Are you a Photographer or a Machine Operator ?

[Guest Ming Rider]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

All will become clear, I hope.

 

Yesterday in Preston (UK) whilst enjoying a days picture taking, I decided to take a shortcut through a Shopping Arcade that I know because there's a Camera Shop inside.

 

On route, I came across what I could best describe as a Mobile Childrens Portrait Studio. In the enclosure was the Photographer, Lights, Props and a sizeable line of customers. Dotted around were example images of his work, about 16x12 in size.

 

The style of the portraits was in the old seaside manner including amongst many, a cut-out of a boat with waves behind. Children would crouch behind the boat, wearing a sailors hat and the final prints given a shot of sepia in Photoshop (I assume).

 

Now, I have great faith in trusting the first image that pops into my head, my 'inner voice'. What popped up was Nadar, or Seydou Keita.

 

After I had marvelled at the images and enjoyed the bustle going on for a while, the Photographer spotted the Leica hanging by my side and glanced at me. I simply said to him, "I like your images. Made me think of Nadar and Seydou Keita."

 

He stared at me with blank eyes for a brief second as if to say, "who?", then bluntly replied, "I'm only interested in the shot mate!"

 

With that he went back to prepping for the next customer.

 

It was at that moment it struck me. What stood before me was not a Photographer as I understand it. Someone who lives and breaths for it. Reads about it, searches for it, relishes the time shooting, gleans little nuggets of inspiration from past Masters etc. No, here stood what would best be described as a 'machine operator'.

 

Like someone stood in a factory, churning out endless car body panels. A means to an end. A means to make money.

 

Don't get me wrong, I admire him for making a living from it (I assume), no easy task these days. However, this man clearly viewed the Camera as a cold machine, able to produce images, to be processed with a quick 'macro' in his Studio/Office/Home, then printed off, rolled up and "'thrown in the post.". If his camera broke, or became obsolete, it would be repaired or replaced, in a cold clinical manner, like a change of clothes.

 

At no point did I sense any enjoyment going on. His sullen manner and the way he matter of factly arranged the children's positions, fired off the regulation 10 exposures and then called "Next !"

 

I quickly left feeling somewhat sorry and saddened for this person . Within 5 minutes, I'd forgotten about him and was happily back to enjoying my hobby.

 

So my question. "Is Photography an enjoyable process and a part of your being, or do you regard it as a tool and a means to produce a finished result?"

[Printmaker]

About a year or two after graduating from college (BFA Photography & Graphic Design), I worked as the Photo Director of an advertising agency. At least that is what my card said. Basically, I was the staff photographer, lith cameraman and back-up paste-up artist. The Creative Director would hand me an 8x10 tissue with a sketch of the product, the direction of the shadow and where the type would fall. I'd turn the tissue up-side down and reverse it and then tape it to the ground glass of my 8x10 view camera and then set up the product on a shooting table, adjust the lights, shoot a 3 sheet bracket and then go on to the next product. Then we got the Clairol account. I was shooting hair swatches 10 hours a day for weeks. A stereo account was followed by a luggage account which was followed by a pen manufacturer... then more hair. I was 23 years old and working my dream job and the career I trained so hard for had already become a grind. What saved me was taking my M4 out every weekend and shooting personal projects - fun stuff like nudes, urban decay and landscapes.

 

40 years later and it is still the same. Shoot the paintings, shoot the sculpture, shoot the tiles, shoot the tour boats and on the weekend take the M9 out and see what I can find to keep me fresh.

 

So, to answer your question, sometimes you have to be a machine operator to keep clients happy and a photographer to keep yourself happy.

 

Tom

[mwilliamsphotography]

There is a lot in-between some rote production function that may be needed for various applications, and the happy-go-lucky, free-wheeling, "find it if you can" hobbyist. Added to that, there is a huge range of talent levels that mitigate what one may get paid for ... or not.

 

I still shoot fabric swatches for GM. It is per-piece work with a set price. They are hand delivered and picked up by the agency. The challenge for me is to shoot 10 pieces or so @ $75 each in less than 2 hours and in effect earn $400 per hour. I don't mind it, since I do it in my PJ's during morning coffee and the proceeds paid for my Leica M9P ... which I use for personal work :-)

 

I also shoot wheels for catalogs, which take longer, but the per piece price is higher. They are more fun because you have to figure out how to light each one differently.

 

I don't do either on a daily basis ... maybe 10 -15 times a year for a couple of hours. Mostly in the Winter, which is a fine time for me.

 

Most everything else is pretty creative work ... whether pre-visualized and planned, or spontaneous discovery.

 

It is all valid if you like it ... and the rote production work is okay if it is putting food on the table or paying for your gear. I wouldn't do it if it was a daily grind ... there are other ways to make money.

 

-Marc

[Jeff S]

The comments from Marc and Tom are consistent with what I and others already wrote in your other thread on careers. And that is that there are many shades of gray in between your black and white, either/or, views. Many photographers shoot for both commercial and personal intent. Any reading of the history of photography will point to many such examples, which are often duplicated among lesser known photographers.

 

Jeff

[CalArts 99]

This is a good read: Photography: A Middle-Brow Art - Pierre Bourdieu and associates Translated by Shaun Whiteside

 

And if you can find a copy, the late Johan van der Keuken's 16mm short film, To Sang Fotostudio is a delight to watch. (Available on DVD as part of a collection) JOHAN VAN DER KEUKEN: THE COMPLETE COLLECTION - VOL. 2

[Carduelis]

I suspect that I know that arcade rather well in Preston and often go there to visit the camera shop (Leica dealer) there.

 

Possibly you may be being a bit harsh about the photographer you describe. Although you were trying to be complimentary, the sight of an expensive Leica camera and mention of two photographers he may never have heard off probably made him react that way. He might also be having a bad day at the office, so to speak.

 

I have never heard of Nadar and Seydou Keita, and now feel suitably enlightened thanks to the internet and yourself. I actually just googled the name Keita to start with and it only initially came up with a Seydou Keita who is also a famous Malian footballer would you believe (played a number of seasons with Barcelona) !!! Googling Seydou Keita had the desired effect and revealed a famous and talented Malian photographer I was impressed with.

[Guest Ming Rider]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In hindsight I agree that maybe I was a little harsh in my appraisal of the photographer and for sure, he may just have been having a bad day.

 

At the time and on similar occasions, if I see photographs that stimulate thought or association with more famous works, I feel there is no bigger compliment than when someone says "I like it", and that it's reminiscent of 'so and so'. Maybe some people, including this guy believed I was merely calling them a 'copy cat' and goes some way to explain his apparent (to me) lack of interest in the subject.

 

Admittedly with regards this thread, I have added 'color' to the original post, in an attempt to kickstart conversation and healthy debate (as I do with all my threads) and provide an alternative to the more common "what's this strange line in my pictures", "what's your favourite brand of...", or "why does my camera do this"?

 

Jeff. I know the 'Careers' thread you mention, but it's not mine.

[honcho]

In hindsight I agree that maybe I was a little harsh in my appraisal of the photographer and for sure, he may just have been having a bad day.....

 

Most of my professional colleagues (those I associate with regularly) fall into two broad working disciplines: fine art and social. All are imbued with photographic ability, knowledge and artistic skills that ensure they are able to translate their ideas into images which will keep their paying clients pleased. It would be impossible to continue in business without these skills. Anyone can learn about the technicalities of photography, it takes something more to produce exceptional, or just commercially viable work.

 

Your example photographer sounds as though he has arrived at his temporary niche in a Preston Arcade through careful study of what is likely to pay, how he will market himself and his work and has a understanding what his target audience are likely to buy from him.

 

That does not make him a machine operator, it makes him an astute businessman with commercial acumen and obvious photographic ability. It does not mean that he is disinterested in 'your' subject. He has perfected his product and that is something that you, as a hobbyist will never have to do. Likewise, he does not need to pay great attention to his personal photographic library to do what he does well.

 

There is a very well-known professional mantra: "Shoot for show and shoot for dough"

 

One begets the other, but you need a machine to achieve it.

[alun]

The guy may well not be a photographer in the sense the OP means. He probably is more of a 'camera operative' if not a 'machine operator'.... On the other hand, he probably works on a commission is paid little more than the minimum wage by a company that specialises in placing pools of photographers in such locations -- a friend of mine did it many years ago. He certainly didn't really regard it as photography as such -- it was a way of earning his keep.

 

The Magnum photographer Alex Webb recently said (in an interview with Geoff Dyer): "After the Spanish Civil War, every part of the pig was used. It was eaten. Clothes were made from it. Shoes. The pig was used for everything. Now photography is the pig."

 

Truer now than ever -- photography is the pig and all its parts can be used (if not eaten)...

[Jeff S]

Jeff. I know the 'Careers' thread you mention, but it's not mine.

 

Sorry...meant to refer to the film/digital thread you started. But interestingly, the point I made there was the same; the decision needn't be either/or...many photographers do both.

 

In addition, while you admitted to a possible case of GAS in that thread, the photographer you "feel sorry" for here evidently has no such problem, at least in his work mode; he's content to focus on the project at hand. Who's the one with the 'problem'?

 

BTW, I recommended in that thread that you focus on a project to get out of the gear mode and into the photo mode. One can do this with positive energy, not with the attitude that you (perhaps erroneously) attributed to the photographer you judge here.

 

Jeff

[stunsworth]

I suspect that I know that arcade rather well in Preston and often go there to visit the camera shop (Leica dealer) there

 

I know the arcade too - I bought my M8 from the dealer (Harrisons if anyone's interested).

 

Martin Parr had a book several years ago of photos of him taken by similar jobbing photographers around the world.

 

I'd never heard of the photographers mentioned by the OP either - which is my problem not his.

[Carduelis]

I know the arcade too - I bought my M8 from the dealer (Harrisons if anyone's interested).

 

.

 

Thought Harrisons were in Sheffield. Wilkinsons are the Leica dealer in that Preston arcade.

[stunsworth]

Thought Harrisons were in Sheffield. Wilkinsons are the Leica dealer in that Preston arcade.

 

Yes it's Wilkinsons. I'll go and sit on the naughty step <grin>

[Carduelis]

Yes it's Wilkinsons. I'll go and sit on the naughty step <grin>

 

I may be on the naughty step already. I hope forum members don't mind me extolling the virtues of my Ricoh GXR camera (with A12 mount) when I don't own a Leica camera yet. I am very enthusiastic though about my second hand Leica M lenses that I have bought from David Stephens in Manchester.

[bill]

I have to say, having read this that if I was shooting for a living and someone rocked up in the middle of what I was doing with a poncy Leica around his neck, spouting names of photographers of whom I had never heard (I had to Google them) I probably wouldn't be too civil either.

 

Face it, we are all machine operators. It's not what you use, it's the intent and skill with which you use it.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[stunsworth]

I hope forum members don't mind me extolling the virtues of my Ricoh GXR camera (with A12 mount) when I don't own a Leica camera yet

 

No problem from me. Enjoy the camera and lenses

[lct]

As the guy said "I'm only interested in the shot mate". The rest is fun or litterature.

[Paul J]

Your assuming and judging a whole lot there. To feel sorry for someone because they don't think the same way you do is ridiculous. This is the kind of things that makes me cringe when people talk about "Leica people". Get a grip man.

[stunsworth]

Maybe I'm 'chilling' because I'm on holiday, but I think people can be very judgmental about a situation that they didn't observe for themselves.

 

Fear not, normal service will be resumed next week.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jdlaing]

I'm a machine photographer. Does that count?