This photographer only received $500 working with Will Ferrell doing 6 different scenes. Is it time we find a new profession?
>>2776305
at least he fucked up the white balance for good measure
>>2776305
But the exposure and publicity he got from shooting the pics are priceless!
>>2776334
Were you the one posting in the scanner thread about colour balance not being a creative choice?
>>2776336
no, I was trolling the thread about "The Revenant" stating they couldn't correct the white balance and that's why it's all blue.
>>2776335
this always make me rage and lol at the same time because that kind of thing comes up irl time and time again.
reminds me of the alterbridge incident a few years ago.
>>2776365
what a great life you have
>>2776305
how do u know he only made 500?
>>2777055
he doesnt
>>2776305
>only received $500
$500 seems ok for a days work.
>>2777439
It does if you're making it every day.
Photographers don't work every single day, though. We're lucky if we get two gigs a week, and yet we invest our lives and tens of thousands of dollars into honing our craft. It's also worth pointing out that it's not just a day's work, there are several more days put into processing and editing in most cases, and we also have a lot of overhead.
Photogs who think "$500 seems OK for a day's work" are the same photogs who've destroyed the wedding photography industry, and then end up being sued by their clients.
>>2777445
lol, fucking cry more.
my eyes glaze over every time i see a photographer talk about how much money they had to invest in their gear.
>>2777445
>We're lucky if we get two gigs a week
Be better then. The idea that charging ridiculous prices is ok because you only work 6 days a month seems silly to me.
Honestly I have a friend who makes about $400 a day as a cameraman, but he gets paid every single day for an entire shoot (which can be up to 3 months solid). Even He gets upset at photographers who think "well I want to make $4000 a month, but I only get work 6/7 days a month so my rate should be $800 a day.
Charge less, work more. You should start charging more when you're in high demand, not because you're in low demand.
>>2777454
Worked for me
>>2777454
Hey, cinema is a different field than photography. A 'cameraman' also doesn't need to go edit that work painstakingly for days after the fact. That's the job of the colorist or the editor, occasionally the DPs but usually a regular old camera op doesn't need to do any extra work outside of showing up that day. The DP (who gets payed significantly more for more work) does the coordinating of those things. Photographers do all of this by themselves.
Further, your friend probably doesnt even own the gear he's shooting on. The production team either rents it or the DP owns them, buying/renting things to cater to a particular gig. Photographers often have to own all their own gear.
![potatophoto[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/0K3zk2F.jpg "potatophoto[1].jpg")
>>2776305
>This photographer, Kevin Abosch, sold a photo of a potatoe for 1,000,000+.
http://petapixel.com/2016/01/21/this-photo-of-a-potato-sold-for-over-1000000/
Looks like you need to quit bitching and get to networking.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 800 Image Height 800 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2016:01:21 10:01:22 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 640 Image Height 640
>>2777483
If I copy and paste this image onto my computer, did I effectively just steal $1,000,000?
>>2777483
I never heard of this photographer until this potatoe piece of shit, I always throught it was a just PR move by him to get his name out where someone makes that "transaction" but no money is really exchanged.
>>2777483
>it's just the way the system is how dare you complain, but somehow at the same time capitalism is a meritocracy.
Fuck off cuck
>>2777492
Idiot.
>>2776335
>>2777451
This.
Professionals in other technical fields don't have the benefit of millions of filthy casuals also buying their tools of the trade as consumer baubles, driving down the cost and fuelling innovation in features and design.
My sound engineer mate, for example, who pays $200 for every cable he has made for his kit, about $1000 for each of the most common mics he needs to use, $2000 for wireless transmitters he needs. These are all practically consumables, by the way, or obsoleted every 12 months.
Unless you're rocking an up to the minute Phase One, Profoto, wide format printing-equipped studio, you're getting off pretty fucking easy mate.
>>2777492
Thank you!
Some one at last finally said it the way it really is.
>>2777439
>$500 seems ok for a days work.
Go fuck yourself you fucking cunt, you clearly don't do this for a living.
>>2777534
Lol mad cuz you poor. Poor cuz u bad. Mad cuz u bad.
>>2777536
Just mad at outsiders opinions on rates, bro, not even poor or bad.
If you're not mad then you don't actually make a living doing this.
>>2777541
"No true Scotsman"
Look it up
I'm a part timer, and I charge $150 to shoot, and $50 on delivery of 10-15 solid, edited photos, on CD.
That's for maybe 8 hours of work, if I'm slow to edit that night.
$200/8=$25 per hour. Twice as much as my starting pay from my full time IT job.
$500 a day is a pretty good chunk of change, especially if you aren't the plebs itt complaining about only shooting twice a week, which, coincidentally, at $2000 per two weeks, is double what my IT job started at.
Stop complaining about it being a pretty low paying job, because compared to a day of real world work, it's a lot higher paying.
>>2777477
Hi Jake
Legit question: Why are pro photographers such whinny pussies?
>>2777492
>>it's just the way the system is how dare you complain, but somehow at the same time capitalism is a meritocracy.
the system is that way for a reason, because demand for photographer's services dropped through the floor in many areas. and your whining about how it isn't fair won't change it. News organizations know that some bloke with a smartphone will be on scene for whatever the days newsworthy event is, and will give them pictures and video for a price of having his name on TV. Web designers know that there's plenty of stock images to be had at prices all the way down to nothing. Couples getting married just think you want too much money, and in any case you have competition from the bazillion hobby photographers that might shoot a wedding for extra cash.
So yeah, it's like the rest of the job market. You have more competition than ever before, and, except for a few rock stars, the people who're buying what you're selling often don't think it's worth what you've traditionally charged. You know all this, and you're gonna have to accept it sooner or later.
Perhaps you should get a real job and stick to shooting on the side.
Nobody forces anyone to take up photography for a living.
>>2777637
*Unintelligent provocative question
>>2777637
It's a highly competitive field with a very low barrier of entry, so you get a bunch of dabblers and wannabes. They all think that they're special snowflakes and cry when the market doesn't go their way.
>>2777487
Supposedly he's hot shit in Silicon Valley, which would explain the outrageous price tag for a picture of a fucking potato
I wrote a poem for you guys.
Work harder, charge more.
The end.
>>2777637
Because it's a job that anybody perfform at a satisfactory level for some cash, not to mention as a pursuit(eliminate hobby vs. commercial), there are many photographers out there and it is easier than ever to take photos and publish them. So that's one degree of devauation.
Then think of it from this standpoint: Why should newspapers hire a staff of let's say...8 photographers when they can source stock images and photos from people with smartphones and only need 1 senior guy, the video guy and and maybe a guy for sports? don't even get me started with interns.
I've seen people get good enough to be paid within 3 months of starting photography with a DSLR(often, these people have some eye for photo but that's besides the point). I'm sorry, but I just don't see how people can get pissy about it. It's like being a secretary in the future. Yes it will be viable, but so many people can perform to the level of satisfaction.
