Nature’s Pic Images Blog

Recently I helped judge the New Zealand Geographic Magazine Photographer of the Year awards with Andris Apse, Arno Gasteiger & James Frankham. Some interesting things stood out, but one in particular really surprised.

I’d guess 50% of images submitted in the landscape / scenic section had overly heavy use of HDR (high dynamic range) or some other overworked tonal mapping technique. For me it’s becoming the ‘graduated tobacco coloured sunset filter’ of the 80’s; obviously fake, overblown and often used pointlessly. It knocked how I felt about current landscape photography for a number of reasons…

Nature blesses us with remarkable beauty. We should seek to be good enough to do her justice in a photo. Sure, it can be tough dealing with the light she gives us, but we should rise to the challenge and learn how to capture it with strong technique and novel ideas when you’re out in the field, and then maybe touch it up with a light hand back home on the computer. We learnt good field skills before digital was invented.

Now it seems many just bracket shots, run them through an HDR program, wiggle a few sliders and output a terribly… > > > Continue reading : full post + comments > > >

I’m regularly asked about making money from stock photography. Here are some thoughts:

Producing quality stock photography requires a huge commitment. The business models are changing continuously and will continue to change in the future, but through your hard work, keeping the faith and producing quality work then it might just work.

The trouble is there are plenty of places to flog your work for a pittance (or likely a big loss) these days such as the micro-stock industry like I-stock, and it’s becoming harder to find a sensible route. Photography has been commoditised* and if you want to make some dough you need to figure out a way around this problem.  It seems like everywhere you turn there’s a chance to make a few cents from your photos – but a little thought easily uncovers a major problem:

Recently I met a Canadian chap (not a local canadian boy whose name rhymes with ‘potatto’ I should stress) who proudly told me that he’d licenced 268 images. I was impressed because I knew he took the odd photo, so I was keen to learn more. He proudly told me he’d made “$67.00″ total for all 268 images through an online microstock website! I asked him why he bothered for that tiny amount given the huge amount of work and expense he’s put in? “To make some money” was his reply. $0.25 per license isn’t making money – it doesn’t even cover the time taken to upload the images (let alone equipment, travel, or even make some income), but this seemed irrelevant to him.  In his mind he’d made some money.  I wondered if he’d ever work willingly for someone on this return? I bet not – so why had he been taken advantage of so easily? … > > > Continue reading : full post + comments > > >