I wanted to let other photographers know about a particularly offensive television commercial I saw recently in the Philadelphia PA market area.
The commercial is for a Panasonic point & shoot digital camera and goes something like this:
A "nature" photographer is seen in the "wild" on his knees, with a camera bag and lenses near by making a lens change (going to a 200 zoom) to his tripod- mounted DSLR camera to photograph a raptor that is poised on the landscape. ( I can't remember the exact bird, probably a hawk)
Next, a young couple out hiking enters the area, wearing smiles and day packs with the man carrying a dinky little Panasonic p&s - with rear screen LCD of course.
They stop, the young guy says something like "hey, wow, look!, points the little p&s at the bird, "click", and proclaims "Nailed It!" as the "nature" photog looks on haplessly, lens in hand.
Cut to "simulated" photo of bird taken with p&s....looks like it was shot with a 600mm. The bird then flies off.
Young guy points camera again and makes a MPEG video of the bird flying off as he says " Got that, too" or something equally revolting.
This is just another example of how the art and craft of photography in general and professional photography specifically has been demeaned by the advertising industry and the media - which oddly enough relies on professional photography of all kinds to get it's message across.
Of course it's only TV, a wasteland of garbage, but the onslaught on our art and craft continues.
I've seen it in news and sports photography - which I shot for 30 years - as "I reporters" and worst of all, images from cell phone cameras are published on the web and in some cases, newspapers. Photography at some publications is thought so little of that reporters are occasionally handed a small prosumer DSLR or worse yet a p&s and told to shoot images to go with their story. Why incur the cost of sending a photographer? One person can do both jobs.
The wedding photography market is suffering greatly from an influx of amateur photographers with prosumer DSLR's and a laptop computer. They shoot weddings for a price that can't turn a profit - there by diluting the market for qualified wedding photographers who earn a living shooting weddings. Think: Ashton Kucher wielding his Nikon-whatever around at a wedding reception. Wow! Ashton is so cool.
The public relations photography market has been under attack from the cell phone camera for the last few years. A close friend of mine - someone with 30+ years of experience, bid on a corporation's CEO-appearance photo-op only to be told by the public relations flak " No thanks, we'll have someone there with a cell phone camera, I'm sure." This is God's honest truth.
To me, nature photography is one of the most artful forms of photography I can think of. It requires skill, patience, knowledge of your subjects and photographic methods and of course suitable equipment. The results can be fabulous.
As everyone on NPN knows, a great moment doesn't fly out of the sky and "boom!" you capture it with a "digital camera". Photography doesn't have to be complicated! You don't need expensive equipment to make a great "picture"! You don't have to be a "pro" to get that once-in-a-life-time-photo! Hell!, it's easy with a "digital".
That's the exact message this offensive commercial is trying to get across. And this kind of message (along with other factors) has helped to drive down the rates we photographers are paid for our time and efforts.
Yet another kind of photography under attack. And that bothers me greatly because photography has been my passion and my livelihood for almost my entire life.
I take it as a personal attack on my art, my craft and my sense of accomplishment when I see what I am and what I do portrayed as clumsy, out of style and replaceable.
I hope that my fellow photographers feel the same sense of outrage that I do.
The "nature photographer" should have been prepared and not on his knees praying that he will get the image. I thought the commercial was pretty funny, especially when the man with the Panasonic actually took the camera and positioned it in front of the one on the tripod.
I don't feel any outrage at all. F8 and be there.
But I will agree with you that you don't need expensive equipment to take that once in a lifetime image.
Maybe with all the advances in technology and what customers are willing to buy in the way of images, it may be the time to look at and revise your business model.
Haven't seen the ad.
But it's a well know fact that the great picture moment occurs when you're changing lenses. So the guy kneeling behind his tripod missed it and the Panasonic P&S guy nailed it. Happens every time.
Posted by John W. Wall on April 1, 2010 at 6:48 PM
I laughed out loud at that commercial. Outraged? Is this an April Fool's Day question?
I haven't seen this commercial but I think it's great! I hope everyone who wants to be a photographer as a profession goes out and buys this little p&s camera and expects nothing but those same results! I'm sure it takes shots not only as good as a dslr but probably better! After all the talent of photography is in the equipment not the person using it. I thought everyone knew that.
I think I will sell my dslr and go buy 2 of these, that way I can take twice as many pictures at the same time, one in each hand. Snap... Snap... Nailed'em.
its either an aprils fool joke or (meaning no assault here) you were sitting in your room alone for too long and should go out more often. don't get outraged by stuff like THAT! I mean, c'mon...
I've seen guys take images with snappies and cell phones right next to me with my 4x5 gear and then print it real large and hang it next to mine in a gallery - with the same quality!!! (ah - ok - sorry, forgot its april 2nd already...)
georg
Posted by Frank Winters on April 2, 2010 at 10:24 AM
This Ad is an over simplification (like most ads that aren't outright lies) but there is a kernel of truth to it. I was the guy struggling with the tripod and big lens. I sold the lens but kept the tripod. Switched from Canon to Panasonic.
Now I use a Panasonic LX3 and get good results. Also use a G1. If the task fits the equipment you can get wonderful photos. Cartier-Bresson (ever hear of him?) used a hand held Leica with a 35mm lens and conquered the photographic world (and the Nazis).
My friends and I formed a cooperative art gallery in town -- doing well thanks -- and about a third to half of what I show and sell was taken with a P&S (Canon G9 and now the Panasonic LX3). Street scenes -- a fav or mine -- lend themselves well to the LX3 (or is it the other way around?)
On April 11 (double fools?) I'm giving a talk in the gallery -- one that I've given before -- its called "Photographs taken on the run -- making art with your (simple) digital camera." I enjoy talking to people about not over looking their pocksized marvel.
Yes the commercial is silly but I agree with F8 and be there and the best camera is the one you have with you.
life isn't fair-which sucks. The best way to combat the influx of amateur photographers is to specialize and make your photographs unique. I do feel that the commercial had a hint of false advertising. I also think it displayed bad photo etiquette to stand in front of another photographer while shooting. Maybe it's just funny. I didn't see it.
" The best way to combat the influx of amateur photographers is to specialize and make your photographs unique. "
Yes. But -- 'amateurs" can do the same thing with a disposable, cardboard camera if they have the patience and vision. And who are these amateurs anyway? I'll hazard a guess that most of the photographers here on NP do what they do for love more than money -- one definition of amateur. So is it the influx of us that you are concerned with Erik?
Anyway your advice is good -- make your photos unique. And I'll add that we shouldn't worry about gear quite so much.
Discussion
10 repliesThe commercial is for a Panasonic point & shoot digital camera and goes something like this:
A "nature" photographer is seen in the "wild" on his knees, with a camera bag and lenses near by making a lens change (going to a 200 zoom) to his tripod- mounted DSLR camera to photograph a raptor that is poised on the landscape. ( I can't remember the exact bird, probably a hawk)
Next, a young couple out hiking enters the area, wearing smiles and day packs with the man carrying a dinky little Panasonic p&s - with rear screen LCD of course.
They stop, the young guy says something like "hey, wow, look!, points the little p&s at the bird, "click", and proclaims "Nailed It!" as the "nature" photog looks on haplessly, lens in hand.
Cut to "simulated" photo of bird taken with p&s....looks like it was shot with a 600mm. The bird then flies off.
Young guy points camera again and makes a MPEG video of the bird flying off as he says " Got that, too" or something equally revolting.
This is just another example of how the art and craft of photography in general and professional photography specifically has been demeaned by the advertising industry and the media - which oddly enough relies on professional photography of all kinds to get it's message across.
Of course it's only TV, a wasteland of garbage, but the onslaught on our art and craft continues.
I've seen it in news and sports photography - which I shot for 30 years - as "I reporters" and worst of all, images from cell phone cameras are published on the web and in some cases, newspapers. Photography at some publications is thought so little of that reporters are occasionally handed a small prosumer DSLR or worse yet a p&s and told to shoot images to go with their story. Why incur the cost of sending a photographer? One person can do both jobs.
The wedding photography market is suffering greatly from an influx of amateur photographers with prosumer DSLR's and a laptop computer. They shoot weddings for a price that can't turn a profit - there by diluting the market for qualified wedding photographers who earn a living shooting weddings. Think: Ashton Kucher wielding his Nikon-whatever around at a wedding reception. Wow! Ashton is so cool.
The public relations photography market has been under attack from the cell phone camera for the last few years. A close friend of mine - someone with 30+ years of experience, bid on a corporation's CEO-appearance photo-op only to be told by the public relations flak " No thanks, we'll have someone there with a cell phone camera, I'm sure." This is God's honest truth.
To me, nature photography is one of the most artful forms of photography I can think of. It requires skill, patience, knowledge of your subjects and photographic methods and of course suitable equipment. The results can be fabulous.
As everyone on NPN knows, a great moment doesn't fly out of the sky and "boom!" you capture it with a "digital camera". Photography doesn't have to be complicated! You don't need expensive equipment to make a great "picture"! You don't have to be a "pro" to get that once-in-a-life-time-photo! Hell!, it's easy with a "digital".
That's the exact message this offensive commercial is trying to get across. And this kind of message (along with other factors) has helped to drive down the rates we photographers are paid for our time and efforts.
Yet another kind of photography under attack. And that bothers me greatly because photography has been my passion and my livelihood for almost my entire life.
I take it as a personal attack on my art, my craft and my sense of accomplishment when I see what I am and what I do portrayed as clumsy, out of style and replaceable.
I hope that my fellow photographers feel the same sense of outrage that I do.
I don't feel any outrage at all. F8 and be there.
But I will agree with you that you don't need expensive equipment to take that once in a lifetime image.
Maybe with all the advances in technology and what customers are willing to buy in the way of images, it may be the time to look at and revise your business model.
Or is this an April Fool's post?
But it's a well know fact that the great picture moment occurs when you're changing lenses. So the guy kneeling behind his tripod missed it and the Panasonic P&S guy nailed it. Happens every time.
I think I will sell my dslr and go buy 2 of these, that way I can take twice as many pictures at the same time, one in each hand. Snap... Snap... Nailed'em.
The results will speak for themselves.
I've seen guys take images with snappies and cell phones right next to me with my 4x5 gear and then print it real large and hang it next to mine in a gallery - with the same quality!!! (ah - ok - sorry, forgot its april 2nd already...)
georg
Now I use a Panasonic LX3 and get good results. Also use a G1. If the task fits the equipment you can get wonderful photos. Cartier-Bresson (ever hear of him?) used a hand held Leica with a 35mm lens and conquered the photographic world (and the Nazis).
My friends and I formed a cooperative art gallery in town -- doing well thanks -- and about a third to half of what I show and sell was taken with a P&S (Canon G9 and now the Panasonic LX3). Street scenes -- a fav or mine -- lend themselves well to the LX3 (or is it the other way around?)
On April 11 (double fools?) I'm giving a talk in the gallery -- one that I've given before -- its called "Photographs taken on the run -- making art with your (simple) digital camera." I enjoy talking to people about not over looking their pocksized marvel.
Yes the commercial is silly but I agree with F8 and be there and the best camera is the one you have with you.
Cheers,
Frank
" The best way to combat the influx of amateur photographers is to specialize and make your photographs unique. "
Yes. But -- 'amateurs" can do the same thing with a disposable, cardboard camera if they have the patience and vision. And who are these amateurs anyway? I'll hazard a guess that most of the photographers here on NP do what they do for love more than money -- one definition of amateur. So is it the influx of us that you are concerned with Erik?
Anyway your advice is good -- make your photos unique. And I'll add that we shouldn't worry about gear quite so much.
Cheers,
Frank