# "P Stands for Professional" or does it?



## Austin Greene (Jan 8, 2015)

I'm sure this has already been discussed here, yet when searching for a previous post I couldn't find one.

Yesterday, I learned about Joe Buissink. Really I more just came across him speaking in a B&H video on YouTube. You see, I've been wanting to expand into shooting weddings for some time now. I've grown sick of seeing crap images on local photography Facebook pages, and I've steadily become determined to push them out of the local market.

But that's besides the point. The question here, comes from what I learned about Joe, or "Uncle Joe" as he calls himself. The guy is incredibly successful. If there is a definition for a "winner" in the wedding photography game, this guy is it. He shoots around the world, and his clients range from Jessica Simpson, to Michael Jordan. _*The surprise came when I learned that he shoots almost exclusively in Auto,*_ and has for the past 18 years.

We're all taught, "Get out of Auto", "Stay in Manual", or "Learn about Av/Tv" from such an early stage, to see a master in his own right using Auto mode seemed like blasphemy. 2 hours of listening to him speak in his video later, and I'm finding his logic to be, surprisingly, spot on.

I can't say I don't fully understand why he'd shoot in Auto vs Av or Tv modes, but at the end of the day the guy gets the gigs, and he gets the results. It's a tough pill to swallow, this whole "shoot in Auto" thing, but I'm finding myself considering what I'll do during my first weddings more and more.

*So, what about everyone else? What are your thoughts? Do you ever shoot in full Auto? Is it blasphemy, or just a technique to focus more on content then technique, as Joe suggests? After all, isn't it true that "P" does mean "Professional" in his case? *

P.S: I should mention that he does not endorse spray and pray, and that that is an entirely separate topic which really doesn't fit into this discussion.


----------



## runnah (Jan 8, 2015)

I think that any blanket statement regarding an "art", with the exception of pointing the camera the right way, should be taking with a large grain of salt. Do what ever floats your boat and gets you results that you and any clients you have are happy with.

I dislike shooters who do things "only one way" as I think it's foolish and puts unnecessary restraints on the shooters and compromises what they and their camera can do.


----------



## JacaRanda (Jan 8, 2015)

runnah said:


> Do what ever floats your boat and gets you results that you and any clients you have are happy with.



It sounds so simple.  It is so simple, yet.......


----------



## runnah (Jan 8, 2015)

JacaRanda said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > Do what ever floats your boat and gets you results that you and any clients you have are happy with.
> ...



That is why I dislike those who make a big stink about what they do or do not use.


----------



## D-B-J (Jan 8, 2015)

runnah said:


> I dislike shooters who do things "only one way" as I think it's foolish and puts unnecessary restraints on the shooters and compromises what they and their camera can do.



THIS.


----------



## dennybeall (Jan 8, 2015)

He most likely has "THE" top of the line cameras, flashes and assistants so sure, he can use the Auto settings on his cameras. He doesn't have fast action. He doesn't have need for extreme DOF, either shallow or deep. He's posing the shot where and when he wants it. He's concentrating on creativity and doesn't need to be distracted by the f-stops and shutter speeds.
It's not "WRONG" to use AUTO, it's just wrong to not know when to Not use Auto.


----------



## photoguy99 (Jan 8, 2015)

He's got a good sense of timing, an eye for an excellent setup, and some very wide lenses.

Stand in the right place and squash the masher at the right time. Everything else is details.


----------



## ronlane (Jan 8, 2015)

It's alluded to above and has been said in a lot of places that I've seen. You've got to know the "rules" and then you can break the rules.

That's the artistic side of it. As long as he gets the shots and people like you mention will pay his asking price, then I guess P really is Profession mode in his hands.


----------



## Austin Greene (Jan 8, 2015)

dennybeall said:


> He most likely has "THE" top of the line cameras, flashes and assistants so sure, he can use the Auto settings on his cameras. He doesn't have fast action. He doesn't have need for extreme DOF, either shallow or deep. He's posing the shot where and when he wants it. He's concentrating on creativity and doesn't need to be distracted by the f-stops and shutter speeds.
> It's not "WRONG" to use AUTO, it's just wrong to not know when to Not use Auto.



A couple things, because I think this needs to be addressed.
- He's shooting a 5DmkIII, nothing out of the ordinary. Rarely uses flash.
- These are weddings, plenty of fast action.
- He doesn't pose 90% of the images. He doesn't do formals (secondary does them).
- Google his name and check out his images, gives a sense for the environment he's working in. 


Totally agree with your last line, besides that. I agree with that mentality. More just curious what other people think besides myself. No convincing needed here


----------



## Austin Greene (Jan 8, 2015)

ronlane said:


> It's alluded to above and has been said in a lot of places that I've seen. You've got to know the "rules" and then you can break the rules.
> 
> That's the artistic side of it. As long as he gets the shots and people like you mention will pay his asking price, then I guess P really is Profession mode in his hands.



Could not agree more with you on this!


----------



## MSnowy (Jan 8, 2015)

Pro photographers only shoot in $ mode


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jan 8, 2015)

I think there are always some people like that who have figured out how to do one thing or do something one way and make that into some semblance of a career or success out of it.

This might be more about being in Beverly Hills/LA and making contacts etc. Taking a quick glance I don't see anything all that different from what plenty of photographers are doing, although he may have enough of an eye for this to get some unique pictures even with what seems to be a limited way of shooting. Most of us probably aren't where there's much in the way of celebrity types to do what he does anyway.

I can appreciate your feeling though; I see it in sports where people with cameras are prayin' and sprayin' and manage to get a decent enough photo to have it used, Of course it's also that many publications and media outlets have struggled financially and may go with whatever so-so photos they can get cheap.


----------



## sashbar (Jan 8, 2015)

MSnowy said:


> Pro photographers only shoot in $ mode



Depends on where they are shooting


----------



## photoguy99 (Jan 8, 2015)

Dude's (Buissink, that is) definitely got an eye and a sense of timing. Flip through the portfolio for more than a few seconds.

Still, it IS more about making contacts and running a business. It's always more about running a business. Photography itself is a distant second. And within that, anything other than pressing the button at the right time from the right position is a distant, I dunno, 119th.

I am fascinated by your plan to destroy the local wedding photographers, though. I think you might find it a trifle ambitious.


----------



## Austin Greene (Jan 8, 2015)

photoguy99 said:


> Dude's (Buissink, that is) definitely got an eye and a sense of timing. Flip through the portfolio for more than a few seconds.
> 
> Still, it IS more about making contacts and running a business. It's always more about running a business. Photography itself is a distant second. And within that, anything other than pressing the button at the right time from the right position is a distant, I dunno, 119th.
> 
> I am fascinated by your plan to destroy the local wedding photographers, though. I think you might find it a trifle ambitious.



It's interesting to here him talk about that in the video. Provided that he's coming from a place of incredible success, he is quite animated about the notion that business has to be secondary to the photography, and that the money will "somehow follow." I can't say I buy it.

As for my ambition, I'm not looking to displace the quality photographers in my area. More that I'm looking to make it a bit harder for soccer moms who just picked up their DSLR's to get contracts. I've got a stable job shooting full time currently, so I can spare my weekends doing cheap shoots if it means keeping the cameras out of those people's hands, and fewer ruined wedding shoots.


----------



## sashbar (Jan 8, 2015)

I have spent some time flipping through his portfolio, the guy is definitely talented, no doubt about it. Auto or not, some images are well beyond the commercial wedding photography. Unlike 99.9 % of this genre, there are images that have an independent photographic value.  No wonder people pay to be part of these images.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jan 8, 2015)

My guessing at some point he lucked into a high society type wedding and it spun from there, word of mouth carries a lot of weight.  Shooting everything on auto, well good for him, although I still can imagine situations where light would become a factor.  How many images has he missed because of an auto only shoot. Perhaps there are all kinds of behind the scenes things going on that he doesn't talk about.  If he's doing well for himself then good for him, and if auto works for him, then good for him.   I never shoot auto, never have, it works for me shooting manual.

Don't look for me on youtube boasting the fact that I shoot sports well, and I don't use auto.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jan 8, 2015)

I can't say I saw anything that made me particularly want to look any further. But this does seem to involve a certain amount of marketing; I mean, he's got himself on Creative Live etc. which gets him seen online in a more mass market way and I would think must make him more money.

I think eventually some of what you're seeing might run its course. It seems like those type people with cameras are eventually going to get tired of the work involved and underpricing and not necessarily making much money at it, and all they need is to start having to deal with an unhappy client or two (or getting unfriended and bashed online etc.) or something happening and they weren't insured, etc. etc.

We've just had a number of years of a recession and of cutting costs, job cuts, etc. so it will probably not be a fast process of it changing (even though there are signs continually of improvement and people not necessarily wanting the cheapest option possible). If some of those people with cameras don't have the passion for it I'd expect eventually they'll get tired of playing at being photographers and move on.


----------



## beachrat (Jan 8, 2015)

I used to work with a guy that finished every wall and ceiling with an 11" trowel.
No bigger,no smaller.
While the rest of us struggled with everything from pointers to 18" bulls,he smashed everything with that one tool because he knew exactly how to push it.
He knew how to work that tool to its full potential.
Same thing.


----------



## photoguy99 (Jan 8, 2015)

This has been bothering me, so let me clear this out:

P mode isn't Auto.

ETA: The bhphoto video has a coherent and complete explanation of why he uses it, how he uses it, and why it's the right tool for what he does. Not what you do, not what I do, what HE does.

Austin is only partially right about his video, by the way. Yes, Joe talks a lot about passion and personal vision (and he's spot on) but he segues immediately after into how to turn that into a business model.

If you want to move up-market, he's totally worth a watch.

You're gonna need to find a personal vision, though. If you're just grinding out flickr/500px ready copycat stuff, his ideas are useless to you. Yeah, I'm probably looking at YOU, and YOU TOO. But not YOU, you're ok.


----------



## beachrat (Jan 8, 2015)

I'm not OK.


----------



## photoguy99 (Jan 8, 2015)

beachrat said:


> I'm not OK.



Then watch the first 20 minutes of the bhphoto video! It's for you! It will make you be OK. Whether or not you want to be.


----------



## Vtec44 (Jan 8, 2015)

The only time I shoot in full auto is either when I use OCF or doing portrait/studio work.  I shoot however I shoot to get the result I want.  So Auto, P, S, A, you name it.


----------



## beachrat (Jan 8, 2015)

I'm OK now.
Like it matters.


----------



## Vtec44 (Jan 8, 2015)

BTW, Joe doesn't really care what you think of which mode he shoots.  He charges like 15k per wedding.


----------



## photoguy99 (Jan 8, 2015)

Vtec44 said:


> BTW, Joe doesn't really care what you think of which mode he shoots.  He charges like 15k per wedding.



If I were guessing I would guess 3-10x that number. Is that a real figure, or just a guess as well?


----------



## Ilovemycam (Jan 8, 2015)

Austin Greene said:


> I'm sure this has already been discussed here, yet when searching for a previous post I couldn't find one.
> 
> Yesterday, I learned about Joe Buissink. Really I more just came across him speaking in a B&H video on YouTube. You see, I've been wanting to expand into shooting weddings for some time now. I've grown sick of seeing crap images on local photography Facebook pages, and I've steadily become determined to push them out of the local market.
> 
> ...



Very seldom I shoot auto. I hate program codes. I pay big money to shoot manual. I don't like being raped, but that is how cameras turned out nowadays. (Leica)

I like superwides and shoot left and right on the street. Either direction has different light. Sometimes very different light.

nsfw

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe..._Pizza_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg

Go try shooting auto in the shade left then shooting in the sun right with a fisheye...do it instantly.  I can adjust the Leica in a snap while walking and don't have to even look at it.

I shoot tons in the black of night.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fa/Juggalos_no._4_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg/1024px-Juggalos_no._4_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...no._36_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...ess'_Copyright_2013_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr-mr.jpg

nsfw

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5b/Bikers'_Mardi_Gras_no._6_Copyright_2012_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr...jpg/735px-Bikers'_Mardi_Gras_no._6_Copyright_2012_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr...jpg

I need fast adjustments in an instant. As such I use manual cams like Leica and the half-ass Fuji. Now, I don't like either cam, they both have problems. But they are the tools that are available to me.

M240 IQ is 'just' doable for me. I prefer Fuji's X sensor for IQ.

This is about as good as it gets for the M240 with my work.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/63/Bikers%27_Mardi_Gras_no.177_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg/1046px-Bikers%27_Mardi_Gras_no.177_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0a/Juggalete_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg/1037px-Juggalete_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Amsterdam_no._49_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg/997px-Amsterdam_no._49_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg

M240

They talk of pixel density. The Leica M240 strikes me as 'low density' compared to the Fuji...but I'm not expert. Just some files work better than others. Leica's files will fall apart when you push em.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/05/The_Plane_Worshipers_vers_1_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg/1040px-The_Plane_Worshipers_vers_1_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Orient_Beach_St._Martin_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr._LR.jpg/1026px-Orient_Beach_St._Martin_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr._LR.jpg

If you like manual controls Leica is it. What a shame you have to pay so much premium for a manual cam with a so-so sensor. There is nothing wrong with the sensor for snapshot shooters, but it is second rate in my opinion. If only they made more cams with a simple shutter speed dial, aperture controls and a manual focus ring.

I prefer Fuji's X sensor for IQ.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/48/Mosh_Pit_no._7_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg/1280px-Mosh_Pit_no._7_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg

Fuji X-E1

Fuji has a stupendous sensor. It is so good, I hate having to use the Leica sensor cause I know what the Fuji can do. But, I hate fighting the screwy controls on the Fuji. Fuji must have been designed by a real camera fondler. Focus by wire is one of the worst inventions that have come out of camera design. And Fuji's trend is to dummy down their lenses removing controls.

When I put a flash on my Fuji it wont work unless you reprogram the damn cam. I've missed many a shot due to the screwy Fuji. When I put a flash in my Leica...guess what...it works. That is worth $7000 isn't it? But, both cams are fudged up in their own way. So I can't chew out Fuji over Leica or Leica over Fuji.

If Leica had put a first rate sensor in their cam then the only issue would be the price. The Leica is not disposable, the Fuji is disposable. I ruin my cams regularly and can't afford to lose my Leicas. I use Fuji's when their is danger.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c2/Faygo_Gathering_of_the_Juggalos_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg/757px-Faygo_Gathering_of_the_Juggalos_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg

Fuji X-E1

OP...'P' stand for...well I can' say it here. This forum full of camera fondlers would not like it. Suffice it to say it is a 'P' word.

I like having full control in an instant with my cams OP.

nsfw

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...i_Gras_Copyright_2014_Daniel_D._Teoli_Jr..jpg

In the end OP...it does not matter what I say he said or they say. Do what works for you.


----------



## photoguy99 (Jan 8, 2015)

Jesus, Daniel. Way to hijack a thread.


----------



## Vtec44 (Jan 8, 2015)

I can't neither confirm or deny if the figure is real


----------



## Austin Greene (Jan 8, 2015)

Vtec44 said:


> I can't neither confirm or deny if the figure is real



I'd hope that if J. Simpson turned around and sold a couple of his images to a magazine for 1.5 million, that he either 
A) Got a cut of that
or
B) Charged a lot more than 15K for that wedding


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 8, 2015)

Well after reading all the way through this I'm left with the following:

"A stands for A hell of a salesman".


----------



## Vtec44 (Jan 8, 2015)

Austin Greene said:


> Vtec44 said:
> 
> 
> > I can't neither confirm or deny if the figure is real
> ...



He shoots weddings for non-celebs too.   Plus celebrities usually buy the copyright outright so obviously that will be a lot more than 15k and NDA ... I hope lol


----------



## W.Y.Photo (Jan 9, 2015)

Austin Greene said:


> photoguy99 said:
> 
> 
> > Dude's (Buissink, that is) definitely got an eye and a sense of timing. Flip through the portfolio for more than a few seconds.
> ...




Well he makes a good point to say that the business has to be secondary if you really think about it. To make an excellent photograph you need to be very involved with your artform, though I really appreciate the paint roller analogy made earlier I am going to use it to make a point here: Photography is much more than painting a wall, it is an artform and an artform requires more than just skill. It takes passion, drive, and creativity to create a truly exceptional photograph. A person who is so focused on the business side of photography cannot pour the amount of effort they need into their actual image making. With most professions (like a house painter's) the business absolutely comes first as all they need to be is skilled at painting a wall, they can show up with their tool in hand and do their job, they just need paint, a wall, and their tools; but with us it takes a lot more than being somewhere and having our tools for us to do our jobs well.. wouldn't you agree?


----------

