Jobs

>>3117613
bump

>>3117613
I did job for a political candidate.
but not much.

>>3117613
>move to tiny hick town <10,000 residents
>apply to local newspaper
>??????
>still not get job

your fucked, op. keep your day job

Work for free for a while. If you're consistently good, someone will notice and pay/hire you. If you're at it for a while and no one ever offers, then you're not a good photographer.

File: 10549878719735.gif (210KB, 280x199px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 280x199px

>>3117852
>Work for free
>someone will hire you
This is a good way to do a lot of work for no good reason

>>3117978

I got numerous paid jobs this way. Like I said, if you're trying and you get no offers, then it's probably because you're not a good photographer.

>>3118033
People like you are why the industry's so swamped with potential employers expecting everyone to work for free.

Seriously. You should be able to judge a photographers by their portfolio, not by how much free shit they do.

>>3118059

OP asked how to find a job. Working for free (for a while) is a way to find a job. If you're a bitter press photographer being squeezed out, then be a better photographer.

>>3118064
>Lol jus take better photos bro
Fuck you.

Who would you want to hire more? A pro that takes great photos but expects payment in return for his work or some faggot who takes medicore shots but will work for free?

>>3118086
quality shots are extremely important in most industries, newspapers are an exception though.

>>3118103
Yeah, no, bullshit. Free work is free work, and as long as the pics are passable anyone with money and a brain will take free over paid.

>>3118086

Sorry you're having trouble getting work. Maybe photography is not for you.

File: large.jpg (44KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 600x400px

>>3118033

>he doesn't know about the 90/10 rule

Have fun getting paid in exposure, my dude.

>>3117613

OP, I'm willing to help you, but my question is this, do you have a portfolio, and would you be willing to share that portfolio with us?

>Is OP even still around?
>Am I falling for bait right now?

>>3118125
Yes yes and no, genuinely asking for help here. I made a portfolio just today actually and sent it out to a few places. Not sure if it's any good, though.

drive.google.com/file/d/0B7_uUAbuQrspX3hFUi15OEN5dVk/view

Any crit would be helpful. I tried to cover a broad range of subjects, but is it better to do that or to focus on portraiture or cityscape or something like that?

File: 17369276416081.jpg (11KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 480x360px

Seems like people are recommending free work, which seems like a good start, at least. Where can I find it, though?

>>3118033
Nigga please. Plenty of shit photographers get paying gigs. It's partly because people are stupid and don't know what good photography is, but it's mainly because those shit photographers are good at marketing themselves and making connections.

>>3118134
>drive.google.com/file/d/0B7_uUAbuQrspX3hFUi15OEN5dVk/view

By removing all the statue photographs, your portfolio would be ten times better.But even then, it would just be ok. Also, remove the two portraits because they're trash.

You're strongest photos by far are 1 and 4. 5 is good, too, but nothing special. Based on these photos, which is still a very small selection, your obvious strength is in photographing cityscapes. Perhaps you should consider narrowing your field to travel photography, especially within major cities.

One of my photography adjuncts in college created photography travel guides, including a phone app, for major cities on the eastern seaboard.

File: DSC_0037.jpg (291KB, 1000x749px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 1000x749px

>>3118157
Thanks m8, I figured the portraits were terrible. I'm pretty awful at working with models. A good quarter of my library is filled with pictures of statues like the ones in my port cause I can't focus on taking good portraits and interact with people at the same time.
You're right, I prefer to work more with inanimate objects like buildings and candid photographs (like the one of the trooper). Travel photography would be cool as fuck if i could figure a way to monetize it

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D3400
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.10.1 (Windows)
Photographer	TB Johnson (@tbjson)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	800
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	27 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:07:21 02:45:26
Exposure Time	1/500 sec
F-Number	f/22.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	1600
Lens Aperture	f/22.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	18.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3118134
>drive.google.com/file/d/0B7_uUAbuQrspX3hFUi15OEN5dVk/view

This isn't bad. I would remove the two of the girl, they seem a little soft-core porn esque. shoot some portraits, but make sure they're outside and good.

Your work is good. I wouldn't say it is impressive, but it is good. See, in contemporary society we are over saturated with photographs. It makes it harder to find impressive images.

But, I made this post >>3118113 and I think the important thing to remember is being a photographer is 90% sales and 10% photography.

If you want to make money, I'd suggest getting into freelancing for concerts, events, and weddings, senior photos, engagement photos, etc.

The truth is, nobody cares about your education. Can you take a pretty picture and talk to people without being a sperg? That is all that matters.

That is my advice. Your portfolio seems pretty tight, and i'm suprised if you're not already working in the field.

>>3118170
Damn dude. This is probably the most encouraging crit I've ever gotten. Like, seriously, it's always either "I like it" or "you're utter shit." Thanks a lot.

Freelancing would be amazing. Any idea where to look for it?

File: noosabeach-web.jpg (2MB, 989x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 989x1500px

>>3118157
You're not a bad photog (room for improvement though, especially in post-processing)

but goddamn do these images drive home just how lacklustre I find digital imaging. It's all so ... sterile

>>3118175
be proactive with how you approach freelancing. my mate got his first paid gig by asking the bartender at my university's bar if they ever had events that needed photographing, they did, she talked to the boss, then he talked to the boss, showed him some of his work and then went on to photograph a party at the bar later that evening

ask people/businesses before they start asking elsewhere. Chances are a wanted ad for freelance photogs will receive a lot of applications, and quite a lot of those applications will be better and more experienced thatnyours.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi

>>3118182
Who let the hipster in

I kid, but that's not a great shot to demonstrate the power of film. Pretty much just proves that film won't make a boring shot look any less boring.

File: American.Ferry.18.6.20.85.IMC.MasterSp.jpg (1MB, 1000x991px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1000x991px

>>3118187
yeah probably not a great shot, I got a lot of emotional attachment to the pictures from that day so I can't really be objective about them.

Here, have a picture from a photographer who doesn't suck ass. Shot with a Rolleiflex, ~1985 I believe.

I don't hate digital photography, but I find it takes more time at the computer to get images where I want them to be than film

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>3118188
Yeah, never take photos of vacations or girls you like or anything you've got an emotional attachment to (unless they're just for you). Speaking from experince here, some of my best shots were taken on days I either felt like shit or don't even remember.

With photography and pretty much any art or craft, it's less about the tools and more about how you use them. If film looks better to you, go for it, but bad composition is bad composition, film or digital.

>>3118059
FUCKING THIS

>>3118033
>>3117852
thank you motherfucker for making clients pay photogs in ''EXPOSURE''
fags like you ruined the industry
kill yourself