it happens to others... trust me. i could tell you stories.... thats why i am very careful who, if ever, is send hires shots to. GT i dont want to contribute to highjacking Webb Bland's marvellous thread so if this continues it should be done so in its own thread....
bill? only noticed about four people posting nice requests!? most pics posted o f-chat are not by professionals, and the shooter takes it as a compliment if someone asks for a hi-res version. plus he is advertising his wares for free, to a target market, and providing the source for purchase. w/ digital equipment your chef's pan analogy doesnt quite fly. there is quite a difference from top to bottom in resolution, although as you suggested there is quite a difference in set up. i think people are paying him a compliment to ask for a hi-res version. they didnt specify free of charge, or that they wouldnt be willing to pay, although i agree that was the implication. i'm sure he probably knew the question would be coming as well! goes hand in hand w/ posting on a public forum, and not on a commercial sales web site. best,
+1 Some of the requesters even offered to leave a watermark on for further free advertising.. Also, if you can look at the recipe for a food item at a good restaurant, and are able to make it yourself at home... more power to you! Shouldn't you be a chef somewhere else? Anyway, It's not a very good analogy because you're not taking away the photographers ability to make money from future photo shoots of different cars. It's more like taking your food in a carryout box, and enjoying it at home (and with others). If others enjoy it, they will come back to the restaurant for more food (the takeout is already finished by then) As for the photos: if others enjoy it, they might consider hiring this photographer for photo shoots of their own cars. If they don't have a nice car of their own, they're not causing the photographer to lose any business my having the high-res photo. ~shahedc .
You're correct about making it yourself at home part .... you're not asking for the recipe, you're asking for a free steak, a bottle of the sauce they top it off with, and the directions on how to best prepare it. As far as leaving the watermark, are you joking? You're argument is that it would be just fine if a photographer gave away his negatives for free (let's repeat .... that's the majority of his revenue stream) as long as he got advertising out of it that would theoretically lead to more requests for "free" work? I take it you are not in business for yourself ... if you are, please tell me what products your company offers, I love free things. To take your food in a carry out box is to say that you paid for it and decided to eat it elsewhere. No one here asking for hi-res photos offered anything. So your analogy is way off the mark. As far as your last sentence .... you are saying that its okay for a photographer to give away his negatives to anyone who would not be able to afford his services. So a dentist should give free cleanings and fillings to anyone who wouldn't be able to afford him? A lawyer should be give free legal advice to anyone who doesn't have a major legal problem or who wouldn't retain his services anyway? This is getting away from my initial point, I was hoping to understand why people are okay with asking for free service when that service is photography but it doesn't apply to any other service oriented profession. I've never heard of anyone going up to a hooker and saying, "I don't pay for sex, but since you advertised in the local paper, could I get some for free if I promise to tell all my friends about you?" Bill
1) There were at least 4 people asking for hi-res versions of the photos 2) The title of this thread is "Commissioned photoshoot ...." - sounds like a pro gig to me 3) The photos are obviously done by a pro 4) The Chef's pan analogy certain does fly. When I put 16 years of photography/lighting/setup experience into creating a great set of images and someone says, "Wow, your camera takes great pictures" (basically saying that it's my equipment, not my talent, that made the photo) .... that's the same thing as someone telling a Chef that his food tastes great because he uses an awesome set of pans. The analogy is right-on. If it still doesn't make sense to you, tell me what your profession is and I'll provide you with an analogy that hits closer to home. 5) I don't understand what you are saying in your "top to bottom in resolution" sentence, please clarify 6) Yes, I'm sure he expected the questions as well .... but that leads back to my original point: What other profession do you commonly see people flatly ask for a free service? Why do people do it to photographers? Bill
bill, you wanted an understanding of peoples mindsets on the subject. i gave you my opinion . . . we simply disagree. "top to bottom" . . . megapixels if you expect the questions, why worry about the results? i appreciate mr blands contribution. best and no offense meant.
I think HDR is used in this set, and IMHO it is done wrong. Your darkroom romanticism is entertaining, but composition and subject are far more important in my books.
HDR does alot of tone mapping to combine the images (2 or greater). If you adjust the scale too much you can get artifacts like weird looking texture. For cars, they generally bring out the reflections, so be sure your reflections aren't too busy.
Bill, you're getting too worked up over here.... and creating analogies that don't really make sense in this context. 1. First of all, just wanted to clarify that I'm NOT one of the people who requested the free hi-res photos. 2. I'm just supporting their right to request a hi-res photo, just as I support the photographer's right to deny that request or negotiate a compromise (re: watermark) 3. The watermark suggestion didn't come from me, it was a suggestion by another requester, and if the photographer agrees to it.. why not? 4. The key thing here is the photographer's consent. Whatever he decides about his photographs should be honored. 5. I'm not talking about every photographer in the world or even every professional who provides any service... each individual decides what he/she sells and what he/she wants to share for free, in a limited way. My analogy with the food carryout still stands. If you take the food away, you can feed it to other people who never entered the restaurant... so they never paid a tip or bothered to get dressed for the restaurant. But it's the restaurant's choice whether they want you to take food out or not (almost all buffets won't allow this). In the same manner, the photographer can refuse to share hi-res photos with the requesters, or provide a giant watermark across it, or just ask them to buy the photos on his website. As we have seen, they are definitely worth looking at, and definitely worth buying to those who want them. ~shahedc .
That's because even with the recipe I still wouldn't be able to pull it off and end up with something that tastes like chicken. Burnt. And cold. I'm somewhat of a photographer (heck, everybody is a pro photographer, these days), and I have no problem posting a few 1280 px wide pictures. It's not big enough to infringe on the poster business, and it's large enough to be enjoyed as a desktop screen. Win/Win. Now if someone asks me for the 10MP original, that's obviously not gonna happen ... mostly because they are straight off the camera and I never share non post-processed shots. And 10MP is enough for someone to decide to print their poster themselves. And that's not cool. It all boils down to the photographer. I guess I'm pretty liberal about it, some are copyright nazis. There's nothing wrong in asking if a higher resolution version is available. But it's down to the photographer to decide wether or not he will do it. Not some random guy.
Thanks for your post, Zorro... so you see what I mean! Bill Ng, read Zorro's post above... you see, to each his own.. no harm done. Let each photographer decide what he wants to do with his own photos. ~shahedc .
Send me a 1280px wide photo and I can uprez it to a 300ppi 24x30 that would make you think twice about ever sending me anything even close to that size again. The uprezzing algos are getting SCARY good these days. Bill
Go for it! sorry for the random shot ... http://img61.imageshack.us/img61/9003/dsc02986bm6.jpg Don't want to come off rude or hi-jack the thread, but I really have a hard time believing blowing a pic to such an extent will retain even half of the original quality. You got me curious and intrigued now!
INCREDIBLE! Can you tell us how you make the car so reflective and shiny? Is that a particular lense/filter or is it in photoshop?
OMG its the best 599 pic session i have ever seen, its so DAMN good, can't we have even 1 hi reso of the gr8 pic labelled PALMS on the website, why not to give that one on the WALLPAPER section
