a shout out to the sound man at the show I went to tonight. Some chick was like: "Take a picture of me!" so I'm like: "*sigh* Okay." It happens all the time while I'm shooting a show. I take the picture, they're happy. No biggie. But this time... ...she then proceeds to flash her boobs and just then the backlighting on stage brightened up for nearly perfect crowd lighting. HPL fucked around with this message at 08:18 on May 14, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 08:16
|
|
|
Bojanglesworth posted:Do you mean whats the music scene where I live, or what type of scene do I shoot them in? The music scene is pretty decent, I mean its not the type of music I like but there are about a million screamo bands in my area. I normally charge a band between $150 and $300 depending on a few different criteria (if I have shot them before, if I have to travel, if they don't seem like jerkoff's that will waste a ton of time) we generally start at my house in my home studio, shoot a handful of photos of each member, then venture out somewhere to shoot some group stuff. Don't apologize, it was a good read. I guess when I say "The going rate" I mean to say "The rate the hobbyists charge". Most bands around here wouldn't even consider paying anywhere near $100 for photos. I'm fairly certain that a large majority of bands around here don't pay anything for their pictures, though I could be wrong. One thing's for sure though, even at the "Low rate" of $50, most bands get promo shots maybe twice a year. It's a shame, but honestly I don't see myself making a living off band photos anyway. Even in the ideal situation, maybe 10% of my income would come from shooting bands. If I really wanted to shoot bands (or try to make a living off photography in general) I'd probably move to Minnesota.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 09:25
|
|
|
HPL posted:I'd like to give a shout out to the sound man at the show I went to tonight. Some chick was like: "Take a picture of me!" so I'm like: "*sigh* Okay." It happens all the time while I'm shooting a show. I take the picture, they're happy. No biggie. But this time... 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 09:46
|
|
|
HPL posted:I'd like to give a shout out to the sound man at the show I went to tonight. Some chick was like: "Take a picture of me!" so I'm like: "*sigh* Okay." It happens all the time while I'm shooting a show. I take the picture, they're happy. No biggie. But this time... I don't see the clickable link in your post? Maybe I missed it? Concert boobs are good boobs.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 10:59
|
|
|
AtomicManiac posted:Don't apologize, it was a good read. I guess when I say "The going rate" I mean to say "The rate the hobbyists charge". Most bands around here wouldn't even consider paying anywhere near $100 for photos. I'm fairly certain that a large majority of bands around here don't pay anything for their pictures, though I could be wrong. One thing's for sure though, even at the "Low rate" of $50, most bands get promo shots maybe twice a year. It's a shame, but honestly I don't see myself making a living off band photos anyway. Even in the ideal situation, maybe 10% of my income would come from shooting bands. If I really wanted to shoot bands (or try to make a living off photography in general) I'd probably move to Minnesota. If a band won't pay $100 for promo photos, they're loving idiots. If a band of 4 people isn't willing to pay $25 a piece for a decent photo to make them look like they don't have band practice in their parent's garage, they're too stupid to be in a band. I can't fathom charging $50 for a promo shoot. Even a simple shoot figure an hour of shooting, and if you want to do a good job editing and going through the photos, that's maybe another few hours of work. Let's say 4 hours total. That's $12.50 an hour for just your work. Then factor in your camera equipment and other things you had to buy to be able to take those photos. I'm not going to keep going on and on about what this adds up to, I'll just say that charging less than $100 for a promo shoot is idiotic. If you can't get a band to pay you $100 you're either clearly not worth the money or the band is dumber than rocks. A good promo photo can open doors for small bands. If you're trying to get booked for a show and all you have to show them is some demos and a photo, that photo is half of what they're basing their decision on.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 15:28
|
|
|
Ahhh, the joys of shooting in dimly lit bars.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 16:11
|
|
|
rockcity posted:If a band won't pay $100 for promo photos, they're loving idiots. If a band of 4 people isn't willing to pay $25 a piece for a decent photo to make them look like they don't have band practice in their parent's garage, they're too stupid to be in a band. This. Its good to hear other photographers feel the same way. That's what always gets me, a person who cannot come up with $25, like how do you feed yourself?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 17:01
|
|
|
Bojanglesworth posted:This. Its good to hear other photographers feel the same way. edit: If you don't have the money, that's fine, you don't buy the thing you can't afford. A photographer absolutely should ask what she or he feels they're worth. But understand from your perspective as someone selling a service that someone not being able to afford you != lack of appreciation or understanding of your craft. It's not a judgment on you, yet you're making dumb blanket judgments about them. pwn fucked around with this message at 18:46 on May 14, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 18:38
|
|
|
pwn posted:rockcity is completely right, and yet I feel compelled to dress you down when you mock someone to whom $25 is a lot of money. Have you been poor? I have eaten condiments for months to stay alive, I know more about being poor than you may think. The difference is when I was poor I wasn't going out and buying thousand dollar guitars or trying to pay a professional to take my photo. I certainly wasn't attempting to hire a professional for anything, and then complaining when their prices were out of my range. Would you do that with a doctor? I don't think so, so why should any other profession be an exception?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2010 20:39
|
|
|
I'll agree that good photos can make a difference, I just don't know why I have this hang-up about getting paid what you guys would consider "Fair". I'm trying to understand it, and as time goes I think I get it more, partly because you guys are always pressing it, and because my confidence as a photographer is growing. I have to ask, what would you suggest I start charging for my shoots? I've been looking at the photo business thread, and the part I don't really know about are usage rights. Assuming 99% of bands are just using the pictures for myspace/facebook and press kits, what's a fair rate? Also, what's a fair rate for basic post-processing, assuming you're just running the shots through light-room, and calling it a day? Here's a link to my flickr if that helps http://www.flickr.com/photos/bensemisch/ AtomicManiac fucked around with this message at 01:25 on May 15, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2010 01:03
|
|
|
AtomicManiac posted:I'll agree that good photos can make a difference, I just don't know why I have this hang-up about getting paid what you guys would consider "Fair". I'm trying to understand it, and as time goes I think I get it more, partly because you guys are always pressing it, and because my confidence as a photographer is growing. I have to ask, what would you suggest I start charging for my shoots? Quality aside, because I won't get into that. The main factors that I personally think should go into the shoot are the following. - How much time the shoot will take - How intricate the shoot is (are there props? clothes? etc) - Did you come up with the shoot idea? If you did you're basically a creative director too - How long will editing take you? Those are basically the things I look at when I tell a band what it's going to cost them. Now I can't tell you a rate based on those, because that's up to you, but those are the things that should give you a relative idea of how to look at charging someone. The other things that go into cost are more fixed costs to you, like camera gear, software etc, so that doesn't really affect how to price based on the shoot, it's just more of where you want your shoot pricing to start. Like I said, personally, I'd never do anything for less than $100. Set a minimum that you think is fair for a small shoot and then use the above factors to vary your costs from there. Edit: On a related note, I should be getting a promo photo shoot with the band Set It Off in a few weeks. rockcity fucked around with this message at 04:13 on May 15, 2010 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2010 04:09
|
|
|
When I first started charging for things, I started pretty high. At least I thought it was high. For example, some one asked me to shoot a wedding. I didn't want to, so I quoted a huge sum. At least in my eyes. Without as much as a bat of an eye, they said ok. Again, ask yourself, what are they using it for? Is it for a myspace/facebook page? Or is it for a promo shot that they will use to get gigs? I know it's the same, but I put more effort into promo shots. The facebook shots will teach you, the promo shots will pay you. Your time and photos are valuable- charge for them. Do not give them away. So, what to charge? Hard to answer.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2010 20:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:18 |
|
|
I'm thinking of starting with a standard $25 for a solo artist, upping it $5-10 per additional band mate, and then applying more if I come up with the ideas, and depending on how much post I think it'll take to hit those ideas. I figure a shoot for a band with 4 members would come out to $50-75. That seems about right in my eyes, both for the market, and for what I think I'm worth. I figure it works out to right around $15 an hour for me. On a side note, I got turned away for my first photo pass today. I set it up with the PR people for Between The Buried and Me and got told that there had been no photo passes issued for anyone. Lesson: Get a contact number for someone that can help you day of the show. Still had a good time though, and that's what really matters.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2010 09:33
|
|