|
Re: Salvage - what is acceptable?
[Re: Julie]
#14897
05/02/08 05:12 PM
05/02/08 05:12 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2008
st. petersburg, florida, usa a...
Visceral Image
Old hand
|
Old hand
Joined: Jan 2008
st. petersburg, florida, usa a...
|
Sometimes the image is strong enough without the missing piece. This is a full-frame image of a gull fishing that has sold many times, never had an editor complain about the missing wing part
[image]http://visceralimage.com/cpg/displayimage.php?album=topn&cat=0&pos=0[/image]
Last edited by Visceral Image; 05/02/08 05:22 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Salvage - what is acceptable?
[Re: Skeeter]
#14903
05/05/08 08:36 AM
05/05/08 08:36 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2005
TN
Julie
Addict
|
Addict
Joined: Jun 2005
TN
|
Quote:
No need to apologize! Dog sport people typically do not care about perfect pictures, particularly the ones that don't show or breed dogs (which is definitely the majority of us).
Kim, I gotta disagree with this. Dog sport people DO care about the photos, just as much as breeders. If you are charging very little, they will buy more. If you are charging what a professional will, they will expect professional photos.
It is easy to get googly eyed over "good enough" photos if they are free, or very cheap. When you start asking real money for them, people will only buy if they are excellent
A missing body part isn't that big of a deal if there is some other factor in the photo that wows you. The one I posed of Dot is coming into the frame and you have eye contact. You see a dog that is intense on the lure. The missing foot wouldn't be a deal breaker.
So, don't sell people short by saying "dog sport people don't care". They do. Even if they don't breed or advertise
|
|
|
Re: Salvage - what is acceptable?
[Re: Julie]
#14905
05/05/08 10:42 AM
05/05/08 10:42 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Canada
Skeeter
OP
Tracker
|
OP
Tracker
Joined: Feb 2008
Canada
|
Quote:
Quote:
No need to apologize! Dog sport people typically do not care about perfect pictures, particularly the ones that don't show or breed dogs (which is definitely the majority of us).
Kim, I gotta disagree with this. Dog sport people DO care about the photos, just as much as breeders. If you are charging very little, they will buy more. If you are charging what a professional will, they will expect professional photos.
It is easy to get googly eyed over "good enough" photos if they are free, or very cheap. When you start asking real money for them, people will only buy if they are excellent
A missing body part isn't that big of a deal if there is some other factor in the photo that wows you. The one I posed of Dot is coming into the frame and you have eye contact. You see a dog that is intense on the lure. The missing foot wouldn't be a deal breaker.
So, don't sell people short by saying "dog sport people don't care". They do. Even if they don't breed or advertise
Well, you've twisted my words, Julie  I said they don't care about "perfect" pictures (perfect meaning from a photographers/artists perspective), not that they don't care.
After 10 years of competition in a variety of dog sports...agility, flyball, disc dog, lure coursing, formal obedience, rally obedience, dock dogs, etc, I have noticed that dog sport people in my country and region are not as nit picky about photos...sometimes I am shocked at what people will buy from the "pro's".
Regarding "wow" factor...that can be quite subjective, and also a bit biased when evaluating a photo of your own dog (human emotion tends to override everything else). For example, I have an agility photo of my stafford, Gus, that I absolutely love...his body is contorted in a very odd and humourous position coming off the teeter, but it is really not a great photo from a photographic perspective. It's underexposed, poorly composed, and the focal length of the lens was not long enough to do the subject any real justice.
To the photographers credit, he was shooting film with a manual focus lens in less than ideal shooting conditions. Regardless, he captured a moment for me, his money was well earned, and I will always treasure this less-than-perfect photo. Imagine what I would have missed if he had "culled" it.
Generally, dog sport people will pay for these special "moments" even when there are photographic flaws in the presentation. What is "special" to them is personal, subjective, and emotionally charged...
Kim
|
|
|
Re: Salvage - what is acceptable?
[Re: Skeeter]
#14906
05/05/08 11:09 AM
05/05/08 11:09 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Florida
Jim Garvie
Addict
|
Addict
Joined: Mar 2005
Florida
|
Kim, you originally posted the question so if you think the image is "salvagable" based on whatever criteria you use for the term, then why ask? Nobody's questioning your experience with dogs. You seemed to be questioning whether or not the rest of us would do something with the image you posted and my response was based on whether or not I felt I could sell it. When I shoot events, that's the only criteria I can use. It ain't about art in those cases; it's about negotiable American currency. When I'm shooting for me -- for fun -- my criteria may be different. But even then, my best images aren't usually "accidents" that managed to have something special in them. Of course, every time I get the image I imagined, it's pure luck. And the harder I work, the luckier I get  . Again, if you think that original image meets your criteria for "salvage" then that's all that matters. The rest of us represent a different perspective and different opinions. But that's all they are -- opinions. Cheers, Jim
|
|
|
|
|
0 registered members (),
212
guests, and 3
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums6
Topics631
Posts997
Members3,317
| |
Most Online876
Apr 25th, 2024
|
|
|
