As a photographer, artist, and mature adult, I am slowly tiring of social networking sites. There are just too many of them; they consume too much of my time; and they do little for me as a promotional tool. Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, Instagram, Tumblr, on and on; it’s endless. There may be something of value in them for some people. But for me, there are just too many problems.

Problem No. 1: Netbarf

I invented this word. Netbarf is the spew of networkers who seem to have to say something every 5 minutes. Don’t these people have lives? Do I really want to know what they are doing every 5 minuets? Frankly, I don’t care. For one thing, I personally know very few of my online “friends;” and even if I did know them, I am not interested in what they are doing every minute.

Go back to the Age of Telephones that ended 10 years ago. Would you have a friend who phoned you constantly to tell you what he or she was doing? At some point you would tell them to get help and hang up, never to take their calls again. I make it a habit to drop any contact who posts more than twice a day—and that is very generous.

Problem No. 2: The Cause

A lot of networkers use these sites to promote their politics, charities, friends, and businesses. Since I am politically aligned with most of my “friends” who post on these sites, there is no reason to preach to the converted. Those who promote their friends’ work are of no interest to me either, for their comments lack sincerity. (I promote you if you promote me: big deal.) As for charities, I have my own list of favorites.

Problem No. 3: It’s All About Me

The balance of networkers seem only interested in telling me what they are doing and do not care what I am doing. That is not interaction; it is self-promotion. People who are not well known (including probably myself) want to be recognized by those who are. It only makes sense but it seems to me that those people who are well known usually have very little time for anybody else.

Simple test: Contact a well-known Facebook friend and ask a question about your career. You probably will never get an answer. Ask them a question about their career or technique and it’s 50/50. Ask them to meet you for coffee and it’s 100% you will be ignored.

Facebook frustrations, Pinterest pinching

I actually am on Facebook (dsaxe). I usually post a photograph of mine once a week and write something brief about what I saw or felt when I took it. The only personal responses I usually get are from those friends I know personally. From the rest of my so-called friends I might get a few clicks of the Like button.

I am on Twitter but I hardly ever look at it. The reason is that I cannot read it because it is always updating with new tweets and so the screen keeps jumping. Perhaps in the wee hours of the night, fighting insomnia and drinking cognac, I might open my iPad and see what is going on. I have more than 150 Twitter followers, but I really have no idea who they are. They are mostly connected to me through photography but I have no idea what kind of photographers they are. There are just too many of them to check it out in detail.

I joined Pinterest (rhymes with plagiarism) a while back and posted a few photographs of mine. A week later I noticed that they had migrated to other sites and there was no credit. No credit means that any cheapskate looking for a cheap image can grab one and not pay for it. It might have happened to me but it’s unlikely I will ever find out. Tumblr is interesting when I am in a mood to just look at pictures — pictures of anything. But as a business tool I find it somewhat useless and no longer upload my pictures there.

What about a real relationship?

Have you found yourself sitting in a restaurant and gazing over at the next table to see a group of adults sitting together, all looking at their cellphones and ignoring each other? Are they relating to each other? Not! They are hiding, taking refuge in their telephones and tablets to avoid what a lot of people fear more than anything: face-to-face contact.

I managed to build a successful advertising and communications business without using social networks. I found that the best way to connect with people is to actually meet them — by going to meetings, cold calling, and hanging out in the right circles. In my case, I found that a better way of connecting with people was by learning to play golf.

For any of you aspiring photographers who want to build your businesses, consider this advice: Talk to people directly. When you address someone directly in conversation, there is a good chance they may be listening to you. If you do it via social network sites, they might read you but they will rarely respond. If you look at your Facebook “friends” list” you might notice that a lot of these people have thousands of friends. Do they really have time to see what you are up to? Do they really care?

(Second of two parts)

We are drawn into images by the sharpness of eye contact. Eye contact transcends the initial view of the image and allows us to establish that personal connection. Images that draw us in, keep our interest, and give us time to view the entire image are those where the eyes of the portrait subject look into our eyes. There is a feeling of connection to the subject, as if you are sharing the moment with them. It’s very hard to articulate and explain in words that feeling that connects you to a subject, either in the viewfinder or on the printed page. When that connection is there, its obvious – and doesn’t need words to explain it, we feel it.

Most of us have shot portrait jobs, whether on a professional basis or as an interested relative. We prep our subjects about what clothes to bring, props to pose with, and location backgrounds to deal with. We combine those elements into compositions and shoot away, telling our subjects to move this way, change hand positions or hip angles, chin angles up or down. But when it comes time to shoot the image those eyes had better be sharp.

The moms of the world, those that hire us and fire us, have the sharpest vision on the planet. If her daughter’s eyes aren’t the primary focus point in enough images, Mom will fire you and look for another photographer. That’s how important that connection is to her. Her child’s personality can be brought out the best by that whimsical look, that offhand glance, or a penetrating gaze that is defined by the eyes.

Lazy Focusing Hurts Portraits

That single focusing grid goes on the eyes of your subject. If I am close, or shooting a dedicated portrait lens like an 85mm lens, or at least that end of a zoom’s range, it’s easy to frame the image, move the multi-selector dial to position the focusing grid over the eye, and then focus. The common practice of holding the shutter-release button down in order to maintain focus while recomposing the image is cumbersome and another opportunity to screw up critical focus. If you are shooting on a tripod, which I use in every situation where I can, locking down the composition while still holding the shutter-release down halfway, is nearly impossible. The multiple focusing grids are meant to allow you to compose and focus, without the need for shutter-release manipulation.

If I’m farther back from my subject, or subjects (like a family), or using a wider-angle lens, I’m still placing the focusing grid across the eyes of the subject, even if it covers most of the head. And remember: If you’re shooting a family image, you focus on Mom. You compose the image to benefit mom, you focus on mom, and if you are smart, retouch her face for the digital proofs. Just to repeat, moms are the hiring/firing executives in the world of portraiture.

While this might seem elementary to many of us, I’ve seen examples of what I like to call “group focus,” which in bird photography would be called “flock shooting.” That single point of focus is just left in the middle, and if it’s on a father’s beer belly, so be it. Photographers might think that the depth-of-field of a typical portrait f-stop, like f8, will cover the sharpness issue for a group. But that’s not the point. The point is making the eyes of your subject the critical point-of-focus, which means it is the purest, sharpest, best defined part of the image. Lazy focusing skills won’t help you in portraiture.

Focusing on the eyes can be further enhanced using selective depth-of-field. An extremely shallow dof will draw your attention to the eyes even quicker. Using the program mode options of a camera, selected to portrait mode, will almost always result in the least creative image that can be taken. Critical focus and composition, and creative use of the f-stop, can result in portrait images that really have a power to them.

Level with Your Subject

Another aspect of focusing on the eyes is shooting at eye level. Now there are a lot of caveats to this, especially in portraiture, but my main concern has always been to give the subject the respect it is due. Sounds a little silly maybe, but shooting at eye level is as important to gaining that connection to our subject as is the sharpness of the subject’s eye.

Photographers diminish their subjects when they look down on them, an angle-of-view that can be seen as demeaning. Sometimes when we are new parents, and our toddler is crawling along the carpet, we call to them to look up at the camera instead of lying on our stomach and photographing them at eye level, in their world. In nature photography this is even more important.

A few years ago I was leading a photo safari out to the Toroweap (also known as Tuweep) area on the western edge of Grand Canyon National Park. It was early in May and there was still some snap to the early morning air as we drove the 60-plus dirt-road miles out to the rim. After shooting the sunrise and working the gorgeous, blooming cactus gardens and wildflowers we headed back north to the highway. Along the way I nearly ran over a five-foot gopher snake sunning itself in the road.

We all jumped out and started to photograph it, but no one except me wanted to get down on the road and shoot it at eye level. A snake in the dirt isn’t a wildlife portrait, but a photographer in the dirt shooting at eye level can capture a wild portrait. The image speaks for itself. Now, I know a gopher snake is a constrictor, and not poisonous, but I also know they can leave a good bite mark if disturbed – so I was careful. (In my earlier blog post I might have called this “pushing”.)

Standing and shooting down (when you could kneel or lay down) at small subjects takes something away from the photographer-subject relationship. It could be wildflowers, or butterflies, it could be small children, or snakes – practice shooting at eye level, and when the subject has eyes, focus on the eyes as well. The eyes are our invitation into a subject’s life. Every emotion can be shown in the face and eyes, and that moment tells a story.

(First of two parts)

I was leading a safari to California’s Morongo Valley to photograph a gold mine of songbirds and raptors, and this article was on my mind. As we worked the different birds I found myself commenting about the difficulty of getting the eye in tack-sharp focus, and keeping it in focus. Some of the birds were in shade where the eye wasn’t lit up by a reflection of the sun and thus more difficult to key on. While there are always exceptions (silhouettes, profiles, artistic blur, etc.) we normally shoot the eyes of our subjects if they appear in the image.

What does it mean to “shoot the eyes” of our subjects? If the image is a portrait, and the subject’s eyes will be in-frame, they become a focal point of the image. I look at the eyes in a photograph first: the eyes of a bride, the eyes of an athlete competing, the eyes of a grizzly bear, the eyes of an owl. If the eyes aren’t sharp I tend to disregard the quality of the overall image unless it was clearly shot with other intentions.

Focusing on Camera Settings

We improve our connection with our subject through the sharpness and placement of the eyes in our photographs, and there are tools built into our camera bodies to help us accomplish this. Modern digital cameras, and their finely tuned AF systems, can be twitchy – and twitchy is my kind word for it. We have all been in situations when critical focus was achieved only to be lost a second later as the camera’s AF system re-evaluated and re-focused … on something else. Taking the focusing off of AI-Servo (Canon) or Continuous Focus (Nikon) will help with static subjects.

Since I shoot Nikon, I will use their terminology. Go to the Focus Mode Selector on the front of the camera and select “S” rather than “C” or “M.” On the back of the camera use the AF- Area Mode selector to choose Single-point AF. You don’t want to be using Dynamic Focus (and all 51 of those AF points) or Area Focus. You want the camera to focus once, using one focusing grid, when you tap either the shutter release button or the AF-ON button on the back of the camera. Personally, my D3s is set to back focusing, with the shutter-release button only taking the image, not focusing. Most consumer-grade cameras don’t have an AF-ON button on the back.

I’m not sure I could go back to the shutter-release button focusing as well. Every shot you take activates the AF system, creating many more opportunities for a focus shift to occur – sometimes so subtly that you don’t notice it in the viewfinder. Back focusing, using only the AF-ON buttons for focusing, allows you to continue to shoot images without activating the AF system. This is a tremendous advantage once critical focus (on the eyes) is achieved. Compositional changes can be made easily without refocusing before the shot.

Servo and Continuous modes will attempt to keep the subject in focus, even when you aren’t triggering an image, a major source of twitchiness. Since we are shooting the eyes of the subject we want to only be using a single focusing grid. Now this might vary between nature subjects and portrait subjects, but I use a single focusing grid – just one. Obviously, you want to understand how to move that point around your viewfinder so that your grid can be placed exactly (if possible) on the eye of your subject. Now with the camera on single focus, using a single grid, focusing on the eyes is easier to maintain.

Shooting Wildlife Portraits

The standard wildlife lens is the 500mm f4 lens. It’s big, heavy, cumbersome, and expensive – as in your buying another car expensive. This lens and its 10x magnifying power are both a blessing and a curse. While we can easily isolate our subjects from the surrounding environment, depth-of-field is at an absolute minimum. Since wild animals are dynamic subjects and not static, there is more need to use some of the tools (dynamic focus and continuous focus) we talked about earlier, and thus bring AF twitchiness back into play.

On my recent safari I was going back and forth between single/continuous focus as the need to have the correct equipment options for different subjects demanded. But there were times when I manually tweaked the focus of that big lens to insure eye sharpness, the focusing grid covering the entire bird, not just the eye. That little bit of extra effort can help, but sometimes it can lead you to missing shots. Many of the little birds I was shooting were around 30 feet away; some were in the shade. While the D3s has extreme high ISO abilities, ISO 400 is still better than ISO 800, or higher. I shoot for quality, so I keep the ISO down when I can. I say this to show that there is a trade-off between ISO and shutter-speeds. I need high SS to stop movement, but I need quality images, or what’s the point? At 30 feet I have about 2 inches of depth-of-field at f4 with that 500mm lens. On a small bird critical eye focus is an absolute.

I had an interesting situation in Yellowstone a few years ago. A large bull bison was swimming the Yellowstone River towards me. If I focused on the front of his face – like his nose, his eye, about 18 inches farther back on his large head, would be out of focus. I had to change positions to get a better angle on the bison’s eye, move the focusing grid without looking away from the viewfinder, and shoot images as he bobbed in the river, mostly underwater. The resulting image was great, but without the eye in focus there would be no connection to the image, the personal struggle of the bison would have been lost.

I’m not a birder, I’m a bird photographer. I don’t just shoot people, I’m a portrait photographer. I know my photography has improved as I’ve struggled to make the connection in my images between the image viewer or buyer, and the subject. The more I work towards that perfectly sharp eye, composed in a creative way, the better my photography becomes. When I’m teaching a photography seminar I emphasize that we can move our feet, change our position, adapt to the shooting environment, all with the final goal of more powerful images.

The stock photography industry has to face the challenge of becoming relevant in an economy that has no patience for inadequate business models.

Today the vast majority of photographs are used without any contact with the traditional photo industry, which has completely lost control of production and distribution. But the industry continues stubbornly to apply old rules to this new landscape. It does not see, or purposely wants to ignore, that their model does not fit current needs and thus is chasing customers away.

It still hopes to enforce the antiquated rights-managed model on a space that obviously is not adapted to negotiate every usage, every fee, every image and where everyone is a publisher. It has failed to understand that in a world of Twitter, Tumblr, WordPress, Pinterest and Facebook, the client universe has changed from a few publishers to almost everyone in the world.

Agencies, Photographers Once Ruled

There was a time when the only two places one could find images were a photo agency and through a photographer. Back then photo agencies and independent photographers controlled production, as they decided what to shoot as well as where and how. This is no longer the case, and hasn’t been, actually, for a long time.

Take Flickr, for example. It has, and for a long time, offered a new channel of distribution to anyone looking for images, whether free or paying. Sure, Getty Images has tried to put the lid on that massive leak but with little success. The majority of images on Flickr are used without ever passing through a Getty representative. Why? Because they use Creative Commons, a licensing tool that exists outside of the photo industry, invented and used simply because existing ones were inadequate.

Spend some time on Facebook and ask yourself if any of the images you see have been licensed (or even if permission was sought). A study by PACA showed that 8 out of 10 images on the web are stolen (that is, used without permission).

Production? It has also been a long time since pro photographers and photo agencies had any control. They have massively been overtaken by the decisions of the masses, who now dictate to the photo industry the type of images that are successful.

Industry Reaction Repeated Mistakes

The traditional photo industry has attempted to react in numerous ways, first by accepting this new source of production in their tradition distribution channel: microstock. Most stock photo agencies have lowered their bar of entry and are accepting submissions by non-professional photographers, forever changing the production landscape.

In order to compete with the widening distribution channel, they also have increased dramatically their offering. While a traditional photo agency used to keep a few tens of thousands of photographs maximum, they now are in the tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions. And that’s still a speck of sand in the overall universe of available images.

They have also, repeating the mistakes of peers (RIAA), tried to engage image thieves in hopeless lawsuits. While some have anecdotal success here and there, the vast majority, here again, simply do not have the manpower and resources to fight back. It is a self-defeating process, as it will never be an effective solution against sharing. Piracy, you see, is not about stealing but accessibility. People do not steal images because they are evil; they steal because they are no practical alternatives if they want to use an image they like.

‘Lawsuits or Despair’

We have switched from the “one to many” (one magazine, millions of readers) model to many to many (millions of users sharing with millions of users). Everyone is a publisher. Royalty Free might seem a little better adapted, but most images end up being used hundreds, if not thousands of times without the owner ever knowing it. The stock industry is horribly ill-adapted to the current market. And, instead of adapting, it is fighting it. Sounds very much like the dinosaur scenario to me.

Take, for example, the absurdity of trying to sue over every copyright infringement. It borders on complete insanity. If people steal your images it is because they like them. For some reason, they either can’t pay for them (too expensive) or cannot find who to pay (poor accessibility). Rather than find a way to accommodate this huge opportunity with a creative licensing solution, the industry reacts with lawsuits or despair.

If the photo industry wants to survive, it has to quickly understand that it is not the amateurs who are taking their bread and butter but their own infantile stubbornness.

It’s a simple question. When I read camera reviews on blogs, why are many of the sample photographs that some reviewers use so bloody awful?

You know what I’m talking about. Whenever a new camera review is posted on a blog or website someplace, it usually includes a series of sample photographs taken with that camera. For the most part, they all suck. I know some of these reviewers are simply writers, but many of them claim to be working photographers. Why don’t they use images that show off their talent?

I know some of these blogger/photographers are better than the images they show us. Instead, they show me nothing. A wife’s face, their kid, their dog, flowers on the dining room table, a view from their living room window. Wow, how exciting!

Many Review Photos Are Little More Than Snapshots

These guys spend countless hours going over every arcane detail in the camera’s software, every button, every menu item, examining in minute detail every subtle nuance in the design, but when it comes to taking a few photographs to show to the audience, they seem to be going through the motions, spending a few minutes and coming up with photographs that amount to nothing more than snapshots. (Well, at least the camera was level.)

When I read a camera review, I only want to see five photographs.

• One shot in broad daylight
• One shot on an overcast day
• One shot indoors
• One shot at night (ISO 3200)
• One shot of a fast-moving subject at wide aperture.

That’s it. I don’t need to see anything else (nor do I need to see extreme crops of the corner details). I know this little rant seems a bit picky since most camera buyers have very little experience. But I never read reviews for those cameras; I am simply not interested. What I am talking about are pro or prosumer cameras targeted for professionals and advanced amateurs. After all, if I am expected to evaluate the value the camera as a working tool, it would follow that I want to see how it performs in situations to which I can relate.

For instance, sometimes I see a night shot at ISO 3200 as one of the samples. It is usually a simple shot of a street at night. The reviewer puts on his hat, puts his dog on a leash, and steps outside with his review camera. As he walks the dog, he snaps a few of the street. Awesome! If he is going to show something taken at night, make it interesting. Put a person in the photo, go into a coffeehouse or bar, do anything except simply snapping the shutter the minute you step outside.

Useful Reviews Take Time and Effort

Since I am not famous and my blog isn’t visited by thousands of people a day, it’s unlikely that I will ever be asked to review a new camera from a major manufacturer. But if I were, I would do it like this: First, I would see what market this camera is targeted to. Then I would carry it with me for a few days and shoot 500-1000 shots with it in various conditions pertaining to the camera’s target audience. Then I would begin editing these shots and quickly get it down to 50 or so. Then I would wait a week or so and choose my final six or seven shots to include in my review. Then I would write about what I thought of this camera from the user’s perspective. That’s it. But that’s another story; and I might save that little rant for my next article.

In this edition of Ask the Photo Business Coach, I discuss how content is becoming a commodity and how you can react to that reality.

When it comes to equipment, photographers always have to find a balance; no one wants to carry around something that’s not useful. Two-way radios (or commercial-grade “walkie-talkies,” as many users call them) are affordable, lightweight and provide photographers important advantages, several of which can significantly improve the images they capture.

Safety, Discretion Among Benefits

Brent Russell Paull operates American West Photography in Tulare, Calif., and has four 2-way radios for his photo safaris.

“We use them mostly between vehicles so that folks see what I see and I can tell them where to look,” he says. “A typical safari group might be in three or four vehicles spread over a mile or so. Folks in the back may spot something none of the rest of us saw and call us back.  This happened last week when the last car spotted a bobcat and we all came back and were able to photograph it.”

Bill Lockhart’s article “Photography and Safety” begins with a discussion of two-way radios. “Landscape photography involves hiking and going into areas that are sometimes treacherous,” he writes. “One should never do landscape photography alone.  And in my opinion, good communications is essential.”

Wedding photographer Kevin Keel has written about how he’s able to work discreetly even at ceremonies where he has two or three photographers.

“The last thing we want is to ‘make a scene’ and part of what makes us different is our established workflow that allows us to know instantaneously where and when each of us needs to be at any particular moment in time. We even go to the extra added effort of using two way radios for those times when we need to talk to each other quickly and quietly.”

Considerations in Choosing Radios

Three things to consider when choosing a two-way radio are size, range, and features, and the CLS Series from Motorola Solutions is perfectly suited for photography professionals.

The Motorola CLS1110 and Motorola CLS1410 are two-way radios that are easy to use, reliable, and weigh less than five ounces.  Their rechargeable batteries provide up to 12 hours of battery life, and an available earpiece has an inline push-to-talk microphone. The Motorola CLS Series two-way radios are inexpensive and have plenty of range.

No matter which model you choose, two-way radios help photographers stay in touch in the field, at events, even when caravaning in vehicles. They are helpful in coordinating assistants, and when communications have to be discreet. At just a few ounces, they won’t weigh you down.

It was 20 below zero that morning as Casey Bell and I drove toward Yellowstone National Park on a winter photo safari. We had headed out in the dark from Gardiner, Mont., passing through Mammoth Hot Springs and heading east into the park. A passing storm had dropped about six inches of new snow, and we seemed to be the only vehicle on the road.

Shortly after arriving we spotted two wolves mixing it up with a pack of coyotes that had taken possession of a bull elk carcass. We’d seen the wounded elk the previous afternoon, staggering out of Soda Butte Creek, and the two wolves waiting him out. Now, with snow flurries coming and going we shot amazing images of the black wolf trying to push the coyotes off their kill. A hundred yards away the gray wolf sat on her haunches, her belly hanging heavy with unborn pups.

I heard the ranger vehicle a couple of hundred yards away, crunching through the snow towards us. In previous years rangers had allowed parking on the main road in winter as long as everyone was parked in the same lane allowing access past them. This ranger parked and walked up to us, the wolves and coyotes still very active a hundred yards away.  “You can’t park here,” he said. “You need to move along now, right now.”

As I debated past Yellowstone winter parking rules with the ranger, I continued to shoot, never looking away from the viewfinder. Then I heard the words I knew were coming: “If you don’t stop shooting and get in your vehicle right now, I will ticket you.”  The roads were empty and the park was quiet, but we stopped shooting, broke down the tripods and slowly, ever so slowly, got the 4Runner’s tires rolling. We continued shooting out the side windows as the ranger shadowed us back into Lamar Valley.

I relate this experience as an example of the obstacles we sometimes face as photographers in the field.  We were parked legally, standing on the road, with the wildlife more than a hundred yards away – yet the ranger decided to run us anyway. But I shot at least a hundred extra images while I tried to talk him into letting us stay.

My friends and my clients both like to say I “push” in my photography, and I suppose in this case I was pushing back a little, not willing to just pack up and leave immediately. But there are times when photography success doesn’t come until the very end of a difficult day, a long drive, a nasty storm – or when a difficult animal or ranger finally relents, and we experience and photograph breathtaking moments.  Nature photography is about breathtaking moments, and sometimes you have to push, and push hard, to experience them.

Pushing Past Objections

I was shooting a wedding in Pasadena, Calif., not long ago when the location director told me I couldn’t use a curving staircase in my group photography images.  Now this location was built around this curving staircase — the wedding ceremony was downstairs and the reception area was upstairs. It was the perfect backdrop for me for this large wedding.

When the director told me to stop shooting on the stairs I asked the bride’s mother to come over.  I told her this was the perfect spot to shoot these group images and the director wanted me to stop.  I asked her the rental fee for this facility (which was outrageous) and if the director had specified no photography on the staircase.  He melted under the mother’s glare and we continued with the photography. Something like that seems to happen on a regular basis, people or circumstances conspiring to reduce our ability to create images.  We should never give in easily or allow others to control our photography.

Photographers are blessed with an ability, borne from tireless hours, to see in a way that is different from most people. We see moments, we see landscapes, we see poses, we see backdrops, we see the blending of color and design; we see what others don’t. Overcoming the obstacles that are placed before us has to be part of our makeup.  That ability to see has value to our clients and is worth pushing for. I equate pushing with passion.

Pushing Past Protests

My photography is my business and my passion.  I have found it odd that others, not professionals, want to hamstring us and restrict our successes. Sometimes folks take an ownership position in our national parks and along our beaches. I don’t know how many times folks have stopped their cars on a road in Yellowstone to yell at me as I was photographing some animal. Even though I’m the requisite distance away, they know better than I do. My reply is always the same.  “If you don’t have a badge, keep driving.”  Every time they have driven on.

A few years ago I was shooting with a friend, Bob Sutton, down at La Jolla Cove outside San Diego, a great location for shooting newborn harbor seals and mothers. After parking we approached the cliff overlooking the cove only to find protestors with placards blocking our access to the stairs leading to the beach. We walked over to the nearby lifeguard station and asked them about it. They said the beach was open to the public regardless of the protestors, and to just remain a reasonable distance from the seals. Of course, a 500mm f4 lens provides all the distance I need for wildlife and personal safety.

Bob and I are big guys but we still had to push through those folks to access the beach. The protestors had set up a string on the beach they didn’t want us to cross, but we crossed. With long lenses we began shooting from 25-30 yards. The seals ignored us, but the protestors didn’t. They came down from the cliff and stood in front of our lenses, shouting that they loved the seals and we must hate the seals. Telling them that my images had appeared in dozens of magazines promoting wildlife of all kinds meant nothing to them. I took off my photo vest to show them that I was carrying mace, and that if they continued to threaten us I would mace them. It was a drastic step I would never have taken, but the bluff worked and they retreated, leaving us in peace.

Each photographer has to decide how hard to push themselves, their subjects, and those around them.  Whether shooting for myself or on photo safaris, I try to push through the opposition, whether people or weather, through physical exertion or the monotony of looking and seeing nothing.  Great images don’t come easily, or without some type of pushing.  None of us can count the sunrises anymore, or the missed meals – but the photographs speak for themselves.

Pushing Gently for a Helping Hand

Not far from my home in Tulare, Calif., is a small valley that leads into the foothills of the Sierras, just southwest of Sequoia National Park. An old paved road passes through Yokohl Valley, meandering through the oak woodlands, rolling hills, and pastures. In December 2011 I was creeping my way through the valley when I found a bobcat crossing a pasture, maybe 60 yards off the road.  When I stopped the cat leaped into an oak tree and out of sight. I looked at that barbed-wire fence and began to weigh the risks of crossing it. Then I looked down the road to see a ranch employee repairing fences about a half-mile away.

I drove down and told him about the bobcat and asked for permission to cross the fence to photograph it. He said he was the only ranch employee that ever allowed someone to cross a fence.  I sped back to the spot, parked, crossed the fence, and shot the most amazing images of that bobcat in the tree from about 25 feet, just inside the oak branches. A few minutes later the ranch hand drove up and I waved him over, and we both stood there while I shot more images, amazed at how tranquil the cat was.  He told me he had never seen a bobcat that close before.  But more importantly, he told me that I was welcome to cross the fence anytime I wanted to shoot photos and if anyone bothered me to tell them I had his permission. His name is like gold now.

It’s no secret that social media can be leveraged to monetize your reputation as a photography expert. But there is a dark side to this: a whole new generation of photography role models coming up who are unfit to be role models.

The Internet gives people the ability to self-publish and craft an online image. And there is no rule that says in order to be an expert influencing others you have to run an ethical business or have good business practices. So it’s buyer beware.

I’m not suggesting that it is a bad thing to have a photography mentor or role model, but you need to choose wisely. Don’t be afraid to question the advice you get from another photographer. Hear what they have to say, but make your own decision using sound judgment. If something doesn’t add up, then it probably doesn’t.

Bad Advice that No Beginner Should Read

I bring this up because a former wedding photographer / influential figure recently released an online guide giving his 10 steps to starting a wedding photography business. He advocated building a wedding photography brand even if you don’t have the requisite photography skills, because, he said, your brand is more important than your product.

Advice like “spray and pray on P mode” if you are so overwhelmed you forget how to use the camera is so irresponsible that no beginning photographer should ever read such advice.

My own advice if you are too overwhelmed by a photo shoot and forget how to use the camera: Stop shooting weddings (or any other paid assignment) and spend a few years learning how to be a good photographer so you don’t ruin a couple’s special day. Ask yourself: Is this a level of responsibility I am ready to handle? The first rule of customer service is to put the customer first, and sometimes that means turning down a job for which you are not yet qualified.

Further advice advocated spending as little time as possible editing a wedding photo shoot because you have more important things to do. (Like cashing the $6,000 check and not doing work?) He said that you should spend no more than two hours editing a wedding photo shoot and batch process everything. No need to open your images either because it’s a waste of time.

I suppose that strategy makes sense if your business is geared around placing a higher priority on your own image than those in the photos, but that is not the way to go about being a professional photographer. If you take paying jobs, then you need to be able to deliver the goods. This is not the time to be lazy.

Beware of the Hard Sell

Stuffed in the content was the constant reminder to use his products. It turns out that the photographer only had four or five years of actual wedding photography experience before getting out of the business to lecture and hawk products several years ago. There is an old saying that applies here: “Those who can, do; those who can’t, teach.” If you are going to seek someone out as a mentor in person or online, make sure that they have legitimate credentials.

The sad part is that he is just one of a bunch. Despite all the great things photographers have done with the Internet, but there are a lot of toxic characters out there who have far too much visibility. And people without the experience to discern right from wrong tend to flock to those who shill the most. Those who shill the most usually do not have your best interests in mind. These “industry leaders” know that and exploit it for all it’s worth.

To these shady photography mentors I say if you got into professional photography merely as a get-rich-quick scheme or to be famous, then do your clients a favor and tell them that first. The let them decide if they still want to hire you.

I’ve been thinking about my photographer friends. They are absolutely passionate about what they do; they capture memories that last forever; they make people look so much cooler than they are in real life; and most of them are absolutely, totally exhausted.

And that has me wondering: What’s going on here?

Because of the pride they take in their images, they are absolutely killing themselves by poring over every minute detail and working their talented fingers to the bone.  Sound familiar? I hate to break it to you, but if you’re working your tail off with 12-plus-hour days, you’re losing money.

We talked last month about the essential moneymaking activities in your business and how you simply have to dedicate time to them every week.  Well, if you’re as overworked as most of my professional photographer friends — attacking those all-too-urgent but nonessential tasks (and feverishly chasing distractions on Facebook, Youtube, and Pinterest for stress relief) — you’re probably too busy to do them.

Your Biggest Limitation: Time

It’s time to break your self-dependence.  Don’t even tell me that you can’t afford it.  If you want a truly profitable photography business, you can’t afford not to get some help. Think about it like this:

1. How much do you get paid hourly?

2. How much would it cost you to get someone to do the mundane work for you?

3. When you subtract the cost of hiring someone from your hourly wage, do you have money left?

Investing in hiring some help — and it is investing — will make you money. Why is that? Because every hour you gain by having someone else do your non-moneymaking (but necessary) chores is an extra hour you can use to tackle those moneymaking tasks.  So even though it comes with a small expense, it’s still actually making you money.

Don’t fight me on this.  Your business can only grow to the limits of your finite time and energy resources; if you want to keep growing, you need help.

It’s Time to Outsource

What tasks can you outsource?  How about starting with the stuff you hate to do. Take these tasks:

• Blogging
• Social media
• Organizing and filing images
• Paperwork
• Bookkeeping.

Get rid of the most dreaded ones first.  You might even be able to get an intern to do some of them for free. It’s easier to find good help than you think.  There are plenty of people who would love to earn $10 an hour for the privilege of helping you.

Where to Get Relief

1. Your kids.  Don’t laugh this one off; most of them probably know their way around Google and Facebook better than you.  Put them to work.

2. Colleges. Contact your local colleges and offer a job position. I suggest that you don’t hire a photography or arts major for administrative work. You’re better off with a business, communications or journalism major for busy work.

3. Hire a virtual assistant. That’s someone who works for you from home.  Some great sites to find someone: HireMyMom.com, Odesk.com, and Elance.com.

Whatever you do, don’t keep slaving away all by yourself.  You got into this business to pursue your dreams, and you deserve it! Ditch the busy work so you can focus on what you really want to do, and free up a little precious free time in the process.

What’s the No. 1 task you’d like to outsource?

Recently, I wrote an article about photographing strangers in the street and the perils and risks that befall all of us who do such “horrid things.” Though this is the method I usually prefer, there often are times when I will ask permission of the people I photograph. It all depends on the situation.

For instance, one of my ongoing projects involves photographing people at their place of work. I chose to do this series by having the subjects pose for the camera because a cooperative subject facing the camera works best for this project. I want to take my time photographing someone in their environment. Sometimes I want to take a series of photographs, which, is difficult, if not impossible, if the subject is unaware of what I am doing.

Focus on Conversations to Win People Over

So how does one go about asking complete strangers for permission to take their picture? Over the years, through trial and error, I have developed a number of ways to approach strangers to request and receive their permission. What follows are but a few.

1. Often, it is the subject who approaches you. “Nice camera!” “Can you tell me how to get to…”  “Got any spare change?” People approach you all the time. Some of them are interesting and others are not. When this happens all I have to do is engage them in a conversation for a short while and then ask.

2. Compliments are nice door openers. “Nice hat!” and “Nice dog!” are ways of breaking the ice. People like to be noticed. They respond favorably, we exchange some words and I ask. If they are gruff or ignore me, I move on.

3. People at work are often bored, and talking to them about their work or their lives is something that they appreciate. Again, they are noticed and are only too happy to speak to you about themselves. Waitresses and bartenders, sales staff, placard holders (very common these days) are all in this category. Remember, people like to talk about themselves — they really do — so learn to be a good listener.

4. Day to day, I talk to people about many mundane, everyday things. Picking up the laundry, getting my car serviced, business meetings, etc., put me into contact with many people on a daily basis. Eventually they become used to seeing you. Eventually you show up with a camera around your neck and they become used to seeing you that way. One day, you simply ask.

Sometimes It Pays to Have Patience

Having said all that, there is still a technique to get people to say yes. Walking up to somebody and saying “Nice dog! Can I take your picture?” is a bit aggressive. The subtle approach works best. Forget that there is a camera around your neck and just talk to them about anything. Save the picture-taking for later. Most of the time, once someone is comfortable with you, they say yes.

There have been occasions when I returned over and over to the same person on different occasions and finally asked them on the third or fourth visit. For instance there is one store in Palm Beach that I return to four or fives times a year and chat with one of the saleswomen.  I have photographed her on many occasions but I am still not completely satisfied but this has spawned a relaxed, friendly relationship. She has invited my wife and me to parties, gallery openings, etc., and I have been more successful photographing her on these occasions than in the store. One thing always leads to another.

Sometimes it’s best to have some ammunition. Women photographers seem to get more yes’s than no’s. I wonder why? Older photographers are less “threatening.” If the photographer is with his or her dog, that surely helps because dogs are great conversation starters.

All it takes is practice, more practice and a lot of patience.  This photograph was made recently close to my home. I was driving by, saw her holding the sign and parked a few blocks away. I walked back and as I passed her I smiled.

“Nice hair,” I said.

“Thank you.” she replied. “Do you want a tattoo?”

“No thanks, my wife probably would probably strangle me.”  She laughed.

“Can I take your picture? I am doing a series on Dixie Highway and you would be perfect for it.”

“Oh, please do.” she replied, and I took six or seven shots of her. Her boss was sitting on a chair behind me.

“Cool camera. Do you do this all the time?”

“Yes,” I said. “It keeps me out of trouble.”

I asked if I could take a few of him. It was easy.

In this edition of Ask the Photo Business Coach, I discuss how to look at the numbers for your photography business. By starting with your financial goals and knowing your conversion rate, you’ll know how heavily you’ll need to market.

Every businessperson wants to know how to make his or her business more profitable. And yet when it comes to actually doing it, we often shoot ourselves in the proverbial foot.  Especially photographers.

Put on your big-kid panties and grow some thick skin, because I’m about to tell you something you probably do not want to hear. Ready?

You don’t have the success you want and deserve because you’re spending too much time doing the wrong things. And you’re not the only one. This is a chronic problem for all small businesses, but for photographers in particular.  They’re busy working on the everyday activities of the business — answering email, filing, uploading, downloading, posting to blogs, editing photos. These activities, while essential for your business’ success, are not money-making.

If you want to increase your profitability, you have to spend time – every week, if not every day — on the money-making activities of your business.

1. Lead-generating activities. These are the marketing, networking and promotional activities you do that bring in more leads.

2. Sales-generating activities. These are the things you do that turn those leads into sales.

3. Improving your service or performance.

4. Education, which helps you to do these things.

Any of These Time Wasters Sound Familiar?

I’ve been kind so far.  Everyone admits to being over worked with the everyday chores of running a business. But what about the time wasters?

In a survey conducted by America Online and Salary.com, the average worker wastes 2.09 hours per day, not counting lunch.  That’s what he admits to. That adds up over the course of a week, a month, a year!

· Email. Did you know that the average person spends 49 minutes per day managing email?

· Text Messages. The average user sends 188 text messages per month.

· Surfing the Web. More than 75 percent of us spend at least 1-3 hours every day on the Internet.

· Television. The average American watches 28 hours of television per week. That’s 4 hours a day.

You Can Eliminate Your Time Wasters

You don’t have to eliminate all your time wasters.  But if you cut out just two hours per week and used that time to work on money-making activities for your photography business, just imagine what you could accomplish in a year!

I’m going to help you uncover hidden time you didn’t even know you had with a simple exercise.  In fact, most people recover at least 1 hour per day by doing this.

1. Get out a piece of paper and write down everything you do in a day.  I mean everything. No cheating.

2. Look at your list and circle all the time wasters. Anything that doesn’t improve your health, relationship, financial situation, emotional or spiritual well-being falls into this category.

3. Pick just one time waster you can eliminate or at least limit to free up a minimum of one hour per week.

4. Replace that hour of wasted time with a money-making activity and book it on your calendar as an appointment that you have to keep with yourself.

It’s not easy eliminating your time wasters, especially when you use them as stress relief, but doing so is the first step to increased profitability.

(Editor’s note: Want to set yourself apart? Consider adding new skills for in-demand services. In this post, Tatianne Lugo from ICE Portal describes the techniques behind high-quality 360-degree virtual tours.)

For some industries, 360-degree panoramic images have gone from novelty to virtual necessity. Travel websites can increase hotel bookings, and real estate listings can increase traffic, just by featuring 360 tours.

But beyond hotels and houses, panoramic photos can be used in a wide range of applications — from online editorial features to highlighting corporate facilities. Local healthcare facilities, sports fields and parks can promote their sites with virtual tours. Even wedding photographers are starting to offer 360 photos of the ceremony and reception venues.

There are several ways to create 360s, from simple right-out-of-the-box, one-shot solutions to more laborious and higher-quality production and post-production techniques. For those serious about 360 imaging, let’s explore some of the practices that create higher-quality results.

A 360-degree image essentially is a full-circle view of a location that allows the viewer to virtually turn left and right as well as “look” all around (in a cylindrical image) and even up and down (in spherical image). A realistic 360-degree image gives users a more encompassing and immersive view of a location. And the production process can be completed in 10 minutes.

Let’s start with the hardware. What do you need?
• A wide-angle lens (preferably 17mm or wider)
• A rotating head. I recommend the Nodal Ninja, as it’s lightweight and easy to maintain.
• A sturdy tripod
• A leveling head/hot shoe camera level
• A shutter remote. This will help avoid camera movement when the shutter is released.

Shooting a High-Quality 360

Now to the production: First, place your camera in an interesting spot, and remember that it does not have to be in the center. You are not framing a still shot; you have to think three dimensionally. Stand in a position and rotate in place to give yourself an idea of every angle. Frame every angle as if it were a still. It is good to have some foreground elements to help the show depth.

Make sure your camera is leveled. This is where your leveling head comes in handy. If you don’t level your tripod and camera correctly, you will end up with a crooked horizon and may also have issues stitching images together.

I highly recommend bracketing. Since it would be time consuming and challenging to properly light all 360 degrees around, shoot multiple exposures to capture the varying light levels. One bracket of three with a plus-2 exposure value and a minus-2 exposure value should give you good color and light values in an indoor/outdoor space with even lighting. If you have multiple light sources, such as a window in a room, remember to bracket for each light source.

Overlap your images. For a successful stitching, you need to overlap at least 20 percent to 30 percent on each image depending on your lens focal length. If you don’t have enough overlap, you may see seams or even missing fragments in the image when in post-production. I shoot with an overlap of 30 percent on each side with a Nikon 10.5 mm lens, which allows me to take six angles at 60 degrees each for a full 360-degree turn.

How 360s Are Put Together

Part of creating a good-quality image is bracketing. But to acquire all the ranges of light and shadow, you need software that helps blend the images together. Photomatix Pro has done it for me for years; their interface is easy to understand and helps manage all the options. There is also “Merge to HDR” in Photoshop. Use the software you have available. The result you are looking for is an image that is evenly exposed all around.

Once you have all images blended, it’s time to stitch them together. There are several types of software that allow stitching of images. The one I have used for the past eight years, PTGui, has a great interface, produces the best results as far as seams and such, and a batch stitcher that makes life a little easier on big jobs. Find the option that fits your budget and needs. It’s better to have your images stitch to an equirectangular image as a TIF or PSD. This way you can Photoshop your image to perfection and then deliver it to the client as is.

Presenting a 360-Degree Image

If your client doesn’t have a player (and most do not), it’s up to you to deliver. There are several options, such as those from Java, Flash and QuickTime, as well as HTML5.

The Java player is still used by many sites and is usually the only format they will display. Flash Player allows you to do some interesting things implementing some flash interactivity, but sadly, it does not play on the iOS devices that are growing in popularity. The QuickTime player is used less than in the early days, and at ICE Portal, we have never had a client request we display in QuickTime. HTML5 offers a solution if you want to a broader reach (i.e. mobile devices including iOS and Android and most desktop browsers). I suspect this will become more of ubiquitous in the future as more developers create “Flash-like” features and functionality.

There is no shortage of interest in Pinterest, and photographers seem especially keen to take advantage of this most visual of social media. But, as with most everything shiny and new, there are concerns, and bloggers haven’t been shy about voicing them. Let’s take a look, and stick some pins on both sides of the board.

‘The Place to Be’

“The site is perfect for photographers because its target market user group is women between the ages of 25 and 44, and it’s a visual media form,” according to a Virtual Photography post that goes on to say, “we’re seeing a wide variety of visual businesses use Pinterest on a regular basis, from photographers to graphic designers and other artisans. If you are in a visual field, Pinterest is the place to be.”

As a visual medium, Pinterest has clear value as a vehicle to showcase photography portfolios. Some photographers use it as a place to post inspirations to be shared directly with clients, or even to solicit some. It’s even used to prepare clients for shoots with visual tutorials. There are flyers, brochures, business cards, even coupons. Big fans pin how-to videos and suggestions for clients on displaying photographs.

Suggestions abound for setting yourself apart on Pinterest. Come up with an interesting name. Concentrate on detail photos grouped by theme. Make sure to add descriptions and links. Reward people who pin your stuff with Like on Facebook. A “Pin it” button on your site encourages sharing.

Copyright Questions

Now, the bad news – actually, the news that some say is bad. Pinterest is yet another social medium that allows users to capture images and distribute them without compensation, or even credit.

Dave Copeland explains on ReadWriteWeb.com how Pinterest avoids copyright violations by publishing information provided by others. He writes, “As long as Pinterest continues to comply with a provision of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act that requires it to remove content when asked by the copyright owner, users are free to continue pinning any images they find on the Internet.”

Sara says on SavingforSomeday.com that she used her legal education to pore over the Pinterest Terms and Conditions. She says, “I do have serious concerns about Pinterest hosting full-size images on their server, often without knowledge or permission from the original copyright holder. In doing this, Pinterest removes all references to the the original source. That creates significant issues with copyright (as well as other issues), especially when the copyright holder may not have provided authorization, tacit or otherwise, for the redistribution of the image. Now, the image can easily be redistributed without any determination of whether the image is protected by copyright.”

To avoid infringing on the copyright Sara advise Pinterest users to refer to the original work rather than cutting and pasting it. Rather than “re-pinning,” she says, take a minute to verify the original source. Never copy an image from Pinterest to use on your blog, she says, and don’t perpetuate the wrong owner of an image. Sara goes as far as suggesting watermarking images.

Anyone have other suggestions for keeping Pinterest safe? Anyone run into problems already? Tell us in the comments.

In this edition of Ask the Photo Business Coach, I break down what you need to do (and how long it takes) to make it in the photography industry. Take a look at the steps I lay out in this video.

Looking at photographs is a very personal experience. Everyone has their opinions about what is good art and what is not. When it comes to photographs, some like landscapes, others go for street photography, and others prefer conceptual photography or portraits. It’s all a matter of personal taste. Of course, I have my own preferences, but it is not a particular style of photography that I prefer over another. What interests me are the way a photograph is made and the impact it has on me as a viewer.

Seeing and Believing

Photography these days is moving along two separate, distinct paths. The first is the photographer observing something, photographing it, and printing the image exactly as he or she saw it. Outside of correcting the RAW image for color balance and exposure, nothing else is done to the photograph. No burning in of the corners, no darkening or lightening of the subject, no darkening of the background or dodging of the subject — nothing. What they are telling me is, “This is what I saw.”

In order for these types of images to succeed as photographs, what the photographer saw has to be special — something unique; something that is unnoticed by the casual viewer. A different angle, a shadow, a relationship between between subject and background, anything to tell me that the photographer noticed something out of the ordinary. Then it is transformed into a photograph, something special. Unfortunately, when it does not work, it is because the photographer was working to a formal, preordained plan or statement and the resulting images are no more than a checked-off list to suit that plan. Working this way results in dull, uninspiring images.

Once More, with Feeling

The second path is to view something ordinary and make something special from it — to take what the photographer saw, and then by some form of manipulation such as framing, dodging, burning in, contrast adjustment, adding something personal to the image. I am not referring to extreme Photoshop manipulation techniques but simply the same adjustments that photographers have traditionally used to place their distinct marks upon an image — passion, feeling, something to tell me, “This is what I felt.” That is done by working with the image, changing it in such a way as to put some of the photographer’s heart and soul into it. Dark corners or background, lightened subject, bleached color or color desaturated or super-saturated — all of these techniques may contribute to putting the photographer’s personal impression upon their image.

This is nothing new. Photographers have been doing this for years. Eugene Smith was fanatical about his printing and would spend days working on a single print — bleaching small areas, darkening foregrounds, and lightening shadows until he got what he wanted. Man Ray would solarize his images (exposing the negative to light while processing) to create the surreal image he desired.

In my view, the best images work when the viewer is transformed from an ordinary reality (seeing what everybody else sees) to what the photographer saw and felt when he or she snapped the shutter. These photographs work because they make the viewer want to linger, to explore and involve themselves in to what is happening in the image. If the all the photographer has to say is, “This is what I saw,” I am left unimpressed.

In working to license rights to your photography, you need to recognize that there is a tremendous oversupply of images. So while your images are certainly much better on a quality and artistic level than most of the images out there, unfortunately that isn’t all it takes to make sales. As I said in my most recent post, getting the images seen by potential customers is the big problem.

Here’s a list of the number of images in a few categories at 4 of the major distributors.

Statistics show that the vast majority of customers choose an image from those found in the first 300 reviewed in a web search. Very few look at more than a few hundred images in any category before making a decision either to buy, or go somewhere else. So the question is how do you get your images shown in that first 300.

Customers can’t buy what they don’t see. At most sites the newest images uploaded play a major role in the sequence images are shown. This means that newly uploaded images have a chance of being seen in the first weeks or months after being uploaded. But it won’t be long until they are pushed down below that 300 level.

Using additional keywords to define specific aspects of an image may keep your image high in the search returns for a longer period of time – assuming some customers actually use the words you’ve inputted to search for images. Specifics don’t always help because many customers are looking for more generic images.

Algorithms Have Replaced Editing

Twenty years ago customers would call a picture agency for research, describe what they were looking for and the agency’s researchers would go through the files and pick a selection of images that they thought would fit the customer’s needs. The researchers got to know the best images in their collections and developed a sense of what their customers wanted. New images weren’t sent out just because they were new.

Now, all that personal visual judgment is gone. At the rights-managed and traditional royalty-free agencies the personal judgment of image quality and appropriateness of the subject matter has been replaced by computer algorithms that are heavily dependent on words.

Buyers Often Follow the Herd

The microstock sellers (iStockphoto, Shutterstock, et al) do offer a variety of ways for the customers to organize search returns. One is usually the number of times an image has been downloaded or purchased. There aren’t any good public figures on how frequently customers use any of the sort options, but it is believed that a significant percentage of customers sort on Number of Downloads when it is an option. This gives the customer the benefit of quickly seeing the images that a huge number of other customers found useful and purchased.

In one sense the picture research principle is still working. But, it is now much harder for that new image that has just arrived to ever get seen unless the customer is smart enough to do a search for newest images as well as a separate search for most downloads.

Take iStockphoto for example. The top-selling waterfall image has been licensed more than 2,000 times; mountains, 1,500 times; domestic cats, 1,500 times; and tigers, 1400 times. I encourage you to go to iStockphoto, search for the subject matter in your collection, sort by downloads, see how many times some of the images have been downloaded and how long they have been on that site.

Look at some on the first page, but also look at the 100th and 300th image to see how quickly the number of downloads falls off. This will give you a good idea of the demand for that subject matter.

Traditional Sites’ Methods Mysterious

Traditional sites (RM and RF) don’t offer a variety of search options like the microstock sites do. With traditional sites the search order is pre-determined by the distributor and the customer must take-it-or-leave-it.

Traditionals do use complex computer algorithms that attempt to bring certain images to the top, but often they are based on which images will generate the most revenue for the distributor (lowest royalty percentage for the creator) rather than a visual judgment of image quality and appropriateness that a good editor might make. In some cases weight is given to the number of times an image has been viewed, put in a lightbox, or licensed. Part of the problem is that the information about how the algorithms work is considered proprietary and not shared with the image suppliers.

Some Good News About Microstock

More and more customers are going to the microstock sites to find most of the images they need. Microstock prices, while still low, are going up. Prices for RM images are going down as the sellers of these products try to compete with microstock. Many RM images are now being licensed for prices lower than microstock The proportional share of images licensed as RM relative to the share licensed as microstock is declining steadily.

Most of the RM companies (Alamy excepted) will want exclusive rights to the images (and similars) they accept. To maximize earnings it is important to have your images in as many different places as possible so they can be seen by the broadest possible cross-section of customers. You can put the same images with multiple microstock sites plus Alamy on a non-exclusive basis.

For more information check out: Getting Images Seen, 2011 Stock Photo Market Size and Average Return from iStockphoto.

I’m regularly contacted by photographers wanting to know how they can license rights to their images in today’s market. Recently I was contacted by a nature and wildlife photographer whose work was excellent. This photographer regularly conducts photo workshops where he teaches others how to take great scenic and wildlife pictures. Here’s what I told him.

The challenge is getting your images where customers can see them. Two good specialist wildlife agencies in the U.S. are Animals Animals/Earth Scenes and Minden Pictures. However, today most customers are going to large online databases to find the images they need.

Among the agencies that license images at rights-managed or traditional royalty-free prices are: Getty Images, Corbis, Alamy, Veer, Masterfile, Superstock, AGE (Spain), Marutius (Germany), Picturemaxx (Germany), and FotoSearch in the U.S. (FotoSearch doesn’t accept images from individual photographers, only agents and production companies.) In addition there are four microstock sites – iStockphoto.com, Shutterstock.com, Dreamstime.com and Fotolia.com – that you may want to consider.

Ask Questions Before Signing a Contract

Most of these major RM and RF marketers not only accept images from individual photographers but also from many smaller agencies. If you put your images with a smaller agency with a good reputation chances are that some of the images will end up in one or more of these major databases.

Before signing with an agency that licenses work as RM or RF, ask for the names of the distributors that represent their work. Also try to determine the percentage of the agency’s gross revenue that comes from direct sales to customers as opposed to sales made through distributors. The problem with distributor sales is that the photographer has to give up a double cut of the fee paid.

One of the first things to decide is whether you are committed to licensing your images as RM or traditional RF, or whether you are willing to accept the microstock philosophy of volume sales at much lower prices. If you license your images as RM there is a possibility of getting multi-thousand-dollar sales, but such sales are very rare.

Both Approaches Can Pay Off

The odds of making a big advertising sale in today’s market are about the same as winning the lottery. It’s not that your images aren’t good enough to compete at that level. It’s that they will be competing against so many other reasonably good images. If you put your images in traditional RF the top price you can get is less than $1,000, but the odds of making a sale at all are about twice as good as having an image on an RM site.

Today, very few photographers are earning enough from stock sales alone to support themselves. On the other hand I think there are about the same number of microstock photographers earning in excess of $75,000 a year as there are traditional RF or RM photographers earning at that level.

Making Your Choice

I estimate that worldwide in 2010 there were about 1.5 million RM and about 3 million RF images licensed at traditional prices. During the same period more than 100 million uses were licensed at microstock prices. Chances are if you go the microstock route your images will get used 75 to 100 times more frequently than would be the case if they are licensed as RM.

But while the odds of a microstock image being licensed are much better, the price per license often will be very low. You need to decide if you will be upset when some company uses one of your snow-covered mountain scenes for a website promoting a ski resort or selling camping equipment, and pays less than $10 for the use.

Which approach will work best for you? Before you decide, read more about rights licensing in my next post.

Blogging is a great, free way to promote your photography business. Its benefits include targeted local traffic and networking opportunities with other vendors and venues. There’s the free promotion when your clients share your posts using social media, not to mention the happy client testimonials collecting in the comments.

Websites with blogs get 55 percent more traffic than those without, according to Hubspot.com. More traffic means more leads, and that adds up to more money. There’s just one problem: What if you’re not a “writer?”

You’ve got great photos to show off, but it’s not enough to post pictures. If you want all that good SEO mojo, you need to have at least 100-200 words of text containing the keywords your clients are searching for. All that amounts to a lot of work if you get blogger’s block every time you sit down at the computer.

Lori’s Lazy Blog Strategy

One of my wedding photographer friends came up with a brilliant strategy for writing a blog post. Lori is an extremely talented photographer, but she’d be the first to admit that she writes like a fourth-grader.

Every time she sat down to blog about a recent wedding, it gave her an instant headache.  Yet she’d experienced the benefits in traffic, leads and booked weddings first hand, so she knew she had to do it. One day, Lori had an idea: What if she could get her brides to write their wedding blog post for her?

She knew brides just love to talk about their details, show off their colors and theme, and tell the story of their engagement. She figured they’d do it for her blog if she gave them the opportunity. That’s exactly what they did, and she’s blogged happily ever after.

4 Steps for Lazy Blogging

Here’s how Lori’s Lazy Blog Strategy would work for a wedding photographer:

1. At your final meeting before the wedding, give the bride a list of questions. Ask whom they hired for entertainment, flowers, catering, makeup and hair, and transportation. Ask about the venue and dress designer. Then ask her about her colors and theme. Why did she pick them?

2. When you’re ready to post the photos on your blog, copy and paste the names of the vendors and details provided, and links to their websites.

3. Copy and paste what the bride wrote about her theme, tweak it for readability, add a sentence or two of your own about the wedding itself, and hit Publish.

4. Give your blog post an extra boost by sending the link to the bride and all the vendors you’re promoting, inviting them to share it with their network.  Your clients will no doubt share it with their friends and family.

Strategy Can be Easily Adapted

This strategy works for any type of photography blog post.  Simply ask your clients to include details about the clothes or accessories the kids have on in their portraits, or where she found that amazing maternity outfit.  If you’re blogging about your commercial work, ask the client about the message they’re trying to convey or the story of the product they’re featuring, and credit all the major players of the photo shoot.

The fans following your blog will eat up those little details, and come back for more. Meanwhile, you’re getting great content that pumps up your SEO without having to do any extra work. With the Lazy Blog Strategy, writing a blog post doesn’t have to be a challenge.

How do you come up with client-attracting content for your blog?

My Dec. 15 posting here – “Fearmongers are Giving Photographers a Bad Name” — invited some interesting comments. Although many readers sympathize with the perils of street photography, there are a number who consider it rude and offensive to photograph a subject when they are unaware and without permission.

I get the impression that some readers think photographers are a crass lot, incapable of any feelings toward their subjects. A few suggest that they would never stoop so low as to photograph strangers. I even get the impression that they would like laws passed to enforce this notion.

Pictures Without People

What kind of world would it be if there were laws preventing people from photographing strangers without their permission? We wouldn’t have the magnificent work of Henri Cartier Bresson, Robert Doisneau, Robert Frank, and countless others. Their work would be illegal.

The photographic record of the 20th century would be very different. It would consist of pictures of empty streets, devoid of people. The only pictures of people would be of them standing still, posing for a camera. Cameras would be forbidden at sporting events, public places, store openings, movie premiers, crime scenes, dog shows, wars — anywhere crowds are present.

Snapshots would be allowed, of course. But you would have to take special care when taking snapshots of children and family friends to make sure there are no strangers in the background. When taking pictures at your kid’s birthday party, you would need a signed release from all the parents. Weddings would be difficult, of course. Some guests would sign releases, but others would invoke their legal right not to be photographed.

News reporting would be entirely different – no photographs of people in the news, spectators, crowds or passersby. All newspapers could publish in the way of photographs would be formal portraits of newsmakers. It would be the same for television news.

Where Does It End?

It wouldn’t stop with people. Before long those who wish to protect their privacy would attempt to pass laws prohibiting photography of homes, offices and monuments. That’s the kind of society that can evolve when we allow ourselves to by driven by fear, political correctness, and ignorance.

Photographs harm no one. We all have the right to refuse to have our pictures taken — all we have to do is politely say no. But to presume we are protecting the general public by restricting these activities in others is fundamentally wrong.

There are two ways to go through life. One way is to be timid, constantly worry about offending others, never taking chances, and always siding with the majority. People like that seldom are very creative. The other way is to be out there, curious, hungry for discovery, and following your own path. That is the road I choose to take.

My wedding work outside London and in Indonesia has provided me with plenty of experience posing subjects and trying to capture for them one of life’s real milestone moments. And while there are lots of ways to make great portraits, it seems to me essential to follow three simple rules.

1. Do some homework.

I have a “Poses” folder where I save images that catch my eye. I look at images in magazines, blogs, or even other photographers’ websites. Studying them with a critical eye, I try and note where the subject was placed in relation to light and the objects around him or her. I try to imagine how I would get the subject to ease into the pose without actually having to show them.

I never want to show people how to pose because everyone interprets directions differently. If I were to ask ten grooms to kiss their brides on forehead, I would get ten different kisses resulting in ten different pictures. If I were to show them how I’d like them to kiss, I’d end up with a generic kissing pose, which is exactly what I want to avoid.

2. Direct the subject into a pose, but shoot the moment before or after the pose.

This is all about getting a shot that looks natural. Most people tend to freeze when the camera is aimed at them, and the photographer is left with awkward smiles that make people cringe. The trick is to capture the moment before and after a pose.

For this very reason, I like to crack little jokes as I’m snapping away. If my subject looks a bit stiff, I might say in a jokey-stern way, “If you don’t smile I’m going to make you look fat!” It catches them off guard and they’ll laugh out loud.

If I’m photographing couples, I’ll play them off each other. I’ll get them into the pose I want, for example, a hug. Usually the girl is more comfortable in front of the camera, so I might say, “Beautiful smile, Tara! James … you’re OK.” They’ll laugh out loud, and since they’re already in the pose I want them in, this makes for a perfect picture.

3. Practice.

It’s all too easy to think about what we’re going to do, but when we’re at a shoot and the subject is looking at us and awaiting direction, it’s easy to forget everything. The most memorable lessons are the ones we learn through our own experience.

A spouse, a friend, even a long-suffering mother can be bribed into modeling. And the less photogenic they think they are, the better. My husband hates the camera. I swear he’s able to smell it. Even when I take it out of my bag as silently as I can from behind him, I see his shoulders tense up. That’s what makes my husband makes a great model.

He challenges me to find newer and better ways of getting a natural laugh out of him, and when it comes to an actual shoot, I remain calm because I know that if I can make my husband laugh for my camera, then I can make anyone laugh.

There are dozens of other tips and tricks to make great portraits, such as using props or getting your subjects to interact with the environment, but for me, these three rules are the backbone of a great portrait session.

These three photographs have something in common: They are all about fear.

They are a reminder that every day, photographers are mistaken for perverts, terrorists, thieves, and other weirdos just because of the cameras around their necks. People seem to assume that we are “up to something.”

People who really are up to something probably don’t announce it by walking around with three-pound DSLRs hanging from their necks. I don’t know of an instance in which a person was injured by having their picture taken.

In fact, it seems to me that the only people who might be hurt by having their pictures taken would be those who might be, well, up to something.

Yelling at Kids — and Photographers

This photograph was shot in London. We were walking through a park for pensioners and sat down on a bench to rest. We were facing a tennis court where a very militaristic guy was trying to teach kids how to play tennis.

As he shouted instructions to them, I took a few frames and realized there was little of interest. I stopped, but the instructor must have noticed me. He started shouting at me to stop immediately or he’d have me arrested.

“It’s against the law, you know. It’s a very serious offense here,” he barked before going back to yelling at the kids.

I seriously doubt that there is a law in England about taking pictures of children in public parks.

Keeping His Belly Private

This photo was taken in Times Square in New York.  I noticed the cop’s belly protruding from the side of the building and took a shot before he noticed me.

“No pictures!” he shouted.

“But this is Times Square,” I replied.

“Keep moving, or I will run you in!”

So I shrugged and walked away.

I seriously doubt that there is a law in New York about taking pictures of police officers.

Not-So-Public Park?

This picture was taken at a skateboard park in West Palm Beach, Fla. It was a public park and as I was walking by, this kid shouted at me to take his picture so I did.

I shot a few and decided to go inside and take a few more. But as I walked through the gate a young lady asked in a very officious tone what I was doing. I said I just wanted to take a few pictures.

“Are you a parent?” she asked. I said I was not; I was just a photographer doing what photographers do. She said it was forbidden for people to take pictures of the kids unless they were parents. She told me to leave.

A public park. In a city of which I am a resident and to which I pay taxes to support parks such as this.

I seriously doubt that there is a law in West Palm Beach about taking pictures in public parks.

Privacy and Photography: Where Does It End?

Over the past few years I have noticed that cameras are now forbidden in shopping malls, stores and museums. Who are we trying to protect? And what are we trying to protect them from?

I used to love taking photographs of people in museums, but that is becoming more difficult. I can understand why some museums forbid using flash, but just taking pictures is also forbidden. Some museums even insist you check your camera at the door.

There is a part of me that wants to resist, to confront, to ignore these people, but it’s simply not my style. All I can do is write about it.

Have you been confronted with this attitude? What did you do?

We are so used to getting things for free – online newspapers, magazines, even books — we expect everything to be free.

Some people think photography should be free, and there are those in the marketplace who have done substantial damage to the value of images and assignments. It’s becoming all too common for images to be free, or next to free.

Sadly, we are perpetuating a cycle of free that is now bleeding over to our own bottom lines when the reality is that photography is worth something — a lot.

Mass Media Runs on Photography

Our images make or break magazines, advertising campaigns, and so on.

A pair of jeans sells on the strength of a photograph.

A president is elected on the strength of the photojournalism surrounding his campaign.

Public opinion is formed on our wars overseas by the images that come out of those events.

Weddings are deemed a success after the dust has settled and the wedding album is fabulous.

But magazines are not paying rates commensurate with what they paid even 30 years ago. If photojournalists continue to be paid $200 an assignment only to lose all their rights, that business model can’t be sustained.

What about photography licensed with huge rights being granted at $1? This is horrible for the profession.

Change Has to Start with Us

We as a society need to understand and recognize the value of photographs, and those who create them. Now is the time for a sea change, and it has to start with us. If we don’t recognize the value of photography, no one else will.

In this edition of Ask the Photo Business Coach, I take the mystery out of a call to action. It’s a frequently misunderstood term, and it’s crucial to your success. Learn how to maximize your marketing with an appropriate call to action.

Most freelance photographers spend much of their time looking for new business, which can come as a surprise to new graduates entering the marketplace.

“Basic courses in photography cover equipment, processes, and techniques,” according to the U.S. Department of Labor. “Learning good business and marketing skills is important and some bachelor’s degree programs offer courses focusing on them.”

Some? Seriously? I can’t imagine the irresponsibility of a school sending a graduate off with a diploma without a skill so key as business. Perhaps this is why we find our markets diluted with hungry, idealistic photographers being churned out only to find there isn’t a market for them.

They’re educated, they’re smarter, more savvy, and by default, artistically talented. But having the skill and passion to create visually stunning images is not enough to survive as a photographer. There is a critical need for business savvy – contracts, accounting, marketing, etc.

Setting the camera on Program and hoping for the best isn’t the solution, nor is ignoring that pile of bills and thinking elves will pay them and send out your invoices.

Business Skills Must Be Emphasized

So, what’s to be done? The school of thought at some point was that starry-eyed students would flock to institutes of higher learning under the promise of education leading to higher dollars in our profession.

But look at these numbers from the Labor Department: “Median annual wages of salaried photographers were $29,440 in May 2008. The middle 50 percent earned between $20,620 and $43,530. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $16,920, and the highest 10 percent earned more than $62,430.”

New Generation Must Embrace the Challenge

There is a critical need for a new generation of photographers, visionaries who can make a difference. Whether they come to us through an institute of higher learning or as an apprentice of an experienced photographer, they are a necessity.

Even newly graduated freelancers are professionals and are worth the money they make in the same way that a young lawyer charges for his or her time.

We are business people, part of an industry. We want a good standard of living. That’s why it’s vital that schools teaching photography recognize their responsibility to teach the business skills necessary for their graduates to succeed.

Not long ago I was sitting in my car by a seawall, watching fishermen surf casting. As daylight faded, a nearly full moon began to rise behind them and light up the water in a beautiful silver and blue pattern.

Moonlight Fisherman is a product of experimentation.

Despite how bright the moonlight looked on the water, the exposure times were still far too long for handheld exposures, even when I raised the ISO of my Nikon D90 to its max of ISO 3200. I considered using a tripod, but with such long exposures and with the fishermen constantly moving, I knew a tripod wouldn’t help that much.

Trying Something New, Even Through the Windshield

As an experiment, I started shooting handheld exposures (mostly of this one fisherman) with the lens resting on my steering wheel. I had to focus on him manually because, as bright as the water looks here, the camera was still having trouble focusing and I was shooting through the windshield (something I would never do unless I was after an abstract image and true sharpness didn’t matter).

Rather than try to constrain my exposures to times when he was relatively still, I just ignored his motion completely. In fact, I hoped he would move around to add to the abstract nature of my experiments. I ended up shooting several dozen exposures of him and another fisherman using exposure times ranging from 1.5 to 6 seconds. The lens was almost wide open at f/4.5. As I watched the long exposures pop up on the LCD I began to love the shapes of the soft silhouettes against the silvery blue water.

Making the Most of What You Have

Surprisingly, most of the frames are interesting and each is somewhat unique. The fishermen’s motion, the motion of the waves, and the intensity of the moonlight were constantly changing. I’m really happy I tossed aside my usual obsession with sharpness and experimented using motion and moonlight to create abstract compositions.

You can’t plan a photo opportunity like this, you have to just watch the world around you and do whatever it takes to turn the moment into something visually different — even if everything you’re doing is technically wrong.

Blur is the new norm. Just look at a newspaper ad or a model’s portfolio and see how all too often a retoucher has taken shortcuts and smoothed out skin at the cost of the little imperfections that make each of us unique. In extreme cases, we see people who look computer generated.

A photograph can be interpreted and manipulated in almost unlimited ways. It’s like a piece of music, with the photographer the composer. The retoucher, then, is the conductor, and as such needs an approach that endeavors to preserve all but the sourest notes.

Big Adjustments First

The first step is to take a deep breath and analyze what you have in front of you.

Where are discolorations? Are there any bigger blotches?

A good trick to find those is to hold down the space bar while in Photoshop’s full-screen mode and then use the mouse to move the whole image around. If you’re looking at a static image, your brain adapts quickly and makes discolored areas blend in with the rest.

Another trick is to flip the image horizontally or vertically. That resets your brain and you will be amazed how many new things you will discover that need fixing.

Sweating the Small Stuff

Once you have identified the main areas that need adjustment, move on to the smaller details. Some people print out a reference copy and circle the areas so they don’t forget.

You are looking for blemishes like pimples or eyelashes. Create a new layer and start removing undesired particles immediately with the help of the smallest clone or heal brush.

When using tools like clone or heal, you will want to set the brush hardness to 0 in most cases so that the artificially created “patch” will blend right in. You will also want to make sure to set an origin ([option] for Mac, [alt] for Windows) that is close in both structure and luminance of the area that you are about to fix.

Easy with Enhancements

Once you’ve cleaned up the photo it’s time to enhance the image. Keep in mind that whoever is going to look at the photo has no clue what it looked like before you started editing it. Part of editing photos so they look natural is to edit them at places you least expect. I look at the hairline and see if there are any gaps that I can easily close.

Similarly, I look for blood vessels in the eyes or flaws with the make-up. Then, if you want to pronounce the jawbone or the shininess of the hair, no problem. Just use a slight dodge on the already brighter areas and a subtle burn on the darker ones. You’re just enhancing what’s already there while creating a little bit of locational contrast.

If a rogue strand of hair is bothering you, take it out. But remember that leaving it in will help to make the image look untouched. Personally, I always aim for an image that looks more real than reality.

In all this, be mindful of the model’s dignity. You are having a big impact on how this person is perceived.

With the power of the tool you’re wielding, namely Photoshop, comes great responsibility.

In this edition of Ask the Photo Business Coach, I share some advice on how to find paying jobs in places where you least expect them.

I have a very thin skin. I don’t take criticism well, personally or professionally. Over the years though, as a photographer, I have learned to deal with it.

When you live in a world where you are constantly being judged by your work, you cannot expect that everyone will like what you do. Sometimes criticism can be beneficial, helping you understand yourself and your work from another’s point-of-view.

Negative criticism is everywhere, and the Internet is crawling with it. “Your work sucks,” “Boring,” and “I don’t relate to it,” are all examples of absolute statements that do not invite a response and are not intended to be constructive. They are intended merely as put downs, and probably have less to do with your work and more to do with the ego of the critic.

In most cases these statements do not even address what part of your work is displeasing. The simple truth is that these people are not interested in viewing your work as much as dismissing it.

There’s a Reason It’s Called Constructive Criticism

When someone asks, “What you are trying to say?” or says, “I don’t see the relationship between your images,” or “It’s interesting, but … ,” they invite interaction. The critic is puzzled, curious or ignorant of what you are doing but still is leaving room for dialogue. It is not a closed-end statement.

Often a response on your part is all that is necessary to explain and clear things up. That is what communication is all about.

In some cases people may not like your work and tell you why. There is nothing wrong with that, and it can be a valuable learning experience. Actually, I like such comments the best because they tell you something you may not already know. People can look at the same image and have different opinions.

If someone doesn’t like my photographs it is interesting to me to know why. I may not agree, but I have a devilish curiosity how another set of eyes views my work.

Four Rules for Critics

Every now and then you may be a critic. Here are a few suggestions:

1. Take your time. Nobody is interested in a critique based on 3 seconds of looking at the photo.
2. Be honest. If you do not like the photograph, say why. If you like it, say why.
3. Be positive. After saying why you did not like an image, mention something you like about it. Most bad photographs are not 100 percent awful. Nobody wants his or her ego crushed.
4. Learn the language of photography criticism. Gallery owners, reviewers and collectors have a language of their own. Learn it so you know what they are talking about. It will also prove helpful when you are the critic. Miscommunication can be hurtful.

The most important thing to remember is this: Not everybody is going to like your work. I often go to galleries to see exhibits that I hate, and wonder why that particular artist was selected. Obviously, the curator of the exhibit would not agree.

I look at winners in online exhibits and prefer an honorable mention to the grand-prize winner. I don’t like Picasso, and think Matisse was a much better painter.

That’s my opinion. Of course, it’s all personal. Opinions always are.