Jerk "pro" photographers

"Angela M. Cable" wrote

http://www.fortunecity.com/westwood/alaia/354/

What, no barbwire? You're not really from Wyoming now,
are ya?

"We don't have much use for reality out here"
Wyoming rancher -- Anne Proulx

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/

"Angela M. Cable" wrote

http://www.fortunecity.com/westwood/alaia/354/

What, no barbwire? You're not really from Wyoming now,
are ya?

"We don't have much use for reality out here"
Wyoming rancher -- Anne Proulx

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/

Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:

"Angela M. Cable" wrote

http://www.fortunecity.com/westwood/alaia/354/

What, no barbwire? You're not really from Wyoming now,
are ya?

Are you trying to actively demonstrate that you are composed of 75% water?


--
Angela M. Cable
Neocognition, digital scrapbooking source:
http://www.neocognition.com/

PSP Tutorial Links:
http://www.psplinks.com/

5th Street Studio, free graphics, websets and mo
http://www.fortunecity.com/westwood/alaia/354/

Nicholas O. Lindan wrote:

"Angela M. Cable" wrote

http://www.fortunecity.com/westwood/alaia/354/

What, no barbwire? You're not really from Wyoming now,
are ya?

Are you trying to actively demonstrate that you are composed of 75% water?


--
Angela M. Cable
Neocognition, digital scrapbooking source:
http://www.neocognition.com/

PSP Tutorial Links:
http://www.psplinks.com/

5th Street Studio, free graphics, websets and mo
http://www.fortunecity.com/westwood/alaia/354/

Roger,

I've usually always watch for your posts...I always look forward to reading
them since you clearly have a "right mind" perspective if I might say so.

Interesting experience and not surprising. I found that when I was active
in a few of the "pro" orgs, the orgs were dominated by folks who were quite
self-absorbed and only in it for themselves. The type of people who would
criticize the aspiring photographer's wonderful work unfairly in a supposed
professional portfolio review. All the while I see some of their work of
lesser quality published all the time due to the longevity of their
relationships and the usual cronyism in the industry.

I no longer belong to these "pro" organizations as I have found that one
doesn't need them and I have also found that the successful photographers I
respect the most have done quite well without these "pro" organizations. My
mentor was an exception to this before he and his wife passed away a few
years ago. After all...the technical definition of a "Professional" is
someone with a PHD...thus I always lower case "pro" when referring to
"professional photographers".

Just my two cents...which will probably result in a total lambasting up
here. But as things go, I was taught by a man who always made these same
pro's real angry when he would set them straight in the columns he wrote.

Interestingly, I have seen a few mainstreamers up here on this board who
spout out their opinions with the same irreverence as the photographer you
dealt with. In particular this type of thing happened a while back
regarding a startup magazine effort, in which I was accused of being the
publisher when I defended the concept (which by the way modeled the exact
concept of one of the supposedly "reputable" nature magazines...which
happens to be controlled and published by the supposed "Pro's". This
startup effort by the way was quite well done on it's first issue and
accepted by the largest publishing channel in the country that only a "Pro"
would associate themself with.

Far as I am concerned there is only one type of photographer...the kind who
cares about the world and enjoys photography for the sake of the personal
meaning derived from the experience. This is a perspective my mentor
taught me prior to his death...something that the "Pro" you ran into was out
of touch with.

This supposed pro was probably a former Enron executive or some such thing.

Regards...






On 7/26/04 7:43 AM, in article , "Roger N. Clark
(change username to rnclark)" wrote:

Hi, I need to vent a little.
I just returned from Grand Teton National Park and had a
wonderful time, spectacular weather (meaning a great storm
then clearing clouds to make it interesting). I saw moose
every day, along with deer, elk coyotes, bald eagles,
osprey, etc. I was imaging with my 4x5 and with
digital from wide to long telephoto.

Multiple times, other amateurs would generally ask if they
were in the way of a shot, or if they were, they all quickly
moved when I said something. Everyone was very nice.

Except "The Pro."

I was at Oxbow Bend the morning after the storm, I with
clearing fog and clouds just after sunrise. It was one
of the prettiest mornings I've ever seen there, and
I've seen dozens. I had the 4x5 set up very close
to the bushes, so there is plenty of room all around and
there are only a couple of other people there.

Two women stop, and approach my area.
One is dressed very nice, the other has a camera in here
hand (looked like a high-end 35mm body). She points to a
spot in front of my camera. I have the dark slide pulled on
the 4x5 and am ready to trip the shutter. These two
people move into the camera field of view,
which was relatively narrow as I was using a 210mm lens.
I explained that they were in my field of view and I
was about the take a picture. The woman with the camera
said:

"I am a professional photographer and am getting paid to do
a shoot."

I said "common courtesy would say you should wait until I
am done. There are plenty of spots to photograph here."

She responded: "This is a public park and I am a professional,
I can go where I want."

They proceeded to stay in my field of view while she
photographed the other woman. She would not give me her
name. I called her a jerk and said no real professional
photographer would act this way.

I had to wait until they were finished before I could
shoot again. Fortunately, the clouds and light were
not changing fast, so I got good images, just not one
of those I was planning.

They continued shooting at other places along Oxbow Bend
so it shows that my spot was not the only location,
even for the "pro."

While I did not let the incident ruin my day, I wonder what
I might have done differently. Next time, as soon as there
might appear to be a problem, I think I will act interested
that they are a pro and get their name and a card before
a confrontation starts. Do "pros" shooting models need
a license in the park? I would report them to the park
service, but I don't think it would do any good.

Roger
http://www.clarkvision.com

Roger,

I've usually always watch for your posts...I always look forward to reading
them since you clearly have a "right mind" perspective if I might say so.

Interesting experience and not surprising. I found that when I was active
in a few of the "pro" orgs, the orgs were dominated by folks who were quite
self-absorbed and only in it for themselves. The type of people who would
criticize the aspiring photographer's wonderful work unfairly in a supposed
professional portfolio review. All the while I see some of their work of
lesser quality published all the time due to the longevity of their
relationships and the usual cronyism in the industry.

I no longer belong to these "pro" organizations as I have found that one
doesn't need them and I have also found that the successful photographers I
respect the most have done quite well without these "pro" organizations. My
mentor was an exception to this before he and his wife passed away a few
years ago. After all...the technical definition of a "Professional" is
someone with a PHD...thus I always lower case "pro" when referring to
"professional photographers".

Just my two cents...which will probably result in a total lambasting up
here. But as things go, I was taught by a man who always made these same
pro's real angry when he would set them straight in the columns he wrote.

Interestingly, I have seen a few mainstreamers up here on this board who
spout out their opinions with the same irreverence as the photographer you
dealt with. In particular this type of thing happened a while back
regarding a startup magazine effort, in which I was accused of being the
publisher when I defended the concept (which by the way modeled the exact
concept of one of the supposedly "reputable" nature magazines...which
happens to be controlled and published by the supposed "Pro's". This
startup effort by the way was quite well done on it's first issue and
accepted by the largest publishing channel in the country that only a "Pro"
would associate themself with.

Far as I am concerned there is only one type of photographer...the kind who
cares about the world and enjoys photography for the sake of the personal
meaning derived from the experience. This is a perspective my mentor
taught me prior to his death...something that the "Pro" you ran into was out
of touch with.

This supposed pro was probably a former Enron executive or some such thing.

Regards...






On 7/26/04 7:43 AM, in article , "Roger N. Clark
(change username to rnclark)" wrote:

Hi, I need to vent a little.
I just returned from Grand Teton National Park and had a
wonderful time, spectacular weather (meaning a great storm
then clearing clouds to make it interesting). I saw moose
every day, along with deer, elk coyotes, bald eagles,
osprey, etc. I was imaging with my 4x5 and with
digital from wide to long telephoto.

Multiple times, other amateurs would generally ask if they
were in the way of a shot, or if they were, they all quickly
moved when I said something. Everyone was very nice.

Except "The Pro."

I was at Oxbow Bend the morning after the storm, I with
clearing fog and clouds just after sunrise. It was one
of the prettiest mornings I've ever seen there, and
I've seen dozens. I had the 4x5 set up very close
to the bushes, so there is plenty of room all around and
there are only a couple of other people there.

Two women stop, and approach my area.
One is dressed very nice, the other has a camera in here
hand (looked like a high-end 35mm body). She points to a
spot in front of my camera. I have the dark slide pulled on
the 4x5 and am ready to trip the shutter. These two
people move into the camera field of view,
which was relatively narrow as I was using a 210mm lens.
I explained that they were in my field of view and I
was about the take a picture. The woman with the camera
said:

"I am a professional photographer and am getting paid to do
a shoot."

I said "common courtesy would say you should wait until I
am done. There are plenty of spots to photograph here."

She responded: "This is a public park and I am a professional,
I can go where I want."

They proceeded to stay in my field of view while she
photographed the other woman. She would not give me her
name. I called her a jerk and said no real professional
photographer would act this way.

I had to wait until they were finished before I could
shoot again. Fortunately, the clouds and light were
not changing fast, so I got good images, just not one
of those I was planning.

They continued shooting at other places along Oxbow Bend
so it shows that my spot was not the only location,
even for the "pro."

While I did not let the incident ruin my day, I wonder what
I might have done differently. Next time, as soon as there
might appear to be a problem, I think I will act interested
that they are a pro and get their name and a card before
a confrontation starts. Do "pros" shooting models need
a license in the park? I would report them to the park
service, but I don't think it would do any good.

Roger
http://www.clarkvision.com

I enjoyed reading this post, Roger's points all ring true. The traits
mentioned are probably not confined to the "pro". I am an amateur
photographer, and the same sort of behaviour can be found among non "pros".
Although my local club are a pretty laid-back bunch and are all in the
organisation for fun and enjoyment, I do come across the "would-be" pro from
time to time. Having said that, I also come across many exceptional
professional photographers who have similar qualities to the chap you
describe as your mentor. I have been inspired by their unselfish and
unpretentious sharing of knowledge and experience and a willingness to put
themselves out to help others, including amateurs, improve their
techniques. I could name many, but Laurie Campbell and David Eustace have
perhaps made the strongest impression, by being what I consider *true*
professionals.... having the knowledge, attitude and manners which impresses
others in a positive way.

Dennis

"Information" wrote in message
...
Roger,

I've usually always watch for your posts...I always look forward to
reading
them since you clearly have a "right mind" perspective if I might say so.

Interesting experience and not surprising. I found that when I was
active
in a few of the "pro" orgs, the orgs were dominated by folks who were
quite
self-absorbed and only in it for themselves. The type of people who
would
criticize the aspiring photographer's wonderful work unfairly in a
supposed
professional portfolio review. All the while I see some of their work of
lesser quality published all the time due to the longevity of their
relationships and the usual cronyism in the industry.

I no longer belong to these "pro" organizations as I have found that one
doesn't need them and I have also found that the successful photographers
I
respect the most have done quite well without these "pro" organizations.
My
mentor was an exception to this before he and his wife passed away a few
years ago. After all...the technical definition of a "Professional" is
someone with a PHD...thus I always lower case "pro" when referring to
"professional photographers".

Just my two cents...which will probably result in a total lambasting up
here. But as things go, I was taught by a man who always made these same
pro's real angry when he would set them straight in the columns he wrote.

Interestingly, I have seen a few mainstreamers up here on this board who
spout out their opinions with the same irreverence as the photographer you
dealt with. In particular this type of thing happened a while back
regarding a startup magazine effort, in which I was accused of being the
publisher when I defended the concept (which by the way modeled the exact
concept of one of the supposedly "reputable" nature magazines...which
happens to be controlled and published by the supposed "Pro's". This
startup effort by the way was quite well done on it's first issue and
accepted by the largest publishing channel in the country that only a
"Pro"
would associate themself with.

Far as I am concerned there is only one type of photographer...the kind
who
cares about the world and enjoys photography for the sake of the personal
meaning derived from the experience. This is a perspective my mentor
taught me prior to his death...something that the "Pro" you ran into was
out
of touch with.

This supposed pro was probably a former Enron executive or some such
thing.

Regards...






On 7/26/04 7:43 AM, in article , "Roger N. Clark
(change username to rnclark)" wrote:

Hi, I need to vent a little.
I just returned from Grand Teton National Park and had a
wonderful time, spectacular weather (meaning a great storm
then clearing clouds to make it interesting). I saw moose
every day, along with deer, elk coyotes, bald eagles,
osprey, etc. I was imaging with my 4x5 and with
digital from wide to long telephoto.

Multiple times, other amateurs would generally ask if they
were in the way of a shot, or if they were, they all quickly
moved when I said something. Everyone was very nice.

Except "The Pro."

I was at Oxbow Bend the morning after the storm, I with
clearing fog and clouds just after sunrise. It was one
of the prettiest mornings I've ever seen there, and
I've seen dozens. I had the 4x5 set up very close
to the bushes, so there is plenty of room all around and
there are only a couple of other people there.

Two women stop, and approach my area.
One is dressed very nice, the other has a camera in here
hand (looked like a high-end 35mm body). She points to a
spot in front of my camera. I have the dark slide pulled on
the 4x5 and am ready to trip the shutter. These two
people move into the camera field of view,
which was relatively narrow as I was using a 210mm lens.
I explained that they were in my field of view and I
was about the take a picture. The woman with the camera
said:

"I am a professional photographer and am getting paid to do
a shoot."

I said "common courtesy would say you should wait until I
am done. There are plenty of spots to photograph here."

She responded: "This is a public park and I am a professional,
I can go where I want."

They proceeded to stay in my field of view while she
photographed the other woman. She would not give me her
name. I called her a jerk and said no real professional
photographer would act this way.

I had to wait until they were finished before I could
shoot again. Fortunately, the clouds and light were
not changing fast, so I got good images, just not one
of those I was planning.

They continued shooting at other places along Oxbow Bend
so it shows that my spot was not the only location,
even for the "pro."

While I did not let the incident ruin my day, I wonder what
I might have done differently. Next time, as soon as there
might appear to be a problem, I think I will act interested
that they are a pro and get their name and a card before
a confrontation starts. Do "pros" shooting models need
a license in the park? I would report them to the park
service, but I don't think it would do any good.

Roger
http://www.clarkvision.com

I enjoyed reading this post, Roger's points all ring true. The traits
mentioned are probably not confined to the "pro". I am an amateur
photographer, and the same sort of behaviour can be found among non "pros".
Although my local club are a pretty laid-back bunch and are all in the
organisation for fun and enjoyment, I do come across the "would-be" pro from
time to time. Having said that, I also come across many exceptional
professional photographers who have similar qualities to the chap you
describe as your mentor. I have been inspired by their unselfish and
unpretentious sharing of knowledge and experience and a willingness to put
themselves out to help others, including amateurs, improve their
techniques. I could name many, but Laurie Campbell and David Eustace have
perhaps made the strongest impression, by being what I consider *true*
professionals.... having the knowledge, attitude and manners which impresses
others in a positive way.

Dennis

"Information" wrote in message
...
Roger,

I've usually always watch for your posts...I always look forward to
reading
them since you clearly have a "right mind" perspective if I might say so.

Interesting experience and not surprising. I found that when I was
active
in a few of the "pro" orgs, the orgs were dominated by folks who were
quite
self-absorbed and only in it for themselves. The type of people who
would
criticize the aspiring photographer's wonderful work unfairly in a
supposed
professional portfolio review. All the while I see some of their work of
lesser quality published all the time due to the longevity of their
relationships and the usual cronyism in the industry.

I no longer belong to these "pro" organizations as I have found that one
doesn't need them and I have also found that the successful photographers
I
respect the most have done quite well without these "pro" organizations.
My
mentor was an exception to this before he and his wife passed away a few
years ago. After all...the technical definition of a "Professional" is
someone with a PHD...thus I always lower case "pro" when referring to
"professional photographers".

Just my two cents...which will probably result in a total lambasting up
here. But as things go, I was taught by a man who always made these same
pro's real angry when he would set them straight in the columns he wrote.

Interestingly, I have seen a few mainstreamers up here on this board who
spout out their opinions with the same irreverence as the photographer you
dealt with. In particular this type of thing happened a while back
regarding a startup magazine effort, in which I was accused of being the
publisher when I defended the concept (which by the way modeled the exact
concept of one of the supposedly "reputable" nature magazines...which
happens to be controlled and published by the supposed "Pro's". This
startup effort by the way was quite well done on it's first issue and
accepted by the largest publishing channel in the country that only a
"Pro"
would associate themself with.

Far as I am concerned there is only one type of photographer...the kind
who
cares about the world and enjoys photography for the sake of the personal
meaning derived from the experience. This is a perspective my mentor
taught me prior to his death...something that the "Pro" you ran into was
out
of touch with.

This supposed pro was probably a former Enron executive or some such
thing.

Regards...






On 7/26/04 7:43 AM, in article , "Roger N. Clark
(change username to rnclark)" wrote:

Hi, I need to vent a little.
I just returned from Grand Teton National Park and had a
wonderful time, spectacular weather (meaning a great storm
then clearing clouds to make it interesting). I saw moose
every day, along with deer, elk coyotes, bald eagles,
osprey, etc. I was imaging with my 4x5 and with
digital from wide to long telephoto.

Multiple times, other amateurs would generally ask if they
were in the way of a shot, or if they were, they all quickly
moved when I said something. Everyone was very nice.

Except "The Pro."

I was at Oxbow Bend the morning after the storm, I with
clearing fog and clouds just after sunrise. It was one
of the prettiest mornings I've ever seen there, and
I've seen dozens. I had the 4x5 set up very close
to the bushes, so there is plenty of room all around and
there are only a couple of other people there.

Two women stop, and approach my area.
One is dressed very nice, the other has a camera in here
hand (looked like a high-end 35mm body). She points to a
spot in front of my camera. I have the dark slide pulled on
the 4x5 and am ready to trip the shutter. These two
people move into the camera field of view,
which was relatively narrow as I was using a 210mm lens.
I explained that they were in my field of view and I
was about the take a picture. The woman with the camera
said:

"I am a professional photographer and am getting paid to do
a shoot."

I said "common courtesy would say you should wait until I
am done. There are plenty of spots to photograph here."

She responded: "This is a public park and I am a professional,
I can go where I want."

They proceeded to stay in my field of view while she
photographed the other woman. She would not give me her
name. I called her a jerk and said no real professional
photographer would act this way.

I had to wait until they were finished before I could
shoot again. Fortunately, the clouds and light were
not changing fast, so I got good images, just not one
of those I was planning.

They continued shooting at other places along Oxbow Bend
so it shows that my spot was not the only location,
even for the "pro."

While I did not let the incident ruin my day, I wonder what
I might have done differently. Next time, as soon as there
might appear to be a problem, I think I will act interested
that they are a pro and get their name and a card before
a confrontation starts. Do "pros" shooting models need
a license in the park? I would report them to the park
service, but I don't think it would do any good.

Roger
http://www.clarkvision.com

Thanks to all who responded. I do want to clear up any
possible mis perceptions to my post.

I have met many photographers in the field, from real pros,
to a lot of advanced amateurs, and relative newbies.
The vast majority have been very nice and helpful. Most will
usually tell about other places they've been and cool places to go,
what animals they've seen, and openly talk about equipment.
It has been a rare few that are otherwise, probably one or
two at most per year out of hundreds I've met in the field.
While the real "jerks" a far less than 1%, a slightly larger number
are arrogant in my experience, but probably only a percent or
two, and not to the level of being real jerks.
Than means the rest have all been real nice. I think that
really says something about the the people who do photography
as a profession or as a hobby, and it is very impressive
what a great bunch of people everyone is. This newsgroup too
is one of the better groups out there with many helpful people.
It is unfortunate that a few bad apples stand out and can
give the field a bad impression when so many are nice.

Roger

Information wrote:

Roger,

I've usually always watch for your posts...I always look forward to reading
them since you clearly have a "right mind" perspective if I might say so.

Interesting experience and not surprising. I found that when I was active
in a few of the "pro" orgs, the orgs were dominated by folks who were quite
self-absorbed and only in it for themselves. The type of people who would
criticize the aspiring photographer's wonderful work unfairly in a supposed
professional portfolio review. All the while I see some of their work of
lesser quality published all the time due to the longevity of their
relationships and the usual cronyism in the industry.

I no longer belong to these "pro" organizations as I have found that one
doesn't need them and I have also found that the successful photographers I
respect the most have done quite well without these "pro" organizations. My
mentor was an exception to this before he and his wife passed away a few
years ago. After all...the technical definition of a "Professional" is
someone with a PHD...thus I always lower case "pro" when referring to
"professional photographers".

Just my two cents...which will probably result in a total lambasting up
here. But as things go, I was taught by a man who always made these same
pro's real angry when he would set them straight in the columns he wrote.

Interestingly, I have seen a few mainstreamers up here on this board who
spout out their opinions with the same irreverence as the photographer you
dealt with. In particular this type of thing happened a while back
regarding a startup magazine effort, in which I was accused of being the
publisher when I defended the concept (which by the way modeled the exact
concept of one of the supposedly "reputable" nature magazines...which
happens to be controlled and published by the supposed "Pro's". This
startup effort by the way was quite well done on it's first issue and
accepted by the largest publishing channel in the country that only a "Pro"
would associate themself with.

Far as I am concerned there is only one type of photographer...the kind who
cares about the world and enjoys photography for the sake of the personal
meaning derived from the experience. This is a perspective my mentor
taught me prior to his death...something that the "Pro" you ran into was out
of touch with.

This supposed pro was probably a former Enron executive or some such thing.

Regards...

"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)"
wrote in message ...
SNIP
It is unfortunate that a few bad apples stand out and
can give the field a bad impression when so many are
nice.

It's a bit like aliasing. The artifacts seem bigger than they actually
are! ;-)

Bart