# Are my photos good enough?



## puchu (Dec 27, 2015)

Hi guys,
I am a beginner in the field of photography, but I would like to be a pro. I really find my photo flat, not emotional, but many people like them... Could you tell me what do you think of my photos? Are they good enough to start a professional activity? Thanks in advance

Here some photos:
Das Pako


----------



## imagemaker46 (Dec 28, 2015)

Sure you can be a pro, you own a camera.


----------



## Gary A. (Dec 28, 2015)

What genre do you expect/desire to pursue? As a former pro, and as such maybe I have higher standards than most, but I saw nothing exceptional or promising ... Just a random collection of snapshots and not much story telling, emotion or display of pro-level execution.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying you don't have the ability to turn pro ... I'm saying I don't see it in your images.  Much of photography is craft, the more you shoot the greater your experience and skill ... And ultimately the better your images.  Consistency is important in any profession. The ability to consistently and repeatedly capture the exceptional image, day-in and day-out, upon command, it what separates the pro from the hobbyist.  Consistency starts with harmonizing with your equipment and understanding How to exploit all the elements of photography to capture your previsualized image.  It takes years to perfect one's craft whether it be painting, dance, writing, or photography.


----------



## KmH (Dec 28, 2015)

Where you are in the world (no location info in profile) has a lot to do with how much opportunity there is for being a pro photographer.

What do you consider is being a pro photographer?
While some consider that selling a photo makes you a 'pro', others consider being pro to means being an expert photographer that can produce whatever type of photograph a customer wants.

Staff photographer jobs working for magazines or other print publications basically no longer exist.
Those that used to be staff photographers went freelance, or into a different profession.

It gets tougher by the day to make a decent living from doing photography.


----------



## puchu (Dec 28, 2015)

Ok, thank you for your answers. I try to be clearer: when I look some works of pros, I say "wow!", whe I look at mine I say " gosh!", do you believe my photos are ugly? Do you see a particular problem in technic or composition that is ruing my pictures? Thanks in advance


----------



## john.margetts (Dec 29, 2015)

I see too much work on the computer. Photoshop (or whatever program you use) should be used to slightly adjust brightness and contrast. If you need more than that, delete the photograph and go back to the camera.

Sent from my A1-840 using Tapatalk


----------



## KmH (Dec 29, 2015)

While it is desirable to get a photograph as close to completely done in the camera, many types of photos simply don't allow that so that editing only entails slight adjustments to brightness and contrast even when the shot is nailed in the camera.

If you want critique and comment (C&C) on a specific image, post just that image.
You put a link to 20 or so varied genre photos and seem to be expecting people to give specific C&C.
A person spends 3 minutes evaluating and writing C&C on each of 20 photos would take 60 minutes to do so.

I can make a broad and general comment that IMO you need to control light quality and direction better in most your photos.


----------



## ronlane (Dec 29, 2015)

john.margetts said:


> I see too much work on the computer. Photoshop (or whatever program you use) should be used to slightly adjust brightness and contrast. If you need more than that, delete the photograph and go back to the camera.
> 
> Sent from my A1-840 using Tapatalk



This is the ideal situation. But I would bet you that most of the images that do well on flickr and 500px are at least mildly processed if not heavily processed in PS and/or LR.


----------



## Overread (Dec 29, 2015)

john.margetts said:


> I see too much work on the computer. Photoshop (or whatever program you use) should be used to slightly adjust brightness and contrast. If you need more than that, delete the photograph and go back to the camera.
> 
> Sent from my A1-840 using Tapatalk



My view is that editing is as much a tool to learn in depth as the camera is and that honestly with digital editing the editing side, even for minor work, is potentially more complicated; often because there are several methods to get to the same end result; each one having a different process and some slight differences in how it will render the final result and in how fine you can adjust it. 

So my advice would be even if you only plan to do minor editing you should aim to learn far more than you need to use. This gives you several advantages;
1) It means that you "choose" to use the level of editing you are using; rather than being forced to use that level because you don't know anything else.

2) It lets you do more editing if you need to. This isn't just about "fixing faults" its also about using the full potential of what you captured in the camera. As said above some shots are nearly impossible within the camera alone; some situations won't let you get the shot as you want - editing is there to help (especially if you're a professional and its what the client is paying you to get). 

3) It gives you a wider appreciation of different potential methods to the end result. This is important because its put more tools in your bag. More tools means more options which means you can produce your product, your photo, in a wider range of situations. 


Also note that good editing can be like good CGI in a film - its so good you don't notice it which often means its quite detailed and skilful. Even something like dealing with noise and sharpening can get very complicated - but if you're indoors in low light and you've got the shot at a high ISO then you're going to need skill in both and different tools and methods to bring the best out of your shot.


----------



## john.margetts (Dec 29, 2015)

I was looking at over-saturated colours and excessive sharpening which has caused haloing. I am certain that these pictures would be improved by much less processing.

Sent from my A1-840 using Tapatalk


----------



## Vtec44 (Dec 29, 2015)

As long as paying clients think that your photos are good enough, that's the important part.  I told one of my apprentices this, there will be clients in every stage of your photography career.  Liking a photo is one thing, will people actually pay fr it is another.  The hardest part s always finding the right clients.


----------



## Dave442 (Dec 29, 2015)

The Flickr site shows photos that date back to 2006. Are the dates accurate, the photo "Love, Festival dell'Oriente 2015" says it was taken Nov 22, 2012. 

The newer shots that do not have any EXIF data all look like snapshots of people or general shots of places with a website name plastered on the photos. 

Overall if this set of images was representative of a portfolio I don't think a prospective client would be able to identify if you are who they are looking for. 

I do sort of like Agropoli, because the man standing at the bottom of the stairs. The same for Portici with the boy looking down at his shadow (but needed to step to the side so the man in the background was not right behind the kid).


----------



## dennybeall (Dec 30, 2015)

If your client is happy with the memories you've captured and pays you for them, then the photos are good enough.
If you're looking to please other photographers then good luck with that. I've never seen a photo that couldn't be improved somehow. Just a little or a whole lot but always something that could have been better. One guy stacks 30 photos to get extreme depth and the next guy is going for all the Bokah he can get. I fight for no sun glare ever in anything and another person puts sun glare on purpose in a commercial wedding photo??????
If you did it on purpose it's right???


----------



## Shades of Blue (Jan 5, 2016)

People get really defensive over this subject, especially if they have put a lot of blood, sweat, and tears into their own photography businesses.  I tend to relate photography to the music business...because aspects of it are similar.

First you have the "bar band."  These are the guys that have fun, play their music, and get paid enough money to buy a new guitar every now and then.  I've been there and I knew I wasn't going to play arenas, but it was fun making money while it lasted.  This is also me with photography.  I take photos for friends and family and occasionally have a paying customer.  I wouldn't mind if my business grew, but I won't have my dreams crushed if it doesn't.

Secondly you have the bands who relocate to a good music town and have a part time job while trying to really get their name out there.  The best they usually hope for is opening for a big name band and they pull in some decent money, but not enough to not also have a part time job.  I'd say this is the majority of professional photographers who are serious about their craft.

Lastly, you've got the big time bands that make it.  Congratulations.  I'm also sure there are lots of exceptional photographers out there who excel at what they do and make enough money to live comfortably, if not better than they would at a desk all day.


I know that their are photographers out there who loathe the part timer with the new camera for Christmas.  My opinion is that if their pictures are good enough that someone will pay money for them, then it can't be all that bad.  The next time you have a night out at the bar with the guys/girls and are digging the music, be sure to remember that those guys aren't "professionals."


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 5, 2016)

Shades of Blue said:


> People get really defensive over this subject, especially if they have put a lot of blood, sweat, and tears into their own photography businesses.  I tend to relate photography to the music business...because aspects of it are similar.
> 
> First you have the "bar band."  These are the guys that have fun, play their music, and get paid enough money to buy a new guitar every now and then.  I've been there and I knew I wasn't going to play arenas, but it was fun making money while it lasted.  This is also me with photography.  I take photos for friends and family and occasionally have a paying customer.  I wouldn't mind if my business grew, but I won't have my dreams crushed if it doesn't.
> 
> ...


Yup,
as others have stated before.
If the clients are happy then all is good.
But photographs to photographers can be reviewed in technical details of photographers.  Or they are be reviewed by artistic measurements. Or by "current trendy stuff" measurements.  Every one is going to review stuff differently based on their background, knowledge and experience and specific techniques.


----------



## Shades of Blue (Jan 5, 2016)

astroNikon said:


> Shades of Blue said:
> 
> 
> > People get really defensive over this subject, especially if they have put a lot of blood, sweat, and tears into their own photography businesses.  I tend to relate photography to the music business...because aspects of it are similar.
> ...




Agreed!  Hey, guitar players are the WORST.  I can't tell you how many times I've had people come up to me after a gig and be like "dude I play guitar, do you know how to play this and so on..."  It's like a never ending pecker matching episode.  Everyone thinks they are the best guitar player in the universe.  When you find a guitar player or photographer who is down to earth and can admit their flaws, then you've probably found a pretty dang good guitar player/ photographer...


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 5, 2016)

Shades of Blue said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > Shades of Blue said:
> ...


Ha!   same with saxophonists and clarinetists.   I keep quiet about my guitar stuff (still learning a lot) but I play an early '93 Epiphone.


----------



## Shades of Blue (Jan 5, 2016)

astroNikon said:


> Shades of Blue said:
> 
> 
> > astroNikon said:
> ...



I've been playing guitar for 15 years, and I can tell you that there is nothing wrong with a good 'ol Epi!!!  People tend to try and mask their skill level behind an expensive guitar!  But in all honesty, there are a lot of similarities between guitar players and photographers.  The more confident the guitar player, the more gracious and willing to share their knowledge with others.


----------



## Overread (Jan 5, 2016)

I think the key is to consider a few aspects:

1) Is the client happy? In professional work this is a major, but not only, consideration. Because this is the one that pays the bills. However you also have to consider the clients as a body not just an individual. Are your clients the right ones to be listening to? Ergo is your client today your client for tomorrow as well - if you're currently doing friends and family but want to do companies you've got to consider about building your skills and portfolio higher than what most family are happy with. 

2) The client is happy, but can be client be MORE happy with little or no cost of production increase? Clearly any business generally aims to please the client for the least possible cost so as to reap the most reward from the profits and to deliver the best price to the client. However in something like photography changes to exposure, composition or editing workflow can result in big jumps in quality for no material investment nor production cost increase. Clearly this is something to work on - especially if you're considering point 1 and thus aiming always at a higher level of client. 

3) Caring. Professionals and hobbyists alike like to think others in their craft care about their craft. Indeed the idea that someone else is working, charging money and not "caring" about what they produce is a shocking thing to some. That someone could be so slaved to money; so devoid of passion; so empty of soul etc..... that they don't "care" or project caring about their product. 
This gets people a lot more than they realise; its why some get angry and frustrated at others not reaching their full potential. 

4) No photo is perfect, but there reaches a point where perfection is more a question of taste and style than of raw skill and mechanics. Thus there will always be critical points to raise; however if your client is happy and if your skill level is as high as you need it to be for today's and tomorrow's client then you're doing well.

5) Stagnation - its easy to stagnate; to develop a series of skills that reach a plateaux where you can work without having to push the limits. This is risky as once you reach this point its very easy for little things to slip. You get complacent and lazy as you're not learning and just working; the drive to improve is weaker and thus you get lazy. Happens to us all in everything we do; this is why companies have refresher training, sure everyone "knows" what to do but they oft need reminders to remember what they "Should" do. For artists it can also serve as a regular period of time to reflect and try new things; to branch out with a new style or to experiment. Even if it doesn't become your main method and you still use the old methods you've at least refreshed yourself and stopped adding to the pile of little errors/lazy points 

6) YOU. Clients have been mentioned lots; but YOU have to be happy too. Happy with what you produce, how you produce it and with your general standard of work. And again you have to avoid point 5 of complacency every so often too. 

7) Peers/contemparies - actually these people don't have to be happy unless you want them to be. This is more about you than them and comes at the very end of the process. 
That doesn't mean you ignore them, it just means that you have to put things into priorities and if you're meeting all the other points then this comes near the end. Of course this body of people is also a prime resource for help if you're not meeting those earlier goals and can really help shape and improve your work because its the most likely area of all to give you actual advice (this ignores yourself and self-learning of course). Clients are good at saying they like/dislike something but many will often lack the experience and vocabulary to articulate their thoughts and relay them to you and even themselves as to what they do and don't like about your work. You'll get basic feedback from them at best; only if you really mess up will you likely get more detail but likely nothing about methods to resolve the problems (that is your job, professional photographer).


----------



## Overread (Jan 5, 2016)

Shades of Blue said:


> The more confident the guitar player, the more gracious and willing to share their knowledge with others.



This is generally true; especially as the more confident and experienced tend to also realise that there are few if any real "secrets". That said I think professional VS hobbist also comes into this. For better or worse people get defensive about their skills to their community. It's why a pro might help someone in another county/country/discipline but if it gets to their own ground they might clam up more so. Mostly if they are worried about their market slot - of course part of that is confidence too! Just a different kind I think - business confidence not just craft.


----------



## puchu (Jan 5, 2016)

ok, thanks


----------

