Where Has The Quality Gone?

[clickshot]

 

 

I believe that we have entered the age of the "Good Enough" mentality. At

last statistic, there are over 1/2 million "Professional" photographers with

websites in America. That figures has grown from about 50,000 about 10 years

ago. Many of them are willing to work for less than $1,000.00 per day and are

totally willing to give the high resolution original camera master images to

the client after the affair. So, we must ask ourselves, "What is a

Professional Photographer?". We do not have to be licensed as do doctors,

lawyers, architects or even plumbers! There are no unions for us. What

separates the amateur from the professional? And, does the buying public

really care if we are professionals or amateurs...experienced or not? Will

the images they are buying be just "Good Enough" or will they be quite

exceptional, capturing the love, emotion, excitement, spontaneity and fun of

their special day? We know that everyone must start somewhere...I know I did

over 35 years ago. I worked as an assistant for about a year and then one day

was thrust out with one days notice into a wedding when a photographer called

in sick. I was somewhat terrified, but I took solace in the fact that I was

able to draw on my year of experience working with several talented

photographers. I used the knowledge that I learned to make the day and the

images special for that Bride and Groom, even though my only strobe crashed

and burned in the middle of the ceremony! I also learned how important

my "personality" was in dealing with the principals of the wedding

celebration. I grew in that department as well, encouraging myself to become

more extroverted and funny as time went by. I learned that the photographer's

responsibility is to divert and distract the subject's attention from his/her

self-conscious feelings and help them to become an eager part of the session

and actually enjoy it. I believe that a "people" photographer should make his

subjects the most important thing during a sitting...without fussing over

equipment, technique and lighting. Those technical features should be second

nature to the professional, allowing her to focus on the relationship of

Photographer and Subject...a sort of bonding if you will. The photographer?s

self confidence and professional demeanor will foster his subject's trust. An

excellent sense of humor and funny disposition are very helpful as well. I

went on to join several professional organizations and entered my images in

competitions. I learned about good print quality, composition and color. I

earned the "Master of Photography" degree from the Professional Photographers

of America. I took the test and submitted a portfolio of my work which led to

my becoming a "Certified Professional Photographer". Less than 3% of the

photographers in America are Certified. (If any of you wish to learn more

about certification, drop me an email) I am not telling you this to brag, but

only to encourage you, as photographers, to grow and never stop learning. I

still go to workshops and seminars whenever I have the opportunity. With the

onset of photojournalism into wedding photography, it is also the professional

photographer's responsibility to encourage the attendants to be themselves

and "let their hair down". In other words, just be yourself and we will

capture those wonderful facets of your personality and your special day. So,

how are we to proceed? I believe we must encourage the inexperienced

photographers to become more educated by attending seminars and workshops in

their chosen specialty. I also encourage photographers...experienced or

not...to join organizations like PPA and WPPI, APA and ASMP and to get

involved entering competitions. It's a great way to improve your quality and

your business by learning more and more about our craft and running a

business...about profit and loss...about how valuable your time is...to

yourself and your client. About correct pricing in a competitive

environment. Do not sell yourself and your talent short...especially if you

have earned it through education and hard work. Get your price! And, let's

hear your comments. Thanks for reading.

 

[steve_levine]

"Quality", was shoved off a cliff years ago by it's evil twin, "low price". People don't want they best, they want "cheap".

[ronald_moravec1]

95% of people shop by price alone for all goods and services. People do not know good from bad wedding photos.

 

A quality conscious lady I worked with picked her photographer carefully without regard to cost. The photos were delivered on a cd.

 

She needed some prints fast and went to Ritz or another local quick lab. I told her the print would be too contrasty with washed out whites and totally black darks. Guess what? She had reprints made a my pro lab that turned out fine.

 

People have been conditioned to accept poor finishing with contrasty paper and overly saturated unnatural colors. They now believe that represents quality. Most have never seen a quality photo that shows a full range of tones and don`t know what is missing.

 

Everybody has gone into the photo business today who are totally unqualified. You can tell from the very basic questions raised here by new wedding photogs. Yet they are out there doing weddings. Case in point is what tele zoom should I get for wedding work. Nobody evers asks how to pose a couple or how to light them.

 

I understand in Germany some certification is necessary in order to go into business. I don`t know why something similar is not required here.

[matt_needham]

You rotten kids! Get off my lawn!

 

"Somebody Let the rabble in." Lewis Carroll remarking on the introduction of film.

 

"Let me here call attention to one of the most universally popular mistakes that have to do with photography - that of classing supposedly excellent work as professional, and using the term amateur to convey the idea of immature productions and to excuse atrociously poor photographs. As a matter of fact nearly all the greatest work is being, and has always been done, by those who are following photography for the love of it, and not merely for financial reasons. As the name implies, an amateur is one who works for love; and viewed in this light the incorrectness of the popular classification is readily apparent." Alfred Stieglitz

[vlad khavin]

Matt... Amen.

[austinphoto]

In spite of what I read into this posting, I think that the oppsite is really happening. I think that what was good enough yesterday is not good enough today. I see the photography and quality of work much better than it used to be. At any given time, there are standards of quality. But when you really look at work from 20 years ago, and compare them to today, The quality of work has improved tremendously! Maybe you think that standards have changed between years ago and today, but really look at work that was coming out of your studio years ago and the work that is coming out today. I don't really think that the quality has gone down. Now I know that you really meant other studios and not yours. But from what I see, it's the same increase in quality almost everywhere. There are always exceptions, but that hasn't changed over the years. We had people who thought that good enough was fine, then, and we still have them now. But for those who don't think like that, and that is a majority of photographers today, the quality of work has substantially improved. I see amazing results from many (and I mean Many!) photographers today, who produce work that is far more impressive and beautiful than I have ever seen years ago. You don't have to be "certified" to be a fantastic photographer. You have to have the desire, the love of your craft, and the knowledge to produce what you need, not the certificate. PPA, WPPI, APA, ASMP, etc. will not, cannot, and will never make an excellent photographer if he has a "good enough" attitude.

[Jerry_]

Once the wedding 'kits' appeared (i.e., the bride's parents buying little throw-a-way 35mm cameras to put on every table at the reception,) the business has been in decline.

 

 

 

 

Why pay a professional to shoot when a $6.95 toss-camera can take a snapshot?

 

 

 

 

 

It makes sense: the meal goes for $44.00 a plate. Why pay $8.00 a print?

[greg jansen]

I tend to agree with you Dennis. I think many of the new photographers have only seen "good enough," therefore, when they set their one camera on Program and take a ton of snapshots, it's "good enough" to call themselves a pro. It's all they have ever seen.

 

I also agree with Abe. With the internet, we are exposed to a vast greater number of photographers, many of which are very, very good.

 

We see the work from the good photographers because we are interested in photography, constantly learning. We search them out.

 

Does the public see these great photographer's work? Often not, I'm afraid. The internet makes it just as easy for the novice to display a series of images as it does the true pro's images.

 

I think it's good more people, pro and consumer, are taking pictures. I just think the true pro stuff does not have the same exposure. People need to learn what a good photograph is.

 

Consumers flood the internet with snapshots from their camera phone or a point and shoot digi-cam. For most these photos are all they know.

 

I don't think all the blame has to be on a consumer being cheap, I think much of it has to do with the public not being educated on what constitutes a good photograph, or good photographer for that matter.

 

On a side note, I think printing, for both consumer AND professional, has taken a nosedive. When you look at some hand printed B&W silver prints from the 20th century, you see a certain skill, a certain depth, that is not seen on the Photoshop/Inkjet prints of today. I think this is an area where the PROS say "good enough." I am guilty of this one.

 

No digital camera or modern printer can capture the look of a hand-printed B&W that was shot on a large format film camera.

 

That is not to say I'm going to drag that equipment out on every shoot. It would be terribly impracticle, and expensive. I have a corporate shoot today where digital "snapshots" is all they are looking for. Awards type thing. Sure, I'll use the proper lighting, proper exposure, work in a professional manner, but at the end of the day it's they want a disc with a photo of each award recipiant. It would not make good business sense for me to take those shots with a medium format camera, and have each one hand printed. Not for what I am getting paid for the job.

 

I think there is a slight lowering of price charged that is coupled with the lower expected quality. That is fine for some things, like my job today.

 

I think where things are lacking is the more high-end, quality driven photography, like a wedding or professional portrait.

 

It is here where time spent and skill should dictate a higher price. It is in those areas that the consumer is not exposed to great photographs. Many young couples have never seen a high-quality professsionaly printed enlargement.

 

They have seen plenty of snapshots from their digi-cam printed 8x10 from Walmart.

 

How do we, as professionals, educate the public? I don't know.

[larry_moore]

This is the major question for photographers who have been working for more than a short time.

 

I continue to be amazed at what poor quality images I see not only in wedding photogrpahy but commercial photography as well. The impact of digital doctoring has created a vast array of images that say nothing and don't even look very good.

 

As clients see so much visual junk it is harder and harder for them to identify what makes an image that sings that calls to them the feeling of an event or a person. I am mystified as to how most couples manage to pick a photographer from among all of the options good to bad to great that they can see at the click of a mouse. Unfortunately not all of what they are seeing is real.

 

Mass production of "wedding stories" and web sites have replaced a careful examination of images, albums and enlargements with direct dialogue with a photographer. There is little subtle interaction other than about price and price warfare.

 

As I look into the future of my business it is sort of depressing, but on the other hand I have reinvented myself several times and will probably do so again.

 

Once a good quality product is delivered to a client I do take satisfaction in seeing that they "see" the difference between what they have paid for and what other guests at the event have given them.

 

As for the professional title who knows, I was involved with most of the major pro organizations early on in my career but found them so boring and so not on the mark in terms of what my clients were indicating they wanted that I wandered away. Even when teaching at a major photography school the students who really stood out were those who pushed at the limits and yes learned technical skills but also were not afraid to go beyond them.

 

For so many of those who post on here and are trying to jump into the field with not much more than a camera and a wishful thinking some will make it and many more will realize how much hard work there is to week after week create images that tell a poweful story of people, places and emotion.

 

In support of photojournalism it is not random grabshots or set up people jumping in the air. Photojournalism is about the moment, the real and captured moment which is observed and captured with a specific intent. INTENT that is the difference between a pro and an amateur. What comes into the field of view is identified and made real. Sort of poetic but in my mind great photogrpahy is like great poetry or music it transends the moment and reveals it again through emotion and the interaction of memory and reality.

 

Brooke Moore

photographing since I was 7 and realized that a camera was way into the world that would let me be both an observer and an active participant!

[rtrace]

"What separates the amateur from the professional?"

 

The client.

 

Bogdan

[neilambrose]

<p>One of the great things about the widespread interest in photography today is so many more people are being encouraged to produce innovative and meaningful work. Of course, statistics being what they are, there's also a lot of less talented work too, so you have to look a bit harder. But the general standard now is higher than it was. If you're in any doubt, just look through older photography books/journals and see what the standard used to be. And then look at some of the amateur work on the net (even on this site) and see what it is now.</p>

 

<p>And, separately, I don't really agree with Dennis about the importance of professional associations. I certainly believe it's important to strive for quality, but I'd be more impressed with someone's credentials who had graduated from a fine-arts course rather than a professional certification. But ultimately, it's always the quality of the work that counts most.</p>

 

<p>Out of interest, I looked at some sample questions that the certification program of the PPA requires. I wasn't especially impressed. Multiple choice questions like: "'For best results, where should the hair light be positioned?'" [a] Over the hair...".</p>

 

<p>It doesn't compare very well to the extraordinary range of work someone has to produce to get a MFA degree. And it could be argued that associations issuing degrees on the basis of insubstantial exams are perhaps more guilty of diluting quality.</p>

[surfidaho]

I don't believe that quality has necessarily gone down overall. But the ability to make a lucrative living as a wedding photographer has.

 

Wedding photography used to be an intimidating and scary business. It still should be. Digital promotes a false sense of security in beginners.

 

I see many $600 "digital only" wedding photographers flood the market, disappoint their customers, and bail within a year or two. But in the meantime, they have undercut the true professionals who love the craft and work hard at it.

 

I also believe the "buy now, pay later, don't save" attitude of the typical baby boomer has hurt us. Parents tend to be highly leveraged these days with car payments and credit card debt, so their kids often end up footing the bill for the entire wedding themselves. This introduces young couples to the same cycle when they put their wedding on a credit card.

 

Tuppence,

 

Paulsky

[jake_holt]

Just a few links from my "favorites" bookmarks:

 

http://www.f8studio.com/f8/

 

http://seanflaniganphotography.com

 

http://www.boutwellstudio.com/site/index.php

 

http://www.stacyandmary.com

 

http://www.eclecticimagesphotography.com/htmlver/index.php

 

http://www.billmcculloughphotography.com/

 

http://www.photographybyvanessa.com/

 

http://www.joebuissink.com/home.php

 

http://www.susanstripling.com/

 

Sure is a shame that there's no quality left in this industry.

[bob_penfield]

I have been a silent reader on your site for some time but this posting has pushed me to finally create an account and post. So forgive my lack of established credentials.

 

Simply put this is this biggest self righteous rant on this site that I have seen in some time.

 

It's 2007 and photography is more accessible than anytime before. Low costs digital cameras and computers have made the art more accessible. It's the digital age and many customers would rather preserve their memories digitally. While it may hurt the wedding photographers bottom line - it is simple a much more efficient way to store memories. The fact is that the club house isn't quite so exclusive and the public is pouring in. As a professional photographer it's your responsibility to adapt or simply change fields. Pandora's box has been opened and you can't get the demons back in.

 

I will counter the quality argument and say that the work of a photographer with decades of experience or even an extremely talented new photographer is obvious if viewed comparatively. It means that you need to work all the harder to position yourself as a quality photographer. Some people are content with a Honda and some want to own a BMW. Ultimately beauty is in the eye of the customer though. And if they are satisfied with that $1000 wedding photographer then so be it.

 

Let me say that my personal wedding photographer had all of the right certifications and produced terrible wedding photos. Guests with point and shoots produced much better shots that she did. Certifications should not be the deciding factor for a customer. References, referrals, and a portfolio of quality work are by far the most important factors in choosing a photographer. It's not to say that professional organizations have some merit - for example a network of back up photographers. But in the end it's just a label produced by an organization that collected a fee.

 

This whole thing reminds me of the Williams sisters in tennis. When they entered the scene there were tons of people complaining how they didn't learn tennis via the "established methods." And they challenged their detractors by riding right to the top. I think that a customer should focus on a photographers work and not their credentials. After all Bill Gates didn't get a college degree and he did ok in his field.

 

Now don't get me wrong - Encouraging others to improve their skill sets is a lofty goal. Self improvement is one of the things that attracted me to photography in the first place. But the beginning of this thread just struck me as another rant against "those #$#$@ kids on my lawn" or those pesky Mother's With A Camera. And it encouraged me to finally make an account and post.

 

Thx

[ni_gentry]

I haven't read much of the above thread (I have some semblance of a life), but I think I get

the jist of what's being asked. <p>

To answer the question "Where Has the Quality Gone?"... I think you look at it several

ways.<P>

Yes, there is a lot of crappy (wedding) photography out there. But there has always been,

and always will be crappy photography. There also is/was/always will be some amazing

photography. I think in today's fast-paced, digital world there is definitely some

compromise of quality for the sake

of speed and quantity. <P>

There's tons of morons buying DSLRs and claiming to be "photographers" and "wedding

photographers". It's just silly.<P>

On the other hand, there will always be those who actually know their craft and produce

amazing, mind blowing work that comes from the heart. There will also be people in this

world who know the difference and are will to pay handsomely for it.

[susan_flewelling1]

Well I would like to add that everything comes in waves. Right now there are a lot of people joining wedding photography. Photojournalism has come and made some people experts at wedding photography because they can click a shutter (not bashing photojounrnalism I love pj). Suddenly everyone can do photography because they have a pj eye. But as I said it comes in waves. Now I am seeing a shift back to quality, back to traditional photography that makes people look their best. Clients will always want the PJ feel to their photos but they also want to look their best. I believe as time goes on it will shift more and more torward quality. I guess I am a optimist. The only thing that bothers me is the amount of photographers with blown out stuff. It is so overphotoshopped that in twenty years it will look like the stuff done in the seventies.

[gregory_c]

I come from a photography family that has been shooting since back in the early 60's. I used to see beautiful, carefully posed, excellent exposed wedding photographs. I shot my first wedding in 1983. Up until about early- mid-90's this craftsmanship was present. Now in the days of auto exposure auto focus cameras, everyone is doing it. Face it, all you have to do is turn camera on, hold it level, & click away & great images come out. Instead of 50-100 beautiful wedding photographs composed by a true artist of a photographer. Now you see 2000+ images, shot every way, every direction, manipulated all different ways. Instead of "quality" it is now "quantity".

What has "hurt" the business more than anything is the digital age. Shoot it now, correct it later. What happened to correct it now & shoot it correct the first time ? Do not get me wrong, I shoot film & digital, corrrect a FEW images, & shoot a lot of images. Also the availability, affordability and ease of use of good digital cameras. Also photoshop taught in high schools, so you have a 16 year old who manupliate a image to look as good or better than a 30 year veteran photographer can do. The bottom line is that "true photography" is becoming a lost are like knowing your way around a darkroom.

[pete_s.]

Professional just means you get paid, doesn't mean you're "good".

 

And quality isn't anything absolute...the quality of a product or service refers to the perception of the degree to which the product or service meets the customer's expectations.

 

BTW, had a look at some sample questions for the PPA certification and some website of those that has been certified. It was pretty basic stuff and the work of some certified profesionals where not impressive by any means.

 

Anyway this discussion is older than time. The nice thing is that a free market is self regulating. Those that delivers what their customers perceive as quality will be those left standing.

[jake_holt]

Quality is in the eye of the beholder. Some people love my work because it's fun, others

probably hate it because there aren't any serious photos of brides with their hands by their

faces or any shots of bouquets on trains.

<p>

Free market rules, literally and figuratively. I can be happy shooting how I want, and some

people like it, so I stay in business. Others can shoot 100 posed photos, and some people

like that, so they stay in business. <p>

<p>

And sorry, you can't just "turn camera on, hold it level, & click away" to get great images.

The people who are always complaining that AF/AE/digital/insert new technology here/ is

the downfall of the profession will always be there and will always complain about

something new. Newsflash: no technology will ever tell you where to stand, how to

compose the photo, and how to use light. These are the cornerstones of good

photographs, and folks with a brand new DSLR aren't gong to steal business from truly

talented photographers just because they can now set the camera on Program.

<P>

 

If you are a professional photographer and you are really, truly worried about someone

who just bought a D40 and a kit lens charging sub-$1000 and taking your business, I

humbly suggets that you take a long,

hard look at your business model.

<P>

Also - please, go to the PPA forums and take a long, hard look at some (not all!) of the

websites of people who have lots of certifications and letters after their names. Not my

cup of tea, to put it mildly. Certification does not equal quality.

<P>

I suggest going here: http://www.flickr.com/

<p>

And here: http://www.jpgmag.com/

 

<p>Spend some time browsing those links and viewing some mind-blowing shots from

folks who were never "certified" by anyone.

[picturesque]

"The quality" hasn't gone anywhere because it's meaning is relative and general as it relates to wedding photography, not specific. The same is true for the meaning of the word "professional". Define these specifically and maybe answers can be given. The general public usually doesn't care if the wedding photographer hired has degrees, certifications, licenses, etc.--they just care whether they are getting the kind of photography they want at a price they are willing to pay. Hopefully they get the kind of photography they contract for. I agree with Jake re the fact that the free market is self regulating. In the end, it doesn't matter whether you are licensed, win awards, or even whether you are highly regarded among your peers. Define your own quality, and if you can sell that standard to clients and survive, even profit from, and do well for yourself, I would say you could call yourself a professional wedding photographer.

[waltflanagan]

Sorry but you can't control the free market. Some people just want okay photos, they don't care for the best. Even if you educate them and show the difference they may not want to pay the premium. I have a 50" HDTV but my friend has a 19". It gives me a headache watching his little TV but he isn't willing to spend $2K despite all the obvious benefits. Another friend has a $10K TV and laughs at mine. Everyone has a different opinion on how much value they place on a TV, car, photo quality, and you can't force them to agree with you.

[stacy]

I'm late to this, but thanks Jake!

 

I don't really have anything to add- good points have already been made. There's good photography and awful photography and everything in between. And what I consider good might not be what someone else would consider good. There are lots of people who don't care for my style of photography- and I know this because they tell me- I don't mind though :)

[jake_holt]

Hey Stacy, no problem - us crappy photographers have to stick together!

[chetn]

I agree with Abe. Look up top photos on photo.net from its first years and compare to recent photo.net photos. I beleive the reduced cost of digital has allowed "amateurs" to practise their skills and excel. Quality and innovation is on the up.

[Ed_Ingold]

The term "quality" might be applied to consolidating your thoughts into sentences and paragraphs.

 

A good photographer is going to be good whether he uses film or digital. At weddings and events, technology takes second place to people skills and organization. You have to be comfortable with your gear, and nobody cares a tinker's damn how difficult that might be - just results.