Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/12/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Oh, no, for sure. some photography is work. Some of it's not bad work, some of it's decent work, some of it's good work, some of it, even, is Very Awesome work -- but some of it is loading-boxes-type hideous clock-watching work. The "work" bit of it is often when someone who's not an art director has Very Specific Instructions for what they want. And when it's made clear that you're the help, not the creative talent, it's work. And when you get allotted 60 seconds for a portrait from someone who will later complain they don't like any of the 16 photos you took, it's work. But the same thick skin that gets you through gallery reviews is the same thick skin that reminds you that you don't need to put the cliched shots someone else came up with in your portfolio, and the things that Would Have Been Better Had They Listened To You -- you just take them and use the paycheck to fun the stuff that you want to be working on. As Kurt Vonnegut would say: "And so it goes." On Dec 5, 2010, at 11:47 PM, R. Clayton McKee wrote: > It's not the shooting part that's the "work." or the "job." It's > dealing with the people who decide what's to be shot, and the ones > who pay for it. THAT is way too much of "work." > > > Still, it beats sitting behind a desk ALL the time. > > > Quoth the tedgrant at shaw.ca : > >> The terminology by some folks that photography is work is beyond my >> comprehension, it's never been work! >> > -- > > > R. Clayton McKee http://www.rcmckee.com > Photojournalist rcmckee at rcmckee.com > P O Box 571900 voice/fax 713/783-3502 > Houston, TX 77257-1900 cell phone # on request > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information