Photography Topic thread...

explicit4u said:
Sooooo, I've been contacted by some independent publisher who wants to create what they called a coffee-table style book of the London Riots. They have not confirmed how many images they would like to use but they did email me and asked if I wanted a flat rate or a percentage of the sales should some images be used.

I've never had any experience with selling photos so I'm not sure what would be the best option for me. They also mentioned that I would retain all rights to the images used. They look like a very small company so I'm not sure what option would make the most sense financially. Any ideas?
Click to expand...

did they give you an idea of what percentage or flat rate they were offering?
 
You say that, one christmas I got a present from Dad's gf, was a big heavy book, had a picture of a child in a 3rd world country on the front, had a flick through, such a depressing book.

Inside the front cover "Hi Jake, saw this and thought of you, Maxine x"

Nice :/
 
Phate said:
You say that, one christmas I got a present from Dad's gf, was a big heavy book, had a picture of a child in a 3rd world country on the front, had a flick through, such a depressing book.

Inside the front cover "Hi Jake, saw this and thought of you, Maxine x"

Nice :/
Click to expand...

There's quite a lot of awful photography books out. My mum just showed me one of my town, which has clearly been taken over the space of a year or so, and with an inexpensive camera, or with poor lenses at the very least. The skill of the photographer, whose name I didn't even bother to look for in the book, was dire to say in the least. One shot that I saw was supposedly of a church. You wouldn't know as 60% of the photo was the building next to it and trees, bushes and lamp posts hiding the actual church.

It makes me wonder how these people get asked to do this sort of thing. I'd make a fortune with my average at best photos, if monkeys like that one are cashing in.
 
Mmm Lightroom is such a cheat. I don't think I can publish any of my pictures without touching them up.
 
olv said:
Can't fault that at all. Good choices. The 17-55 is a quality, well regarded lens so as well as being brilliant you get the added bonus of it holding it's value well too.
Click to expand...

i have the tamron equivalent. sorry if i was a bit late but i would have recomended that purely for two reasons.

1. My tamron f2,8 17-50mm has teh exact same IQ as yours
2. it is half the price of the canon equivalent.

The only minor issue is that the build quality and AF is not as good as the canon one.

But with the money spent on that canon lens you could have got the tamron plus a 85mm f1.8 canon prime OR the tamron plus the money left to get a 7d instead of a 60d. anyways enjoy your purchase. dont make you feel you regretted your choice because the canon lens is very very good and so is the camera. i have a 400d that takes beutiful pics and my mate said i should stick with it as all u need for a DSLR is shutter, apparture, white balence and ISO settings and your good to go.
 
jonneymendoza said:
i have the tamron equivalent. sorry if i was a bit late but i would have recomended that purely for two reasons.

1. My tamron f2,8 17-50mm has teh exact same IQ as yours
2. it is half the price of the canon equivalent.

The only minor issue is that the build quality and AF is not as good as the canon one.

But with the money spent on that canon lens you could have got the tamron plus a 85mm f1.8 canon prime OR the tamron plus the money left to get a 7d instead of a 60d. anyways enjoy your purchase. dont make you feel you regretted your choice because the canon lens is very very good and so is the camera. i have a 400d that takes beutiful pics and my mate said i should stick with it as all u need for a DSLR is shutter, apparture, white balence and ISO settings and your good to go.
Click to expand...

But you have no is though :) and Tamron's quality control is a bit hit and miss due to them reverse engineering their lenses. But still Tamrons offering is very decent, but if you have the money the canon is very very much worth it
 
ElDude said:
It makes me wonder how these people get asked to do this sort of thing. I'd make a fortune with my average at best photos, if monkeys like that one are cashing in.
Click to expand...

Probably because like a lot of things, technology has allowed people to 'have a go'.

Web Design is probably the worst offender for this kind of thing.
 
Nexus said:
Probably because like a lot of things, technology has allowed people to 'have a go'.

Web Design is probably the worst offender for this kind of thing.
Click to expand...

I still haven't put my site up yet, and to be honest I'm not sure I want to, looking at my photos recently :D
 
Going to Italy on Thursday to shoot a wedding Friday...pressures starting to build to say the least! :eek:
 
I have a rule - no wedding photography for family, direct colleagues or very close friends.

different topic, in a 48hr spell (fri to sat) i did a wedding, a modelling shoot and a party.... was so knackered by the end! Photos came out really well though.... heres the worst of the lot:

p169859902-3.jpg


Without the censored sign its quite horrific....
 
Last edited:
"Content protected by owner" :p

Sounds great though! I would've liked to have got into sports event photography but never got anywhere, so nice one! :)
 
Rojin said:
..and your wife is your second shooter? Result! :D
Click to expand...

yes... unfortunately she seems to take better photos than me. Whilst mine are normally technically good, she always seems to spot 'that moment'. I give her the 70-200mm and she snaps away if a second shooter has been requested.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom