If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Hard to break into National Geographic's staff.
Draco wrote:
Either way it is looked at, working at NG isn't as glamorous as it once was. But then again no job really isn't that glamorous when you are doing the job. What ever your choice, good luck. It does, however, add a bit of luster to a photographer's resume to be able to say he/she has shot assignments for National Geographic. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Hard to break into National Geographic's staff.
Andrew Venor wrote:
This topic got me looking around on the subject and I found that National Geographic is running a photo contest right now where you could end up winning a DSLR and have your picture published in a future issue of the magazine. http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/...o-contest.html While it obviously isn't a steady job, but I guess you would get some bragging rights out of getting you picture in the magazine. ALV Cool! Now all I gotta do is go out and take an award winning photograph. ;-D |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Hard to break into National Geographic's staff.
"Andrew Venor" wrote in message ... Draco wrote: On Aug 11, 6:19 pm, "William Graham" wrote: I wrote to National Geographic asking them whether they would consider hiring good quality wildlife photographers, and this is the response I received.... ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 12:49 PM Dear Mr. Graham: Thank you for your email to the National Geographic Society. Photography jobs on staff are very rare. National Geographic does use freelance photographers, but to be frank, it is extremely difficult to obtain a first assignment for the magazine. The magazine does not accept any unsolicited submissions. The editors meet regularly to discuss possible story ideas. If an idea is decided upon, the article is then assigned, usually to someone with whom we've worked before or to someone with many years of outstanding work in the field of journalism. Because there is a large investment behind each National Geographic article, we are conservative in choosing writers and photographers, opting for those with well-established reputations. At this time we have many more freelance photographers than we do assignments. If this all sounds negative, we apologize. It is, however, a response dictated by a rather precise goal for the style of the magazine, coupled with the limited number of stories we are able to publish each year. I am sorry that we could not offer more encouraging news regarding your friend, but we appreciate your thinking of us. Sincerely, CL Stroud Communications National Geographic Society- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Bill, Several years ago NG told all its staff photographers that they would have to sign a "work for hire" contract with NG. This was in effect taking all the work of the photographer away from the photographer.Any extra income they might be able to generate in the way of using their work to gain other jobs or even sell their own photographs. Except for one or two who signed the agreement, the rest walked. A "work for hire" contract gives all the rights to NG or who ever holds it. The photographer has no rights to the image if they sign this type of agreement. They get a flat fee for the assignment and no way to earn any other money from their images. Now NG has one maybe two staff photographers and a lot of freelancers who will do the work for not much. Most of the stories are work by two people. A writer who interacts with the subjects or has a very good knowledge of the subject. And the photographer. They work as a team to get the story. Sometimes the writer will guide the photographer to certain images. Sometimes the photographers images will guide the writers words. Either way it is looked at, working at NG isn't as glamorous as it once was. But then again no job really isn't that glamorous when you are doing the job. What ever your choice, good luck. Draco Getting even isn't good enough. Doing better does. This topic got me looking around on the subject and I found that National Geographic is running a photo contest right now where you could end up winning a DSLR and have your picture published in a future issue of the magazine. http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/...o-contest.html While it obviously isn't a steady job, but I guess you would get some bragging rights out of getting you picture in the magazine. ALV Yes.....Well, at least they, (or someone who works for them) would have to actually look at whatever photograph you submitted, and that is, (apparently) not something they are accustomed to doing. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Hard to break into National Geographic's staff.
"Philip Homburg" wrote in message .phicoh.net... In article , William Graham wrote: "Kinon O'Cann" wrote in message news:Yatvi.9353$eb4.5464@trndny08... Always has been the case. It's a very desireable job, and the competition has driven incomes down to the point where if you don't do it for love, you have no other reason. Unless you're one of the top tier shooters, you'll starve. I think that's the case with any art. It certainly is true with painting and music.....They aren't looking for artists....They are looking for pushy salesmen who can push harder than everyone else......Or, at least, that's who they hire, so that's the bottom line...... At least for music (I don't know anything about the 'painting scene'), that depends on how much the audience values content. If the audience goes for the public image of the artist and accepts contents any competent artist can deliver then yes, the best best salesmen will win. Some time ago I went to concert and I was suprised how badly a rather famous archestra performed a work of a famous composer. It was not that the orchestra was bad, pieces from a different composer were excellent. That concert reminded me how good those people a they are really specialized in certain subjects and cannot deliver the same quality just everywhere. Popular music is strange in that a large percentage of the audience just wants a show, and (apparently) can't tell a good musical performance from a bad one. That's why groups that light themselves on fire and smash their instruments to pieces seem to become very popular, while others, like Peter Nero, just find a niche to operate in, but can't draw the huge crowds and make the really big bucks, even though they are artists of the first order. - And, I guess the principal applies to photography as well. Just compare NG's circulation with that of People Magazine........ |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Hard to break into National Geographic's staff.
On Aug 13, 11:39 pm, Annika1980 wrote:
On Aug 12, 9:16 pm, DMac wrote: I really though Bret was heading towards sponsorship to publish some "coffee table" book but he says not so. http://www.lulu.comis worth exploring. I'd love to do a coffee table book and probably will some day, in a very limited production run. My attorney friend even offered to bankroll the whole deal on the whim that we could sell them. But when I told him how much it would cost, he was less enthusiastic. Self-publishing is a nice way to get your pics into a book, but 99% of the time it's a money-loser like 99% of other photography books. The exception would be a wedding book where you could command a high- dollar fee. But nobody is going to spend a couple of hundred bucks for a collection of photographs unless they were taken by HCB. Lulu is cheaper than some, but even a good quality calendar will cost you around $20. How are you gonna make money at that price when you still have to worry about marketing them and selling them? I appreciate you've come to a wall you feel you can't climb. Go down to the local office equipment supplier and have a look at the output from a Xerox C525 A digital laser printer. They cost about $550 AUD. Next trip along to the paper suppliers and get a quote for 2000 sheets of 180 GSM "silk finish" paper. Then trip on back to your lawyer and get a grand off him and go get the stuff. With the change go to a scrapbooking shop and figure out how you're going to bind the works of art you'll make. You know what a digital wedding album is? http://www.brisbaneweddingphotograph...igi-albums.htm. Use that fertile imagination of yours to figure out the rest. Print on both sides of the pages and do it so they are horizontal orientation, with the binding at the short side but don't bind them yet. From the "Scrapbooking" shop get some "posts" and nuts along with a hole drill. A bit of woodworking here... Start with 1/4" ply and make a front and back, just like a post bound photo album. Get some 1/4" foam and glue it on the outsides of the panels figure out your own hinge method then cover the boards with your favourite furnishing material or Use some that Italian leather @ $70 a square yard I make my wedding albums from. If you do it right, You'll easiely get $100 each for them. Get real smart and buy some Coffee lounges so you can put them on the 'coffee tables' in the gallery with your photos adorning the walls and you'll pretty soon be able to afford a boat like mine. Otherwise rent them to coffee shop owners along with your monster wall art printed on canvas. Mark's never been able to find my galleries because he couldn't figure out where to look! Now you know. I know you and I got into an unwinnable situation when I tried give you valid advice. So lets leave it there for now. If you get real serious about the idea, go off-line and I might help further. Doug |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Hard to break into National Geographic's staff.
I received another reply to my rather flippant answer to the NG
answer.....Here it is in its entirety: Dear Sir: I did understand your first response, completely. Desire and talent, both of which your friend will have, are very important ingredients for success in a photography career here at National Geographic. Equally important is experience. Our photographers have almost all come from backgrounds in photojournalism, and a background in that field is essential. The editors have to know that when they send a journalist into the field that he or she has the experience and the know-how to bring home photographs that tell a story. For example, how would a photographer illustrate an article on smell (September 1986) or modern slavery (September 2003) or the war on disease (February 2002)? The harsh truth is that because the investment in a National Geographic article is so great, the editors are not going to trust a story to an untried photographer, no matter how talented. Just to give you an idea of the time and staff involved in one story, the following was taken from our Photography FAQs: When a story is approved, the photographer and photo editor meet to plan coverage and budget. The photographer sends images from the field to Washington, and the photo editor contacts the photographer to discuss the images. Midway through the coverage the photographer and photo editor meet to assemble the best shots so far. Senior magazine staff offer comments and the photographer returns to the field. When fieldwork is complete the photographer and photo editor prepare a final edit to present to the magazine editor. Once approved, a layout is designed. The process spans a long period and involves many hands, so it is expensive. Travel costs and fees to photographers and other staff involved often add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars. This makes us quite cautious in choosing photographers, opting for those with established reputations. As I mentioned, we have many more experienced photojournalists than we do assignments. However, if your friend would care to send in an article proposal, the editors would certainly give it consideration. CL Stroud Communications National Geographic |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Hard to break into National Geographic's staff.
In article ,
William Graham wrote: I received another reply to my rather flippant answer to the NG answer.....Here it is in its entirety: Dear Sir: I did understand your first response, completely. [...] As I mentioned, we have many more experienced photojournalists than we do assignments. I think this is the key issue. You don't want to be in a profession where qualified people are abundant and commercial issues very much constrain/determine what can be done. I don't read NG, but there is good chance that the risk of taking on an unknown photographer exceeds the potential for the quality improvement (as perceived by the readers) that person may be able to deliver. -- That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make. -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Hard to break into National Geographic's staff.
In article ,
William Graham wrote: Peter Nero As always, just putting some mp3 or avi online is too hard for most artists. For security reasons I don't do flash. There's this great medium, and people can't be bothered to fully exploit it. make the really big bucks, An real artist should be lucky to make a living. There can only be relatively few people who make big bucks. And then you have to be more of an entertainer than an artist who is potentially way ahead of his audience. Great artists often produce art that requires a significant mental effort of the audience. Most people just want to relax / have a good time. -- That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make. -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Hard to break into National Geographic's staff.
On Aug 11, 7:46 pm, Rita Ä Berkowitz ritaberk2O04 @aol.com wrote:
William Graham wrote: If you were a brick contractor, and I asked you if you needed any more bricklayers, and you replied: We're sorry, but NG only lays 100,000 bricks every year, and we already have 152 bricklayers, which is more than enough to lay all those bricks, so we are not accepting any applications at this time....Then I would understand your answer perfectly. But, in fact, we are not talking about bricklayers here....We are talking about artists. So, what I want you to understand is that it doesn't really matter how many photographers you have already on your staff, or waiting in the wings. - The fact is, I know one who is better than all those 152 (or howevermany) that you have........(some unimportant details deleted) You are missing the point. It's all about simple economics. Why should they hire anymore on-staff photographers for their limited on assignment jobs when they can go to pbase, flicker, photo.net and other photo hosting sites and offer the photographer $5 and a years NG subscription for truly spectacular wildlife photos instead of some over-Photoshopped crap? There are some really spectacular wildlife photos out there other than what you see on Usenet. Rita Yes William missed the point, but this isn't the only point he missed. What NG was saying is "we have plenty of gifted photographers who we know and trust, we do not know you and we do not trust you. Go get some experience and if you stand out, we'll call you (just like the other people we already use) and then we can talk. William, if you want assignments like that, you need to earn your stripes. Go start shooting assignments like that for a stock company, a newspaper, or someone. When you work stands out, then you can go talk to them. This level of photography isn't about pulling off 1 really great picture in your life. It's about pulling off a dozen really, really great pictures in a day -- doing that day in and day out until you get the pictures they want. They aren't looking for someone who want to move into the big leagues. They are looking for people who are already there. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Hard to break into National Geographic's staff.
"Rita Ä Berkowitz" ritaberk2O04 @aol.com wrote in message ... Pat wrote: You are missing the point. It's all about simple economics. Why should they hire anymore on-staff photographers for their limited on assignment jobs when they can go to pbase, flicker, photo.net and other photo hosting sites and offer the photographer $5 and a years NG subscription for truly spectacular wildlife photos instead of some over-Photoshopped crap? There are some really spectacular wildlife photos out there other than what you see on Usenet. Rita Yes William missed the point, but this isn't the only point he missed. What NG was saying is "we have plenty of gifted photographers who we know and trust, we do not know you and we do not trust you. Go get some experience and if you stand out, we'll call you (just like the other people we already use) and then we can talk. William, if you want assignments like that, you need to earn your stripes. Go start shooting assignments like that for a stock company, a newspaper, or someone. When you work stands out, then you can go talk to them. Let me get this straight.....NG doesn't trust it's own judgement well enough to do its own hireing and fireing.....So, instead of looking at the work of photographers, they sit back and wait for other people (of completely unknown ability) to do it for them, and then after one of those photographers makes it and becomes well known, they pay an exhorbitant price to hire them away from who,ever found them......I would think that they could trust their own judgement a little better than that, and find their own gems among the pebbles...... This level of photography isn't about pulling off 1 really great picture in your life. It's about pulling off a dozen really, really great pictures in a day -- doing that day in and day out until you get the pictures they want. They aren't looking for someone who want to move into the big leagues. They are looking for people who are already there. Well said. They are refusing to trust their own judgment, or are too lazy to trust it, is what they are doing. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Will it break the $3,000 mark? | Paul Furman | 35mm Photo Equipment | 6 | February 6th 07 08:35 PM |
Will it break the $3,000 mark? | Paul Mitchum | Digital Photography | 0 | February 5th 07 09:00 PM |
Will it break the $3,000 mark? | Paul Mitchum | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | February 5th 07 09:00 PM |
Will it break the $3,000 mark? | David Dyer-Bennet | Digital Photography | 1 | February 5th 07 05:06 AM |
Will it break the $3,000 mark? | AnOvercomer 02 | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | February 5th 07 12:19 AM |