Re: [Leica] Re: It's so easy..

[Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca>]

David Rodgers said:
Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: It's so easy..


> Ted,
> > Business manager or not, you obviously succeeded. And that's all that
> matters. You were a better manager than you give yourself credit
for.<<<<<,,

Thank you kind sir. Although I must confess you would not likely have said
that a few times along the way. :-)

> I tell people that the path to success is to do something you love; do
> something you're passionate about. Build some demand for whatever it is
> you're producing. Above all, be honest, and hope for a little good fortune
> along the way.<<<<<,,,

I think in my case there wasn't any question about having the passion for
photography and being a photographer, as it's been the driving force of my
career. I could pack and be on a plane faster than anyone I know. Tick my
wife off occasionally certainly after being away for a month, arrive home to
find I have to leave again the next day on something else. :-)

But it was always an adventure, never a chore and still isn't. And even at
my age when something comes up I fill with the energy of a twenty year old
and can't get at it fast enough. :-) Damn I love it so. Unfortunately that
borrowed twenty year old's energy doesn't last long! ;-)

>Passion doesn't guarantee success. But even failure
> can be rewarding if you're doing what you love.<<<<<,

True, had it happen .

> I have a good friend who's a portrait photographer. He charges big bucks
and
> is always busy. He went digital last year. He spends countless hours
dealing
> with digital files now; hours that he used to spend photographing and
> drumming up more business.<<<<<<<

The interesting thing about this comment is that it's becoming obvious to
many pro photographers that they are shooting less and spending countless
hours after the fact in front of the computer.

Even here I'm spending far too much time in front of the screen than I
believe I'd spend shooting and darkroom work combined. I hear about work
flow is so much easier, hell I haven't a clue what's easier, other than,
"you look at your exposures faster."

And there are other good things, certainly when it comes to repeat printing
and that is time saving. But it's the original that takes the time of
fiddling, fine tuning and other little visual adjustments the screen tends
to lead you into. Than what you'd do in the darkroom.

> Today I hear again and again how much he's saving on film.<<<<<<,

Well that certainly is a major factor without question. Several of the stock
photographers from the agency I belong to have told me they save $15,000.oo
to $20,000.oo a year in film and processing cost due to shooting on digital.
But then they'll whine about all the extra time they're sitting on their
butts at the screen and not shooting . It's sort of a no win situation. :-(

> For one things, he takes two to three times as many
> pictures. But he doesn't get any more keepers.<<<<<<<,

Oh another one that hits home. :-( OUCH!

I never count rolls when on assignment or working a photo project, film is
merely the ink of the writer or paint of the artist and they don't count
tubes of paint nor strokes of pen. Doing the piece is all that matters as it
should be. However, there is a tendency with digital to blast away in an
almost infinite manner and I think it has something to do with knowing it's
all going on a little card that you can wipe and use again at no cost. And
without souping two hundred rolls of film. ;-)

But what it does do is, make you sit at the screen longer editing, therefore
wasting time because of over shooting. I suppose one must learn to govern
themselves more and take time as though we're shooting with an M7.  I'm sure
it would be better for the soul and butt! :-)

Interesting conversation, thank you.
ted





- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html