 }})
Oddly, it might not bother me as much if I were a full time pro at this making my living at it. I would bite the bullet and get into weddings as well as trying my hand at free lance stuff for magazines.
However, since I have a full time job that already keeps me busy for 45-60 hours a week and I have two great kids under the age of 5 who still like to hang with Dad, I just don't have the time or necessity to get into it. I tired a doing weddings. Once. I might try it again some day but only if I have a chance to work with a real pro for a while which I doubt will happen. I did large scale magazine like stuff in college when I worked for the yearbook for beer money too. That is tough to do if it isn't your number one priority.
If we get down to brass tacks, most pros probably look at me and consider me part of the problem they have making money at this thing so I should probably be careful about who I am throwing stones at. Of course, having said that, I have seen work from guys who shoot full time for a living that I just shake my head at and wonder why someone paid them for it. Guess the lesson there is everyone has an opinion and everyone's tastes differ.
I would also be lying if I didn't cop to being a bit melancholy over losing the romance in the art. I have done it both ways and I can tell you that digital is cold in comparison. Easier, sure but there is something to said for effort and discomfort. I really miss the dull, warm orange glow of a darkroom safelight, the buzz I get from the first look at the contact sheet as it comes up on the paper floating in the developer and the excitement of bending the light of the enlarger to my will as I turn out photo after photo in a dark hole.
Digital can't compare to that.
And I fear that true "still" photography is dying and doing so a little faster every day. Will photogs take the time to consider the composition as much if they are shooting 20 or 30 seconds of video to pull the still from? Will true stills even still be wanted by anyone or will we all hang 16 x 20 digital frames over our fireplace and loop those 20 seconds of the family rather than a single static shot? And finally, will guys like me, who love the still photograph, still be able to get equipment to take our prize shots with in a couple of decades or will still cameras go the way of Kodachrome and be gone forever?
I guess, if pressed into being honest, I don't dislike what technology is doing to something I love so much as I fear that it might just kill the parts of it that made me fall in love in the first place.
However, since I have a full time job that already keeps me busy for 45-60 hours a week and I have two great kids under the age of 5 who still like to hang with Dad, I just don't have the time or necessity to get into it. I tired a doing weddings. Once. I might try it again some day but only if I have a chance to work with a real pro for a while which I doubt will happen. I did large scale magazine like stuff in college when I worked for the yearbook for beer money too. That is tough to do if it isn't your number one priority.
If we get down to brass tacks, most pros probably look at me and consider me part of the problem they have making money at this thing so I should probably be careful about who I am throwing stones at. Of course, having said that, I have seen work from guys who shoot full time for a living that I just shake my head at and wonder why someone paid them for it. Guess the lesson there is everyone has an opinion and everyone's tastes differ.
I would also be lying if I didn't cop to being a bit melancholy over losing the romance in the art. I have done it both ways and I can tell you that digital is cold in comparison. Easier, sure but there is something to said for effort and discomfort. I really miss the dull, warm orange glow of a darkroom safelight, the buzz I get from the first look at the contact sheet as it comes up on the paper floating in the developer and the excitement of bending the light of the enlarger to my will as I turn out photo after photo in a dark hole.
Digital can't compare to that.
And I fear that true "still" photography is dying and doing so a little faster every day. Will photogs take the time to consider the composition as much if they are shooting 20 or 30 seconds of video to pull the still from? Will true stills even still be wanted by anyone or will we all hang 16 x 20 digital frames over our fireplace and loop those 20 seconds of the family rather than a single static shot? And finally, will guys like me, who love the still photograph, still be able to get equipment to take our prize shots with in a couple of decades or will still cameras go the way of Kodachrome and be gone forever?
I guess, if pressed into being honest, I don't dislike what technology is doing to something I love so much as I fear that it might just kill the parts of it that made me fall in love in the first place.
