Stratshooter- this is just awesome. I love photography- it can capture something a paintbrush cannot do with presicion- and that is a snapshot of emotion in a glimpse of time.

I would like to get into photography, I have never followed up on it and I just dont know where to start. I love it when people turn it into art- and I love going through the National Geographic magazines as they have some really impressive pictures in those magazines (I have a collection from 1968-2005 all issues counted for & unread mostly). The photographers who work for them shooting wildlife and culture for a living in my opinion have the best jobs in the world.

I would like to know, what are the career oportunities like?

_________________

Thanks, Blerties -
The great thing about photography is that you can apply it to virtually anything else you're into. I agree Nat Geo photographers do some amazing work but it probably isn't as glamorous as you might imagine. It can be really grueling work in very extreme conditions. Check out the PSB documentary called "At Close Range". (NetFlix has it) It's described as profile of Nat Geo photographer Joel Sartore, but it gives a pretty good behind the scenes look at what these guys go through.

I had what some would consider a dream job several years ago. After I graduated I worked for Playboy for about 7-8 years - first as an assistant and then as a photog. Was able to travel to some amazing places and of course, there are far worse things to photograph , ... but believe it or not, after a while it became a job and I had to move on.

The reality of photo career opportunities today is that it's very, very difficult to make a living at it. I hate to sound discouraging but that's the truth. With the internet and digital photography, many parts of the market are so over-saturated with hobbyists and advanced amateurs willing to accept pennies for work worth hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars, even highly-skilled, veteran shooters are scrambling for work - and getting paid a lot less than they used to. It's a tough racket.

Nothing is impossible though - follow your dreams!!

-phil

_________________
Then again, what do I know ... I've only been playin' for 6 months ... !

Wow Strat thanks for the lighting 101! Love the way you brought out the curves of a strat.

Was a big photog buff years ago. Still have my Nikon F2SB, umbrella's, lenses and my signed Ansel Adams Yosemite and the Range of light. I have a great deal of respect for anyone who can create the pic in the camera vs. photoshop. Big black & white fan too. Keep up the good work.

And the one neat tip I learned at the Nikon school. If you ever want to know how a portrait was lit, look in the person's eyes. You should be able to see the light source(s).

_________________
2015 Epiphone Casino Goldtop
2011 Taylor 814ce
2009 EC Custom Shop Merc Blue
2008 Schecter ATX
1964 Epi Granada E444T
Fender Super Champ XD

Great shots. love the one of your guitar and amp!! lot of other great shots, the resophonic is awesome. (The two shots i mentioned are under the 'Product' tab.) other stuff of interest to musicians under th event tab too. Nice work.

_________________
I'm not an expert, but I play one on the internet.

Does this count as guitar photography? Hey, it was her rolling stones cover shot. This is christina aguilera, the singer, in case anyone wants to know.

_________________
Your Fender HSS Standard Stratocaster in Electron Blue was made at the Fender Ensenada Plant in Mexico in the Year: 2008.
Final Assembly Date: July 30th, 2008
Model Number: 013 4700 587
Serial # MZ8031252

Trauma, after studying that image for about 20 minutes, I noticed that there really is a guitar there. Fascinating!

_________________
I really like all them "Aster" guitars. You know, like the Stratoc, Telec and Jazzm.

Thanks guys. I'll keep going (and even shoot specifically for the thread) if there's enough interest, but as bbrodie correctly pointed out, it is time consuming. (And that's time I should spend practicing!)

Good to meet a fellow photog, bbrodie! You have some nice work. Thanks also for the link - most "how to do it" sites I've seen aren't terribly accurate. Only glanced at the site, but it's good to see a guy who seems to know what he's talking about.


I understand what you're saying but using Photoshop isn't necessarily "cheating". Depends on how it's used. For me, I pretty much use it as a digital darkroom, enhancing or altering tonality - sometimes the effects are really subtle, and sometimes way over the top depending on what I want. But it's really no different than what I used to do in a wet darkroom. Ansel Adams manipulated the crap out of his prints in the darkroom (Moonrise Over Hernadez would be really bad if it were a straight print), and I have no doubt that if he were still around, he'd be huge Photoshop fan. In the end, it's the final result that counts - not how you got there.

The problem with Photoshop is that many (most?) people use it to "fix" bad photography because they don't know how to get a good photograph to begin with. They're usually the ones who "know a little" about Photoshop and when you combine bad photography with minimal PS knowledge, crap is likely the result. (A little knowledge is a dangerous thing!) No photographer can say they've never used PS to correct a shooting mistake - including me, but I'll do everything I can to get it right in-camera. BUT, there are times when I shoot with Photoshop in mind.

This image was created from several different exposures using separate light sources for each (strobe, tungsten modeling lights, ambient, fire, holiday lights). Then each exposure was combined and manipulated in post. It would have been fairly impossible without photoshop (especially since there was a conference going on at the time with about 300 people behind those closed doors).



My rule is if you can tell an image was manipulated, it's a failure. My motto is to use Photoshop for good - not evil! (enhancements people - not repair! lol). I also have to say I have a love/hate relationship with PS. I love it for the creative possibilities - I hate it for the perception that it's a magic pill. "You can just fix my makeup in Photoshop, right?" Ugh!

Sorry for the OT.

Trauma -
There's a guitar?
In all seriousness though, that's a really unflattering pose for her.

-phil

_________________
Then again, what do I know ... I've only been playin' for 6 months ... !

"I understand what you're saying but using Photoshop isn't necessarily "cheating". Depends on how it's used. For me, I pretty much use it as a digital darkroom, enhancing or altering tonality - sometimes the effects are really subtle, and sometimes way over the top depending on what I want. But it's really no different than what I used to do in a wet darkroom. Ansel Adams manipulated the crap out of his prints in the darkroom (Moonrise Over Hernadez would be really bad if it were a straight print), and I have no doubt that if he were still around, he'd be huge Photoshop fan. In the end, it's the final result that counts - not how you got there. "

I stand corrected! BTW I passed on a Adams MOH print right before he got famous. Was getting married and needed the dough for other things. Then his prints shot through the roof. Sigh ...

_________________
2015 Epiphone Casino Goldtop
2011 Taylor 814ce
2009 EC Custom Shop Merc Blue
2008 Schecter ATX
1964 Epi Granada E444T
Fender Super Champ XD

Jim takes some great pics :

http://www.pbase.com/jroy/the_gear

_________________
Being able to play and enjoy music is a gift that's often taken for granted.

Don't leave home without it!

Ahhhh!!!! you are giving away too many trade secrets!!! now cut that out.!!! Just joking
Great info in the thread

Yes,
Adobe Lightroom 2 as the digital darkroom, took over from eXpress digital for me.
Adobe PhotoShop cs3 as the main image editor (and it does very good pano merges),
HdrSoft's PhotoMartix for HDR (High Dynamic Range) image merges
Microsofts ExpressionMedia as the DAM (Digital Asset manager).

I think you could go broke just trying to keep all the packages updated, if you can't write them off to business.
Keep wishing for an all-in-one do everything well package, maybe someday.

_________________
Keep on Truckin, Going full speed ahead down the highway to hades.

Haha ... not sure Lightroom can be considered a trade secret.
(I know you were joking but it made me laugh)

But to get serious about "trade secrets" for a minute - there really aren't any. Whatever and however you're shooting, it's been done before. The good news for us pro photographers however, is that the majority of people don't understand lighting - and that knowledge can't be ordered in a box. That's a major aspect that separates pros from hobbyists.

But yes, I use LR daily - probably processed close to 100,000 images with it last year. Also agree with you Bob - Real Photographers shoot RAW! That's all I've shot for over 10 years.

But I don't view LR and Photoshop as an "either/or" proposition. They really serve different purposes, IMO. The vast majority of my images just get the standard color/exposure tweaks in LR (aka - "straight photography"), in additition to adding metadata, and then processing. But when I want to get creative, images head to PS.

I know you can also get creative in LR, but the tools, even the localized tools are too clunky and don't provide enough control. It's all about layers, masks, and blending modes, baby!

_________________
Then again, what do I know ... I've only been playin' for 6 months ... !