Band Photos - 'Free' often means CRAP

#1 05-23-2010, 06:15 PM

So my band wants to have photos taken. A close personal friend of mine is a professional photographer who's just so happy that I'm playing in a band, he's willing to do the shoot at a half-day rate a fraction of what he normally charges. And this guy is pretty damn good too. Published plenty of places.

However . . . yeah, you guessed it. The singer knows a guy who's trying to get into band photography and is willing to do the shoot for free, as long as he can watermark all the photos. etc . . .

So let's see, we get a real pro for a few dollars, or some 'free with a watermark' amateur . . .

My reply from the band is . . . well, this guy here says he's willing to do the shoot for free, you know, and . . .

Really? REALLY?!! You're not willing to shell out 30-35 bucks apiece and KNOW you're getting something good? You'd rather take a chance on 'free' guy and his stupid watermark across your photos?

For Pete's sake, dudes . . . if it's about the money, get a freakin' job. Quality work doesn't come free in any medium.

What am I gonna do with these mo's?

genstormbringer · #2 05-23-2010, 06:27 PM

you can't win this argument they are mo's

pasta4lnch · #3 05-23-2010, 06:33 PM

some things you just shouldnt skimp on. I'm "life on a budget" these days, but sometimes ya gotta spend $$ to make $$

elgecko · #4 05-23-2010, 06:42 PM

Do the free ones...if they suck, hire your friend.

#5 05-23-2010, 06:44 PM

It's like . . . if you want to be a pro in any aspect of life, you need to hang with pros, you know? If you want to stay an amateur, hang with amateurs.

Every small business person I know who has a website designed by their 'nephew' or something for 50 bucks has a crappy website.

ryognbass · #6 05-23-2010, 06:48 PM

I agree with you completely. Go with the pro always.

what band are you with?

elgecko · #7 05-23-2010, 06:50 PM

What, do you get a "finder's fee" or something"?

clmayhew · #8 05-23-2010, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elgecko

Do the free ones...if they suck, hire your friend.

This. Best case scenario: You end up with pics you like, random guy gets something for his portfolio and you can offer him a couple of bucks for images with no watermarks. Worst case scenario: The pics blow, random guy still has pics for his portfolio which will blow and you hire your friend. No harm, no foul as I see it.

YMMV

M0ses · #9 05-23-2010, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clmayhew

This. Best case scenario: You end up with pics you like, random guy gets something for his portfolio and you can offer him a couple of bucks for images with no watermarks. Worst case scenario: The pics blow, random guy still has pics for his portfolio which will blow and you hire your friend. No harm, no foul as I see it.

YMMV

This. What's the big deal? If it's free, it's worth a shot. Nothing to lose but a few hours. And who says they're gonna suck, anyway? Everyone has to start somewhere. IMHO you're being a bit snobby.

Alucard817 · #10 05-23-2010, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elgecko

Do the free ones...if they suck, hire your friend.

i agree.
OP if the watermark ones suck then go with the pro, maybe work a deal with the amateur (if the photo's look good) to remove the watermark.

DWBass · #11 05-23-2010, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elgecko

Do the free ones...if they suck, hire your friend.

^^^^^THIS^^^^^

Bongolation · #12 05-23-2010, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Band Photos - 'Free' often means CRAP

"Expensive" usually means crap, too.

Seriously.

pklima · #13 05-24-2010, 12:26 AM

There are some things bands don't have to pay for; beer and photos are among them. But it's sometimes worth paying for them anyway. Though not always... at my brother's wedding they hired a professional photographer and ended up with better photos taken by me using a camera borrowed from an uncle. And I'm not even an amateur photographer. So, try the free guy.

One of my bands got lucky - we got a free amateur photographer who was paying a professional photographer for instruction and for loaning his lighting setup. The pro guy took some pics, too, though we haven't gotten those from him yet.

trowaclown · #14 05-24-2010, 12:50 AM

I say give the amateur a chance. I've worked with them outside of a band context (committee photoshoots on a budget etc) and some are real gems.

Maybe shoot with the professional first to get a feel of how it goes, so that you can maximise your time with the amateur afterwards? Like what they said, you can always pay him if his photos work out and get the watermark removed.

TortillaChip520 · #15 05-24-2010, 12:51 AM

When my band paid for our photoshoot, we got a whole profile layout too.

i_got_a_mohawk · #16 05-24-2010, 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elgecko

Do the free ones...if they suck, hire your friend.

Yup, makes sense!

phatbass · #17 05-24-2010, 04:49 AM

I used to go through this fight whenever I got in a serious band. Or a band that *thinks* they're serious.
Everyone's got a friend who can do photos/posters/garage recordings for free. And you usually get what you pay for.

But OTOH I've never regretted it when I've paid a pro who actually knows what the heck they're doing

Go with the professional...

I'd rather pay a pro and *KNOW* I'm gonna get a decent selection of good shots to choose from. He'll know what works in a shot from a publishing/printing point of view, and a bunch of other stuff an enthusiastic "camera owner" won't even think of.

One Bad Monkey · #18 05-24-2010, 04:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elgecko

Do the free ones...if they suck, hire your friend.

At some point, all of the photographers making the big bucks were small time guys. If you can, ask to see some work they've done before committing to anything. That may be enough to have the other guys in the band agree that in this case, spending the money is a wiser investment in the band. Or maybe, you'll see the guy's portfolio and say "Wow! He's really good!"

ericw · #19 05-24-2010, 06:10 AM

What kind of photos? Live performance or promo shots? Obviously looking at a portfolio is all you need to do to make your decision.

Nobody looking at your photos cares about the 'stupid' watermark. Usually it is just something small and fashionable in the corner.

Don't knock amatuers. The difference between 'pro' and 'amatuer' photographers is often just the choice to make photography the main source of income - not necessarily talent. Most people wouldn't know a great photo from a good photo if it smacked them in the face anyhow. Especially when it comes to lighting promo shots.

PSPookie · #20 05-24-2010, 06:30 AM

Here's something to consider: time

For me and most of the folks I know, time is at a premium. I would spend the money just to up the odds that we can get the job done well in one session.

Then again, I have a full-time day job and 2 kids under 3. Your situation may be significantly different.

I often use a simple formula for figuring out whether something is worth my time: if the cost per hour of having someone do the work for me is worth less than my free time (I value my free time at my overtime pay rate) then I go that route. Otherwise, I do it mysellf. The same concept could apply here.

If you have the time to check out the free option first then go for it. If not; go with the pro whose work, I assume, you are familiar with.