That may or may not be my laundry in the background. This is, after all, a film about honesty. After a brief introspection, I realized that the ONLY thing I might be offering of value is that of being honest. Online culture, and not just online photography culture, is in great part about the facade. How do we craft the most palatable version of our work or our message, so that we can build the largest following possible. That’s the driving force and methodology.
It is entirely possible to make a living shooting average to below-average photographs.
I’ve seen this happen my entire career. I believe there are far more average photographers making a living than excellent photographers. With excellence comes risk. More time, more money, more exposure, more cutting-edge imagery which might require more contemplation, as opposed to the safe, the standard, the easy, the expected.
When it comes to my consumption of photography, something like the National Geographic Year in Pictures Special Issue has resonance, while the bulk of what I see online doesn’t. It’s quite that simple. The magazine is edited, curated, and designed to a high level, by people who know what they are doing. The photographic contributors are skilled and have many years if not decades of experience under their belt, otherwise they would not have been chosen for assignments in the first place.
An issue like this is a goldmine of expandable exploration of what is being done at the highest level of the business while most of the work I see being featured online is about everything except the final product photography. The list of contributors here will keep you busy for weeks if not months. Each of the images represented is but ONE image of a much larger, much more in-depth essay reflecting some of the most important issues of our time. This my friends, is where I spend my time ingesting photography.
Comments 10
Have the recent layoffs affected image quality? I dug around and the news articles were all about layoffs of staff writers, with some vague mention of editorial staff. I assume Nat Geo has relied primarily if not entirely on freelance photographers, but it’s the editors who make the assignments and the selections, who determine the tone and quality, in the end. Any idea whether photo and photo story quality is affected? Maybe too soon to tell.
Author
I’ve heard horror stories of how many people are leaving. I do think it’s only a matter of time before it’s gone. The change in ownership didn’t help things. Trust with those owners isn’t great. Historically, they had staff photographers. And then staff and contractors and then just contractors and now who knows?
Dan, the appeal of your channel is, primarily, that you have been there, done that.
I’m a lot older than you, and my gig was probably ending when yours was hitting its stride, but the basic truths and realities of the business, as you describe them, are all perfectly recognisable to me, so yeah, you do know what you talk and write about, which isn’t such a common thing today.
During my working time there existed no Internet, and so exposure to opinions and views about the business pretty much always came through curated channels in magazines, and in the UK at least, about the only one anybody paid attention to was The British Journal of Photography, maybe because it carried job vacancies… Of the non-professional magazines, the one called, simply, Photography, edited by Norman Hall, was excellent. Amateur Photography was what it said on the tin: very handy for any novice wanting to pick up on how-to, and in that sense, much like women’s general magazines, in that they were kinda cyclical, each year being a seasonal copy of the previous one. Just like fashion mags, in that sense.
Today, there are no online checks, and anybody can write whatever they feel like writing, so I guess that most of what gets out into the world is just people trying to build followings and earn a buck. The person who hasn’t lived the life has no idea. How or why would they? Unfortunately, for one reason or another – maybe for thousands of reasons – it seems to me that I now live in a world where I really don’t see many things or groups with which I want to spend my shrinking time as a sentient being. Photography is a great way of filling in time, until one realises (yet again) that that’s all one is doing with it. I have always maintained that with pro photography, apart from the work itself, if you are doing stuff you want to do, perhaps the biggest buzz comes from the fact of the assignment. That vote of confidence somebody makes feels pretty damned good. It doesn’t exist in the amateur context.
Author
Yes, photography means different things to different people, and that especially applies to pros. I know more than a few full-time people who won’t constantly and yet they don’t like photography at all. An odd business. I caught the tail end of industry publications being so dominate. Now, a free for all, but maybe that’s what we needed.
You’ve NEVER procrastinated in your life? But how?!
He hasn’t got the time for such a luxury. 😉
Author
I know. It sucks. But it’s happening. I feel major changes on the way.
Does waiting for change count as procrastination-lite?
Hi Daniel, I loved the National Geography magazine back in the days and many of their staff photographers were/still are legendary. People like Michael ‘Nick’ Nichols for example who followed animals deep into the jungle not minding catching any disease or literally going through torture like on this video https://youtu.be/5ql4vMljI9I?si=I4vz2eViOs9Zd0MS
I stopped my subscription to the magazine after Murdoch acquired NG. Most recently it seems they fired the few remaining staff photographers.
I love your YouTube content, please stay honest (as one of the few in photography on YT) and keep going.
Author
Staffers were gone quite a long time ago. Then big lawsuit with contractors, then lost subscriptions, etc. Not looking good in the long run.