You can't use that. It's not professional

[bajasurf]

The comments after the article are worth reading


http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2012/03/you-cant-use-that-its-not-professional.html

 

[Every Miles A Memory]

Yep, I love some homemade stuff like this.

One shoot the client kept looking at us with a quizzical look like "Wait, I'm supposed to be paying you guys for this?"

I handed one of the Compact Flash Cards to my assistant who was working the computer with the client to see if we were getting what he wanted and he walks back into the studio and says "I cant believe the images look the way they do and you're using shop lights!"

As long as their happy with the images, who cares what you use to achieve them

 

[ywen]

the argument is only valid up to a point.. that home made flourscent setup - if someone accidentally knocked it over on set the thing would shatter into million pieces.. a pro-level light would offer much better protection, and will allow you to continue shooting after the incident.

So is your responsibility to your client worth that additional one time cost of the equipment? Only you can decide. But for certain things such as this light, there is significant diff between using DIY vs well engineered pro equipment. If you want to use a home made sand bag vs a brand name sand bag to hold the light stand down, there is probably little difference.

 

[HumphreyBear]

I agree with the article regarding the fact that toting around a bag full of EOS 1 series cameras and expensive glass doesn't help without a hefty dose of creativity and knowledge of the foibles of the equipment (aka experience). But. Given the same level of creativity and experience the results from someone with the bag full of high end kit will (IMO) always be better thanks to the quality of the equipment. If you can't afford the bag full of kit then creativity and experience will compensate for lower equipment far more than higher end equipment will compensate for a lack of imagination and talent. I think we all accept that without argument. Just don't knock the expensive equipment because you can't afford it or don't like paying for it.

I also think that DIY stuff is potentially fun, capable and efficient, but it is usually limited in scope, as ywen points out. Where I find fault with the blog is that he argues that the expensive kit is not relevant anymore, and lists a few examples to justify his own perspective. Shall we list some pro photographers who use pro equipment to produce professional quality images? There are a number of you on this thread and this portal for starters... If someone's world is myopically limited to 800x600 output in a limited web-optimised colour space then that might be so, but then I would hesitate to nominate them as what I consider a pro. A professional photographer (IMO) can shoot for a wide variety of mediums at a wide variety of output resolutions under a wide variety of conditions and nail it first (or second) time they try.

This article reminds me of the discussion on here a few weeks or months ago about the slow death of the professional photographer. Fellows like this who produce good images to sell and argue they are better value than great images are devaluing the role of the professional photographer.

Humphrey

 

[haven]

The only "professional" image I have been associated with was of fall foliage near Bishop, CA. The image was chosen out of tens of thousands of entries by the Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles to be part of their permanent exhibit. The photo was taken with a Kodak point and shoot that, if I remember correctly, had a 3 megapixel sensor.

So, yes, I agree that equipment is only a small part of achieving professional-level results.

 

[4lowdean]

If I walked into a studio and saw that lighting rig I would turn around and walk out. Not because it was a DYI project but because it is a fire-hazard and a major safety issue. it has nothing to do with being "professional" in terms of the gear, but as a "professional" i think the safety should be a higher priority than just saving a few bucks. Granted I have used my fair share of improvised lighting and a few DYI things that pushed the limit, but never that far.

I do see where he is coming from, but at the same time you get what you pay for. Pro-series gear is serviceable; most consumer grade stuff these days is disposable. Over the long-haul you'll save money since rather than replacing gear you can get it fixed. And yeah, there are a lot of DYI stuff you can make and use once or make and leave in the studio however, going back to the difference between pro and consumer grade gear, pro level gear is built to travel and built to last. I doubt if he had to shoot "on location" he could pack up the light stand and take it with him. I am not even sure I would want to touch it let alone even breath near it.

My bro (also a pro-photog) and I have done a lot of shooting just with flashes and remotes. Rather than drop a few grand on pro lights he picked up a few used flashes and some remotes and can get pretty creative with them. Not only it is a cheap DYI style of lighting but it is also SAFE and still looks "classy" --- at least when compared to a bunch of lights bungied together.

 

[Pathfinder]

How can we begin to evaluate that post - he only showed us the light he used, not the image he captured.

The image, is where the rubber meets the road. Who cares what the light looked like at the end of the day?

And yes, safety is important, but even 8 foot Pro-Fotos can be knocked over too.

I would like to think that those of use who travel off-road are capable of evaluating acceptable risks versus rewards....

It is the image, not the light that is worth discussing.

 

[nwoods]

How can we begin to evaluate that post - he only showed us the light he used, not the image he captured.

The image, is where the rubber meets the road. Who cares what the light looked like at the end of the day?
<snip>

It is the image, not the light that is worth discussing.

In the article, it says, "It worked great. The images were exactly what the client wanted."

 

[ywen]

The image, is where the rubber meets the road. Who cares what the light looked like at the end of the day?

And yes, safety is important, but even 8 foot Pro-Fotos can be knocked over too.

I would like to think that those of use who travel off-road are capable of evaluating acceptable risks versus rewards....

It is the image, not the light that is worth discussing.

Yeah but one example does not an argument make.. do you know why the vast majority of pros do not use anything other than Canon or Nikon? Because they offer competent professional service unmatched by other manufactures. You have an issue with your equipment, a loaner is sent to you immediately. I can knock over a pro foto and pick it up and and continue the session, I knock over the DIY light and session is over..

Your 4wd rig breaks down in the backyard trail because you went cheap on a part - worst thing that can happen is you get a tow and you shorten your trip, not on par with responsibilities to a client paying big bucks.

 

[4lowdean]

In the article, it says, "It worked great. The images were exactly what the client wanted."

Yeah, but how "educated" was that client? Was he after a spectacular professional level photo, or was he after something quick, dirty, and CHEAP? Just 'cause the client got what they wanted doesn't mean it was anything worth while.

There have been times I spec'd out a job for a client and they turned me down due to price. They went ahead and went with a cheaper DIY alternative and it looked like crap. The funny part was the person ranted and raved about how "awesome" it was and how much better it was than "what the pros could do." I just shook my head and laughed quietly to myself.

Look at it this way, if your dentist whipped out a DeWalt cordless drill for your next root canal and said "oh, this is good enough" you'd probably laugh at him. If your doctor tried to draw blood with a turkey baster saying "oh, this will work fine and is cheaper than what the professionals use" you'd probably run out of there screaming. Just because DIY "works" doesn't mean it should be used.

 

[grahamfitter]

Look at it this way, if your dentist whipped out a DeWalt cordless drill for your next root canal and said "oh, this is good enough" you'd probably laugh at him. If your doctor tried to draw blood with a turkey baster saying "oh, this will work fine and is cheaper than what the professionals use" you'd probably run out of there screaming. Just because DIY "works" doesn't mean it should be used.

Its that kind of thinking that has everybody convinced they need an XXX rig that costs XXX and weighs XXX with an XXX inch lift and XXX fridge before venturing off pavement onto a dirt road. The discussion really is about being realistic when deciding what is adequate and appropriate for a particular purpose and what is simply overkill.

 

[LR Max]

For absolutely specific kinds of equipment, I go home made. Just because the specific stuff is SSSSOOOOOO expensive if it is professionally made. Makes more sense to spend $5 and bungee it together than it is to spend $300 on the same thing that has a fancy plastic holder-deal.

My beer grids have gotten me mad respect over the years. They are falling apart, though. Will rebuild them soon.

 

[bajasurf]

Kirk´s Bio

Link to Kirk's bio. Look on the right side of the page and see the 4 books he has written about lighting. In his bio you will see a link to Amazon with more information about his books. Not everything his incorporates is home made. If you click on the Amazon link be sure to read his bio and click on the "read more" and that is where he tells about his photography life. Very interesting

http://www.kirktuck.com/site/FYI__Kirk.html