How badly paid are local news photographers?

[GarfieldLeChat]

Garf? You read this thread yet?

Again another hater with nothing to say ...

It just sound's to me like unprofessional jealousy ...

neither you or herbs would even get your foot in the door with that attitude which is a shame cos I've always been willing to take keen photographers along to all manner of shoots with me, I don't see why anyone wouldn't...

 

[Pie 1]

I've never advertised my photo services since the age of 13

http://www.lucidlondon.co.uk/

 

[Pie 1]

It just sound's to me like unprofessional jealousy ...

you would [not] even get your foot in the door with that attitude which is a shame...

Which door would that be, Garf?

 

[tom_craggs]

Took some photos at an event alongside a photographer doing some work for a local paper in North London. He said he would get abpout £30 for every shot he had published in the paper. Bearin in mind the event he would have about 2 maximum 3 photos published...if he was lucky...we were both shooting for a good 5 hours...that's pretty bad IMO. Saidf he worled an average of 12 hours a day 7 days a week.

 

[Herbsman.]

Sorry Garf I didn't read your barely legible babble. I'm quite surprised that such a successful pro like yourself needs to take time out from 'living the life' so that he can come and defend himself and criticise others on a message board. I would have thought you had more important things to get angry about.

No-one cares about your non-existent clients Garf. And if you're going to show off about how much of an awesome pro photographer you are, at least have some matching work to back it up.

Didn't you say your photos speak for themselves? Looks a bit quiet apart from the shit that you're chatting.

 

[Herbsman.]

</derail>

Back on-topic, I have never seen anyone dressed that badly, even builders wearing old clothes on site.

I'm not talking about someone dressing 'scruffily' or 'casually' I'm talking about someone in a respectable job literally looking like they slept rough in those clothes... you trying to tell me that that's normal and I shouldn't have batted an eyelid?

 

[tom_craggs]

tbf I have always found Herbsman very self effacing about his photography...but anyway.

For me it depends on the work I am doing. If I have been asked to photograph a black tie events, awards dinner or something, or for some corporate stuff I have done I will dress more smartly. In fact it on one occasion it was actually written in to a contract for a job.

When I have covered more local work, journalism or events where there are young people or where I will have to do a lot of crawling around, theatres etc, I will wear something more practical....emphasis on practical though....most of the proffessional work I have done involved trying to naturally engage with people - one part of being practical is wearing soemthing which fits to the ciircumstance. I am not sure I have ever gone to a job looking really 'scruffy' though. I will be honest my photographic abilities are not good enough to forget my personal appearance completely!

To be fair though it' not my main job and I have had very little proffessional work for the last year, concentrating more on my own projects and trying to get a bit more creative about my own work.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

http://www.lucidlondon.co.uk/

cheers for the link are you saying that I'm not allow to have a professional portfolio website in the 21st entry cos if you are then you're a mug.

it doesn't constitute advertising however how else do you think clients can access their downloads? via the mind?

Sorry Garf I didn't read your barely legible babble. I'm quite surprised that such a successful pro like yourself needs to take time out from 'living the life' so that he can come and defend himself and criticise others on a message board. I would have thought you had more important things to get angry about.

barely legible are you using one of the 3'rd gen browsers with a special font changer on these boards?

or is it a dig at dyslexia?

either way it'd be inaccurate...

comprehensible that'd be different or arguable but legible you're clutching at straws now...

more cunty judgmental behavior i see... keep it up love you do yourself the power of good.

as for living the life I'm not the one poncing around decided that photogrpahers should make more effort in the way they dress or bitching about others photogrpahic syltes I just get on and do son you're the one talking about it...

I'm merely pointing you with your shit attitude you wont' get very far and your boring snobby attitude to everything urban won't get you very far, up to you if you take that on board or not...

personally I'll never work with you so couldn't give a shit...

It's not nice when someones overly judgmental about you tho's is it herbsman can you see a comparator at all in anything you've posted recently i wonder?

you shabby photographer...

or is it only you that can be the arbiter of sartorial elegance and photographer chic?

No-one cares about your non-existent clients Garf. And if you're going to show off about how much of an awesome pro photographer you are, at least have some matching work to back it up.

I have work up on my site which has been up for less than 24 hours in it's present form which I'm not contractually bound on and update the site when I have time which is also limited due to work levels.

I'm sorry there's nothing there which doesn't cover the gamut range of shit you might like to see, commission me and we'll stick summit up there for you ok.

The main purpose of the site tho god know's why I'm telling you is to allow clients web access to their shots but as you aren't you don't have access to them, sorry no fee no access.

either way I don't need your critic of the site or the photographic work I do ta very much and i certainly don't need your jealousy and bile save it for those who give two shits about your pretension.

seeing a pie's kindly provided a link to my online portfolio let's see yours now... for comparison... like...

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

</derail>

Back on-topic, I have never seen anyone dressed that badly, even builders wearing old clothes on site.

I'm not talking about someone dressing 'scruffily' or 'casually' I'm talking about someone in a respectable job literally looking like they slept rough in those clothes... you trying to tell me that that's normal and I shouldn't have batted an eyelid?

what if anything at all does how they look have to do with the photos they take.

sum it up for me in one sentence.

cos i'll sum up your attitude in one sentence.

no Irish, no blacks, no gays.

you arrogant judgmental muppet.

what they look like has zero input into how they shoot... no one gives a fuck except you who are once again looking for a way to dismiss others and elevate yourself...

 

[Pie 1]

it doesn't constitute advertising

Jesus wept, you're fucking dumb. (((((((Garf)))))))

seeing a pie's kindly provided a link to my online portfolio let's see yours now... for comparison... like...

It's listed as your homepage on your profile on this very site, Garf.
And aside from having no need, or will, to get into a pissing contest with you, if you think I'm about to link my business site with all my personal numbers & email addresses on a public bulletin board, next to my anonymous user name, then you're very much mistaken.
I have freely PM'd it to people from the photography forum on request, but unfortunately I trust you about as much as a dog on the loose in a sausage factory. So no chance there I'm afraid.

 

[Refused as fuck]

cos i'll sum up your attitude in one sentence.

no Irish, no blacks, no gays.

you arrogant judgmental muppet.

 

[tom_craggs]

cos i'll sum up your attitude in one sentence.

no Irish, no blacks, no gays.

you arrogant judgmental muppet.

what they look like has zero input into how they shoot... no one gives a fuck except you who are once again looking for a way to dismiss others and elevate yourself...

eh!? Bit extreme!

You're right how people look is not an indication on the qaulity of the work they produce for sure but I think you have been lucky so far if you have not come accross any client expectation that you need to present yourself according to the job you are doing (same as all employers). That said it may be that this particular photographers work did not demand it...then fair enough.

 

[boskysquelch]

ruttists.

 

[fubert]

No exaggeration, this woman looked like she was homeless. She had really disgusting looking trousers on and they were too short as well, it was as if she didn't have a clue how to dress to look good. And her shoes were really cheap trainers that were worn to fuck. I see her about town all the time taking photos of corporate wanker-type people that are in the city's main newspaper. Surely if you're regularly meeting corporate businesspeople you should dress smartly, I got bollocked for walking into a different paper's office in hoody and jeans before selling them some pictures and I'm not even their employee!!!!

As far as I understand it, yeah, photography can be a profession with really low pay. Think I read somewhere that the best thing to do if you're trying to make money of it is do it part time but keep your proper job (may have read that on Ken Rockwells site, but you never know when to take him seriously)

The way that the woman was dressed, up to her really. If it was me and it was a first time meeting with a client I would dress appropriately. If I was more familiar with the client then a little bit more casual I think.

I was at Amsterdam Zuid railway station last week, they were launching some kind of new electronic travel card there. Loads of photographers and press kicking about, loads of upper management director types. The way the photographers were dressed varied from out and out smart to pretty casual.

As for you Herbsman.. well.. I reckon your bark is worse than your bite. You say some rough stuff to people sometimes about pics but in the past you've proved yourself to be your own harshest critic.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

eh!? Bit extreme!

You're right how people look is not an indication on the qaulity of the work they produce for sure but I think you have been lucky so far if you have not come accross any client expectation that you need to present yourself according to the job you are doing (same as all employers). That said it may be that this particular photographers work did not demand it...then fair enough.

I've never found it necessary from royality downwards tbh and if royals don't want you to dress up like a monkey in a gimp suit then I'm not sure what job would require it.

I've always found it's how you carry yourself in these situations which makes all the difference behave in a responsible professional manner and you'll get treated that way.

I really cannot see the point is dressing up like a tart to take photos....

erm no sorry david litchfield you can't take my portrait today you've got trainers on... kinda thing... it just doesn't happen.

Herbs seems to have a constant bee in their bonnet about how others look or act which isn't really anything to do with shooting...

It might be part of their process but it shouldn't be part of everyones or indeed even a relevant part...

Moreover tho they can dish out rather sniping and judgmental critics of peoples work on here they don't like it in return and throw toys out the pram.

still I'm in the middle of sorting out some shit for this wedding so am too busy too be here (curse you urban <shakes fist>)

 

[Herbsman.]

Still babbling on I see, Garf?

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Jesus wept, you're fucking dumb. (((((((Garf)))))))



It's listed as your homepage on your profile on this very site, Garf.
And aside from having no need, or will, to get into a pissing contest with you, if you think I'm about to link my business site with all my personal numbers & email addresses on a public bulletin board, next to my anonymous user name, then you're very much mistaken.
I have freely PM'd it to people from the photography forum on request, but unfortunately I trust you about as much as a dog on the loose in a sausage factory. So no chance there I'm afraid.

so your saying i can't list my portfolio site on urban although many others do as it's my only site and the space is there to list your home page...

what exactly am i missing here?

It's my profile I can have what i like on it can't I?

I'm not aware but perhaps someone will correct me that urban is known for it's passing trade in photography work where users get requests for work via their profiles.

and as a non advertising site if it constitutes advertising I'll happily remove it.

I still don't get how linking to my own site as my home page (which it is) is advertising tho other than you clutching at straws...

still we'll never know what your's is like cos you're too covert to even bother producing a link... right...

so put up or shut up son.

I don't give two shits whether you trust me or not that wasn't the case in point.

so feel free to anonymously continue to take pot shots you're clearly capable of dishing out but not in receiving which shows your candour really...

well that and marks you out as a cowardly spineless gimp whose all mouth and no trousers...

btw what's not to trust about someone looking at your site?

is it that fragile that if they look at it in the wrong way it blinks out of existence?

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Still babbling on I see, Garf?

still a muppet i see herbs...

whatcha wearing today I don't want to be responding to someone who's shabbily dressed it might affect their posts...

 

[Herbsman.]

Do you make this little sense this often?

 

[chainsaw cat]

Very, very badly paid.

Next?

Not paid at all in some cases. They certainly whine about forking out £50 for a full 2 pages worth of difficult to get pics to a freelance.

 

[tom_craggs]

I've always found it's how you carry yourself in these situations which makes all the difference behave in a responsible professional manner and you'll get treated that way.

Guess this is the key point really, for me what I wear being appropriate to cirmstance helps me do this but may not be neccesary for other people.

 

[Pie 1]

Right Garf, let's do this slowly shall we?

The original quote, from you, was:

I've never advertised my photo services since the age of 13

I then quoted you, adding a direct link to your website. That website advertises your photographic services.

The point of this Garf, was to illustrate a small, and admittedly cheap point, that you claiming to have not advertised your photographic services since the age of 13, wasn't entirely correct.

That's it. That's all there was to it.
Are you still with me, or would you like me to start at the beginning again?

btw what's not to trust about someone looking at your site?
Is it that fragile that if they look at it in the wrong way it blinks out of existence?

And you can stomp & puff & beat your chest all you like - i really couldn't give a monkey's - There is no way that I am putting my personal telephone numbers, email & address on a public fucking bulletin board full of random internet nutters such as your good self.
That's my prerogative "son", so you'll just have to eat it.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Right Garf, let's do this slowly shall we?

The original quote, from you, was:



I then quoted you, adding a direct link to your website. That website advertises your photographic services.

The point of this Garf, was to illustrate a small, and admittedly cheap point, that you claiming to have not advertised your photographic services since the age of 13, wasn't entirely correct.

That's it. That's all there was to it.
Are you still with me, or would you like me to start at the beginning again?

and my point is it's my home page it's not advertising unless urban is suddenly a haven for photographic and web work where by people gain work via the bulletin boards.

I'm sure if you were to google Photographic or web freelancers that urban wouldn't be the top ranked listing service for such things because that's not what the sites about.

It's not a point it's you attempting to construe something out of nothing in order to well I have no idea tbh make yourself look like a tit?

And you can stomp & puff & beat your chest all you like - i really couldn't give a monkey's - There is no way that I am putting my personal telephone numbers, email & address on a public fucking bulletin board full of random internet nutters such as your good self.
That's my prerogative "son", so you'll just have to eat it.

this is an entirely different point and I guess that you don't want other urbans to see your site fair enough I have no such qualms but then I don't assume that everyone here is a nutter who'd want to take my contact details and use them for nefarious purposes maybe because that would be the thinking of a paranoid self important prick maybe??

tbh pie i don't care one way or the other but if you're gonna take a swipe then you should at least pony up and be able to compete on a level playing field...

as i said it shows your candour...

I'll leave it at that...

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Do you make this little sense this often?

ok let's put it like this herbs.

If there was a thread started with the lines

No exaggeration, this black man looked like he was homeless. he had really disgusting looking trousers on and they were too short as well, it was as if he didn't have a clue how to dress to look good. And his shoes were really cheap trainers that were worn to fuck. I see him about town all the time taking photos of corporate wanker-type people that are in the city's main newspaper. Surely if you're regularly meeting corporate businesspeople you should dress smartly, I got bollocked for walking into a different paper's office in hoody and jeans before selling them some pictures and I'm not even their employee!!!!

get where the issue is yet?

what's how they look got to do with what they shoot?

really genuine question as you've couched it in these terms.

and more to the point, what precisely makes you qualified to make such assessments of other photographers work based on their looks?

why do you constantly feel the need to attack other photographers on this site, when your own work is lacking?

you haven't started a thread saying

man how little do jobbing local rag shooters get paid you've made a pointed attack on another photographer based entirely on their dress sense.

 

[Pie 1]

tbh pie i don't care one way or the other but if you're gonna take a swipe then you should at least pony up and be able to compete on a level playing field...

as i said it shows your candour...

I'll leave it at that...

Ahh, Sorry Garf for not wanting to join in your little interwebmachoshouty posturing games - I'm sure one of the other sandpits on urban will have someone to play with you soon though, "son"

 

[Herbsman.]

ok let's put it like this herbs.

If there was a thread started with the lines

No exaggeration, this black man looked like he was homeless. he had really disgusting looking trousers on and they were too short as well, it was as if he didn't have a clue how to dress to look good. And his shoes were really cheap trainers that were worn to fuck. I see him about town all the time taking photos of corporate wanker-type people that are in the city's main newspaper. Surely if you're regularly meeting corporate businesspeople you should dress smartly, I got bollocked for walking into a different paper's office in hoody and jeans before selling them some pictures and I'm not even their employee!!!!

get where the issue is yet?

Yep, that you're retarded? Is that it?

 

[Endeavour]

Not paid at all in some cases. They certainly whine about forking out £50 for a full 2 pages worth of difficult to get pics to a freelance.

A little side issue from the thrust of the thread.

In some local papers you see numbers on the photos whereby you can order prints of said picture through the paper. Does the photographer get any/all of this or just a flat fee?

 

[Refused as fuck]

That's pretty much it.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Yep, that you're retarded? Is that it?

there are your words defend them.

 

[chainsaw cat]

There are some right mardy fuckers on here.