[Thorsten]

December 16, 2008 at 6:25 pm

Poulet et Lait… wrote:

Just Dublin has RIDICULOUSLY over-priced photographic studios to rent and in conversation with a few friends of mine, we all agreed that it’s due to this price and the lack of studios in Dublin, that there aren’t many studio photographers and studio photographers are slowly dying off.

Bear in mind that Dublin also has ridiculously over-priced property prices and rents also. A studio to rent is more than just an empty room. Whoever is renting it out is most likely paying a mortgage or rent on that property. Obviously the demand isn’t there for them to rent it out every day and this has to be factored into the studio rental fee.

As for studio photographers dying off, I think you’ll find that most commercial and portrait photographers have their own private studios and for those that are moving away from studios I think it has more to do with a change in demand for studio portraits and a shift towards location portraits. It also has to do with photographers reducing their overheads, a sensible decision in these difficult financial times we live in.

I think your best approach would be to form some sort of collective or cooperative and see what sort of commercial space is available in the suburbs. Once set up you could then look at renting out the studio as well in order to recoup some of the costs associated with it. Of course, this all depends on what you want to use it for.

[Thorsten]

December 11, 2008 at 8:44 pm

Well, about six months ago I bought a Linksys WRT54GL and replaced the firmware with Tomato and all I can say is it’s an exercise that’s well worth doing!

[Thorsten]

December 11, 2008 at 2:33 pm

BM wrote:

A truly remarkable business model: beta test your product at full retail price for free

Nothing new there, at least not to anyone working in the IT industry. Hardware and software manufacturers rarely release product that is 100% bug free. Digital cameras are essentially computers run by software. It’s almost impossible to test for all the possible permutations of usage that people will subject their equipment to and the only way to really find out is when the products are in real-life every-day use.

I would have been very surprised if the 5D MkII had no bugs. I apply the same logic to camera upgrades as I do to computer and/or software upgrades – I simply avoid being an early adopter! I plan on waiting until Spring ’09 before making my purchase. Hopefully the price will have settled down by then as well.

[Thorsten]

December 10, 2008 at 11:04 pm

The various professional organisations (the MPA, the SWPP, the BIPP, etc. etc.), all have their own trade magazines which are aimed squarely at the professional. Outside of those, I think there are only two other publications which genuinely cater to the professional (or aspiring professional) photographer. One is the British Journal of Photography and the other is Photo Pro magazine. Photo Pro magazine is now the only UK magazine that I buy regularly as it features a good mix of news, business related articles and technical articles. Outside of that, my photography magazines comprise such titles as Harpers Bazaar, i-D, POP or Vogue. You’ll find more great photography in titles like that than you ever will in any photography-specific magazine.

[Thorsten]

December 6, 2008 at 3:23 am

markcapilitan wrote:

(Oh, if you’re shooting on Velvia 50, rate it at 80, it’s much nicer 8) )

I beg to differ. Using Velvia 50 at an EI of 80 is is going to result in blocked up shadows and reduced dynamic range. I used to use Velvia with an EI of 40 in order to open up the shadow detail. But I wouldn’t recommend following that advice either! You see, it depends what your final output is going to be. If it is projection, then the rated EI may well be OK but if it’s prints you want, you will most likely want to increase your exposures by a third of a stop or so.

I think using a digital camera as a proofing device (or the equivalent of polaroid film) is a fine idea provided you remember one very important difference between film and digital – the response of a digital sensor is linear throughout the range from shadow to highlight, whereas the response of film as non-linear.

Getting a separate hand held meter and learning how to use it is probably one of the most useful exercises you could do – well worth the investment of time and money getting to grips with this regardless of whether you are shooting film or digital.

[Thorsten]

December 5, 2008 at 12:56 pm

emma64 wrote:

I’ve been converting my raw images using teh canon software provided with my 40D.

If you mean DPP, then I’d suggest you stick with that. ACR isn’t going to be any quicker and the output from DPP has been shown to be better than ACR.

[Thorsten]

December 5, 2008 at 12:50 pm

jessthespringer wrote:

I have to submit 30, 6×4 pictures and I’m trying to present them with/in a documentary/fly on the wall, feel.

I think too many people are missing this point. The image needs to be judged in the context of the remaining 29 images; does it add something to the story you are trying to tell or not? It doesn’t have to be a technically perfect or an award winning image. In fact a panel of 39 award winning images probably isn’t going to tell the story!

[Thorsten]

December 5, 2008 at 12:41 pm

TompixBandon wrote:

I have used “Be Framed” in Douglas and I can recommend them – if you are near or in the city. They are located in at the back of the old Woollen Mills industrial estate.
They have a wide range of materials and a quick turn around.

Regards.

I’ll second that. They were very helpful in getting the six 40″x30″ prints that went into MacDonalds Midleton, framed for me a few years ago and I’ve used them on a number of other occasions since then and have always been more than happy with their work.

[Thorsten]

November 20, 2008 at 12:45 pm

This is an interesting article by Damien Lovegrove which might help – Setting your price – A guide for social photographers. Different market segment, but the concepts and things you need to think about are similar. Just remember that the ‘print’ is simply a mechanism for you to show your image just like a ‘CD’ is simply a mechanism to presnt music to listeners. If musicians priced according to the cost of pressing a CD, then they would all be out of business overnight! :wink:

[Thorsten]

November 1, 2008 at 1:53 pm

I’ve seen no mention of the Canon CP-E4 battery pack yet. Not much use of you’re not using a Canon flash, but if you are it’s possibly the best solution out there for Canon flash units. It’s small and compact and plugs directly into the high voltage socket of the flash. And at GBP 104.00 it’s pretty good value too, IMHO. You still need batteries in the flash to power the flash control.

[Thorsten]

November 1, 2008 at 1:39 pm

There are some tasks that are better suited to a mouse and some better suited to a tablet. For example, I still haven’t been able to make very small precise movements with a pen and tablet but have no difficulty doing so with a mouse (I’m talking here of movements of about 1 or 2 pixels). On the other hands there is nothing better than a pen and tablet for things like brushing on layer masks. So I just use both.

[Thorsten]

October 25, 2008 at 2:05 pm

Firestarter wrote:

Thats interesting, does that mean if you import a camera from outside the EU you dont have to pay import duty on arrival

Yes, correct. But you still have to pay VAT. Many people fail to make the distinction between Import Duty and Value Added Tax. They are two quite distinct taxes. Import duty on consumer goods like these is typically 6% and VAT on goods is typically 21%. VAT is applied after the import duty is applied, so you also end up paying a tax on a tax!

You can look up the tariff codes (and hence the import duties that apply) for any product on the European tax website (don’t ask me what the URL is, I have it filed away somewhere, but you can find it if you dig deep enough into http://www.revenue.ie).

[Thorsten]

October 23, 2008 at 10:14 am

proach wrote:

Untill you’re at the point where you just take an average picture thinkng “Ill make it look good using lightroom/photoshop”. Then, you lose quality as a photographer, as it doesn’t really reflect the reality anymore. Your images are stunning, you definetely know how to use your computer, and do it in a good way, but ive seen people (also on this board) that really only use manipulation to make an average pic look better..

I personally have never seen anyone succeed with this approach. I think that if the fundamental image isn’t good enough to begin with, then no amount of playing around with it in a darkroom or on a computer is going to turn that image into a great image.

[Thorsten]

October 22, 2008 at 9:12 pm

Why not run a quick check on Alamy? You need to ask GreenAer for their usage requirements first and then just plug their criteria into the Alamy Stock Calculator. Doing this, I cam up with a fee of €65.00 based on Editorial Usage in a Consumer Magazine at 1/8 page for a print run up to 10,000 and a duration of 6 months. Alternatively, you define the usage criteria from the outset and set the price accordingly. They are then free to use the image as they see fit without any extra cost or bother, provided it falls within the terms of the usage criteria you have set out to them.

Whatever you do, don’t price yourself out of the market, they will just laugh at you. They know the going rates for these things, so be realistic in your expectations. Oh, and as it’s a stock image, you can only work off stock rates.

[Thorsten]

October 21, 2008 at 11:42 am

My perspective on it, for what it’s worth, is that a slide is simply the medium on which the image is carried and in that respect it’s no different to a CD, a print or a negative. Each will of course have their own characteristics which will affect the image to a greater or lesser degree and this is usually the reason why one is chosen in preference to another. But I wouldn’t get too hung up about a digitaly captured image being written to transparency film using a slide writer. In principle, it’s no different to printing an image using an inkjet printer, for example.