https://www.danpomykalski.com/lana
Dawn and Marco know the owner of Rosewood, which is a dinner theater in Delavan, who was nice enough to let us use their space. The Rosewood had plenty of great spots to take the photos, which turned out better than I had hoped. To top it all off, Dawn and Marco were great to work with. Lorenzo was a little moody, but seeing as how he's not even a month old, I'll give him a pass on this one...
Here are some of my favorite photos from the shoot, which are still in the rough-edit stage:
]]>
Besides it being freezing outside*, the weather on the day of the shoot was pretty good. It was slightly overcast, so the highlights weren't too bad. I think the photos turned out really well, and one went right into my portfolio.
*I didn't ask Shawn and Paige to take their jackets off; they threw them off as soon as we started. I imagine they were freezing, but they still managed to look great in the photos. Kudos to them!
Here are some of my favorite photos from the shoot:
]]>
When done correctly I'd probably never notice that the adjustment brush was used. When done poorly I notice the outline almost immediately, which made me wonder if people who aren't into photography catch it or don't even notice.
Here are some examples if you don't know what I'm talking about:
The first photo is without an adjustments from the adjustment brush. This is usually how I'd edit a photo like this.
In the second photo, I dropped the exposure of the entire photo a little, but used the adjustment brush to increase the exposure of Malin a little. Making sure that the adjustments made aren't too noticeable and unnatural looking and using different sized brushes can make this process very time consuming. I would do this if the subject was either getting lost in the background, or if the shoot was outside and the lighting was bad.
The last photo is what I'm talking about. As you can probably see, there's a very noticeable, unnatural looking glow around Malin. I make a deliberate effort to avoid my photos turning out like this. I'm not sure which annoys me more; how jarring the glow is, or that the person editing the photo didn't take the time to try to stay near the edges of the subject.
]]>
Besides the weather (eventual tornado...) not cooperating, I thought the day went pretty well. I brought Devan along as a creative director and as my second photographer. If I've ever had Devan be a second photographer, it was so long ago that I don't remember it. I wasn't sure what to expect from Devan's photos, but I figured she'd at least pull off a couple of useable shots. I definitely underestimated her though, because she absolutely crushed it.
I think it might be because of a combination of Devan assisting me, Ben and Katie being so great to work with, and how the shooting went in general, but this was definitely one of the best weddings I've shot. Besides the weather, I don't know if there's really anything for me to complain about. Obviously, I wish Ben and Katie the best!
These still aren't anywhere close to being done, but here are some of my favorite photos from Saturday:
]]>
All the way back in the beginning of September, I took some photos for Joe and Lisa, who were celebrating their marriage with their friends and family at the Delavan Lake Yacht Club. The only negative things I can think of is it started to rain about half an hour into the party, and one of the guests shouting "let's go" at me repeatedly while I was making sure everyone could be seen in the large family photo. Other than that, the (outside) location was beautiful, and Joe and Lisa were both incredibly nice and awesome to work with. I was only hired for an hour, so there aren't a ton of photos from the evening, even though I ended up staying for a little over half an hour longer. I'm all about quality over quantity though, and there were still plenty of great photos I was able to hand over.
Here are some of my favorite photos from the party:
]]>
Since I haven't done a blog post in about a month, I decided to just throw up a handful of photos I've taken recently. Most of these photos are from our recent trip up to Hayward, and almost all of the photos have Malin (the dog) in them...
Nikon's D800 was a huge deal because of its massive 36 (and some change) megapixel sensor, which was pretty incredible for the time. The D800 was replaced a year and a half later by the D810, and three years after the D810 Nikon is giving us the D850. There isn't a ton of information about the D850 yet, but I've seen rumors of a 43ish megapixel sensor, and the same focusing system as the D5.
When the D800 was released, its 36mp sensor was the first of its kind in a DSLR. It didn't take long for other companies to follow suit though, so Nikon will probably need to do more than just a bump in megapixels to standout amongst the crowd. I would think since this will be one of their higher-end cameras, they won't drop the ball with this, but after the D7500 it's anyone's guess the direction Nikon will take the D850.
I love Nikon and their equipment, but it's been a while since any camera company has announced something that's gotten me really excited. DSLR sales were pretty horrible last year, and have been on the decline for the past few years now. I think one of the big reasons DSLR sales have been suffering lately is because instead of making strides in the technology, camera companies release new bodies with slight boosts in ISO sensitivity and megapixels. Neither of those are a big enough reason for me, and probably many other photographers, to run out and spend $1,500-$7,500 to upgrade.
Here's to hoping that the D850 ends up being a new trend for Nikon from here on out that gets photographers excited and gives us a reason to upgrade, and that the company stops focusing so much on planned obsolescence. Like I said before, I love Nikon. I think 100 years is an incredible achievement. If they want to be around for another 100 though, I think they need to step it up and consider modifying their business model.
]]>
I didn't have too many shoots during June, and the ones I did have weren't really all that exciting or worth talking about. Although June was a little slower as far as shoots go, I did manage to book a number of things for the future, including a wedding that I'm super excited for in 2018. It's been a while since I've had this many shoots lined up for the future, and it's a nice change of pace to the usual have-nothing-lined-up-but-then-all-of-a-sudden-have-five-shoots-the-following-week type of thing that's been going on lately.
July has been pretty busy for me in the past, so I'm hoping that trend continues this year. Things have been slow when they're usually busy and busy when they're usually slow lately, so it's hard to say though. Last July was when things started getting really busy for me, so we'll see if that happens this year.
]]>
I haven't needed one.
Long Answer:
One of the questions almost every client asks me is if I have a studio.
Back when I first started, acquiring a studio was at the top of my to-do list. Having my own studio would have been one of my biggest accomplishments, and would have made me feel like I had "made it."
It's been four years now and I still don't have a studio. The reason is pretty simple: I haven't needed one. Almost all of my shoots happen on location, and when they don't, there are plenty of public areas that work. My lighting setup is also really easy to pack up, move from location to location, and only takes a few minutes to set up. Out of all the shoots I've ever had, I've only had a client come to my house or apartment three times. That's less than once per year, and two of those times were close friends. I can only think of one time that a shoot didn't happen because I didn't have a studio (that shoot could have happened too, but the person was set on it happening in a studio).
Studios also cost money. Not only would I have to pay rent, but I'd probably have to pay utilities. I'd also probably have to get additional equipment. I'm guessing I would want to have two sets of lighting equipment. One set for at home, and one set for the studio. I wouldn't want to have to run to the studio to pick up my lighting when I'd want to use it, and I probably would want to have to haul it back and forth. Even after raising my prices to help cover the studio, which I would have to definitely do, my profit would probably still take a hit. Based on how little I would probably use the studio, taking on a rent payment doesn't make a ton of sense.
If there's ever a situation where a studio is absolutely necessary, I can use our house, as well as a number of indoor locations in Madison that I have access to. However, an overwhelming majority of my shoots happen on location, and not having a studio keeps the prices lower for my clients. A studio might make sense in the future, but right now, there aren't enough reasons for me to have one.
]]>
Last weekend, I met with Kevin to do some portraits for his Facebook and Match.com profiles. This was the first shoot of the year that Devan tagged along and it was her best one yet. This might have been the first time that I didn't have to wait for my client, even though Devan and I got to the location 15 minutes early. The park we shot at was relatively empty for how beautiful of a day it was.
Overall, Kevin was super easy going and I think the photos turned out pretty well. Here are some of my favorite photos from the shoot:
]]>
When I started thinking about a new logo, there was one person I had in mind; Sydney Michuda. I had met Sydney back in college when she did the graphics for the Royal Purple and I was the photo editor. I liked the work she had done for the paper and some of her other stuff, so I was excited to see what she came up with. I originally touched base with Sydney a year or two ago, but had to put the logo off for a few more months. I contacted Sydney again towards the end of last year and kind of forgot about it until March or so.
It only took two or three weeks for Sydney to finish my logo. Once I opened the file, I wasn't surprised to see that it looked fantastic, and exponentially better than the one I had made myself. Sydney also gave me my logo in 10 different color schemes, as well as different file formats. I knew Sydney was the person to go to when I decided it was time for a new logo. I expected excellent results from her, and I was not disappointed.
Here's my logo in a couple of the different colors Sydney sent me:
You can check out Sydney's website here: www.sydneymichuda.com
]]>
The next day, not surprisingly, I showed up way before the shoot. After getting ready for the shoot mentally with the extra time I had, I went and met the contact. It was at this point that the contact requested that I also take a photo of a mural in their entrance and to have the edited photos by the next day. Not only was the mural maybe 15 feet tall, but it was also in a stairwell. Thinking I wouldn't need my 24mm since this was supposed to just be a portrait shoot, I ALMOST left it at home. For whatever reason, I thought to myself, "it doesn't weigh that much or take up that much room, I might as well bring it." I'm incredibly grateful I did now.
Even with my 24mm, there was no way to photograph the mural in such a tight space. After thinking quickly, I decided the only way to get a photo of the mural straight on would be to take a handful of photos and stitch them together in post like a panorama. I'm not sure how wide of a lens I would have needed to get this photo without stitching it together, but I'm pretty sure it would have had to have been a fisheye. After the mural photos, I met the subject for the headshot, Frank. It took me a couple of minutes to set up my stuff, and even less time to take actually take the headshot.
I began editing the photos as soon as I got home, and managed to meet the 4 p.m. deadline the next day.
Here are all of the photos. I included a photo of the mural I took without stitching it together, which I could only do by standing off to the side.
]]>
Last year, we wanted to go to Colorado, but we weren't sure if we'd be able to make it work financially. We eventually "settled" on South Dakota, which surprised us and turned to be an absolutely amazing trip. We had been to South Dakota a couple of years ago when we went to Wyoming for our honeymoon, but we didn't really spend any time there. Besides Badlands National park, it felt like we were visiting South Dakota for the very first time.
This year, we decided we'd be able to make Colorado happen. Last year, we made the South Dakota trip official a month or so before Devan's Spring Break, so there wasn't too much waiting. This time, we made up our minds about Colorado four or five months in advance, and the wait was pretty brutal. At first, Devan wanted our trip to be three days, but I managed to convince her that we should extend it to four.
Fast forward to March 28th. This was our first day in Colorado. I was afraid the drive was going to be too long to do in one day, but it actually went by really fast. We left Wisconsin around 7 a.m. and got to our hotel in Denver around 10 p.m. their time on the 27th.
We woke up around 6:30 a.m. on the 28th and made our way to the Genesee Mountain Trail, which a friend of ours had recommended. The trail was pretty awesome, and had some great views. Devan and I had thought we were just going to be looking at trees the entire time we hiked, so we were pretty excited when we found out we'd be able to see mountains for most of the hike. After the hike, we spent the rest of the day driving around the Rockies and eventually ended up in Golden, Colorado.
The next day, our plan was to head to Rocky Mountain National Park. It was raining in Denver and snowing up in the mountains, but we decided to head up anyway. The roads weren't that bad, and it was cool seeing the park while snow was falling, even if it impacted the visibility quite a bit.
After spending a few hours in the park, we drove to Boulder to get some lunch. It was way too early to head back to the hotel, so I opened Google Maps, found a road that went into the mountains, and we decided to drive on that until we got bored. While on our drive, we spotted our first herd of elk. Getting a photo of elk was pretty high on my wishlist, since I kind of missed the opportunity when we were in Wyoming a few years ago. We pulled off in a few different spots, and I was able to get a couple of photos. The photos weren't anything spectacular, but they were better than nothing.
The plan for the our third day in Colorado was to head back to Rocky Mountain National Park for a few hours, and then drive three hours south to Buena Vista, Colorado to visit our friend Kelsey. This time, the sun was out, and the park looked completely different. We saw another herd of elk, and I got a photo of them way off in the distance. We hopped in the car and drove to get closer, but they were gone by the time we got there.
We left the park around 2 p.m. to make our way to Kelsey's. The drive was beautiful, but we ended up being about an hour and a half late. Kelsey showed us around her parents' bed and breakfast, and then we went to a restaurant close by for dinner. We were only able to stay for about an hour since we had to drive three hours to get back to Denver, but it was great seeing Kelsey and definitely worth the drive.
On our last day, we went hiking on a trail in Peaceful Valley Campground. The trail head was pretty tricky to find and we were driving in circles for a little bit. When we finally found the trail, we were greeted with a sign warning us about bears, and that if a moose saw our dog, it would try to stop her. We were on pretty high-alert the entire hike.
This trail was basically the exact opposite of the first trail we hiked on. This trail was covered in snow, and the only views we really had were of pine trees. We didn't make it very far before we turned around because Devan and Malin kept falling through the knee-high snow. After hiking, we went into Boulder, Colorado for some lunch, and then headed back to Rocky Mountain National Park.
When Devan and I went to Yellowstone/Grand Teton National Park, every night we would sit in this one spot while the sun went down and watched the animals go to wherever they slept. Our plan was to try to find a similar spot on our last night with the hope of seeing, at the very least, elk.
As soon as we drove through the entrance, we saw a heard of elk right by the side of the road. I jumped out with my camera and 300mm attached and began snapping away. After shooting the elk for about 10 minutes, we were off to try to find our spot.
Since we had already spent two days in the park, we had a pretty good idea of where we were going to sit. We had about two or three hours until sunset, so we decided to drive down on some roads that we hadn't been down yet. We drove around for maybe an hour, and then we stopped at an overlook to take in Rocky Mountain National Park at sunset. After sitting there for 30 minutes or so, we headed to our spot.
We probably spent around an hour in our spot, scanning the open field, anxiously hoping that we'd see anything. We eventually moved to a different spot, and sat there for another 30 minutes. By this time, the sun had pretty much set, and there were probably only about 15 minutes of sunlight left. Just as we were about to give up, an elk came out of the forest, headed to the pond to take a drink, and then headed back.
Devan and I drove to the tree line where we had watched the elk disappear. When we got there, we were ecstatic to see that the lone elk had gone back to a small herd of elk that were grazing pretty close to the side of the road. Seeing elk up as close as we did and getting to watch them until we lost interest was probably the best way to end our trip.
I really wasn't looking forward to the drive back. I thought the drive to Colorado went by so fast because I was excited for our vacation. I figured since we were just going home and not somewhere exciting, the drive would feel like it took forever. Surprisingly, the drive home felt like it didn't take any time at all (excluding the portion after the Wisconsin boarder, which felt like it took years to finish).
We had so much fun on our trip and it went by so fast, it almost doesn't feel like we went at all. The idea that we considered only spending three days there at first is ridiculous to me now, since four days didn't seem like nearly enough time. If you haven't been out to Rocky Mountain National Park, I would highly recommend it!
Devan and i have already begun planning our trip for next year. I thought five months of waiting was bad, we'll see how 12 goes...
Here's a link to all of the photos from our trip: Link
Here's a link to a condensed version of the link from above: Link
Here are some of my favorite photos from the trip:
]]>
We started off with some portraits/headshots of Michele, and then I photographed one of her classes. Michele was worried about feeling uncomfortable in front of the camera, but I don't think anyone would be able to tell from the headshots/portraits. During the class, it seemed like everyone was having a pretty good time, even though everyone looked pretty sweaty and exhausted towards the end. I remember wondering if I'd be able to make it through one of Michele's classes during the shoot a few times.
Michele seems to be very passionate and really enjoy what she does. When I first met with Michele, it seemed like she had a pretty good idea of what she wanted the photos to look like, so I was a little nervous when I sent her the first photo-link. Michele said she was really happy with the photos though, so I worried for nothing. Overall, I thought Michele was really great to work with, and I'm really happy with how the photos turned out.
You can check out Michele's Facebook page here: Link
Here are some of my favorite photos. You can see all of the photos here: Link
]]>
Although things were a little slower as far as shoots go, I managed to get a pretty good amount of contracts signed for this year and next year. All of my shoots have popped up at the last second lately, and I can't remember the last time I had a contract signed for something many months in advance. As many of you probably know, life is much easier and less stressful when you know when and what you're going to get paid.
Having a little less shoots last month also gave me a nice little break. Normally I get a break in the winter, but I've been pretty swamped since August of last year. I don't mind a break to catch my breath as long as it doesn't last too long...
At the end of March, Devan, Malin, and I went out to Colorado during Devan's spring break. We spent four days driving around the Rocky Mountains, and the trip was so fun and went by so quickly it almost feels like we didn't even go. I just started editing the little over 1000 photos yesterday and I'm hoping to have those ready for next week's post.
Edit: I forgot to mention, I'm also working with Sydney Michuda on a new logo. From what I've seen, I'm super stoked and can't wait to show everyone. I'm hoping the logo will be done by the end of this month.
]]>
The first thing that happens with every shoot is contact is established by me or the client. This can be done by phone, email, or face-to-face. Unless contact is established face-to-face, this step can be followed up with meeting the client in person. The shoot can usually be set up without meeting in person though, which is why I didn't include it as a separate step. When contact is established, the client will usually tell me what they're looking for, what day they're looking to book, and at what time. A typical email from a client will go something like, "I'm looking for photos of X, how much would that be?"
The next step is taking into consideration what the client wants done, and creating a package for them. Sometimes this is a single price point, while other times there are multiple price points the client can choose from. When creating a package, I take into consideration how long the shoot will take, and how many photos the client should probably receive. Once I've figured these details out, I calculate the price. Sometimes, the client will know one or more of these details, which will make this step easier. Usually, the client won't know any of these though, and it can take a number of emails to get all of the details I need until I can figure out a package.
After I've created a package, I'll send the details to the client. The client will then either send an email back in agreement or disagreement. If the client sends an email in disagreement, it's either because of the price, or the number of photos. If the client doesn't like the price or number of photos, then the process is either over at this point, or the client and I can work something out. This step can take anywhere from a few minutes to a couple of weeks to complete.
The next step, choosing a location, can either happen when contact is established, while I'm figuring out a package, or after. I'd say it's a pretty even split between the client knowing where they want the photos done, and me having to find a location. If the client knows where the photos are happening, then this step is done, and not really a step at all. If the client doesn't know where they want the photos done and I'm familiar with the area, I'll take into consideration what they're looking for and what setting makes sense. I'll then send them a list of different locations with some details and let them choose. This can take anywhere from a day to a week to complete, and largely depends on how quickly the client responds. If I'm not familiar with the area, I'll ask anyone I know familiar with the area for recommendations, or use Google Maps. I'll make a list of locations, and then send that list to the client.
Once a location has been chosen, I have enough information to fill in the contract. Once the contract has been filled in, I email the contract and invoice for the retainer to the client. I don't put shoots in my schedule until the retainer has been paid, so there's not much I do until then but wait. Usually, retainers are paid within a day or so. The only time the retainer isn't paid in under a week is if the shoot isn't for a few months, but even then, the retainer is still usually paid pretty quickly.
Once I've received the retainer, I begin planning how I'm going to shoot the photos, and get an idea of what I want the photos to look like. Depending on the shoot, I'll use this time to think of poses (unless I don't need them), what equipment I'll need, the best way to get the photo, find an additional photographer or assistant if I need to, and come up with a backup idea or two in case something out of my control happens while on the shoot. This is the most time-consuming step for me, and I'll usually do a little planning every day from the time I receive the retainer until the day of the shoot.
Another part of the planning step is figuring out transportation and lodging if necessary. Normally this step only involves figuring out how long it'll take me to get to the location and when I need to leave. Sometimes, this step will involve purchasing plane tickets and/or figuring out lodging if the shoot is far enough away.
How large the project can also have a huge effect on how much planning is required. The amount of planning for a single headshot or a handful of photos won't be nearly as much as the amount of planning needed for a shoot that's going to last many, many hours.
After all of these steps, it can take anywhere from a few hours to a few weeks to set a session up, with most only taking a day or two to figure out all of the details. Although this process can be somewhat time-consuming for both the client and myself, it's necessary in order to make sure the shoot goes as smoothly as possible, and that when all is said and done, the client is satisfied.
]]>
The 24mm f/1.8 is the third 24mm prime lens I've had, so I've had plenty of lenses to compare this new one to. The first 24mm I had was an old, manual focus 24mm f/2.8 that I purchased for pretty cheap right before our road trip to Moab in 2013. When the back of this lens ended up getting scratched, I didn't have enough to get the 20mm f./1.8 or 28mm f/1.8. I decided to get a used 24mm f/2.8D, with the plan to replace it with a better lens in the near future. Fast forward a couple of years, and I finally had enough to get the 20mm f/1.8 or the 24mm f.1.8.
I debated for a few weeks, and finally decided to get the 20mm f/1.8 even though it was more than the 24mm f/1.8. The plan was to wait for KEH.com to have a sale, and then make my move. Within a week or two of making up my mind, I received an email from KEH for 15% off on used Nikon lenses. When I went to add the 20mm f/1.8 to my cart though, both of the lenses KEH had in stock were sold out. I decided I didn't mind saving some money and going with the 24mm f/1.8 instead.
As with any new camera gear, my first test subjects were the pets. I then had a video shoot and a handful of other shoots that I've used the 24mm on. Even if the new 24mm didn't perform better than my old 24, the extra light the new 24mm lets in would be worth the upgrade for me. However, the new 24mm focuses faster and more consistently, and is sharper than my old lens. Speaking of sharpness, according to DXOmark.com, my 24mm f/1.8G is now the sharpest lens I own. I also read a review, I think on photographylife.com, that said the 24mm f/1.8G performs pretty closely to the 24mm f/1.4, which costs at least three times as much. The 24mm f/1.8G also has a pretty close focusing distance, so getting all up in your subject's space and/or filling the frame is never a problem.
There are a few things I've noticed that may be worth mentioning. The first thing, and probably the most important, is the lens was front focusing quite a bit. Of all my lenses, the 24mm f/1.8 is the only lens that doesn't focus correctly on my D750. I had a handful of lenses that didn't focus correctly on my D7000, but didn't need to be adjusted at all on my D750. The focusing issue isn't a huge deal, since it's a pretty easy fix, but I though it was worth mentioning.
Another thing that might be worth mentioning is there's a little bit of distortion, but I expect that from any wide angle lens. This is also easily fixed in post, but I normally leave it how it is.
The only other thing I don't like about this lens is that the rear element moves when the lens focuses. I wish it was completely internal, like the 85mm f/1.8G.
Overall, I'm incredibly happy with this lens. I'm not a hardcore reviewer by any means, and I don't sit and over-analyze photos. The things that are most important to me when it comes to a lens is if it's sharp enough that a client isn't going to say something, the focus is fast and consistent, and the colors look good. So far, the Nikon 24mm f/1.8G has met all of these criteria, and it's quickly becoming one of my favorite lenses.
Here are a few photos I've taken with the 24mm f/1.8:
]]>
I brought my flashes with me, but I decided to go the HDR route. Generally, I'm not a huge fan of HDR photography. Not only do people use HDR photography when it doesn't make sense, but it's incredibly overused. Most of the HDR stuff I've seen is also edited pretty poorly. In a situation like this though, where I'd normally use off-camera flash, HDR saves me a ton of time because I don't have to keep setting up and taking down my flashes every time I move to a new location. HDR also achieves pretty similar results.
The Holiday Inn Express is one of the nicer chain-hotels I've seen, and I'd definitely recommend checking it out if you're visiting from out of town (I'd say this even if I didn't know the owners).
Here are some of my favorite photos from the shoot:
]]>
Brandon only needed two portraits and the shoot only lasted about 15 minutes, so there isn't a ton to talk about. The weather was great, which was a nice change from last month when two of my shoots had to be rescheduled.
Overall, Brandon was excellent to work with, and I thought the photos turned out great.
Here's my favorite photo from the shoot:
]]>
So far, February looks like it's going to be a really good month as well, and I'm hoping this trend of being-busy-when-I'm-usually-not continues.
On an unrelated note, I've been sick the past couple of days and today is the worst I've felt so far. I was going to make this post longer, but it was very obvious work was going to be a struggle as soon as I sat at the computer. I was going to take the day off today to rest, but for whatever reason, I can never bring myself to not work during the week. I'm sure I'll be feeling better for next week's post!
]]>
I used two cameras to film the video, and it took about an hour and a half to complete the shoot. We were originally going to film on Wednesday, but we had to reschedule for Thursday because of the weather (shocker). The deadline for the video was on Sunday, but I wanted to have the editing done by Saturday, if not sooner. Having the video done in three days was already going to be challenging enough, so losing that extra day wasn't ideal.
The next day, I began editing first thing at 6:30 a.m. The only breaks I took from then until I finished at 4:30 p.m. was to take Malin out twice. I know a lot of people have work days that are close to 10 hours, but I don't know how many of them have worked on the same thing for that amount of time. By the time I was finished, I was exhausted and felt like I was on the brink of insanity.
The hour of filming, grueling 10 hours of editing, and the parking ticket I got were worth it though, and I'd jump on the opportunity to do it again. As always, it was great working with The Begowatts again, and I thought the video turned out really well, especially considering the circumstances.
Also, shoutout to The Begowatts for giving me credit every possible chance they could.
You can see the video here: YouTube
Or here:
]]>
Last week, I had the pleasure of doing some headshots with Alex, who works at Brown and Beam in Middleton. We were originally supposed to meet up on Monday, but those of you who live in the area might recall that the roads were pretty awful (awful enough that quite a few schools were closed). Alex was nice enough to not make me risk my life, and we rescheduled for the next day.
I thought the headshots turned out pretty well, and Alex seemed to be pleased with them too. I used both a blank wall and the store itself for a background. You can't go wrong with a plain background, but I'm glad I did some with the furniture in the background as well. While the plain background is more versatile, I think I like the headshots with the furniture in the background a little more. The two headshots and the additional one I sent Alex are at the bottom of this post.
We did the shoot at Brown and Beam, which was filled with some pretty interesting looking furniture. I didn't really get a chance to look around much, but I'm hoping to head in there some day. Our house is pretty empty, and acquiring furniture is pretty close to the top of our to-do list.
At the beginning of this post, I mentioned that January is off to a great start. I think this might actually be the best January I've had yet, and I'm hoping it's a sign of things to come and the momentum will continue throughout the rest of the year. Tomorrow, I'll be working with The Begowatts again, so expect a recap of that next Tuesday.
For those of you who have read my last two posts, Joby has not replied to my email yet. It's been two weeks now...
Also, check out this video I made: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyinzUSLNLI
I had seen a photo similar to this one when I was initially researching the Gorillapod Focus, but since I had only seen one example of the legs popping out like this, I hoped it'd never happen to me. Although I was devastated, the irony of typing up a blog post about how much I loved my Gorillapod only to have it break in less than an hour of hitting the "publish" button made things a little easier.
Of course, I emailed Joby immediately. According to their website (https://joby.com/warranty), their products are covered by a warranty for a year. Considering I had purchased my Gorillapod two or three weeks before the leg popped out, I figured I'd be good to go. I also uploaded the photo of my broken Gorillapod on Instagram on my photo account (@dan_pomykalski_photography) and tagged Joby. Joby left a comment telling me to email them (which I had already done). After over 24 hours with no response, I decided to drive to REI and exchange my broken Focus for a new one, which was a 78 mile round-trip.
I don't consider not receiving and email within 24 hours unacceptable. I wouldn't even consider no response within 48 hours unacceptable. However, It's now been eight days since I emailed Joby, and they haven't replied to my email yet. The only reason I can imagine they haven't responded to my email yet is that I left a comment on my photo on Instagram saying I had driven to REI and solved the problem myself. Two things about this scenario though. 1) they don't necessarily know for sure that the person who emailed them and the person on Instagram are the same person, and 2) they could have at least sent a follow up email saying something like, "sorry about your tripod, we saw you solved the problem yourself."
Speaking of REI, I felt somewhat guilty not supporting my local camera store and not purchasing my Gorillapod from them. However, they only have a 14 day return policy, while REI's return policy is a year (I believe. It keeps changing). I think my local camera store would have replaced my Gorillapod, but if I decide to return it all together, I can because I went through REI.
I'm hoping my first Gorillapod was just a lemon, but we'll see. I'd hate to have any of my equipment break like this when I'm depending on it at a shoot.
How it happened:
I had spread the legs out to take a video. The Gorillapod was supporting my D750 with a battery grip and an 85mm f/1.8G. I had finished taking the video, and "closed" the legs back up. As I was doing this, the leg just popped out. I don't think the force I was using was excessive, and the weight of my setup was under the 11 lbs limit.
]]>
Background/Fluff
I have a pretty nice tripod, but I use it very rarely. While some photographers, especially studio photographers, use their tripod more often than not, the only time I use mine is long exposures, shooting wildlife, and when I absolutely have to because of lighting conditions. For some reason though, Joby's GorillaPod Focus was calling to me.
Before the Focus, I purchased Joby's GorillaPod GripTight, which is designed for smartphones. I had already been looking for a tripod mount for my phone, the GripTight wasn't much more, and I figured the GripTight would give me a pretty good idea of what the more expensive GorillaPods would be like. Although the GripTight was much smaller than I was expecting, it helped persuade me to purchase a GorillaPod for my D750.
For the next few weeks, I obsessed over which model and combination to go with. I debated between the GorillaPod Zoom and Focus for a few days, and ultimately decided the Focus was the way to go, even though it was twice as much. The next big decision I had to make was whether or not to get just the Focus without the ballhead, or go all out and get the Focus and Ballhead X package.
As I mentioned before, I already have a pretty nice tripod and ballhead, and I couldn't make up my mind if I needed an additional ballhead for $50 more. Eventually, I decided to go for the Focus and Ballhead X package. One of the reasons was because I didn't want to have to keep switching the ballhead between my two tripods. The biggest reason was REI only carried the GorillaPod Focus and Ballhead X package, and not just the Focus legs. I don't normally purchase my camera equipment from REI, but I'm a member and have their credit card, so I get 15% back on all of my purchases from there.
Actual Review/Thoughts
I've had the GorillaPod Focus for about two weeks now, and so far I like it. I like it a lot. I like it much more than I thought I would. I might go as far to say that I love it. Some of the things I've noticed that I like are:
The ball joints are pretty stiff, but still easy enough to manipulate. This means that the Focus will support my D750 when I wrap it around a pole or tree, but I won't struggle doing it in the first place.
Speaking of wrapping the Focus around things, I've done this a few times with my D750 mounted, and I've felt pretty comfortable with my DSLR hanging in various positions.
The Focus is incredibly versatile. Some of you may be familiar with the Focus because of Casey Neistat. He does a better job than I would of explaining all of the things the Focus can do in this video here: Link. I had my doubts about using the GorillaPod as a video rig, but I've tried it, and it works. The GorillaPod works so well as a video rig, I'd be willing to use it in public, even though I look like an idiot.
The Focus is also incredibly convenient. My 3 Legged Thing Brian may be a better tripod overall, but the Focus is easily the winner in terms of convenience. The Focus is lighter, takes up less space, and I don't have to fiddle around with leg locks to get it set up. Some of you may be asking, "but couldn't you just use your regular tripod without the legs extended?" Of course I could, but it isn't the same.
The Ballhead X uses an Arca-swiss baseplate, so I can use the baseplates I already with the new ballhead.
The Ballhead X has grippy, rubber knobs.
Here are some of the things I've noticed that I don't like (they're all about the ballhead).
The Ballhead X's baseplate and d-ring feel incredibly cheap. I'm not sure what material the baseplate and screw are made out of, but I don't like it.
The Ballhead X doesn't have a single bubble level. My 3 Legged Thing Airhead has three bubble levels, as well as one on the legs. My D750 has a level built in, but bubble levels are a bit more convenient.
I'm pretty worried about the ball joints wearing out eventually and becoming too loose that the GorillaPod won't be useable anymore. I have no idea what the lifespan of these are, but I'm hoping I get my money's worth out of it.
Overall, I'm really excited about the GorillaPod Focus, and all of the ways I can potentially use it. I've had the Focus attached to my D750 ever since it showed up, and while my regular tripod tends to stay at home, the GorillaPod will probably be one of those pieces of gear that's always with me. I don't know I'd recommend purchasing the Focus instead of a normal tripod, but I think it's something photographers of all levels should consider picking up.
Here are some photos of the GorillaPod Focus:
Looking back, 2016 was a bit of a mixed bag. I was coming off my best year in terms of revenue, profit, and number of sessions going into 2016. Based on how good 2015 was, I had incredibly high expectations for 2016. For whatever reason though, 2016 started off much, much slower than I had hoped. Things eventually picked up around June, like they always do. Even then though, I wasn't getting as much business as I had anticipated. At one point, I had gotten so discouraged I had began looking for a real job, which I think was largely due to us buying a home and talking with bankers.
I eventually came to the realization, with the help of Devan, that this was the first time I had hit any low points in my career, and that I couldn't just give up at the first sight of trouble. I figured I was still booking sessions, and the only way I'd fail for certain was if I gave up.
Sure enough, things ended up working out. Things started looking better in June, July, and August which are normally my busiest months. Things normally start to slow down around October, but this year I was absolutely swamped from September through the end of November. I beat my record for most sessions in a month in October, and I beat my most revenue in a month record in October and November. There were a few times in October and November where I wasn't sure how I was going to meet all of my deadlines. After the first half of the year, being overwhelmed with work felt amazing.
Unfortunately, I didn't end up meeting my revenue goal in 2016. Every year since I started Dan Pomykalski Photography, I've increased my revenue by 50% or more. I figured I wouldn't be able to continue with that pace though, and considering how good 2015 was, I'm not too surprised I didn't make that 50% increase. I did have more sessions in 2016 than 2015 though, I worked for a bunch of new clients, and I broke a number of other personal records that I mentioned earlier in this post.
Now that 2016 is over, I'm glad I didn't give up and almost can't believe I even considered it. Although I didn't meet my revenue goal, and 2016 didn't start off the way I had hoped, it still turned out to be a pretty decent year. I'd say that now 2016 is over, I can forget about it, but I think there are things I can't take away and learn from for 2017. Thank you to all of my new and returning clients for your business throughout 2016, and I hope to see you again this year!
Here are some of my favorite photos from 2016: Favorite Photos from 2016
]]>
But how good are they? Not only have I heard of people shooting entire weddings on their smartphone, but I've heard some people say that there's no reason to even hire a professional photographer anymore. When I heard this, I knew it wouldn't be hard to prove this idea wrong, and decided to do a quick, side by side, DSLR vs iPhone, comparison post.
Below are two photos. One is from my Nikon D750, and the other is from my iPhone 6s. I'm not going to tell you which is which until after the photos. I'm guessing it won't be hard for you to figure out which is which...
If you guessed the first photo was from the DSLR and the second photo was from the smartphone, you were correct. It's blatantly obvious. I probably shouldn't have been, but I was somewhat shocked at how much of a difference there was between the two.
I tried to do a little work on the iPhone file to try to get it a little closer to the D750 file, but I think it just made things worse...
The TIE Fighter doesn't look as bad, but the background looks absolutely atrocious.
I shot the first photo from my DSLR with a 24mm to try to get a similar angle of view to the iPhone. This next photo I shot with my 85mm, which is probably the lens I would have normally used.
These photos were shot in my office, which doesn't have very good lighting and the subject was also backlit. The difference between the iPhone and DSLR probably wouldn't have been as noticeable outside in a well-lit setting, but I'm pretty confident the differences would still be there.
Some of you may be saying, "but Dan, you're using the iPhone 6s. The iPhone 7 is out and has a better camera."
While this is true, the iPhone's photo is so far from the D750's that the iPhone 7's camera would have to be impossibly better to even come close to the D750.
Some of you may be wondering why there's such an obvious difference. Some of you may think it's megapixels, but the biggest factor is sensor size. Generally, a bigger sensor means better overall image quality. The D750 has a full-frame sensor, which is 36x24mm while the iPhone's sensor is 4.8x3.6mm. For those of you who benefit from visuals, here's a page I found with a pretty good graphic: click here.
]]>
When Rachel had originally set up the session with me a month or so before the shoot, her and her family were thinking about doing the photos at a park. Ultimately, the family was able to find a church that would let us use their space, which was great considering Wednesday was pretty awful for doing anything outside.
I think large group photos are some of the hardest photos to do, and Rachel's family was huge. I believe it was all of her siblings, their spouses, their kids, and her parents for a total of 30 some people. Anytime there are more than even four people, it's difficult to get a photo where everyone is looking, no one is blinking, and everyone can be seen, so the over 30 people was pretty challenging.
Overall, I thought the photos turned out well, and the family was great to work with.
Here are some of my favorite photos from the shoot:
In the first photo, you may have noticed the kid on the left is making a face. As I mentioned before, in photos like this where there are this many people it's hard to keep track of everyone and make sure everyone is smiling/looking/ready. In a situation like this where a kid is making a face instead of smiling, I decided a while ago that it wasn't really my place to tell a kid to smile or not. Some of the reasons why I don't think it's my place to tell a kid to smile are: the parents might not care, the parents might be offended by a complete stranger telling their child what to do, and, since I've likely never met the family or their child before, I don't know if the child has some type of disability. Ultimately, if the parents are upset about it, they can talk to their child about it.
]]>
Going into November, I only had one session booked. One session for November isn't anything to complain about. In fact, I was actually pretty excited to have something lined up ahead of time, which is probably a pretty good indication of how slow November usually is for me. Around this time of the year, things will pop up maybe, but I rarely have anything set up. I would have been okay with the session I had scheduled being my only shoot for the month.
Right at the end of October, The Begowatts scheduled a shoot with me, and then a handful of other shoots popped up throughout the month. I even had a multi-shoot day at the very end of November. A multi-shoot day. In November... November was my third best month in revenue this year. I still haven't come to terms with how good this month was considering how dismal it generally is.
Looking to December, I'm going to try to not get my hopes up. I, like many other people around this time of year, will be doing quite a bit of traveling to see family throughout the month. Although I'm fine with missing a family gathering for a shoot, having photos done are probably at the bottom of other people's priority list.
I am, however, really hoping that the momentum I've picked up over the past few months will continue into the new year. The first couple of months every year are always the hardest for me, so it'd be amazing if I could keep rolling along at this pace. Trends from previous years make me feel a lot of business is unlikely, but the later part of this year has been pretty abnormal. I'll just keep doing my best to do good work and keep my fingers crossed!
]]>
I had never been to The Robin Room before, but it's definitely one of the nicer bars I've been to (also, big shout out to them for letting us shoot there). The only hiccup was there was a small amount of confusion when we showed up. David, the guitarist/frontman, had contacted the Robin Room earlier in the week and got the go-ahead for the photos, and I'm guessing whoever he spoke to didn't let the person working on Sunday know we were going to be there. The confusion was cleared up pretty quickly though, so it wasn't that big of a deal. Plus, we were able to finish up in there before any customers showed up.
I think the photos turned out really well, and it was great working with The Begowatts again. It's awesome when I get to work with clients I have good chemistry with, and it's even better when I get to work with clients I have good chemistry with on multiple occasions. I'm hoping this isn't the last time I see these guys.
Here are some of my favorite photos from the shoot:
www.danpomykalski.com
]]>
The first thing I do is I put the files onto the computer. This normally happens the second I get home, but sometimes I have another shoot, or life happens and i won't get the files imported until a day or two after the shoot. Once all of the files have been imported, I go through them and delete any photo that's out of focus, has someone making a weird face or might not have been ready for the photo, and photos that are the same as another. Usually I keep anywhere from 25%-50% of the photos that end up being imported. I usually go through the photos two-three times until all of the photos that don't meet my standards have been deleted. During this, I also make very quick, general adjustments. Typically, this means getting the exposure in the ballpark, and maybe adjusting the contrast, but that's about it. This entire process can take anywhere from an hour or two up to a week or two, depending on the amount of photos.
The next thing that'll happen, is I'll send the client an email with a link to the photos that are remaining. These photos are rough edits (also commonly referred to as "proofs"). I send the rough edits to the client either so they can choose which photos they'd like, or to give the client a general idea of how the photos turned out. While looking through the rough edits, please keep in mind that they're exactly that and not the final product. Since the photos haven't really been edited yet, this isn't necessarily the time to point out things or make a final judgement on them, since they're nowhere close to being done. This is especially true for converting files to black and white. If a photo needs to be converted to black and white, chances are I won't know for sure until I begin the final edits. On that note, the only reason I convert files to black and white is if it makes sense. I've had clients ask me to convert files with absolutely beautiful colors in them to black and white before.
By the time the client has received the link to the rough edits and looked at them, chances are I've already started the final edits. This is where the bulk of the post-processing occurs. I go through each and every photo, adjusting things such as exposure, contrast, white balance, the angle of the photo, cropping if necessary, chromatic aberration, removing anything that doesn't belong, reducing the amount of noise, adjusting the sharpness, smoothing the skin if necessary, whitening teeth if necessary, enhancing the eyes if necessary, and any other necessary adjustments. This entire process takes about an hour for every hour I spent shooting, except for portraits. Editing portraits usually takes 45 minutes of editing for every 15 minutes I spent shooting.
I usually go through the photos and make adjustments until it gets to the point that I'm just going through the files and not changing anything. This usually doesn't happen until I've gone through the photos six or seven times. When I first started, I'd send the photos to the client at this point. What would typically happen though, is I'd look at the photo and realize I missed something, or something didn't look as good as I thought anymore. It didn't take me long to realize it was better to have the client wait an extra day to receive their photos than to receive two batches of final edits from me. Now I wait at least a day after I think I'm done to make sure I like the way the photos turned out.
After I make sure I like the final edits, I send a link to the client. This is probably the best time for the client to make requests, since I've done pretty much everything to the photos that I'm going to. Please keep in mind though, I've just spent hours and hours getting these photos as close to perfect as I possibly can. If I didn't do something a certain way, there's probably a reason. With that being said, it's always possible that I missed something, so definitely feel free to ask.
An example that comes to mind that's always a tough call are birthmarks/moles/scars in portraits. If something is permanently present on someone, I almost always leave it. Sometimes, a client wants it removed though, which isn't a big deal. Examples of requests that I usually don't end up doing are black and white conversions, which I already touched on, and cropping. There's a direct correlation between cropping and reduced image quality. The more a photo is cropped, the lower the quality of the photo. Usually, a photo can be cropped a certain amount before the drop in image quality is all that noticeable. If a photo needs to be cropped, I'll usually take it up to this point. A lot of times though, I won't crop a photo at all, so again, it doesn't hurt to ask. Another reason why I might not crop a photo, is that cropping a photo can completely change the way a photo looks and feels. It's pretty likely that while I was doing the file edits, I played around with the composition of the photo if it seemed too far away, or seemed like it might benefit by being composed differently. If the photo benefited from being cropped, it was left, and if it didn't it was reset to the way it was. It's important to keep in mind that this is all very general though, and that it is quite possible a photo might benefit from being converted to black and white, cropped differently, or changed in any other way. I know I've said this a million times now, but the best thing to do is ask. If a client makes a request, I'll always try it. If it doesn't work out, I'll let the client know and explain why. Honestly though, I think I've had clients request I change something three or four times in the past four years. It happens very rarely.
If the client is satisfied with the final edits, I'll most likely go through them one more time just to make sure. If the final edits still look good to me, I'll send them to the client either as an email attachment, or on a CD, depending on how many files there are. This entire process can take as little as three or four days, or up to four or five weeks depending on how many photos there are and how busy I am with other shoots.
As you can probably tell, I put a lot of time and effort into editing and trying to create the highest quality work for my clients. I've always felt that post-processing is crucial to making good photographs, so I'm always surprised if I hear a photographer doesn't edit their work at all. I hope this post answered any questions you might have about what goes into editing!
]]>
Originally, Kathy said that she wanted only one photo of her family. She assumed that I required a minimum though, and was ready to pay for something like three photos. She sounded pretty happy when I told her that one photo wouldn't be a problem, and that I charge clients for what they want as opposed to having predetermined packages. Some people get upset that I don't offer packages, and this is the exact reason I don't.
Kathy and her husband wanted to do the photos at the University of Wisconsin Arboretum. For whatever reason, I had never been there before, so Devan and I showed up about 45 minutes early to scope the area out and find some locations. Besides the regular visitors, there was also a wedding happening when we got there, so the Arboretum was pretty packed. This is really the only negative thing from the shoot that happened, which was pretty easy to work around.
Kathy and her family were really great to work with and the photos turned out really well. Like all of my favorite clients, Kathy trusted our judgement, and gave us control of the session. Kathy had mentioned potentially working with us again next year, and I'm really crossing my fingers that it works out.
Here are some of my favorite photos from the session.
]]>
Right at the beginning of October, I had a flurry of sessions come in all at once. It wasn't necessarily the number of sessions, but it was more that they were all during the same week. It was almost to the point where I was beginning to wonder how I was going to edit all of the photos from the sessions. October is usually pretty dead for me, so I was excited to have a decent amount of work. I figured it was just a fluke, and I probably wouldn't have much else during the month, if anything at all.
But surprise! Around the middle of October, another frenzy of sessions happened. Again, all of the sessions happened during the same week. At first, I was hoping to match my record for most sessions in a month. Then the sessions kept coming and I ended up passing that record, which I had matched this past summer. I still can't believe that I beat my record in October, a month that's typically pretty slow.
I'm really hoping that October is a sign of things to come, especially for next year. I don't think November or December are going to be incredibly busy for me, but after last month, I don't know if I'll necessarily mind a little bit of time off.
]]>
Short answer:
Unedited files don't meet my quality standards. I'm very adamant about producing the highest quality work I can for my clients, and unedited files don't come anywhere close to those standards. The client might not care, and might just want the files, but if they share those files, it reflects poorly on me and makes me look like a bad photographer.
Long answer:
This won't come as a surprise to many of you, but I shoot manual. For those of you who don't know, that means I adjust my aperture, shutter speed, and ISO myself as oppose to having the camera do it. Often times, I'll intentionally underexpose the photos from a shoot so that the highlights aren't blown out, and I can retain as much information as possible. This means that if I were to give the client the unedited files, they would end up getting a large amount of dark photos.
Another reason why I don't give clients unedited or original files, is because it makes it easier for the client, or someone the client knows, to edit the photos in a way I might not necessarily approve of. This point really only applies if I were to give the client the RAW files, but I thought it was worth mentioning.
The final reason I don't give my clients the unedited/original file is because I use RAW files. If you aren't sure what a RAW file is, then chances are you use JPEGs, which is a much more popular file format. The biggest difference between RAW files and JPEG files, is that RAW files retain all of the information, while JPEGs get rid of all the information the camera decides it doesn't "need." Basically, a RAW file is a completely unedited file, while a JPEG has been adjusted (edited) by the camera. RAW files are often underexposed, and, most importantly for this point, flat looking. Since the camera hasn't done anything to a RAW file like it would with a JPEG, RAW files always need to be edited in post-production. To many of you, a JPEG probably sounds like the much better option, but RAW files are immensely easier to edit. Not to mention, not only do I know what I want the photo to look like more than my camera does, but adjusting things like white balance and the exposure in post production looks much better when using a RAW file.
In summary, I don't give my clients the unedited or original files because I use RAW files and the original/unedited files will most likely be underexposed, which all result in the original/unedited files not meeting my quality standards. Unedited/original files could also potentially be easier for someone besides me to edit in a way I don't approve of. There are absolutely no exceptions to this; I will not give a client the unedited/original file.
Below is an unedited file compared to the final edit of a family I recently worked with. Please feel free to try to make an argument as to why anyone would want the unedited file...
]]>
Geoff had contacted me about a week before he planned to propose to his girlfriend, and asked me if I was available to shoot it. This shoot would be right at the end of the first* incredibly busy week in October for me, so after telling Geoff I'd be available, I sent him another email asking if he had been in contact with any other photographers. Shoots like this take an immense amount of planning to pull off, especially if you've never met/seen the people before. Based on my schedule, I wasn't feeling too confident that I'd be able to commit the amount of time required to pull this shoot off. Instead of possibly messing this up, I suggested the idea of Geoff going with someone else. Geoff wouldn't take "no" for an answer though, and remained persistent. With the help of Google Maps, we were able to figure out all of the details through email.
Everything ended up working out, the photos turned out well, and Geoff and his fiancee were both incredibly nice. Once it was actually the day of the shoot, and especially after the photos, I was really glad the session ended up working out. These types of shoots are always really fun because everyone is always so happy afterwards. The only negative thing about this shoot is they happened a little later than I was hoping. We had originally planned on 6 pm, but the photos didn't actually happened until around 6:45 pm, so there wasn't a ton of available light anymore. It wasn't a huge deal though, and the photos still turned out well.
Here are some of my favorite photos from the shoot:
*This past week was also incredibly busy. I passed my record for sessions in a month this past month, so I'll be doing October-session-recap posts for a while...
]]>
A few weeks ago, I met with Paige to take her senior photos. It had been a while since I had done a portrait session, so I was pretty excited.
After struggling ever so slightly to find a location, Paige's mom ultimately decided on a park in Whitewater that I had suggested. Devan tagged along on this shoot as well, and it was the most involved she's been yet. Besides the mosquitos and the weather being a bit gloomy, I thought the shoot went well, and I really like how the photos turned out. In fact, I have a number of photos from this shoot that I'm still trying to decide between for my portfolio.
Here are some of my favorite photos from the shoot:
]]>
The bombardment of sessions began with Jill's, who asked me to take a photo or two of her kids and dog for her Christmas cards. Jill originally contacted me sometime close to the beginning of September, and after I had sent her the contract and didn't hear back from her, I didn't think it was going to work out. A few days after I sent the contract to her, I was pleasantly surprised to find the retainer fee and signed contract sitting in the mailbox.
For those couple of days that I hadn't heard from Jill, I had come to the conclusion the session wasn't going to happen. I'm more than used to things falling through by now, so I tried not to dwell on it too much. Looking back on that now though, I'm really glad the session ended up happening. Jill was the type of client who is incredibly laid back, trusts my judgement and stands back while I work, which, as I always say, makes things way easier on my end. Jill's kids were also incredibly easy to work with, even though they apparently don't get along normally, which you wouldn't be able to tell from the photos.
Another factor that I think helped this session go well is I brought Devan along as my creative director. We've been talking about this for a while, and we've tested it out on a few other shoots. So far, I think it's been working out pretty well. Having Devan there to pose the subject(s) allows me to focus more on getting the photo, which I think equates to a better overall product for the client. I also think having Devan there as my creative director also saves time. I already work pretty quickly, but while Devan is talking to the subject(s) and getting things ready on that end, I can make adjustments to my camera, lighting, and/or get into position. This might not save a noticeable amount of time for a quick shoot like this that might only take 10 or 15 minutes, but for a longer shoot that's closer to an hour, the time begins to add up. Based on how things have gone so far, clients should expect to see Devan at future sessions.
Anyway, here are the photos from the shoot. Two of them are the ones Jill chose and one is one that I liked that didn't make the cut.
In hindsight, I wish I would have had one of the kids hold the leash. I tried to remove it, but the dog's fur caused too many problems. I don't think it makes or breaks the photo, just letting everyone know I'm aware of it.
]]>
Although things are definitely slower than they were during the summer, I still had a good amount of sessions this month for both new and returning clients. I had two notable sessions, one of which was the wedding I shot at the beginning of the month. I'm not sure I can talk about the other session yet, so I'll play it safe and not go into too much detail about it. Once I know I can talk about it, I'll probably do a recap of it.
I've already got a number of sessions line of up in October, and I'm hoping I can keep the momentum up through the end of the year. Sometimes sessions pop up without warning, so it's hard to say what the rest of the year will be like. November and December are usually incredibly slow, but the amount of work I received during those months last year was decent, so who knows.
]]>
Liking any post related to the giveaway will count as one (1) entry.
Sharing any post (Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, etc.) will count as two (2) entires (be sure to tag me in the post so I can see it and count it!).
Commenting on any post (Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn etc.) related to the giveaway will count as two (2) entries.
Following Dan_Pomykalski_Photography on Instagram will count as one (1) entry (if you're already following me, you'll be counted. You don't have to unfollow and then refollow).
Retweeting any tweet related to the giveaway will count as one (1) entry.
The winner must like Dan Pomykalski Photography on Facebook OR be following @PomykalskiPhoto on Twitter OR be following Dan_Pomykalski_Photography on Instagram.
The session will be no more than 30 minutes and include three (3) edited photos or one (1) portrait/headshot.
The winner must schedule the session within 60 days of being informed they have won (the session can be anytime, but the session must be set up within 60 days).
The session is transferrable, so if you'd like to give the session to a friend, feel free to!
If the winner is responsible for any form of cancellation, the session will be voided.
The winner will be drawn on October 4th, 2016.
Visit www.facebook.com/pomykalskiphoto for more information and to enter for your chance to win!
(Updated 9/20/16)
]]>
The weather on the day of the wedding might have been the best I've ever had while shooting a wedding. Usually, it's either too cold, too hot, or raining. It could have been a little cooler maybe, but I was also wearing pants and a shirt and a tie. The location of the ceremony, which was outside in the woods, was great. I don't think I've ever shot a wedding in that type of setting before, and I hope I get to again at some point.
I'm definitely happy with how the photos turned out, and I'm really happy that I got to squeeze in another wedding before the end of the year. I've been contacted a few other times about weddings this year the past couple of days, so my wedding season might not be over still.
Here are some of my favorite photos from the wedding:
]]>
First of all, I don't think full-time pro photographers who are established and know what they're doing are going to flock to Snappr. Full-time pros know what their work is worth, and know what to charge, so I can't imagine a website with the primary purpose of providing cheap photographers is going draw experienced photographers in. If Snappr had existed back in 2012 when I started and my photos were far from what they are now in terms of quality, I probably would have been all over it.
Another reason I don't think Snappr is anything to worry about is because photographers are one of the professions that typically fall under the "you get what you pay for" guidelines. An example that comes to mind is when one of my clients hired another photographer because they were cheaper. The next time I saw the client, they told me that the other photographer was not only difficult to work with, but took forever to finish the photos. I've also heard plenty of stories of when someone hires the cheapest photographer they can find, and the photos turn out horrible. In this situation, not only is the client out of the money they spent for photos they can't use, but they have to hire a second photographer and spend more than they would have had to. If this happens with a wedding, or something that can't be reshot, then this situation is even worse. I wouldn't be surprised if people run into these types of situations with a service like Snappr.
Snappr might even end up helping me. The people who would be interested in a service like Snappr aren't the kind of clients I'd probably be interested in. If I have to spend less time speaking with clients who are going to offer me insultingly low amounts of money because they're using Snappr, that means I have more time to communicate with clients who respect my profession, and know that good work is going to cost a little more.
It'll be interesting to see what happens with Snappr over the next couple of months. Here's to hoping I'm right, and it doesn't put me out of business!
You can see the article here: www.digitalrev.com
]]>
For those of you who didn't open the link, here are three of the photos that I liked best:
If you happen to miss out on this piece, keep an eye on Mill & Anvil Engineering's Facebook page for the next time Tony has an item for sale.
]]>
Opinions when you first purchase something, especially if that something is expensive, can be drastically different on the first day compared to after some time has passed and the newness has worn off. Now that I've had my D750 for a little over six months, done plenty of sessions and personal work with it, and taken it on a week-long road trip, I've figured now is as good a time as any to revisit and share my thoughts on the D750.
Very fortunately, I absolutely love the D750, still. I love the DSLR so much, that I don't even really think about the D810 or the D5 like I used to. Before I had the D750, those were THE cameras to me. The file size of the D810 ended up turning me away, and the price of the D5 isn't practical for me right now. I considered waiting for the D500, which some people consider to be a better DSLR, to come out before making my decision, but I wanted a full-frame sensor so went with the D750 instead. If I had to make the decision again, I'd go for the D750 without a doubt.
The two things that I didn't like when the D750 arrived are still issues. One of them, the autofocus points being crammed in the middle of the frame, will never be fixed, while the other, the back LCD screen turning on when I change the ISO, will probably never be fixed either. I'll still hope for a firmware update, but I've gotten used to screen turning on, so I guess you win this one, Nikon...
]]>
I think part of that had to do with how busy I was this past month with work, which I'm definitely not complaining about! I think I mentioned in an earlier post, probably around April or May, about how things were going a little slower than I had hoped. Fortunately, things began to really pick up in June, and that continued into July. This past month I did some real estate photos, portraits, a wedding, and commercial work, so I had a good variety of shoots for both new and returning clients.
So far, things have started off really well in August. It's hard to say how the rest of the month will be, so I'll just cross my fingers and see. This is the point where things sometimes begin to slow down as people start getting ready to go back to school. Last year things didn't slow down for me until December though, so we'll see.
]]>
Here are some of the rough edits so far. I just had this session yesterday, so I haven't had much time to edit them yet.
Engagement sessions with couples whose wedding I'm going to shoot later on is always nice because it's usually a pretty good indication of what it's going to be like to work with them again on the day of the actual wedding. When I met up with Mike and Kellie for their engagement session, they were both easy-going and incredibly easy to work with. I was really hoping that they would be the same way for the wedding, and sure enough, they were. It's always easier to do good work when clients trust my judgement, and don't try to micromanage me too much.
Here are some of my favorite photos from the wedding:
]]>
Here are some of my favorite photos from the wedding.
]]>
Last year was Dan Pomykalski Photography's most successful year without question. Based on the growth I experienced last year, I was kind of expecting this year to be even busier, and hoped to see more growth. We're now half way through 2016, and things have been a little slower than I had hoped. With that being said, I matched my record for most shoots in a month in June, and although I'd rather beat that record, it's hard not to be grateful about any number of sessions in a month. It's also only June, and the busiest time of the year for me isn't going to be over for a few months yet. I'll just have to keep chipping away and see what happens.
Besides the sessions, the other thing worth mentioning is I took a risk and it actually paid off. A few months ago, a clothing company based in Wisconsin asked me if I would be interested in being an assistant to a photographer over the summer months while they shot their new catalog. After finding out how much they were willing to pay me, it was incredibly tempting and I was definitely interested (anyone who pays their bills by freelancing knows how good guaranteed money sounds).
After thinking about it for a while long, I began to realize how many drawbacks there would be. The company's headquarters was an hour and a half away, and the days were typically from 8am to 5pm. I wasn't worried about working those hours, but the fact I wasn't going to be able to do anything for my own work made the job seem less appealing. Not only that, but no one would ever know I was even involved with the shoots, probably. There was very little chance that I would be able to further my career if I took the job, so besides the money, there really weren't any benefits. Ultimately, I decided that if I booked a session for a fraction of what they were offering me, it would be worth much more in the long run.
Sure enough, I was able to book a session with a new client during the week I was supposed to assist. If I had taken the job, I wouldn't have been able to shoot those photos, and grow my business. This whole ordeal is especially worth mentioning because I can almost promise if I took the same risk again with a similar situation nine more times, it wouldn't work out again.
I have a few sessions already lined up for July, so expect some recaps of those in the next couple of weeks!
]]>
Dylan was one of my best friends in college, and was a groomsman at our wedding. He was in town for a wedding at the end of April and stayed with us overnight. While he was at our place, he asked if I could do a headshot for him quickly for his LinkedIn profile (https://www.linkedin.com/in/dylan-dvorak-9b2b75106). Of course it wasn't a problem, and once we both calmed down some, we were able to actually get a pretty good looking headshot. Shoots with friends are always nice because there isn't quite as much pressure, so I can relax a little bit more. Getting paid to hang out with friends is also a pretty big bonus.
Here are some of the photos from the shoot. After seeing the first couple of photos, I wasn't sure we were going to get anything useable.
After we managed to stop laughing and concentrate, we were able to get something that was much better than the photos he was using.
]]>
The first time I worked with these guys, they had expressed interest in having me shoot one of their shows. When I got the email from the drummer, Arthur, I pitched the idea of showing up a little early to get some photos of them backstage, as well. After figuring out the logistics, it was decided that it'd be easiest if we did the backstage photos at one show, and the photos of them playing at another. Doing it this way will also allow me to get shots of them outside and inside.
The actual shoot went really well. As I was walking up to the front door, I ran into most of the band, and from there it was a nice, laid-back shoot. I figured candid-type shots would look best, so I just had the band hang out while I took some photos. After that, we went to the stage and I took some photos of them getting ready.
Here are some of my favorite photos from the shoot. I haven't had the chance to finalize the editing yet, so they're still a little rough.
I'm looking forward to the next shoot with The Begowatts, which will be in a couple of weeks. You can expect a recap of that session as well!
You can see the rest of the photos here: http://www.danpomykalski.com/begowattshns\
]]>
Kellie emailed me about a week before to set the session up. We decided on a park in Stoughton that I had never been to, but it ended up being a pretty nice location. Originally, Kellie had wanted the photos with her, her fiance, and their son, but their son wasn't really in the mood. We decided to just do a few photos of Kellie and her fiance and see how things went. We were eventually able to get some photos of all three of them, so it all worked out. I thought the session went great, especially since we were able to get photos of all three of them. This was Kellie's free engagement photo session, so I'll be seeing them again in a couple of months and I'm pretty excited for that.
Here are some of my favorite photos from the shoot:
]]>
I almost always shoot on location, so me moving to Jefferson isn't really going to impact my new or old clients too much. The only way my new location might affect my clients is if they want to meet with me or have their photos taken at my "studio," which would be our house, and they live near Madison and have to drive out to me. It's probably worth mentioning that there have only been three or four times in the four years I've been shooting professionally where a client has wanted to meet with me at my studio or I've thought to myself, "I really wish I had a studio for this shoot." I do plan on having a dedicated space where I can have some backdrops and my lighting set up eventually just in case, but I doubt it'll get used much. I have also considered finding a small space to rent back in Madison, but based on how much of a non-issue not having a studio has been, I'm not sure if it'd be worth it.
For as long as I can remember, I've charged travel fees if I had to travel farther than 50 miles. Ever since Devan and I decided to move out of Madison, I had planned on omitting those travel costs for my clients in the Madison area, I just hadn't thought of how to handle those travel fees consistently from client to client. As of right now, I'm thinking that I'll determine the travel distance from either Madison (probably the Capitol Building), or Jefferson, whichever is closer.
I still plan on putting most of my focus on the Madison area, so don't think that because I no longer live there I won't work for you. It's an incredibly easy drive that isn't too long, and I don't mind it at all. With that being said, I'm also going to try to tap into the Jefferson and Milwaukee area as well and see how that goes.
For those of you who are curios, here are photos of the house:
(This photo was taken before the wall mount had arrived. The TV is no longer like that).
]]>
My portfolios are constantly being refined, so some of these photos might be removed while others might be added. As of right now though, these are the photos that I really loved from their wedding. I'm incredibly grateful Hana and Jason had me shoot their wedding, and I think the results were my best work yet. Weddings are always stressful, especially when you shoot them by yourself, but when the photos turn out like this and the clients love them it's absolutely worth the long hours that go into shooting weddings.
Wedding Portfolio: http://www.danpomykalski.com/wedding
All of the photos from Hana and Jason's wedding: http://www.danpomykalski.com/ehlertfinal
]]>
After about 12 hours of editing, I'm only up to the dancing. Most of these photos are still rough edits. Once I get through the rest of the photos and then go through the photos at least two more times, I'll probably do another post with more refined photos. I'm just so excited from what I've seen so far I wanted to do a quick recap. Here are some of my favorite photos that I've seen so far.
Not only was my work day incredibly short at around nine hours, but Hana, Jason, all of their families, and the wedding party were great to work with as well. Keep an eye out for a post next week probably with the final edits.
P.S. I had Lobster Wellington for dinner at their wedding. I had no idea what I had ordered, but if you ever have the opportunity to try it, I strongly suggest you do!
]]>
Here is the photo Steven ended up choosing:
The headshot Steve was using wasn't the worst I've seen, but I think this one's much better. I'm definitely satisfied with how they all turned out.
You can see the rest of the photos here (they're all headshots, so nothing too exciting): http://www.danpomykalski.com/kopischke
]]>
The answer is, "of course I also do non-commercial work!" There are a few exceptions, but for the most part, there aren't many shoots I'll turn down. I love shooting things like weddings, as well as working with individuals and families in non-commercial settings. So if you like my work but think I won't take photos for you because I promote myself as a commercial photographer, contact me anyway! Chances are I'll still be very interested in doing work for you!
]]>
Last week, I attended a referral group meeting. While I was there, I had the opportunity to talk to a handful of professionals from various fields about what I do and what they do. One of the professionals I was speaking to brought up headshots on LinkedIn, and how they don't like to do business with people who have bad headshots. The professional went on to say that getting a headshot takes such little effort, that there's really no reason not to have one. Obviously, I'm incredibly biased and agree 100% with these thoughts. Keep in mind though, this is what they said to me.
This not only applies to LinkedIn, but websites in general. I can't tell you the number of times I've seen a website either without a single photo, or a handful of horrible ones. While photos might not be the first thing you look at, I'm sure there's been at least a few times you've stumbled upon a website that didn't have photos up to par with a competitors which resulted in you not considering them anymore. You might not have done this consciously, but I can almost promise it's happened.
In this day in age, the first thing people tend to do is look you or your business (if you have one) up online. The last thing you want is for their first impression of you to be negatively affected by a poor quality photo. This doesn't only apply to business owners either, but anyone applying for a job as well. I imagine it's pretty likely that employers look up anyone applying for a position within their company.
Whether you're a business owner or not, the effort that you take into acquiring a decent headshot or photos for your website can speak volumes about how dedicated you are. Do you absolutely need good photos to succeed? Probably not. Will they help? That's up to you to decide.
]]>
]]>
When Devan and I were trying to decide to go, some of the places on our list were Rocky Mountain National Park, The Grand Canyon, Moab, and Oregon/Washington. I desperately wanted to see mountains, so I was really pushing for Rocky Mountain National Park, since it's the closest of our considerations at about 16 hours away. Since we had decided to take a trip so close to the day we wanted to leave, we didn't really get a chance to save up, so we wanted this trip to be as inexpensive as possible. After figuring out the distances to the places were were considering, plus the number of days it'd take to get to them, we ultimately decided to go to South Dakota. At one point, we had considered camping to save some money (which would have been awesome), but after taking into consideration the park sticker, the camping fee, and the fee for wood, the cost came pretty close to what we paid for our hotel room.
We had already been to Rapid City, South Dakota two years ago when we went to Yellowstone/Grand Teton National Park for our honeymoon. The first time we were in the area we took an entire day to go to the Badlands and see Mount Rushmore, but we felt there was more to see in the area. Based on what I had seen the first time we were there, I didn't really consider the Black Hills mountains, and I kind of felt like we were settling on South Dakota because of how inexpensive it was compared to the other destinations. We love road trips though, and last year we didn't really go anywhere. Not only were we feeling a bit of cabin-fever, but trips like this are incredibly helpful for business. So even though I felt like we were settling, I still felt we should go, anyway.
We left on the 21st and came back on the 25th, which gave us a full three days to explore. I was pretty excited the entire way there. Not as excited as I probably would have been if we had decided to go somewhere else, but it felt good to just get out of Wisconsin. It took us about 10 and a half hours to get to Rapid City, and we stayed at the same hotel we did when we went through there two years ago. I think it was 75 the day we got there.
The first full day we were there, we decided to go see the Badlands again. Now that I think about it, I'm not entirely sure why we did this. The Badlands are awesome, but I'm not sure if they're something I need to see again after just two years. I'm glad we ended up going to the park though, because as soon as we pulled in, we saw a herd of Big Horn Sheep. I'd get excited about any animal that we don't have in Wisconsin, but I'm a pretty big fan of Big Horn Sheep, so this was pretty much as good as it could get. Another reason the Badlands was dramatically different this time, was because I got to be a passenger for a little. Last time, we took my car, which has a manual transmission (of course), so I did almost all of the driving. It took us about three hours to get through the entire park. By this time, I was having an absolute blast, and the feeling that we had settled on South Dakota was long gone. After the Badlands, we headed back to our room, got some lunch, and took a quick nap.
After our nap, we headed out again. I can't remember for sure, but I think we tried to drive to Harney Peak, which is the tallest point in the Black Hills. We didn't end up making it though, because it had been raining a lot and the temperature had dropped below freezing.
We woke up to a snow-covered South Dakota. We knew it was supposed to snow, but I had heard accumulation of less than an inch. It was definitely more than an inch though, but I'm pretty sure other areas, like Colorado, got it much worse. It was kind of funny because three or four years ago when we went to Moab, there was a big snow storm on the exact same day. Anyway, the snow kind of threw a wrench in our plans, because we had originally planned on doing the Badlands on the first day, a driving day on the second, and a hiking day on the third. We wanted to do the driving day in the middle of our trip so we wouldn't be as sick of the car on the way back. Sitting in the hotel for an entire day wasn't an option, so we headed out to see how the roads were.
They were pretty horrible.
We made it to Sturgis and ate some Taco John's. While eating our Potato Oles, we decided it was probably best just to head back to the hotel, and hope things got better throughout the day.
We headed out again around 3:30 pm, and sure enough, the roads were in much better shape. We had planned to do a big loop around the Black Hills National Forest originally, but because we no longer had a full day, we decided to try to just complete as much of the loop as possible. Because of the fresh snow, everything looked amazing, and the drive turned out to be a great idea. The most memorable part was driving through Spearfish Canyon. I'm not a skilled enough writer to accurately describe it, so I'm not going to try. I had no idea areas like that even existed where we were. It reminded me of driving through some of the canyons between Denver and Moab. We got back to our room around 8 pm that night.
The next day was our hiking day. We headed out to Custer State Park, because we heard they allowed dogs. We found out they had a wild life loop and decided to check it out. It wasn't long until we spotted a group of pronghorns. I hopped out the car and began taking photos. One of the pronghorns didn't seem to mind me too much, and ended up getting a car-length away from me. I'm pretty sure pronghorns are fairly harmless, but it's always a little unsettling when a wild animal willingly comes that close to you. After watching the pronghorns for around 30 minutes, we continued with the loop.
We eventually saw large piles of poop in the road. Those piles of poop eventually lead to bison. Tons of bison. There was one point where the bison were standing in the middle of the road, and we had to drive between them to keep going. I didn't film or photograph this because it was pretty tense moment. People always think bison are harmless because they don't eat meat, but more people die from bison than grizzly in Yellowstone. I also heard that settlers were more afraid of bison than grizzlies because bison were so unpredictable. The loop took us a good three or four hours because we took our time through it. Devan let us stop twice so I could do some timelapses, which took about half an hour each. Since the drive took longer than we expected, we decided to get some food, and then come back to hike. We got Taco John's again, and then headed back to the hotel to take a nap.
I don't think we got back to the room until 3 pm; maybe a little later. Since everything too longer than we thought it would, we decided to just drive to Harney Peak again instead of hike. When we got to Harney Peak though, we found out there was trail that went to the top. A sign said to allow four to five hours to complete the trail. We got to the trailhead at 6 pm, so we only had about an hour. We decided to hike in a little bit to see if we could see the peak from the trail. Eventually, it began to get late. We didn't get too far before we decided to turn around so we wouldn't have to hike at night. We also saw a fairly large mountain lion track, which was the real deciding factor to start heading back to the car. We ended the day by pulling off on the side of the road during the last couple of minutes of sunlight and watching the sunset on the mountains.
Before we knew it, our trip was over, and we were on our way home. Almost as soon as we go to Rapid City, Devan and I both couldn't stop saying how much better the trip was than we thought it was going to be. We knew the trip would be fun, but it far exceeded our expectations. The trip was so good, that I almost want to go back in the very near future to see all of the things we didn't make it to. If you're in the Wisconsin area and are considering a road trip that won't kill your wallet, I can't recommend Black Hills National Forest enough.
I've barely begun editing the photos, but here are a few. I'm thinking next week will be a post with a link to the edited photos. I also took a lot of video, so there will probably be a short film as well at some point.
Here's a timelapse from the trip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luZQ8X66yzw
]]>
February 2016 completely exceeded my expectations. At the beginning of each month, I always look at how that specific time of year was previously. Looking at earlier Februarys, I was prepared to have a lot of free time on my hands. For whatever reason though, February 2016 kind of blew up, and I was much busier than I had expected (which is always a good thing).
My favorite sessions from February were probably the headshots I did for Lucas Wimmer and the photos I did for the Begowatts. I can't remember the last time I did just straight headshots for someone, so I was pretty stoked about Lucas' photos. The Begowatts shoot had me seriously considering focusing more on band photos, and the idea still pops into my head from time to time. Besides those two shoots, there were a few others I did throughout February that I could probably talk about, but it's probably better to be safe than sorry.
Other than February being good in terms of business, I also purchased my Nikon D750 at the beginning of the month (or at least close enough it can be mentioned in February's post). I always thought it was the photographer and not the equipment, but the D750 has been sort of a revelation for me, and changed my view on that.
I was hoping that the momentum from February would continue into March, but looking at the calendar, it's mid-March already and not much has happened. I've talked to a few people and set a few things up, but not quite the amount I was hoping for. That being said, there are still plenty of days left in the month, and things can definitely happen quickly. I'll just have to keep chipping away and see what happens!
There won't be a post next week, as Devan and I will be in South Dakota! You can definitely expect a post about that trip as well as plenty of photos. The last time we went on a trip was in 2014 when we went to Grand Teton/Yellowstone, so I'm incredibly excited for this upcoming week.
]]>
A prop can be anything from a favorite toy, to a sign with a cute little message or specific date written on it, to sport equipment. There are times when a prop can enhance a photo, or is necessary to convey a message in a photo, but in my experience, this is rare. Much like dutch angles (photographers taking photos at an angle intentionally that was often used in horror films to prompt a feeling of uneasiness from the audience), I feel that many photographers use props in photos as a crutch to enhance an otherwise boring photo. Think of any photo you've ever seen with a prop in it. That photo is probably either incredibly weak without the prop, or the photo would have been just as good without it.
An example that is coming to mind right now are save-the-date photos. I see a lot of save-the-date photos with the couple holding a sign with the date written on a piece of paper or something when the wedding is, Not only are these photos usually awkward looking, but they can also be redundant. Unless the couple decides to send just the photo as their save the date, the date will probably be printed somewhere else. I'm guessing there's a much better photo the couple could use instead of them standing, holding a sign.
An example that comes to mind of when props are used extensively, but actually work and make sense, are photos of athletes. It can be difficult to convey someone is an athlete without a bat, hockey stick, jersey, football, etc., so this would be a rare time I would suggest the client bring something. Some other examples of props that I don't mind are things like favorite toys, or significant items.
With all of this being said, if you're my client and wish to have a photo with a prop in it, I'm all for it. I'm not necessarily against props, but more against the absolute overuse of them, much like how some photographers convert almost every photo to black and white, even if it doesn't make sense. If you request a photo with a certain prop, I certainly won't say no, it's just not something I typically suggest or do.
]]>
Here are some of my favorites:
You can see all of the photos here: http://www.danpomykalski.com/begowatts
]]>
Here's one of the photos from Friday:
You can see the rest of the photos here: www.danpomykalski.com/lucas
]]>
If reading isn't really your thing, I also made a video. It's pretty bad, but you can see it here: https://youtu.be/aU91PMw8SlY
I made the video so I can show clients I'm capable of making videos (Obviously, the video wouldn't be out of focus for them, since I'd be behind the camera...).
My new strap, which is the BlackRapid Cross-Shot arrived in the mail about a week ago. Before I purchased the Cross-Shot, I wasn't able to find much information on it, specifically comparing it to my old strap, the BlackRapid RS-7 (which I believe is the "Curve," now). Since I wasn't able to find much, I thought I'd type up a quick post comparing the two.
I've had my Curve for four or five years, and it has held up as well as I expected it too. Ever since I first bought my BlackRapid strap, I've been a huge fan of their products, and I'd definitely recommend checking them out if you haven't heard of them. There's really no comparison between their straps and the stock neck straps that come with cameras. I've heard people complain about the strap dropping the camera because of various reasons, but I haven't had that problem. I will say I generally don't use a strap for my type of work. The times i will use a strap are if I'm running around and don't have anywhere to set my camera, or if I'm walking around taking photos in a city or on a hike. How little I tend to use a strap may be a factor of why I haven't experienced these problems, but I kind of doubt it.
I liked my Curve so much, I didn't even consider any other brands. When I went to go buy another strap, though, I found that BlackRapid had expanded their product line quite a bit. I think when I bought my Curve, there were maybe two or three offerings with only one really being a viable option. I looked at the Curve, saw it was $65, and decided to look and see what else was being offered. Enter: the Cross Shot.
The Cross Shot was about $20 less than the Curve, and could also be worn over any shoulder. The main reason I was getting another strap was because I have a few weddings coming up that I'll be shooting myself. I had been using a neck strap on my backup body which wasn't working all that well. My plan was to get a second BlackRapid strap, so the fact the Cross-Shot was ambidextrous was a huge plus and made it seem like the obvious option. There was only one, pretty significant, issue I had with the strap. The padding; or lack-there-of.
My Curve had ample amounts of padding while the Cross-Shot had nothing but a slim piece of thin rubber. I imagined the Cross-Shot wouldn't be nearly as comfortable as the Curve, so I tried to look up some comparisons, but found nothing. Taking the price difference into consideration, I took a chance and ordered the Cross-Shot.
When the strap arrived, I tore the box open, attached my camera, and walked around the apartment. I was pretty surprised at how comfortable the strap was. I also found that since the padding is rubber, it tends to grip a little better than the Curve. I think the Cross-Shot might be more comfortable than the Curve, and after having both straps for a few days, the padding on the Curve almost seems excessive. The lack of padding on the Cross-Shot also makes it more comfortable to wear with a backpack compared to the Curve. I was originally planning on using the Cross-Shot on my backup body exclusively, but now I'm thinking it'll be my main strap. The only concern I really have is that the rubber might break down over time, but I'm thinking that'll take years. There's really no reason I can think of to go for the Curve over the Cross-Shot, especially taking the price difference into consideration.
If you're in the market for a new strap, I can't recommend BlackRapid products enough. The difference between a strap like a BlackRapid and a regular neck strap are night and day. Your entire body will thank you, and you'll probably enjoy making photographs that much more.
]]>
The body I ordered was a refurbished one from Nikon's US site. I was under the impression that, for the most part, refurbished DSLRs were bodies that people ordered, returned, realized they didn't like, sent back, and then Nikon looked over the body, made sure it worked, then resold for less because they couldn't sell it as new under current laws. After I had placed my order, I did a little more reading and found that refurbished DSLRs could also potentially be the floor models in large chain stores that people's grimy mits are all over that were sent back. I was paralyzed with fear as I imagined the DSLR I just ordered being handled by thousands of people, getting covered in gunk, being dropped, used as a hammer...
The delivery day finally arrived, and I sat around waiting for hours. I knew what time the UPS guy normally came at, but I couldn't help but sit in agonizing anticipation. 2 pm finally arrived, and I checked the parking lot the UPS guy normally parked at. I didn't see him out there, and Malin had to go for a walk. I decided that if I went a certain way, I would be able to see if the UPS guy came. We got about a block into our walk, and as I turn the corner, the UPS truck is parked in front of our building, which isn't normally where they park. I froze for a second, turned, and sprinted back. As I got into the apartment, I heard the UPS guy's scanner beeping. I opened the door and there he was, getting ready to turn and leave. There was even a failed-attempt slip on our door already.
I took Malin for her walk, got back, and opened the D750 as calmly as I could. I don't even know how to describe what I felt once I was actually holding my D750. It was glorious (actually. I didn't have the battery grip for my camera yet, so it actually wasn't perfect, yet).
Before my D750 got here, I found a website (http://www.myshuttercount.com/) which allows me to check the shutter actuations. For those of you who don't know, the file system in most cameras goes up to 9999, and then resets. So without software or websites, the only thing someone can know for sure is that the shutter has been released 9999 times. Anyway, I checked my D7000. It had almost 56,000 actuations. The shutter is rated to 150,000 actuations, so that's not too bad.
The first thing I did was an inspection. I didn't see any scratches or anything, and the rubber on the grip wasn't worn down. The next thing I did was took a photo and checked the shutter actuations. It seemed like the website was taking forever. I paced back and forth as I waited to see how used my camera was. The site finally finished. I looked. 90. A mere 90 shutter actuations. As far as I'm concerned, 90 shutter actuations is approximately 0. I was stoked.
Initial thoughts (skip here if you don't want to read the backstory):
So what do I think of the camera? I've had it for about a week now. That's just long enough that I've been able to use it, but not long enough that the new-feeling has worn off. I've always felt that it's the knowledge and skill that makes the photographer; not the gear. Well, after using the D750, I still feel that way, but it should be changed to, "it's the knowledge and skill that make the photographer; and the gear definitely helps."
As I said before, my D7000 was four and half years old, and the technology was even older. That, plus the fact that the D7000 was a cropped sensor and the D750 is a full-frame sensor, makes for a huge difference between what I was using and what I'll be using from now on. I'm not a vastly better photographer all of a sudden because of my new camera, but I might be a slightly better photographer, now...
I was considering the D610 for a long time because it was less than the D750. Up until right before I ordered the D750, I was still considering the D610. After comparing the specifications of the D610 to my D7000 though, I felt that the D610 was just too similar. The D610 was still expensive, and I felt if I was spending that much money, I might as well just pay the little bit extra to get the camera I really wanted. Well, the camera I really want is a D5, but I don't have $6,000 to spend on a DSLR. The D750 was the camera I wanted the second most. I'm almost certain that if I had ordered the D610, in the back of my mind, I would have always been saying, "I wish this was the D750." My wallet hates the decision now, but I feel like I'll be happier in the long run, and I'll probably keep the D750 longer.
To me, the most important improvements the D750 has over my D7000 are:
Better image quality. I've heard people say the difference between full-frame and cropped sensors are non-existent. K. Maybe between current full-frame and cropped sensors (although I kind of doubt that, even), but between my D750's full-frame sensor and my D7000's cropped sensor, there's a huge difference.
Better ISO performance. This was a big deal to me. My D7000 went from ISO 100 up to ISO 6400. My D750 can go down to ISO 50, and up to ISO 12,800 natively, plus an additional two stops higher in extreme situations. With my D7000, I would try to not go higher than ISO 3200, because the noise and colors got too bad. With my D750, I would go to ISO 12,000 without a second thought. I would even go up to the hi 1 ISO setting. That's a big deal. That's four to six times less light I need with the D750 compared to the D7000.
Better auto-focus sensor. The D750 can go down to -3 EV, while the D7000 only went down to -1 EV. Honestly, I'm not sure what "EV" stands for. I probably should. I do know that this means the D750 needs less light to focus. I can't tell you how frustrating it was trying to focus in dim light with the D7000. This was another big selling point for me. The D750 also has 15 cross type autofocus points, while the D7000 had nine. The D750 has 51 autofocus points, where the D7000 had 39.
This wasn't a huge deal to me when I bough the D750, but it has a toggle on the back so you can switch between video settings and photo settings. I used to use the User 1 and User 2 settings on my D7000 to do the same thing, but the lever on the D750 works much better.
The grip is deeper on the D750, which makes it incredibly comfortable. People kept mentioning this in reviews, and I didn't think it was that important. I was wrong. It's very important. The MB-D16 battery grip also has a deeper grip to match.
There are only two things I don't like about the D750.
The first thing, which I hope will be changed with a firmware update, is the rear LCD screen turns on when things such as ISO and white balance are adjusted. Not only does this drain the battery, but it's also blinding and incredibly distracting. It drives me crazy. Fortunately, I shoot a lot in aperture priority, and there's a thing called "easy ISO," which allows the user to adjust the ISO with the rear command dial, which would normally do nothing in that mode. I didn't think I'd use the easy ISO, but it's actually really nice.
The second thing, which can't be fixed, is how the auto focus points are crammed in the middle of the frame. I hated how the D7000's focus points were crammed, and the D750's are even worse. I mentioned earlier that the D750 has 51 AF points, but I'd rather have half of those, even a quarter of those, in favor for more spread out focus points. I've already gotten over it, because I got used to it with my D7000, but it would have been nice to have the points more spread out.
Overall, I love the D750. It felt weird/terrible before the battery grip arrived, but once it did, the camera felt perfect. It's everything I had hoped for, besides the two issues I brought up. I'm incredibly excited to begin shooting with it in both professional and personal situations.
*I didn't go in to much detail about this, but I did order the MB-D16 grip. It was an expensive accessory, but I felt a necessary one. I bought a third-party one for my D7000, which caused a few serious issues while shooting and eventually broke. I went right for the Nikon one this time; lesson learned.
I haven't gotten a chance to get out and take many photos with my D750 yet, but here are a bunch of photos of our pets...
And here's a photo of my 335 and D7000 so there's something besides pet photos.
]]>
With that being said, January 2016 actually wasn't too bad. I had only one session in January, but the fact that I had a session at all is a miracle. Looking back, I'm pretty sure I had two sessions in January 2015. It would have been nice to do better than 2015, or at least the same, but again, I can't complain since I was able to find anything at all in January.
Although I had only one session, I was able to book two weddings. Those retainers should be arriving in the mail pretty soon, and it's a bit of a relief to actually have something set up for this year (and also get paid). Last year, I came in with a number of things set up. This year, I think I had one, so I've been panicking a little more than usual.
I'm hoping that February is a little more busy than January, but I'm not expecting much. I'm thinking maybe a session or two, and hoping to get a few more contracts signed for the summer. I'll just keep chipping away and see how things go!
Oh, and I almost forgot. I ordered a new camera... It should be here tomorrow or Thursday. I'm trying not to think about it though. There will definitely be a post next week or the following week on it.
]]>
Now that I've had the camera for a little over a month, I've had more time to mess around with it and really pick out the pros and cons. I'm going to focus primarily on the cons in this post.
If you're friends with me on Facebook, you know that I've been using the GoPro when I play pond hockey almost exclusively. Poor battery performance when it's cold outside isn't exclusive to the GoPro Hero4 Session, but when the battery life is already around two hours, this is a pretty devastating issue. There have been a few times where the battery has been at about 50%, and the camera dies after 15 minutes. I did pick up a portable charger from REI on clearance, though, so I can always use that to charge the GoPro quick. On the bright side, it doesn't take long for the camera to charge, and a bigger battery would mean more weight, obviously.
My next complaint is also related to the cold. Right now, I have the curved adhesive mount on my hockey helmet. While inside, the mount isn't going anywhere. After being outside for maybe five to 10 minutes, the mount falls right off. Sometimes I get lucky and it's just sticky enough I can get by and stick the camera to my helmet.
The GoPro Hero4 Session doesn't require a housing for it to be waterproof like the other GoPros, which means better sound quality since the mics aren't covered up. While the sound quality is better, it still isn't great. Fortunately, no one really expects exceptional sound quality from GoPros, anyway.
It seems that the Session's footage is initially pretty underexposed. I use Adobe Premiere Elements though, so it's a pretty quick fix.
There have been a few times when the GoPro has started recording, and then I check back on it and it isn't recording anymore. I turn the GoPro back on to see if the battery is dead, and it isn't. I'm not really sure what's going on there, but checking on the camera every now and then isn't a huge deal.
In my initial post, I think I mentioned that I kept accidentally doing timelapses instead of recording video. After making that mistake twice, I haven't made that mistake since.
Those are the only negatives that I've noticed so far, which is pretty good considering how much people seem to hate this camera. Based on all of the bad things I had heard, I wasn't expecting anything great. I've been having a ton of fun with it though, and I think a lot of the bad reviews came before the significant price drop. So far, the Session has met all of my expectations, and I'm pretty happy I returned the GoPro Hero and got the Session instead. The GoPro Hero+ is the same price as the Session, and I would choose the Session over the Hero+ without hesitation. If the price stays the same, I'm planning on picking up at least one more, possibly two, in the near future.
For those of you wondering, I normally shoot at 1440p resolution at 30fps. I either crop the footage, or I squish the top and bottom which is what GoPro's "superview" is. The only reason I record in 1080p is if I want to do slow motion stuff at 60fps. I have ProTune on. I edit the footage with Adobe Premiere Elements. As far as goodies go, I have the bicycle mount, which I'm sure is going to break sooner or later; it's pretty flimsy. I also picked up the head mount, and the tripod mount. The tripod mount was on clearance for less than $2. I'm thinking about getting the chest mount, suction cup mount, and more adhesive mounts.
Here's my most recent video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAzaC1kB50U
Here's a link to my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC88thh1XgPpRwGNyM6IJUSw
]]>
Here are some photos of it:
In 2015, I was hoping to see a 50% increase in revenue from 2014. Within the first couple of months of 2015, I was highly doubting that I would meet my goal by the end of the year. Things were pretty much at a stand still until April, when I broke my record for the most number of shoots in a month. I then broke that record again in June, and met that record in July. After July, I had already met my goal of a 50% increase, and by the end of the year, I had a little more than a 100% increase in revenue. I thought 2014 was a good year, but 2015 made 2014 seem irrelevant. Shout out to all of the people who hired me in 2015, and thank you for helping make it the best year yet.
But, 2015 is over now, and I can't waste time reflecting on the past. I've set my goals for revenue, profit and expenses and am hoping to see at least a 50% increase in revenue this year. I'm not going to lie, as always, I already have my doubts about how business will be this year. This time of year is always the hardest for me. People are either still recovering from the holidays, or simply aren't thinking of photos right now. That, in addition to the fact that my finances spreadsheet is incredibly sparse at the moment since it's the beginning of the year is always incredibly discouraging.
I hope to meet my goals in 2016, but even if my revenue is the exact same this year as it was last year, I would still be pretty happy. It's only January 13th, so who knows what will happen. As for now, I'll continue to chip away and see what happens this year.
]]>
Initially, I purchased the GoPro Hero, which is the most inexpensive model at around $130. I wasn't sure how much I'd use it, so I didn't want to drop a large amount of money on something i might use once and forget about. While at the store, I completely forgot the Hero's case is integrated, as oppose to the Hero4 which can be removed from its case. I was quickly reminded of this once I got home and began fiddling with the camera. I spent the next day and a half relentlessly worrying about the case/lens getting scratched, and since the case isn't replaceable, I'd have to purchase a whole new camera. I tried convincing myself that the case getting scratched was unlikely, and that I could just replace the camera if it happened.
I failed to convince myself, so on Sunday I went and returned the Hero for a GoPro Hero4 Session (which has a replaceable cover over the lens). Here are my initial thoughts on the Session.
Here are the advantages the Session has over the Hero that I've noticed so far:
- The most important thing to me is that the cover on the Session is replaceable. I think you can get a pack of two lens covers for $40.
- The Session can be linked to your smartphone/tablet or the GoPro remote. This allows the settings to be changed and you can use your phone/tablet as an LCD. Neither of the two cameras had live view, so you just point the camera in the general direction of what you want and hope you get something. Given how wide the lenses are on GoPros, it's pretty hard to miss anything, though.
- The Session's LCD screen is illuminated. There were a few times I couldn't see what i was doing on the Hero.
- The Session has way more resolution and frame rate options. This isn't that important to me, because I probably won't be changing the frame rate or resolution all that often.
- The Session auto rotates, so I don't have to worry about changing the orientation in settings like with the Hero. Although this could easily be fixed in post-production.
- The Session is a cube, so it's easier to side-mount.
- The Session is waterproof to 33' without a case. One would think that the Session not being in a waterproof case would result in better audio while not underwater, but the sound is still garbage, basically.
- On the Session, the "on/off" button and "record" button are the same. You press the button and the camera begins recording after a few seconds. Once you press the button again, the camera stops recording and turns off. I think the Hero could do the same thing, but I don't know if it turned off automatically.
- The Session is smaller than the other GoPros. This isn't a huge deal to me, but I thought it was worth mentioning.
- The Session has an 8 megapixel sensor instead of the Hero's 5 megapixel sensor. Again, not a huge deal to me.
Some of the cons of the Session that I've noticed are:
- The app isn't outstanding. It's nice that I can have live view, but there is a slight lag. The biggest issue I have is how much of a hassle it is to connect the camera to my phone/tablet. On the camera, you have to turn the wifi on (you could probably leave the wifi on, but I'm assuming this would affect the battery life), then you have to go into your phone/tablet and connect to the Session over wifi. This means that you have to get off of whatever wifi you're on, and select the GoPro. Then once you're done, you have to go back into your settings and connect to the wifi again. All of this seems like more of a hassle than it's worth, and I've rarely used my phone/tablet with the Session. I do appreciate the option though, as I'm sure there will be a point that I use it.
- There have been two times I've accidentally shot timelapses instead of video. This was pretty much my fault, as I held the button down instead of just pressing it. Now that I've made the mistake a few times, it's been pretty easy to remember and avoid.
- Because the camera turns off when it's done recording, you have to wait for the camera to start up again anytime you want to begin recording. It takes the camera a significant amount of time to start up. Significant enough that I'm sure I'll miss plenty of things while waiting. I do appreciate the simplicity of two buttons though, and only having to press the record button and go. However, the Hero had two buttons as well, and I think the other GoPro models have three buttons, so it's not like they're incredibly complicated.
Based on the reviews I read, the Session wasn't worth the $400 GoPro was initially asking. Compared to the equally priced Hero4, the image quality wasn't as good, and the Session's settings could only be changed from either a smartphone or the wireless remote (both of which were incredibly inconvenient). Every review I read seemed to scream, "Don't get the Session!" However, most of the reviews I had read were before GoPro dropped the price by $100, and then released a firmware update allowing some settings to be changed without a remote or smartphone, then dropped the price by another $100. I would agree that this isn't a $400 camera. However, for $200, I definitely feel it was worth the extra $70 compared to the Hero.
If you're interested to see some of the footage I've capture with the GoPro, you can check out my YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/. I don't have a ton of stuff up yet, and the only thing I've really had time to do is attach the GoPro to Malin's collar. I'm hoping to have some better stuff up soon.
]]>
]]>
]]>
In 2014, my wife and I went to Wyoming. Prior to Wyoming, I spent a lot of time "practicing" for our vacation by taking photos of various wildlife which was the bulk of my personal work that year. Any of you who have gone to Grand Teton National Park and/or Yellowstone National Park will probably agree that after going there, coming home to a place like Wisconsin isn't quite the same. I love Wisconsin, but after taking photos of things like mountains, pronghorns, elk, bears, and bison roaming across geysers, the wildlife and landscapes of Wisconsin just aren't quite the same as they were before we went. I wouldn't say Wyoming "ruined" photography for me, because I still love it, but I think it has certainly made it harder to motivate myself to get out and shoot.
Fortunately, the amount of personal work I've been doing lately has been steadily increasing. I'm also planning on acquiring a new camera soon, so that should definitely get things going.
www.danpomykalski.com
For those of you who haven't been to Grand Teton National Park/Yellowstone National Park, here are some of the photos from the trip.
The session probably worth mentioning the most was Brad and Abbie's wedding. My last post was a recap of their wedding so I'm not going to go into too much detail. Overall, it was a great time, with some excellent results that went right into my portfolio (you can find the recap here).
Speaking of portfolios, I spent a large portion of this morning updating my wedding portfolio, and adding a couple of photos to my portrait portfolio. You can find my wedding portfolio here, and my portrait portfolio here.
Brad and Abbie's wedding may have been my last session of the year. I'm pretty sure since September I've been saying things will slow down for me, but things kept popping up. Well I think things have finally dried up for me this year. I think last year things slowed down towards the end of October, so I'm certainly not going to complain about being busy for a month longer. I'd prefer to stay busy year round, but people being busy with the holidays and the weather being what it is in Wisconsin tend to take photos of of people's priority list.
I've continually been surprised throughout most of the year at how quickly things can pop up and then turn into a job though, so I might still get a few things before the year is done. At this point, I've already passed my goal of a 50% increase in revenue with a 100% increase in revenue, so if nothing happens in December it isn't the end of the world. I imagined that once things slowed down, I would take it easy and enjoy what I've accomplished. However, about a week or so ago, I began to wonder how I'm ever going to meet my goal of a 50% increase in revenue next year based on what my revenue was this year. So now my plans to sit back and relax have been forgotten and I'm frantically trying to get things set up for 2016.
And last but not least, have a safe and happy Thanksgiving!
Also, set up a session with me for next year.
]]>
We got up and got going right on time, and arrived at the salon about 15 minutes early. We started shooting right away, and before we knew it the day was over. The bride, groom, and wedding party were all great, no one spilled beer on my equipment, everything felt laid back and relaxed, we had a great time, and based on what Brad and Abbie have told me, they love the photos. If I could pick just one thing to do differently, it would be to not call Abbie's matron of honor maid of honor 19 million times and not realize it until the next day...
I started editing the photos as soon as I got home Saturday night, and by now I think I've put about 10 hours in at least. These are only rough edits so far, but here are some of my favorites.
This is probably my favorite photo that I took. It might not look like much, but it's the bride and her matron of honor posing for a photo (not for me), and then the groom and his best man hugging behind them.
]]>
In case you're not into photography and kept reading even though I suggested you don't, I'm not talking about filters like Instagram filters, although I hate those just as much but that's for another post. I'm talking about filters that are meant for the ends of lenses, specifically UV filters. The kind of filters that aren't supposed to affect the quality of the image, but are meant more for protection.
In my experience, people either hate filters or love filters. I've head stories about people's filters being completely destroyed, but the front element being unscathed, thanks to the filter taking most of the blow. These stories are what largely influenced me to purchase two filters a little over a year ago. I had just purchased some slightly more expensive glass and I would much rather replace a filter that cost significantly less than a much more expensive lens.
It didn't take me long to realize that my image quality was definitely suffering when I had the filters on my lenses. When there weren't weird reflections from light bouncing off at certain angles, it was an overall decrease in sharpness and clarity. Filter lovers out there will probably blame it on not buying the most expensive, best quality filters.
It's a pretty well known fact that the more expensive the filter, the less it will affect image quality, generally. I will admit, I didn't buy the most expensive filters, but I tried my best to stay away from the most inexpensive. I want to say I spent around $20 on a 67mm filter and maybe $35 on an 82mm filter. Now, it's also common knowledge that the bigger the filter, the more expensive it will be. Take into account that the more expensive/high quality the lens, the larger the filter size, generally. For example. a Hoya 82mm UV filter from B&H is $152.90.
Up to this point, I've owned 13 lenses. Of those 13 lenses, I have broken/damaged to the point where I can't use it anymore 0 front elements (although I'll probably destroy every single lens I have now for saying that). Let's say I bought a filter for each one of those lenses. I don't have time to see how much a filter would cost for every lens I've owned, but let's just say $50 (I think it would actually end up being more) for each filter. That means that I would have spent $650 on filters by now. If I were to damage my most expensive lens tomorrow, I would be able to purchase a new one and have some money left over with the amount I would have spent for filters for every single one of my lenses.
The only way I could see a filter being worth it, is if you're using a lens like the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8, which is $2,400. It really depends on how long I go without damaging a front element, though. Until that happens, which I hope isn't tomorrow for writing this post, I'll think I'll take my chances.
*I picked Hoya because I'm pretty sure it's a well-respected filter brand. I went to BH, searched for an 82mm UV filter and sorted the results high-low. Then I just scrolled until I saw a brand I recognized.
]]>
A month or two ago, a friend of mine sent me a text saying she needed a headshot for work and she needed it that night. She asked if I had any of her, which I didn't, and I didn't have time to take any of her before she needed them. I think she ended up having someone she worked with take them for her. I was able to take a look at the headshots when my friend emailed them to me to see if there was anything I could do to make them look better. Were they headshots? Yes. Would they get the job done? Probably. Would having headshots on hand have worked out better? Almost certainly.
The headshots didn't look terrible, and this post isn't about bashing another photographer's work. This post is more focused on if my friend had had headshots on hand, she could have avoided the whole ordeal of frantically trying to track down a photo of her. She could have also avoided submitting something to her work that she might not have been satisfied with. This isn't a post to bash my friend either, because in her defense the thought, "I might need a headshot sometime in my career," doesn't cross a lot of people's minds.
A lot of people think headshots are for actors, or people involved with entertainment. However, with the rise in social media and the internet, headshots for anyone who takes their career seriously are becoming increasingly important. I've said this before in previous posts; one of the first things people do when they hear about someone is look them up on social media. If that person searching for you is doing so for work-related reasons, it's better they find a quality headshot of you than a terrible one.
October was surprisingly busy. I keep saying that things should slow down for me, but so far they haven't; at least not as much as I thought they would. At the beginning of October, I thought it was going to be a slow month, but then things popped up all of a sudden here and there. This is definitely a good thing, and I'm hoping maybe my slow time might not be slow anymore. I'm not going to get too excited about it just yet in case this is a fluke, though. As of right now, it looks like November is going to be when things start winding down.* I'm hoping a few things pop up like they did in October, but I'll just have to wait and see how things play out.
One last thing that doesn't really deserve it's own post, is I'm currently transitioning from "Dan Pomykalski Photography" to "Pomykalski Photo." Obviously, "Pomykalski Photo" is a bit shorter, and after writing out "Dan Pomykalski Photography" for three and a half years, I decided to try it out and see how it goes. I was already using "Pomykalski Photo" in places where the original name was too long, so it was a pretty easy transition. I just need to change it on my business license, and I should be done. I also figured it would be easier to leave my business to my children if 1) we have kids, 2) if they want to be photographers, and 3) if this all works out and "Pomykalski Photo" is still around when they're old enough to take it over. Based on how things have gone this year, I'm definitely sticking with it another year.
*I have openings in the beginning and at the end of November. If you need photos, you can contact me at www.danpomykalski.com/contact.html
]]>
You may be thinking, "it's just a review. It's pretty straight forward. Bad photographers get bad reviews, and good photographers get good reviews." But hear me out! Sometimes, it isn't that simple.
The most important thing to keep in mind is people tend to only write reviews if they're upset, or if their experience was bad. So if a photographer has only bad reviews, that doesn't necessarily mean that every time they work for someone the photographer does a horrible job (but all negative reviews are probably a pretty good indication that you should avoid hiring them...).
Related to this point, is that sometimes people can be weird, and they'll write a bad review for someone just because they feel like it; even if they've never actually worked with the photographer before. This is one of my biggest fears, but fortunately, all of the site where people can review my business, I have the opportunity to reply.
The way that the "people only write reviews when they're upset" point comes into play the most, is if the photographer has no reviews at all. If the photographer has no reviews, that doesn't necessarily mean they aren't good at what they do; it could just mean they haven't done a horrible enough job to make someone write a negative review. On the other hand, it could also mean that they haven't done a good enough job yet to make someone write a positive review. Personally, I offer a money back guarantee if the client isn't happy with the results from their session, and in the three years I've been taking photos professionally, I've never had to refund money. However, I've never really pushed reviews either, so up until about a week ago, I had maybe three or four floating around various websites. The lack of reviews didn't necessarily mean I'm a bad photographer. It just wasn't a priority to me to bother my clients to write a review.
With that being said, I'm pretty sure all of the people who gave me reviews gave me five out of five stars, so you should definitely base your decision on reviews, regardless of what I just spent typing.
]]>
Back in June, I took some portraits of Tom and Karen Falk to be used with an article announcing their $10 million donation to UW-Madison. For those of you who don't know, Mr. Falk is the CEO of Kimberly-Clark. This session was probably my biggest one yet. There were PR people there, and at one point I heard some people talking to other people about a plan if the news of the donation was leaked. I think I arrived at the location an hour or two early, so I had all of that time to sit and think of all the things that could go wrong. Once Mr. and Mrs. Falk arrived though, it was like any other session, and both of the Falks ended up being very nice people. I heard that the Falks liked the photos from the shoot enough to ask for a few copies, so I'd say things went pretty well.
Here's an article with more details: http://news.wisc.edu/23981
Here are a few photos from the session:
]]>
As I usually do, I think the photos turned out great. Even from looking at the back of my camera, I knew that I had produced some portfolio quality work. Sure enough when I got home, it took me a few minutes to pick a photo, edit it, and add it to my portrait portfolio. As far as I know, Sarah and her mom like the photos as well, which is always what's most important.
Not only do I love going down to Chicago, and not only did the photos turn out really well, but I also got White Castle for lunch and Lou Malnati's for dinner that day. Can't ask for much more than that.
Here are some of my favorite photos from Saturday.
You can see all of the photos here: www.danpomykalski.com/sarah
]]>
For those of you who haven't been following along, I shot Lucas and Chelsea's wedding earlier this month. I've already done a recap post on how the wedding went so I'm not going to go into too much detail on it, but overall I thought it went fantastic. I think Tony and I got some great shots, and I was able to add some of the photos to my portfolio.
I already did a post on Ariel and Garrett's session as well, but overall this was a fun session. Not only did we get great results with the photos, but the session was fun also. Not that I don't have fun on all of my sessions, but this session was nice because it's been a while since I've done something laid back like that.
Thing should start winding down for me at any moment, which isn't going to necessarily be a bad thing due to how busy my summer was with work. I'm not expecting too many sessions after October, so I'll probably just focus on booking things for the Spring and Summer. We'll see though, this year has already exceeded my expectations, so maybe I won't see that typical slow time I have in previous years.
Here are some of my favorite photos from the two sessions I was able to discuss.
]]>
Here is a list of payment types I don't accept, but am frequently offered:
Beer. Usually it goes something like, "I used to know a guy who would take photos for me for a case of beer." Unfortunately, my cellphone provider, bank, the electric company, etc. doesn't accept beer, so I need actual money to pay those things.
Telling friends/family about me. I recently did a post on this, which can be found here: http://www.danpomykalski.com/blog/2015/8/post-55-why-telling-people-about-me-isnt-the-same-as-pay
Permission to use the photos from the session in my portfolio. Because of current copyright laws, I have the right to use my work in any way I want, as long as I'm not selling them. This means I would be able to use the photos regardless if I have permission or not. With that being said, I have had people ask me not to use their photo in my portfolio, and I've honored the request.
"Getting me back next time." I've had people say things to me like, "work for me free this time, and I'll pay you more next time," or, "work for free this time and there will be more things to come in the future." Nope.
Goods or services I'm not interested in/have no use for. I already talked about this in the beginning, but just to make, please don't offer me things like babysitting services, or landscaping services in exchange for photos. At this point in time, I don't have any need for those things.
]]>
Here are some of my favorite photos from Friday:
Here are a few of my favorite photos from Sunday
Overall, I can't complain about how the photos turned out, or how things went in general. I have one more wedding lined up this year and another next Spring, and I can't wait after how this one went.
]]>
The simple answer is "it depends." Editing 10 photos from a quick session is obviously going to take way less time than editing thousands of photos from a wedding. Contractually, I have to deliver the photos within four weeks (unless otherwise stated). That being said, clients can typically expect to receive their photos within a week, if not a few days. I'm usually so excited to show the client the photos that I typically begin editing the photos as soon as I get home. I then edit them over the next few days, look over them at least a few more times to make sure I like what I've done, and then send the link off to the client. Clients typically sound surprised when I tell them that I should have a link to the photos to them in a few days.but that's one of the benefits of hiring a full-time professional, as opposed to a weekend-warrior. Again, this largely depends on how many photos there are, and if I have to edit any photos from other sessions.
www.danpomykalski.com
]]>
Anyway, so how was August for Dan Pomykalski Photography?
August was a milestone month for a number of reasons. The first reason was that I actually had sessions this month for the first time ever in the three years I've been doing this. If you're thinking to yourself that August would seem like a prime month for a photographer and that they would be booked throughout the month, you wouldn't be alone, because I assumed the same thing. However, I have come up with a few possible reasons why August has been so poor for me.
1) Every year, my family goes up north for a week in August, so not only am I not doing the daily work stuff I normally do, but I also don't schedule sessions for that week.
2) One year, my wife and I went to Washington D.C. with her family for a week in August. The year after that, we went to Niagara Falls with her family. So those two vacations, plus the time we go up north with my family, I'm up to around two and a half weeks where I'm not doing any work.
3) Although August is a warmer, summer month, it's also at the very end of summer. So people who have kids, are an educator, or work at a school, are getting ready for school to start up again, and probably not thinking about photos.
I think the first two reasons play a much bigger role than the third, so me not working in August is pretty much my fault.
August was also a milestone month for me because due to the sessions I did this month, plus the contracts I have signed for the remainder of the year, it looks like I will be meeting my 2015 revenue goal. Last year, I made a 50% (and then some) increase in revenue from 2013, so I decided to try to make another 50% increase from 2014 to 2015. Up until a few months ago, I kept looking at my goal for 2015 and wondering how I was ever going to achieve that. This was largely because I had a new record number of sessions in June, and then matched that record again in July. I'm excited I met my goal, and will probably go past it, but I'm already wondering how I'll meet next year's goal...
As far as sessions go, I don't think I can really talk about what I've been doing too much. I've been doing a lot of work for organizations, as opposed to individual clients, such as families, or one-and-done type of sessions, and I doubt the organizations would want me telling everyone what they're doing before they're ready.
And that's how my August has been going! Usually things start to wind down for me after July, but I have a busy September and October this year; I'm not complaining! Who knows, maybe I'll have a busy November and December too. I'll be sure to let you all know in my monthly updates for each of those months. Until then, I'm going to try to keep the momentum going!
]]>
First of all, the person who is promising me to spread my name around might not even be good at it. In fact, they may be absolutely terrible. There's no promise of the quality of the promoting of my work. There's a huge difference between someone half-heartedly telling one person, "hey check this guy out," and a 10 page review that reaches thousands of people. Chances are, when someone says they'll "tell their friends about you," it's going to be the first one, if they tell anyone at all.
Speaking of "if they tell anyone at all," there's absolutely no guarantee the person will tell anyone. There's nothing keeping the person from getting you to work for them for free, and then just bailing on you. Even if the person does tell their friends, who knows if any of those friends will ever hire you.
And the biggest reason why I don't consider someone "telling their friends about me" as pay, is because people should be doing that anyway. At least I think so. If I have a good experience with someone/a company and they do good work, I'll probably tell at least a few other people about it. Maybe I've been approaching this wrong my whole life, but I've never done business with someone/a company and thought to myself, "hey, they should be paying me for this," or, "hey, they should have done my work for free because I'm telling people about them."
I know it takes time for some things to develop while running a business, but working for someone who says they'll tell their friends about you is one of those things that won't put money in your pocket now, or probably ever.
]]>
The first thing that's helpful is if you have a date and time already in mind. If you contact me with a date and time already in mind, I can tell you whether or not I'm available. There have been a few times where people have contacted me and I've asked them when they were thinking of doing the photos and they aren't sure yet. This isn't as much of a problem when there's only a person or two. When it's a family thing, or a large group of people, it's a different story...
This next point is somewhat related to the first, but have a location in mind. Because of travel fees, having a location in mind already helps me give you the most accurate estimate possible. This is another thing that can save a huge amount of time, especially with larger groups. Again, with smaller groups, this usually isn't as big of a deal. It's usually a problem when the person has to get back to me and get in contact with however many people and make sure they're all on board. If you aren't sure about a location, don't worry about it though. I'll usually be able to throw out at least a few suggestions, especially if I'm familiar with the area.
Another thing that can help speed up the process, is acquiring any necessary permits. You usually won't need one, but sometimes in certain locations, you'll need a permit to take photos. I'm sure other photographers handle this differently, but I generally leave it up to whosever idea it was to shoot at the location that requires a permit to handle it. So in other words, if it I suggested the location, I'll acquire the permit. If it was the client's idea, I'll leave it up to them to acquire the permit. Again, permits usually aren't required, but it's something to keep in mind. Usually permits will be required for places that aren't public property.
Be prepared to pay the retainer fee. This is a big one. I require a 50% retainer fee before anything is official and this is usually the biggest road block for people. I accept credit cards, cash, or check, but if you're set on mailing cash or check, it's going to take at least two days. Obviously, if you're trying to get photos done tomorrow, this isn't going to work. If time is a factor, paying the retainer fee over the phone with a credit card or debit card is the fastest way to get things taken care of.
Give yourself enough time. If something popped up all of a sudden, you don't really have control over this. However, if you knew you wanted photos for weeks or months, it'll be easier if you contact me sooner rather than later. Again, sometimes there's nothing that can be done about this.
Having all of these things ready when we start figuring things out can speed up the process greatly, and help me get the contract to you much faster. Here are a few other things that won't necessarily help speed up the process, but are other helpful things about setting up a session with me.
Don't tell me how long you'll need me for (unless it's a wedding, or some type of event). At this point, I almost always know how long it will take to produce a certain amount of photos. There's no point in paying me for an hour when I can get the job done in 15 minutes. There are a few occasions where I'll need to stick around for a certain amount of time, in which case I would tell you, but it'll usually save you money if you tell me the amount of photos you want, instead of how long you think it'll take.
Present any other miscellaneous details to me so I'm ready for whatever might happen and I can get the necessary photos. Every shoot is different, and not everyone wants the same thing. Giving me as many details as possible can help me be ready for the session, and will help me from missing anything you may find important.
I want the process of hiring me to go as smoothly and painlessly for my clients as possible, and I hope this post will help in achieving that. If you don't have all of the details sorted out when you initially contact me, don't worry. As long as you have at least a few details to some of the points, things will probably still go smoothly. It's usually when clients contact me with none of the details sorted out and need photos tomorrow that the chance of things working out are pretty much nonexistent.
]]>
I can't deny that there is a certain amount of credibility associated with a "big camera." People probably assume that one must be extremely dedicated and knowledgeable in photography to lug around all of those lenses that are usually pretty heavy, and that giant camera body that is also usually pretty heavy and can often require dial fiddling and button pushing. Not only that, but "big cameras" are typically expensive. Again, one would probably have to be extremely dedicated and knowledgeable in photography to spend the kind of money to have a camera system like that.
On the other hand, a person with a "big camera" might just have more money than they know what to do with and decided to just buy the most expensive setup they could. Who knows...
But this post is about my setup. So without further delay, here is my "big camera."
As you can see, my camera isn't the biggest, but it isn't the smallest either. The lens attached is my Nikon 300mm f/4, which I've used professionally two or three times. However, it is my biggest, so I attached it to my camera for this post.
This photo is a close up of my camera body. As you can see, I have attached a battery grip. Other than the incredibly practical advantages the battery grip offers, such as extended battery life, the ability to use AA batteries in a pinch, better balance, and, most important to me, the ability to hold the camera more comfortably when held vertically, it also makes my camera noticeably bigger.
In this photo, you can see that my camera is mounted on my tripod. This is typically how I would set up for wildlife photos, but I figured the tripod would, at the very least, make my camera seem even bigger, and might make me look even more knowledgable.
So there you have it. My camera isn't the biggest out there, but if you're going to judge my ability on my camera, I guess I would feel my setup would somewhat accurately convey where I'm at now? I'm not as good as I will be, but I'm far from just starting out.
]]>
As I've gotten more work, and have had less time to think about Facebook, I've started to realize the amount of "likes" I have aren't as important as I once thought. Of course, the more likes a page has, the more people will see the things the admin shares, which might result in more business. Me, personally, I think I've had maybe two or three out of the 345 likes contact me about possibly working for them in the three years I've had my page; none of which ended up happening. I'm sure that isn't the case for everyone, but in order for my Facebook page to result in people hiring me, I need way more people to like my page than I currently do based on how things have gone. Like thousands more.
I also used to try to get people to "like" the photos I would post. I discovered two big problems with this. The first problem is that people just wouldn't do it. I don't know why. I remember I would see my friends in classes, they would show me the photo I posted, tell me how much they would liked it, but then they wouldn't click "like" on Facebook. The second problem, is that Facebook has been making it harder and harder to achieve any organic growth what-so-ever. Back when I used to ask people to "like" my photos, it was in the hopes that their friends would then see the photo. Based on what Facebook has been doing, it's highly unlikely anyone will see my photos without me paying a fee unless they already like my page. The problem with this is those people already know I exist.
Another problem is I don't go on Facebook to hire someone. When I see a business on Facebook, I usually don't think to myself, "oh perfect! I was looking for a professional this or that." In fact, I don't know if I tend to think anything. I see so many ads on Facebook now, I think I might just skip over it, or at most think the business is some kind of scam, doesn't really exist, is no where near where I live, etc. I could definitely be the only one who experiences this problem, though.
Of course I appreciate every single person that has liked my Facebook page, and those likes certainly help when times are hard. However, If you have a Facebook page and you're struggling to get likes, don't get too discouraged about it. It's important to have a social media presence if you're a business owner, but there are things that are more beneficial than your business's Facebook page, such as doing good work.
]]>
Until now...
I thought of this the other day while I was in the shower, and I excitedly made a note to blog about it this week.
If you're in the market for your first DSLR, you shouldn't be looking to buy a camera for the level you're at now, but for the level you hope to eventually reach. The camera isn't going to be the main factor that causes your photos to be good or bad; it's going to be the user.
When most people ask me which DSLR would be good for a beginner, they also tell me what they plan to do with it and what they hope to achieve. Very rarely will the person say, "I want to become a professional photographer." Usually, they say something along the lines of, "I just want to take good photos while I'm on vacation," or, "I'm just going to use it to take photos here and there occasionally."
For this type of person, an entry-level to prosumer DSLR would be ideal. A DSLR in this range will offer better image quality than a phone or compact digital camera, won't break the bank, and is probably exactly what the person is looking for. This type of person isn't interested in editing their photos, and probably won't use manual settings. They just want good image quality and for the camera to do the work.
However, if you think there's any possibility that you may become serious about photography, you plan to edit your photos, use manual controls, and might even try to do it professionally, I would recommend not even bothering with the entry-level DSLRs, and jumping right to the prosumer to professional level DSLRs.
I had a feeling I was going to get serious about photography, and my first camera was an entry-level DSLR. I outgrew it within a few weeks. If I were to do it again today, I wouldn't have spent the $600 to get my D3100. I would have put that $600 towards a better DSLR right away that would have lasted me much longer. People who use their DSLR here and there will probably never notice the difference between a $600 and a $6,000 camera, but if you're anything like me, and you get sucked into photography, you'll be aware of the differences within months, if not weeks.
If money is a factor, don't feel bad if all you can afford is the entry-level DSLR. I said I'd put my money towards a better DSLR, but that's only if I could afford it. An entry-level DSLR is better than no DSLR at all. As I said earlier, the camera isn't going to be the main factor that affects your photos; the user is. A lot of emphasis is put on equipment, but good photographers can make good photos with anything and know it's not the gear that makes the photo.
]]>
I didn't really understand it at the time, but I would never think to suggest to edit another photographer's work now. Since then, a number of people have either offered to edit the photos themselves or tried to get the RAW files from me. This has happened enough times that I've decided to do a post to answer why I don't let other people edit my photos, and why I don't give my clients the RAW files.
There are a few reasons why I don't let other people edit my photos, but the primary reason is quality control. The quality of my work is incredibly important to me, and I want to make sure the client receives the absolute best work that I'm capable of. I'm a firm believer that post-processing is a huge part of photography, so if I give up the responsibility of editing my photos, I'm giving up a significant amount of control over the final product. By giving the client the RAW files and allowing them to do the editing, they can take the photos in almost any direction they want. This includes editing the photos in ways that I would never consider, which isn't a good thing if the editing is done poorly.
You may be thinking to yourself, "well what's the big deal if the client edits the photos poorly? They paid for the photos, they should be able to do anything they want to them."
The problem is if anyone sees the badly edited photos my name and business are then associated with the photos. The situation can get even worse if the fact that I didn't edit the photo isn't disclosed. Then whoever sees those photos will think that's the the work I do, when it isn't. Even if the photo is edited well, this can still be bad if the client edited the photo in a way I wouldn't normally, or a way I'm not capable of doing for the same reason; people will think I'm capable of doing something I'm not.
In order to avoid these situations and to make sure I have complete control over the final product, I don't give my clients RAW files or allow them to edit the photos themselves. The clients can still edit the JPEGs I give them, but there's far less information than with a RAW file, which will limit what can be done. In order to remain fair to all of my clients, I don't make any exceptions to this.
]]>
Chelsea and Lucas met me at my place, and from there we went to Pope Farm Park in Middleton. We were originally going to go to two locations, but we got started a little later than planned. I'm not going to point any fingers, but it wasn't my fault... Once Chelsea and Lucas got to my place, we had a very brief meeting and decided it would be better to go to just one location and be more laid back than try to hit two and be running all over. I'm glad we chose one location. After about an hour, the bugs started to get really bad, so we ran and got some bug spray and snacks quickly, which we wouldn't have had time to do if we had gone to two locations.
The whole session lasted about two hours, not including the drive. Overall, I think it went pretty well. I worked with Lucas at the Royal Purple, so it was a pretty stress-free evening. Chelsea and Lucas brought some ideas for poses, which I think worked out great. If their wedding goes the way their engagement photos did, I'm pretty excited!
Here are a few of my favorites from Friday:
You can see all of the photos here: www.danpomykalski.com/wimmer
]]>
This was the fifth golf outing and the third one I've shot. I originally saw the ad on Craigslist and was pleasantly surprised that the client, Sheri, contacted me again the following year to shoot it again. Sheri was my one of my first returning clients, and the golf fundraiser is something I've begun to look forward to every year. The people involved are always super nice, and the fundraiser is for a great cause. For those of you who don't know, I was diagnosed with melanoma this past winter. So in a strange coincidence, the golf fundraiser means even more to me now. If you enjoy golfing and supporting good causes, you should consider getting involved. You can find all of the information here: Ann's Hope Foundation website.
It had been raining for the past couple of days, and I was afraid the weather wouldn't hold out and the fundraiser would get canceled. Fortunately the weather cooperated. As always, the hosts and participants were great, and the photos were taken without any problems. I'm already counting down the days until next year's fundraiser.
Here's a photo so you can get an idea of the turnout.
You can see all of the photos here: http://www.danpomykalski.com/golf2015*
*There are typically more photos, but some of the things weren't set up yet
]]>
I went through and adjusted the prices of a lot of my products. By "adjusted" I mean I lowered. To tempt you even further to possibly purchase something, I'm also offering a coupon. Use coupon code "June" until the end of this month (shocker, I know) to receive 10% off your entire order of $25 or more and free shipping.
]]>
The only way this post is going to be related to photography or my business is that there will be photos of our pets that I took. As some of you may already know, my wife and I adopted a dog a little over a week ago, so I thought this would be a good time to try to spread some information. So far, my posts have been related to Dan Pomykalski Photography, but this blog has pretty good reach and I figured one irrelevant post wouldn't hurt. If you don't care about pets or adopting instead of buying, I apologize. Next week's post will be back on track.
If the fact that so many animals are euthanized because they can't find homes isn't enough to convince you to adopt, consider the conditions dogs and cats are kept in at pet stores. I don't think there has ever been a time that I've been to a pet store where a dog has had enough room. The dog has enough room to stand up and that's pretty much it. Not only that, but the small glass box the dog is living in is basically it's bathroom as well. Usually, the floor of the dog's cell is a grate, so that the dog's waste can go through, and no one has to clean it up for hours. It's hard to imagine that pet stores like that care if the dog is happy or not, and I'm assuming the pet store only cares about money, and keeps the dog alive just enough so that it can be sold.
For some of you, your eyes may be opening now, and you might feel the urge to go "rescue" every single dog that is forced to live in those tiny, glass cells. It's hard, but try to resist. Although you feel you may be "saving" that one specific dog you purchase, you're only allowing the cycle to continue. You're opening up a spot for a new dog, and you're giving the pet store the money it needs to stay in business.
Adopting an animal can also be significantly less expensive. Let's say you couldn't resist, and you end up purchasing a dog instead of adopting one. Now you have to pay for all of its shots and to get it spayed or neutered, in addition to however much you paid for the dog. Although puppies are still usually pretty expensive from the humane society because everyone wants one, If you time it right, you can get your pet for a discount, or even free.
Devan and I paid full price for our first cat, Noodle, which I think was $45. Our next cat, Panda (who had been at the shelter for a month and wasn't looked at a single time), was less because of a Black Friday deal. Our newest family member, Malin, was free. We stood in line for five hours during Maddie's Pet Adoption Days. All of our pets came fixed, had a check up before they came home with us, and are microchipped. If waiting in line for a free dog isn't your cup of tea, Devan and I saw a few dogs that were only $25 because they had been at the humane society for so long. One of the $25 was only a year old.
My wife said she read that people often feel that animals from the human society are somehow inferior compared to pets bought from a pet store. So far, our cats act like cats, and our dog acts like a dog. The only difference I notice with our pets is that they're very clingy because of their past, so if you don't want a pet that loves you even more than a pet from a pet store probably would, adopting might not be for you.
If you decide it's time for you to get a pet, please consider adopting instead of buying. Not only will you probably save money on a perfectly good friend, but you'll also be saving a life. And if you really want to feel like you're making a difference, adopt a dog or cat, instead of a kitten or puppy. Kittens and puppies are gone in seconds, while the older animals can sit for months without even being considered.
Also, if you get a cat, please don't declaw it. That would be like someone having the tips of all of your fingers amputated. I feel absolutely horrible that Noodle is declawed, and we didn't even do it; her original owner did. We got Panda a cat tree, and that's the only thing she has scratched in the three years we've had her.
As promised, here are photos of Noodle, Panda, and Malin being normal.
It was a beautiful day, and there weren't a whole lot of people around so everything went very well. Hana and my wife are good friends, so she tagged along and also brought Malin, our new family member, with (Malin is our new one year old Australian Cattle Dog that we adopted from the Dane County Humane Society on Saturday). If you look through all of the photos, you'll see one of Devan and Malin.
Here are some of my favorite photos from Sunday (May 31st).
Here is the link to the rest of the photos: http://www.danpomykalski.com/ehlert1
]]>
But here's why I won't take your financial information to buy that $6,000 lens I've had my eye on: I'm not in the business of stealing. I'm in the business of making photographs. Stealing credit card information from my clients is a horrible business plan, and probably won't motivate any of my clients to ever come back or ever tell any of their friends to hire me. Any to be completely honest, I would probably get caught quickly because, again, I'm not in the business of stealing information, so it probably wouldn't even be worth it. There would also be a paper-trail that would be incredibly easy to follow right to me.
I was first able to accept credit cards via PayPal and their card reader a few years ago; it was one of the first things I did. I used PayPal for about a second before switching to Square, which takes less of a percentage than PayPal. My ability to accept credit cards is meant to make things as convenient as possible for the client, while also keeping the client's information as secure as possible by using services like Square.
It's in my best interest to keep my clients' financial information private and secure for both personal (I would probably last a second in prison) and professional (I love my job and want my business to be successful) reasons. I'm sure the creators/owners of Square want their company to be successful, which means they probably try their absolute best to be as secure as possible. I should probably also mention that the only time I see any information is when the client pays over the phone, which is for a few seconds before it disappears once I accept the payment.
Here's a link to Square's security information page: https://squareup.com/security
]]>
Kind of.
I am a firm believer that editing a photograph is part of the process of photography and no photo is complete without a little bit of post-processing. Some people are extremely opposed to editing photographs, but photos are almost always edited whether you like it or not. If you aren't doing the editing yourself, then chances are the camera is doing it for you. If you shoot JPEG, which most people do, the camera determines what information isn't needed and then gets rid of it which makes for smaller files. The camera also adjusts things such as contrast and sharpness. This is basically what I do when I edit photos, except I keep all of the information by shooting RAW files, and I have complete control of how the photo turns out. Cameras can do an okay job of guessing what the user wants the photo to look like, but that will probably never be as good as the user doing it themselves (if they know what they're doing).
There are more editing programs out there than just Photoshop, but that's probably the most popular, so we're going to stick to that and the program I use, which is Photoshop Lightroom. Both Photoshop Lightroom and Photoshop can basically do the same basic editing, such as adjusting exposure, contrast, and brightness, but Photoshop is a much more powerful program. When I try to tell people the difference, I usually say that Photoshop is for things like taking a photo of a river, then putting a unicorn by the river, and then turning the river into a rainbow river, while Lightroom is more for making adjustments.
I don't use Photoshop because I don't put unicorns by rainbow rivers, so I don't need any of those features. The only thing* I do when I edit photos is go through and make fairly minor adjustments to make the photo as perfect as I can.
Please reread that last sentence.
Society has somewhat of a negative connotation about Photoshop and editing photos, largely because of the Internet and magazines. People tend to think if a photo was edited in Photoshop in any way, what they're seeing in the photo isn't real. I tend to have this same cynicism when I know a photo has been edited with Photoshop, but I want to be clear that the type of editing I do isn't the same type that's done in magazines. At most, I'll remove some acne, or whiten some teeth if necessary, but I don't make the people in my photos skinnier, or add any special effects.
For example: People probably think that this photo was created by doing a lot of work in Photoshop, but it wasn't. This photo looks like this because of the way I positioned the lighting. I don't remember how much work was actually done in Lightroom, but I'm guessing not much.
Another example of a photo that people tend to think I had to use Photoshop to achieve is this one of Ryan Reid. Again, I got this effect by using some off-camera lighting and the settings on my camera. Adjustments I made in Lightroom were probably exposure, contrast, and sharpness, with no dodging or burning.
So yes, I do use Photoshop, but not the same Photoshop and not in the same way most people think of. If I get the exposure wrong in a photo, I can easily fix it, but I can't add someone into the photo who wasn't able to make the family reunion.
*Please don't think that by "only thing" I mean I don't spend time editing photos. For photos other than portraits, it's typically a 1:1 ratio, where one hour of shooting will take me about an hour to edit. For portraits, it's typically a 1:4 ratio, where one hour of shooting will take me about four hours to edit. That's where a lot of the amount I charge comes into play. The client may think they're paying me X dollars for the session, but really they're paying me for twice the length of the session (except for portraits) if the time it took to set the session up, take care of the paperwork, etc. isn't taken into account.
]]>
Josh originally contacted me a few weeks ago, and after over 40 emails, a few phone calls, and a face-to-face meeting about half an hour before the photos, we were able to iron out all of the details to make sure things went as smoothly as possible; and they did.
These types of photos usually require a lot of work on both sides to make sure nothing goes wrong, especially if one party isn't incredibly familiar with the area (Josh flew in from New York to surprise his now fiance). There are also quite a lot of things that can go wrong in this situation. Two of the biggest things I worry about are the person proposing without making sure the I'm in the right position, and people getting between the subject and the camera. Fortunately, neither of these happened, and things went as well as they could.
These types of photos are some of my favorite to do. They can be pretty stressful, but everyone is so happy afterwards all of the planning and work that goes into pulling them off are well worth it! So far, the person being proposed to hasn't said no when I've done these photos. I hope this never happens, but if it does, my opinion might change.
Here are some of my favorites from Thursday. If you like my Facebook page (www.facebook.com/pomykalskiphoto), then it's pretty likely you've seen at least one of these photos so far.
You can see all of the photos here: http://www.danpomykalski.com/duboff
]]>
I was looking forward to these photos for a few months, especially since they were with friends. Believe it or not, there isn't quite as much pressure when you know the people you're working with, as oppose to complete strangers. Not only was the session a bit more laid back because I already know Abbie and Bradly, but they pretty much just laughed the whole time and I just pressed the shutter button (not really, but that's what it felt like), which made for a pretty easy work day. The lighting wasn't perfect, but I think I was able to get around it and make it work for the most part.
Here are some of my favorite photos from Sunday:
You can see the rest of the photos here: www.danpomykalski.com/fordreetz
]]>
This post is incredibly depressing so far, but hold on! When I'm feeling low about being a business owner (which is usually during the winter/slower times), I find "pick-me-ups" help a lot. I'm sure there's at least one other business owner out there who experiences similar doubts about what they're doing from time to time, so I decided to make a post with some links to some of my go-to pick-me-ups, as well as some reminders and tips to help keep business owners positive.
When I need a pick-me-up, one of the things I do is watch videos or read articles about how to be a business owner. Usually, the video or article will tell me to do something I'm already doing, and I find this is usually a huge moral booster. A search will bring up plenty of results for you to read through if you think this is something that would work for you.
I also like to remind myself of the reality of running a business. Success doesn't happen overnight. Owning a business is a process that will probably take years. I once heard it takes about a year for someone to hire a photographer after first hearing about them. I'm sure the time it takes for someone to hear about a business and then to become a client/customer is shorter for some businesses, but I feel this is probably still relevant to some degree. I always want someone to hear about me and hire me immediately, but that's not how it works.
I also think it's important for business owners to think about the progress they've made. I might not be where I want yet, but looking back to 2012 when I first started I've made exponential progress. It's important to focus on where you want to be, but it's also important to think about where you were. In 2012, I would have never imagined I would be where I am now as a business owner. I also forget the fact that I've made any money at all and have clients is a pretty big accomplishment by itself.
For videos, I like to watch stuff from Chase Jarvis/CreativeLive. I think some of the videos might be relevant to more than just creatives, but I'm probably a terrible judge.
Here are links:
https://www.youtube.com/user/creativelive
https://www.youtube.com/user/achaser123
I read this article yesterday when I first started this post. It was fate.
I hope this post helps any business owners who are feeling discouraged. It's important that you keep chipping away and stick with it for as long as you can. There may be times when being a successful business owner seem slim, but the only way you'll ever have a 0% chance of success is if you give up.
]]>
There's not much to say about these. The play was "Man of La Mancha," and put on by the University of Wisconsin-Rock County. I had to drive about 45 minutes to Janesville for the photos, which isn't a huge deal. The drive is mostly interstate and I get to listen to my music for 45 minutes, so I actually kind of enjoy the drive. The play lasted about 2 hours or so.
Here are some of my favorite photos from the shoot:
You can see the rest of the photos here: http://www.danpomykalski.com/lamancha
]]>
Here's an example. The client finds a photographer, signs the contract, and pays them. A few days after the session, the client tells the photographer what photos they want and how many. The photographer then tells the client they owe additional money for either the rights to those photos or for prints. The client has already signed the contract and paid them, so now their options are to either pay the additional amount, or be out the money they paid the photographer for the session and get no photos.
There are three ways the client ended up in this situation.
The first way is the photographer was perfectly clear about how things would work, and the client either didn't pay close enough attention, or didn't understand.
The second way is the photographer forgot to tell the client how things would work. The photographer should have been on top of things and should have told the client how things would work. In defense of the photographer, the client probably should have asked how things would work, and the information should be in the contract (keyword: should).
The third way, is the photographer deliberately didn't tell the client how things would work in order to get more money. The photographer probably doesn't charge a whole lot for the actual session, but then makes their money on the rights/prints. As mentioned earlier, the client has already signed the contract, so either the client is out the money they've already paid and get no photos, or they have to pay for the rights/prints.
The only way a photographer can keep the client's money like in scenario three is if there's something in their contract that protects them. Most likely, the photographer will have a section in their contract that details how paying will work, that no photos are included with the fee for the session, and/or that the client will have to pay for the rights or prints. I don't think there are too many photographers who purposely hide that the client will have to pay for the rights/prints in addition to the cost of the session, because it's a pretty terrible business plan that probably won't make clients want to return any time soon. However, that doesn't mean there aren't any photographers out there who use that type of system. The best way to avoid any confusion, whether intentional or not, is to ask questions, and be sure to read the contract.
Unrelated: You probably didn't notice, but I now have a sponsor! You can find the link to my sponsor's blog on the right side of my page in the side bar.
]]>
Before I get started, I feel I should let you know that the I once belonged to this group of people who bought an entry level DSLR, thought they made good photos, decided to try to do it professionally, and tried to get hired based off price. I like to think that if it was 20 years earlier and photography wasn't as accessible as it is today, I'd still be doing what I'm doing, but I'm honestly not sure if that would be the case. I work with film sometimes for fun and develop it myself, but I don't know if I would have learned how had it not been for my first digital camera years and years ago, and then my DSLR when I was in college sparking my interest in photography.
Anyway, I'm not usually one to give away business strategy tips away for free, but I'm hoping this will benefit me and my peers in the long-run. So why is being the least expensive a terrible business strategy? There are a few reasons.
The first reason is there will always be someone out there charging less than you for the same service or goods. If you're trying to make a living off of photography, you know that you can't charge as little as the people who are doing it on the side. The people who are taking photos on the side are usually happy to get anything at all. Since they already have a different job paying the bills, getting paid for photography is just a nice bonus. The people who are just starting their business and aren't quite sure what to charge yet will also probably be charging almost nothing. Again, if you're trying to make a living off of taking photos, there's almost no way you can make a living by trying to compete with some of these prices.
The second reason, which I pretty much stated in the last point, is it's almost impossible to make a living as a photographer when you try to charge the least amount. I used to charge $20 an hour when I first started. When I look back I think that's jokingly low, especially since a lot of times, sessions only take 15 to 30 minutes. I heard someone say that, on average, the typical professional photographer works/gets paid 100 days out of the year. At $20 an hour, if the session actually lasts a full hour, that means I would have been making a measly $2,000 a year. And that's if I would have been working 100 days out of the year. I've been chipping away for three years now, and I'm still not to the point where I'm working 100 days out of the year. You might not believe this, but I've actually seen photographers charging less than $20 an hour.
Another reason why trying to be the least expensive is a bad idea is because it'll hurt you in the future in a couple of different ways. You might get a few clients at first, but eventually you'll realize how unlikely it is that you'll be able to pay your bills when you're trying to charge the least. When this happens, you'll raise your prices. And when you raise your prices, any of your returning clients will most likely pass on you and find someone cheaper, which, as you now know, there will be someone charging less.
Another way charging the least amount will hurt you in the future is if you do find some clients because you're charging the least amount, you do decent work, and those clients refer you to other people, your reputation is that you're cheap. This reputation will continue to follow you around for a while. When you decide to raise your prices, then your reputation is no longer accurate. Those clients that were interested in hiring you because you were the cheapest will no longer be interested in your services. Basically, by trying to be the least expensive, you're seriously hurting your opportunity to grow and increase profit in the grand scheme of things.
So why am I giving away this business strategy away for free? If I'm trying to be noble and what not, it's because I want to see other businesses be successful. If I'm being 100% honest, it's because I'm hoping that photographers who are just starting out stop charging nothing for their services, which will not only help me, but the rest of the professional photographers out there. Photographers who try to be the least expensive aren't only going to make things incredibly difficult for themselves in the future, but they're also making it harder for photographers trying to make a living. If photographer stop trying to charge the least amount, I hope people will stop trying to offer me and other photographers nothing for our services.
]]>
I currently let the client choose where they want to get their prints from. They can either order the prints through my website, or they can take the files they receive from their session and go to any number of places that will print the photos from a CD. It's usually a drugstore, which I won't name and advertise for free ;). We'll just refer to the drug store as "Walreds."
The first thing I did was look at what the drugstore was charging. Taking a moment to look at Walreds' website and mine, it's pretty obvious the prints from my store cost a bit more. Why is there such a big price difference? Where do I even begin? Drugstores charge so little because they don't rely on the money they make from printing other people's photos as their primary source of income. The money drugstores make from printing photos is just a nice little bonus. They can afford to charge almost nothing for prints.
Another reason drugstores charge less for prints than me, is because the quality isn't as good. Prints from my website will last longer and look many times better than what you'll get from drugstores. There's not much else I can say about this. If you're going to spend the money on prints, you might as well spend a little more to get something that won't fade away as quickly and will look great. The orders that are placed through my website are fulfilled by professional labs, which is another reason my prints cost more.
I don't fulfill the orders placed through my site. I have the option to, but I don't have access to the same level of equipment as the labs who produce my prints do. I'm big on quality, and I want to make sure my clients get the best quality products available. This comes at a price, though. The increased quality means the materials and the production costs are higher. Not only this, but the labs also take a percentage of my sales. Add in the discounts I give sometimes and I don't end up with a whole lot in the end. As I mentioned earlier, I think the little I receive is worth the quality of the prints the labs produce. Not only is the quality great, but I'm able to offer way more products than I would be able to without the labs. Having the labs fulfill the orders allows me to offer every size of print to the point where it's almost ridiculous, and also allows me to offer things like coffee mugs and t-shirts with my photos on them.
Another reason my prints are so expensive is because I take into consideration the amount of time I put in to creating the photograph. Not only does the actual session take time, but so does setting up the session and editing the photos afterwards. I put a lot of time and effort in to my work, and I decided my prints should reflect that. Drugstores don't have to put nearly as much time in to the process. They just make their services available and barely have to lift a finger.
And lastly, I don't charge nearly as much as some photographers do for their prints. Some fine art photographers charge hundreds, sometimes thousands of dollars for their prints, but even photographers like myself charge $60 or more for a single 8X10 print. So even though I charge more than drugstores, I'm not at the ceiling for print prices quite yet.
I hope that this post has shed some light on why my prints are more expensive than some stores that will print photos. I also hope that this post can persuade some of you to spend the few extra dollars to order prints through my store. They're more expensive, but for a reason. Like with everything else, you get what you pay for.
]]>
While waiting for that big break, a bunch of other stuff happened. First, I was the staff photographer for the Janesville Jets for a season. While I was doing that, I became the photo editor for the Royal Purple, which is the student-run newspaper at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater. While I was at the Royal Purple, I had to take feature photos for articles, which were usually portraits. While I was getting better at taking portraits, people started coming to me for headshots. During all of this, I still hadn't booked my first wedding.
I finally got hired to shoot a wedding in, I think, the summer of 2013. It was a quick wedding, a priest and witnesses type of thing, but it was enough for me to get my feet wet and get some experience. As the summer went on, I went back to doing more portrait work as I tried to book my next wedding. This trend continued, and I eventually started to consider marketing myself as a portrait photographer instead of a wedding photographer.
Unless this is the very first time you've been to my website or this is the first thing you've read my blog, you know I ended up deciding to focus on portrait work. I liked the weddings I did and I'm looking forward to the weddings I have lined up, but there are a few things about shooting weddings that helped me decide to jump ship and focus on portrait work.
When I get hired, I get incredibly excited to take the photos. I look forward to the session for days, and even have trouble sleeping the night before sometimes. With weddings, the couple usually finds their photographer anywhere from six months to a year and a half before the actual wedding. That's a long time to wait. A portrait session, on the other hand, can be set up and done within a week.
Weddings are stressful. Everything is moving pretty quickly, and if you miss something, chances are you won't get another chance at it. I've never had to retake photos before, but if it does happen, it wouldn't be too hard to quickly set up another portrait session. The same can't really be said about a wedding.
I get to meet people and get to know them more while doing portraits. Related to the last point, weddings are usually so fast-paced I don't really get a chance to interact with the clients as much. While doing portraits, I get the opportunity to talk with the people I'm working with and get to know them just a little more.
Weddings are usually long, all day events. The reason wedding photographers get paid so much to shoot weddings is because they can last 12 hours, if not longer. After taking into account the editing that has to be done, the pay doesn't seem as good anymore. I've done some portrait sessions in as little as 15 minutes, although they usually last around 30 minutes to an hour. I actually get paid a little better per hour for portrait work than weddings.
And the last reason why I like portrait work more than weddings is because weddings don't normally bring in returning clients. When I do portrait work for a client, I hope that they tell their friends who will then contact me if they need a photographer. At the very least, I hope that the original client will hire me again in a year or two if they change their hair or something. For weddings, you'll hopefully never be hired by those clients again, unless it isn't a wedding they need photos of. There's a chance that if you shoot someone's wedding, they'll hire you again for family photos, or anniversary photos, but it isn't as likely as being hired again for portrait work. The only opportunity you have to get more business at a wedding, if you somehow find the time, is hope that the clients' friends are getting married soon.
It may seem like I hate shooting weddings, but don't be fooled! I really enjoy shooting weddings, and jump on any opportunity to shoot one. I've had good experiences with all of the weddings I've shot so far, and I'm shooting some this year that I'm incredibly excited for. But, those little things I mentioned above were just enough to ever so slightly put portrait work ahead of weddings, and made an otherwise difficult decision just a little more easier to make.
]]>
I've mentioned it before, but a battery grip is one of the things I grab right away. I walked in to my local camera store excited and ready to buy a battery grip. I can't remember if I had my mind set on the name-brand or third-party grip, but the name-brand cost about twice as much. After holding both, I decided the third-party grip would get the job done.
After a few months, I had regrets about my purchase, but it was too late at that point. I noticed that when the battery grip was attached to my camera, a green light on my DSLR kept flashing every now and then. I don't know for sure, but I'm assuming this caused the battery to be drained. There were also times my camera would have issues and say there was an error with the SD cards. I don't know if this was because of the batter grip, but I'm hoping it was.
After a little over two years, I finally replaced the battery grip with the name-brand grip. The nub on the third party grip to select the focus point only worked three ways instead of the four it was supposed to. This, plus the fact that the name-brand grip is now old enough that there was a price drop was enough for me to pull the trigger.
I haven't had the chance to really use my camera with the new grip yet, but I can already tell a huge difference in the way the grips feel. The third-party grip felt like cheap plastic, probably because that's what it's made out of. The shutter release button also feels pretty cheap. The name-brand grip is made out of magnesium alloy, and more weather sealed than the third-party grip. The name-brand grip's shutter button also feels more solid. It has that rubbery-feel that my camera has. Some people like this, others don't.
Most importantly, that green light isn't flashing anymore. I'm also hoping that the SD card issue is resolved, although I'm not sure if that was because of the grip or not.
At the time, the third-party grip seemed like a good idea and it worked for a while. But, as with almost everything, you get what you pay for. If I could do it again, I would absolutely buy the name-brand grip. It might have been cheaper to buy the third-party grip at the time, but I ended up buying the name-brand grip anyway. I've had similar experiences with other third-party equipment, like lenses, which is why I feel If you can swing it, always buy the name-brand equipment.
]]>
Fast forward almost three years, and here I am with the same business name. I never thought of anything better, and even if I had, it was too late a while ago to change it. There are some benefits to using your name and adding what business you're involved in to the end, such as not needing a doing business as name, and making it easier for legal situations if they arise. However, some of us aren't all that fortunate when it comes to having a good name for business.
So how do you pronounce my last name? It depends on who you ask. I've had to tell people how to pronounce my last name since forever, and I've always told them it's pronounced "Pom-a-kal-ski" (that "a" is like "uh," not a hard "a" like in "ant." I'm sure there's a way to show that, but I don't know how to do pronunciations). When I hear my dad tell people how to pronounce it, he says "Pom-E-kal-ski" (that "e" is a hard "e," like in either"). If you pronounce it like my dad, my last name can simply be broken up: Pomy-kal-ski. I'm sure my dad is the one who is pronouncing it correctly, and I probably pronounce it differently because I can be lazy sometimes.
So, my last name can be pronounced Pomy-E-kal-ski, or Pom-uh-kal-ski.
]]>
Every now and then, I see someone who hires a photographer and then throws all of the photos onto Facebook. I browse through the album, and I realize the photographer decided to include a color AND a black and white version of every single photo. Why do they do this? I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing it's because they couldn't decide between color or black and white. For some reason, people love black and white photographs, and although I appreciate a well-used black and white photograph every now and then, a photographer who hands out a black and white photograph for every color photograph can be a red flag.
I wish I could say I never have, but there have probably been one or two clients that I gave both black and white and color edits to. If I have, it was when I first started out, and before I knew any better. I've come a long way since then, and I've learned that there is a time and place for black and white photographs, and a professional photographer should be able to determine when this is. A photographer who gives color and black and white edits for every photo is a pretty good indication the photographer doesn't know how to edit photos, yet. Although you should be weary of a photographer who gives black and white and color edits for every single photo, this doesn't mean they won't still do a decent job.
If you have the time to sort through all of those photos, and you think the photographer will edit the photos well, then you can take a chance on a photographer who includes black and white and color edits. Their prices might be better too, since they're probably just starting out. I wouldn't recommend this type of photographer for a wedding, but maybe something not as important that can be redone if you aren't happy with the results. Let me say again, though. A photographer who includes both color and black and white edits of every photo is a pretty good indication they don't fully understand editing yet. Although some photographers will disagree, I'm a firm believer that editing is at least half of photography, and a good photographer will be able to edit photos well.
]]>
The most important thing to look for when trying to find a photographer is that you like their work. I think one of the hardest things is trying to emulate someone else's work. Don't hire a photographer whose work you don't like thinking that if you pay them enough, their photos will turn out like someone else's. Each photographer has their own style and their own way of approaching photography, and it can be difficult to stray away from what they're used to or what they like. You're going to be spending money either way, you might as well spend a little more to hire a photographer who can get the results you want. There have been a few times where people have come to me after hiring someone who charged less than me and they weren't happy with the results. So now not only did those people have to pay the other photographer, but they had to pay me as well.
The next thing to do when looking for a photographer is to not let a budget restrict you. Don't pay an outrageous amount for a photographer, but you usually get what you pay for. I see people all the time trying to pay as little as possible for a photographer, and this is a mistake you don't want to make. Chances are, the photographer who is charging the least amount doesn't know what they're doing or how much to charge. At least this was the case for me; I used to charge $20 an hour... Unless you really don't care about how the photos turn out, don't try to find the absolute cheapest rate. If you care about something enough to hire a photographer to document it, it doesn't make sense to hire someone who isn't going to do a good job only because they charged the least amount. Going with the lowest rate out of a group of photographers who all produce about the same quality of work isn't a terrible idea, though.
Another important thing to consider is whether the photographer and you are a good fit. A good fit isn't all that important, but it can help. Having a good fit can make things easier for both the client and the photographer. If you're having a hard time choosing between photographers, maybe consider whether or not you and one photographer are clicking. This is especially important for weddings, since you'll probably be spending a good amount of time with the photographer.
If you're in the process of looking for a photographer, consider these three things. Remember that the photographer's work should be the what you look at the most. If something is important enough to you that you decide to hire a photographer, don't make the mistake of hiring someone that won't do a good job. There's no point in spending the money on something you won't like. You get what you pay for, and photographers are usually no exception.
]]>
One of the first things college taught me was responsibility/to do things I don't want to. It's a cliche, but your parents aren't there to wake you up and make you go to class. Did I want to go to class? No. Did I? Most of the time. Did I want to type 15 page papers? No. Did I? It was pretty close to 15 pages. Do I want to wake up every morning to sit at the computer and do work, now? It's not my favorite. Do I? Yes. Do I want to do all of the financial things? No. Do I? To the best of my ability. People who aren't their own boss tend to think that once you start your own business, every day is a day off. I was recently shooting a wedding, and I heard a woman say to the client's dad, who is a dentist and has his own practice, "so I bet since you run your own practice you get a lot of days off, huh?"
Of course, he said no. Because that's not the way things work. I may only take photos a few times a month, but that doesn't mean the days I'm not shooting I'm sitting on the couch staring at the TV. If I'm not shooting, I'm doing the not as fun stuff that comes with running a business I don't necessarily want to do. When I decided I wanted to be a photographer, I wasn't imagining myself keeping track of all of my financial stuff and trying to figure out ways to grow my business. The boring stuff is part of owning a business, and college taught me how to get that stuff done.*
Another thing I learned pretty early on in college was how to be organized. Organized Dan did much better in college than unorganized Dan, and that's carried over. A lot of people probably know this, but being organized can make life exponentially easier. If you were to compare 19 year old freshman-in-college Dan's desktop to 24 year old college-graduate Dan's desktop, I wouldn't have even had to have typed this last paragraph; the difference would be night and day. I have a business folder, with folders for each year, with contract folders, pricing folders, etc. There's a chance I would have become more organized without going to college, but there's also a chance I wouldn't have. I can almost say for sure that I learned how to be organized sooner because of college.
I majored in organizational communication in college, so I learned quite a bit about how to communicate and how to communicate effectively with people. I talk to people every day for work, so as you can probably imagine, my major still plays a part, even though I'm a photographer.
Going to college also gave me something to fall back on. I talked about this in the last post, but if I decide I don't want to be a photographer anymore, I can get a "real job," and my degree will certainly help with that.
Most people think that the only purpose of going to college is to get a degree, which will make getting a job in the field you studied easier, so you can earn more money than you would have been able to without the degree. This is a big part of college, but definitely not the only part. Anyone who has graduated recently, or accurately remembers college, will probably agree. More than anything, a college degree shows that you can follow directions and can finish work. It doesn't always matter what your degree is in, but the fact you have a degree at all. Don't believe me? There are plenty of people don't get a job related to their degree. Sometimes people go to school for marketing, and get a job in marketing. Sometimes, people go to school for engineering and become a chemist. Sometimes, people go to school for organizational communication, but become a business owner.
*I know I said I don't like doing the boring stuff, but being completely honest, I don't mind it as much as I make it seem. I'd rather be keeping track of finances and thinking of ways to get more clients than most other things, taking photos is just more fun.
Next week's post: Leaning towards a post on either things I've learned so far while running a business, how photographers overuse black and white, or how to choose a photographer.
]]>
The only situation where a degree in photography would probably be worth it that I can think of, is if you think you're going to be pursing a career with a company/organization that is going to keep you on as their photographer long-term. I'm not talking about just working with an organization or company on a long-term basis, I'm talking about working for an organization or company long-term. The difference being establishing a relationship/good reputation with a company so they keep coming back to you, and applying for an open position and sending in a resume, getting an interview, getting the job, and being on their payroll with benefits, etc.. Basically, working as a freelancer, as opposed to landing a "real," long-term position. Not only will the company/organization most likely require the applicants to have a degree in photography, but, if for some reason they don't require applicants to have a degree, a degree will most likely set you apart from the competition.
Other than that, I don't think there's any reason to get a degree in photography, unless there's absolutely nothing else you want to major in. Not only do you not need to major in photography to run a business/be a freelance photographer, but a photography degree seems like somewhat of a dead end to me. If photography doesn't work out for you, but you majored in photography, your degree doesn't offer many options to you. I know there are plenty of people who get a job that doesn't really relate to their degree, but I feel a photography degree might make it a little more challenging than a degree in something else that's a little more "general."
If you're a freelance/photo business owner, a photography degree might give you some more credibility over your competition. In my experience it seems like clients hire based off of the quality of work, over the photographer's education. I didn't major in photography, though, so who knows. Maybe I would be getting a lot more work if I had. I will say this, though. I took a photography class in college, and it didn't teach me anything. I had already learned more than the class had taught me from YouTube, articles, and my getting out and shooting on my own. I will also say that there were a number of kids in that class who got passing grades, and their photos were awful. Photography is an art, and whether art is "good" or not is an opinion. So usually, as long as the person tries, the professor can't necessarily fail the student. What I'm getting at is although someone might have a degree in photography, they don't necessarily make good photos.
YouTube and articles are great, free resources if you're willing to put in the work. If you think a photography degree is the way to go, then by all means do it. However, practice makes perfect, and staring at a computer screen or listening to a lecture isn't practice. If you really want to get better at photography, get out, shoot, and share. Trial and error is usually the best teacher.
Next week, I'll most likely blog about how going to college helps me now, and whether or not it was worth getting a degree.
Edit: I did do a post on how going to college helps me run a business. Check it out here: http://www.danpomykalski.com/blog/2015/1/
]]>
I remember loving the photos from the first session when I took them, and this session went the same way. Working with Laura was pretty much the best way I could start off 2015. Not only did I get to do headshots, which I love, but Laura is also a returning client. I get really excited about returning business, and sessions always go so much smoother when there's already a relationship established. On a side note, this is actually the exact same way (but with a different client) I started off 2014; with headshots (I was even paid the same amount). I'm hoping that this doesn't mean 2015 will go the same way as 2014 financially, though. Last year was a fantastic year for Dan Pomykalski Photography, but I'm hoping to see at least another 50% increase in profit.
Before I get too off track, here are some of the photos from yesterday.
]]>
But that's not the point of this post.
The main reason for this post is because there have been a few times when I've been negotiating with clients, and I say it will cost $X for Y photos, and they think that I'm only going to take Y photos.
No.
When I say it will cost $X for Y photos, I mean Y is the amount of edited photos that you will receive. I'm not only going to take Y photos and hope that every single photo I take is tack-sharp and turns out exactly how I envisioned. I'll take however many photos I think it'll take to make sure that I can hand over however many photos we agree on before the client signs the contract. Some people don't care either way, but some people feel it's a huge deal if they pay me $X and they think I'm only pushing the shutter button five times.
One last thing. You don't need hundreds of photos from a session. Unless it's an all day thing, no one needs more than 20 photos, at most probably. Who wants to go through hundreds of, or even 50, photos from an hour long session? I find it hard to believe that there aren't at least a handful of photos in there that look pretty much the same. I think it's lazy for photographers to hand over that many photos. The photos professional photographers give to their clients should be like a highlight reel, and only feature the best photos from the session, with very little photos that are, essentially, duplicates. If there are two photos that look pretty much the same and you can't pick between the two, tough. Either let the client choose, or you have to make the choice.
]]>
I hate stock photography.
I hate stock photography, and you should avoid it at all costs; especially if you're a small and/or local business. Stock photography is usually used by larger companies/organizations, but I've seen a number of smaller/local businesses use it as well. Besides stock photography being pretty bland usually, it's also almost always incredibly easy to spot. Not only is stock photography easy to identify, but, at least for me, it doesn't make me feel as connected with the company as photographs taken specifically for the company would. Stock photographs don't feature anyone from the actual company or organization that uses them, so when I, or anyone else, goes to that company's/organization's website, I'm seeing someone I'll never have any actual interaction with.
This might be just me, but I like when I go to a website and see photos of the actual employees or owner(s). This way, I not only know what to expect when I actually meet with someone from the company in person, but I feel like an actual connection has already been established. If I talk to someone from a company that uses stock photography over the phone, I have no idea who I'm actually talking to. If I talk to someone from a company that doesn't use stock photography, but has actual photos of the people involved with the company, I can look at their website and know exactly who I'm talking to. Some people might not care, but I feel this little detail can have an effect on my entire experience with the company.
Look at Noble Choice Chiropractic's website (http://www.mynoblechoice.com/). They not only have photos of their space, but headshots of the doctors as well. If I go to Noble Choice Chiropractic, I know exactly what to expect, and I know who I'll be interacting with. I've seen so many websites that have no photos, and I have no idea who I'd be interacting with. Again, some people might not care, but it's something I like to keep any eye out for.
Stock photographs of products should also be avoided. It's easier to grab a stock photo of a product, but people looking to buy things like when they see actual photos of the product they're going to buy. I hate it when I buy something online and when it arrives, it looks nothing like what I saw online. Another thing I can stand is when I'm on Craigslist and a post has photos, but the photos are clearly pulled from the internet. I usually don't even consider contacting the seller, because there aren't any photos of the actual product; who knows what the thing they're trying to sell actually looks like?
Stock photography might be tempting because of its low cost and its easily obtainable, but it's a trap! Actual photos of you and/or your business can not only give a preview of what someone can expect, but it can also help establish a connection with your client/customer from the second they look you up on the internet.
]]>
Reality shoved those notions aside once I actually had my DSLR. The photos I was creating with it were horrid abominations, and continued to be so for months. None of my photographs were coming out how I had envisioned them. The photos I was creating certainly weren't the epic masterpieces I had thought would come so easily before I had my DSLR. I assumed I wasn't getting the results I wanted because I didn't have the best DSLR or the best glass. I bought slightly better lenses, and my photos slowly became more and more acceptable.
Years later, I know how foolish it was thinking more expensive equipment would make me a better photographer. It wasn't the lenses that I purchased that made me better; it was just me growing as a photographer and learning more about the art. Better equipment makes things easier, but it's not the equipment that makes the photographer. It's skills and experience that make the photographer, and neither one of those can be bought. When I received my first DSLR and I wasn't getting the results I had hoped for, putting the most expensive DSLR and lens in my hands wouldn't have made any difference. I can almost promise my photos would have come out almost exactly the same.
Some of the comments I hear most are how beautiful the pictures my camera take are, or how easy photography must be with an "expensive" camera. If that were the case, then I should be able to hand my camera to anyone, and they should be able to create the exact same photo as me without any trouble. If Ansel Adams or Henri Cartier-Bresson handed me their camera, I can say without a doubt that my photos would look nothing like theirs.
When I worked at the Royal Purple, one of the editors wanted me to get a photo, but I didn't have time. They said something along the lines of "I can do it, just give me your camera." They didn't want my camera because there wasn't one available (there was an office DSLR). They wanted my camera because they thought it was a magic combination of plastics, magnesium-alloy, and skill.
If you aren't sure what I'm trying to say, I've come up with a few analogies:
Saying a photographer's camera makes good photos is like saying an author's computer writes good books.
Saying a photographer's camera makes good photos is like saying an artist's paintbrush paints good paintings.
Saying a photographer's camera makes good photos is like saying an athlete's equipment makes them good at their sport.
So please stop giving my camera all of the credit. Cameras are nothing more than hammers (or paintbrushes, depending on who we're talking about). I'm sure anyone who has run out and bought a DSLR can relate to this post, but for those of you who haven't had this experience, you now have no excuses. Better lenses and cameras make things easier, but until I pull my camera out of the bag, compose the photograph, and push the shutter button, my camera just sits there. It's the photographer who creates the photograph, not that credit-stealing prima donna.
I feel it's important that I admit that I'm a huge gear-snob, though. I don't like using any other equipment other than my own. I could say I only like using my own stuff because of the familiarity aspect, but I also feel my stuff is better than anything else out there. My stuff isn't better than anything else out there, but I can't help feel that way. There are reasons why I have what I have in my camera bag, and it's not the same using other equipment.
So once again, thank you!
]]>
The short answer is yes. I'll most likely accept almost any job that someone approaches me with. I think the main reasons people ask is because they don't want to just assume I shoot whatever it is they need photographed, to see if I am capable of doing it, and to see if I'm willing to accept it. The last two are the most important determining factors.
I think a lot of people think that a photographer has to extensively shoot a certain type of photography to be good at it. While I think it certainly helps, and having a lot of experience in specific situations will probably help get the best results, I don't always agree it's necessary.
One of the first things I photographed professionally was hockey. I spent an entire season with the Janesville Jets photographing their home games, and up to this point, there hasn't been anything more challenging to me to shoot than hockey. The lighting is usually terrible in hockey rinks, especially rinks for non-NHL teams, and the sport is incredibly fast-paced. After an entire season of shooting hockey, I got pretty used to following the action.*
After the Janesville Jets, I was the photo-editor for the Royal Purple, which is the student-run newspaper at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater. One of the sections of the newspaper I took photos for the most was the sports section. I had never shot any sports besides hockey, but the experience I gained from the Jets definitely carried over to photographing different sports. This experience made shooting other sports, except maybe basketball, much easier than it would have been if I hadn't shot hockey. Football was the best compared to shooting hockey. I got a chance to get ready after every play, and (nerd talk warning) I got to shoot at ISO 100 and almost maxed out my shutter speed instead of ISO 1600 and a shutter speed of 1/500th which is what I often shot at for hockey.
It was also at the Royal Purple where I got to practice my portrait work. Besides my wife, the people I took photos of for the paper was where I got my most practice with portraiture. I would normally get "the shot" in the first couple of tries, and then I'd maybe try putting my umbrella in a different spot, try different settings, or do anything else that I might not normally try. Sometimes these experimental shots turned out better than the photo I was planning on using, and sometimes the experimental shots taught me what to never do again.
The things I learned about portraiture and lighting also helped me with product photography. There are a few things that are done differently with lighting, angles, etc., but other than that, they're actually pretty similar.
The other determining factor is if I'm willing to take the job or not.
Almost every time, I'll take the job. I'm not to the point yet where I can turn down jobs that I don't want to do. With that being said, it isn't often where someone asks me to photograph something and I don't look forward to it or don't want to do it.
I feel like I've shot enough of a range of things that I feel pretty confident photographing almost anything at this point. What it really comes down to the most is if I think I'll be able to hand over something to the client that and I will both be happy with. If I don't think I can do a job, I won't take it. I would rather not get paid than to hurt my reputation hurt by accepting a job and not living up to expectations.
And yes, I do shoot weddings. I've shot a few, and I have a few lined up for 2015. I get asked if I shoot wedding so much, I've been considering switching from a portrait photographer to a wedding photographer. Weddings are just like slower-paced hockey with some portraiture thrown in.
*As of right now, I almost feel like if you can shoot hockey, you can pretty much shoot anything. This may be subject to change, though.
]]>
If I don't work, my bank accounts reflect it. Every year in August, my family goes up north for a week to visit my grandma. Sometimes, Devan and I also take a week to go on a vacation with her parents. Dan Pomykalski Photography is definitely the busiest during the summer months, but August is a month where nothing happens consistently. I'm pretty sure the lack of business is because I'm gone for half the month. When I'm not shooting, I'm sitting in front of the computer for hours during the day improving my business. When I'm not home, my business is basically idling.
Rarely do clients find me. The majority of the time, I have to find the clients I work for. If I'm not doing the stuff I do during the day, chances are I won't be getting paid any time soon. Sometimes people approach me, but it doesn't happen often.
Some months, I get paid almost nothing (sometimes it is nothing), while other months I can make a large chunk of my yearly income. Business has been picking up though, so this doesn't happen as often anymore. Retainer fees also help, especially during the months people don't normally get photos done.
I do a lot of work from home, so there are some days I don't leave the apartment at all. I've been combating this by taking the long way and the stairs to the mailbox...
My schedule is pretty much the opposite of Devan's, who is a teacher. I work a lot of weekends, I work a lot in the summer, and I work less in the winter.
I have to do everything. I don't have any employees, or assistants, or anything like that, so everything is up to me to get done. If I don't do it, no one will.
No one is there to tell me what to do. It's up to me to wake up every morning and chug away at whatever I have to do. I also have to come up with business strategies, marketing strategies, etc.
There are a lot of things I have to pay for, like website renewals, business supplies, and camera equipment. I didn't have to pay for anything like that when I had a "real job."
If something doesn't go well, it's on me and I'm the only one responsible. This has only happened once that I can remember, and all I had to do was order a new print for the client.
Sometimes I have to work at times I don't want to. I try to respond to emails and answer phone calls asap. Sometimes, these emails and phone calls happen at night, when other people wouldn't be working.
Business doesn't always go perfectly. Ideally, clients would be flowing in constantly, and I would be turning them away because I was too busy. Like I said before, some months I don't work at all, and it can be hard to stay motivated and positive.
Pros:
I can work whenever I want. If Devan and I want to go on a road trip for a week, or even if I just want to take a "personal day," I can do it (as long as I don't have anything scheduled). As far as working for clients, I can do that as often as I want too. If I want to only work once a month, I can schedule the sessions that way. If I want to work twice a week, I can do that too, assuming I can find enough people to fill that.
I get to keep everything! I had jobs where I thought I was paid well before. Nope. This is better.
Making photos is my job. Even if it isn't for a client, making photos at all is my job. If I'm hiking and making photos, it will benefit my business if the photos are good, because people will see those and remember them.
I can do whatever I want during the day. If I feel like playing guitar or bass all day, I can. This rarely happens though, because my finances have shown me what happens when I take too many days off...
I don't have a boss. I get to make all the decisions and if I don't want to do something, I don't have to. Although I probably will, because it will probably help my business. I also have final say over how the photos are edited, and how I want to conduct business.
I would be buying photography stuff anyway. Now, I get to write it off as a business expense.
I get to decide how much I want to be paid. Although the amount I charge has to be reasonable, or else no one would hire me.
I get to travel for work!
When I think of a new way to market myself, or a new way to grow my business, I get to see the results first hand, which is pretty exciting.
I get to experience the growth of my business. I know where I started out, and I'm absolutely not there anymore. My revenue has also increased from year to year, which is exciting to see. I think this is a sign that things might be working.
That's all I can think of right now. I might add a few more here and there, though. There might be more cons than pros, but the pros definitely outweigh the cons. Another pro is that if I didn't love being a photographer and it wasn't working out, I don't have to do it anymore. I can go get a "real job" any time I want, but as of right now, I don't see that happening.
]]>
I was a little nervous for these photos, because I don't do this kind of thing very often. Everything worked out though, and I really like how the photos turned out. Not only do I really like the photos, but Kenton was more than willing to pay me a fair price, which isn't always the case. I've done photos like these a few times now, and I've been lucky that the girlfriend has never said no. I love doing these kind of photos because everyone is so happy afterwards.
Here are a few of my favorites, along with the link to the rest of the photos.
]]>
Unbiased attempt/opinion:
Full-time pros have no other source of income besides photography. This means that they don't have anything to distract them or to work on besides creating photos. These types of pros will generally actively search for new clients/jobs. Usually, you can expect these photographers to charge more, but you can also expect to receive your photos sooner, as well as a better experience overall.*
Part-time pros are people who have a different primary source of income, and also get paid to take photos on the side. These types of photographers usually shoot on weekends, or whenever they have time. These photographers usually won't actively search for clients. Instead, people will usually come to them because they know the person shoots for fun. Generally, you can expect these photographers to charge less, but you can also expect to wait longer for the photos, and potentially less professionalism.*
Heavily biased opinion:
I don't necessarily have anything against part-time professional photographers like I do against people who take photos and charge almost nothing which makes it harder for me to make any money. Here are just made a few, small observations I've noticed between the two.*
Full-time pros do nothing but make and think photos. They usually have business plans, and some type of guidelines for conducting business. They strive to handle everything as professionally as possible, because a negative review or an unhappy client can have a huge, negative impact on their business. Part-time pros might also have guidelines, but they'll generally handle things less professionally. When I say "they'll handle things less professionally," I'm not saying they're going to be rude or anything. There will most likely be differences in the way the two types handle problems that come up, or there might be differences in communication, though. I'm also not saying that a full-time pro won't be unprofessional. For example, I've heard of people who have hired photographers, and at some point, all communication ceased. Sometimes, this was before the actual photos, which isn't as big of a deal; just hire another photographer. Sometimes, communication will cease after the photos, which is a huge deal; especially for one-time-events, such as weddings. Part-time pros also have less to lose if a client is unsatisfied because photography isn't their primary source of income. Again, I'm not saying this means part-time pros won't care about the final product, or if the client is happy, but they might not care as much as a full-time pro.*
Something else a full-time pro and a part-time pro might handle differently are any problems that might pop up. For example, the client might receive the photos on a CD, but the CD might have been damaged or scratched at some point, and the client can't access the photos. A part-time pro might take longer to address the problem, or not address the problem at all compared to a full-time pro, who should fix the problem as soon as humanly possible... *
Another difference between full-time and part-time pros is the amount of time it takes to receive the edited photos. I don't have too many other obligations besides photography. This usually means I can shoot photos for someone, get the photos into Lightroom, and have the photos edited within a few days. A part-time pro will usually have a full-time job besides photography. So they'll go and shoot photos for someone, and then edit the photos whenever they have time. This might be after they get home from work the next day, or it might be the following weekend. I usually get the edited photos to the client within a week. Sometimes longer if there are a large amount of photos. It will usually take longer for part-time pros to get the photos to the client because they have other obligations. I just worked for someone who said they hired someone once and it took six months for them to receive the photos. For some, this isn't really a drawback. I'd want the photos as soon as possible, but some might not really care.*
One of the benefits of hiring a part-time pro is they'll probably charge less. As I pointed out before, full-time pros have no other source of income. Full-time pros have to pay for everything with the money they make from shooting, and their prices will probably be high enough that they can make ends-meet. Part-time pros don't rely on the money from shooting as much, so they'll be less likely to be as concerned with the actual amount. Sometimes, part-time pros would be taking photos of the event, or whatever it may be, anyway. If someone offers them money for photos they'd be taking anyway, it's a bonus. To put it simply, a part-time pro isn't shooting for the money, they're taking photos because they want to. Photography is more of a hobby for a part-time pro, while photography is a job for a full-time pro. A part-time pro will most likely be shooting for the fun of it, and getting paid is the cherry on top.*
*Please make note of my use of words such as "might." In no way am I implying this is the end-all-be-all, and I'm well aware there are exceptions.
**Also, please make note that although I make it seem like part-time pros are the ones who are having fun and full-time pros aren't, full-time pros are still having fun. Sometimes, full-time pros just have to take some jobs that we don't necessarily love.
]]>
The word "professional" is probably used incorrectly in other areas as well, but it seems it's especially misused when it comes to photographers. For whatever reason, when people hear "professional," they assume the person is also an "expert" at whatever they do. However, these two words don't necessarily have anything to do with one another, and shouldn't be used as synonyms.
According to dictionary.com, a professional is an adjective that means "following an occupation as a means of livelihood or for gain." On the other hand, expert, according to dictionary.com, is an adjective that means "possessing special skill or knowledge; trained by practice; skillful or skilled."
So although someone may be a professional photographer (or professional whatever), that doesn't necessarily mean they're an "expert." A professional photographer is simply someone who is paid to take photos, and in all reality, that doesn't necessarily mean they're any good at it or know what they're doing. A professional could be someone who has been paid once and has no experience, or someone who has been working professionally for years. A professional could also be someone who doesn't know much about photography, but has the connections. I've seen plenty of work I'm not a fan of produced by photographers who are easily making a living, while others are creating amazing work and aren't being paid anything. Being a professional photographer isn't so much about good work as it is about being able to run a business. I think there's a quote that goes something like being a professional photographer is 80% being able to run a business and 20% actual skill (it may take even less skill).
Do I consider myself a professional? Yes. Do I consider myself an expert in photography? Not at all. I've come a very, very long way since I received my first DSLR, but there's plenty for me to still learn.
So if you're ever looking for a photographer, don't think that because photographer A is throwing around the word "professional" and photographer B isn't, that photographer A is better. Photographer A might be better, but the deciding factor should be the photographer's work and reputation of the photographer (a photographer who produces outstanding work isn't necessarily reliable), and not their vocabulary.
]]>
Here are a few of my favorites:
By now, I'm probably beating a dead horse, but for sake of the new blog and the new FAQ section, here's yet another post on why I won't work for free.
First and foremost, working for free doesn't pay the bills. In order to be successful, a business must bring in money. If I'm not getting paid, I'm not bringing in money, and therefore I won't be successful.
Sometimes, people will try to get me to shoot for free and promise to "pay me next time." This won't work either. Chances are, I'll do the job for free, and then never hear from them again. They'll either find someone else who is willing to work for free, or they'll find someone who wants less than me.
Working for free also undervalues my work. This is somewhat related to the previous point, but if I work for free the first time, it's incredibly hard, if not impossible, to get that client to pay me next time. Working for free suggests that my work is worth nothing, and the client will continue thinking that. This is also why I'm fairly reluctant to budge on my quotes. If the client doesn't want to pay me what I think is fair, I usually offer less photos, or work out some other type of arrangement. I'll never accept less than I think my work is worth, though. If I work for someone, and they tell their friends, coworkers, family, etc., they'll probably also tell them how much they paid. If I remained firm on my quote, or if I lowered my price and took whatever they threw at me, whoever they tell will almost certainly find out. I'd rather have a reputation of "he charges too much" or "he charges a lot" than the reputation of "he'll take whatever you offer, so lowball him."
I also won't work for free or lower my price to "use the photos in my portfolio." Not only do I have a section in my contract granting me permission to use the photos how I want, but under copyright law, the photos I take belong to me and are my property. I can use the photos however I want as long as I'm not selling them without permission.
Working for free and working with someone or an organization for some type of mutual benefit isn't the same thing. For instance, if someone doesn't want to pay me full price and they offer me a product or service for compensation.
]]>
What is a retainer fee?
A retainer fee, at least for Dan Pomykalski Photography, is basically a downpayment of 50% of the total cost that's due when the contract is signed. Nothing is official until I have received the retainer fee. If I'm still negotiating with client A and they want a certain date, but client B contacts me and also wants that date and submits their retainer fee first, client B will most likely get that date over client A. Usually, the retainer fee can make paying a little easier for the client; especially with more expensive things, like weddings.
What is the purpose of the retainer fee?
The retainer fee is supposed to deter clients from canceling on me; especially at the last minute, or at least compensate me for the time I spent contacting and negotiating with the client and any potential lost revenue. The retainer fee is non-refundable if the client is responsible for any form of cancelation in any way.
Negotiations with clients are probably one of the things that a lot of people don't think about. Rarely do negotiations get settled quickly, and can take days or even weeks of communication to get something set up. If a client cancels on me, then all of that time that could have been spent elsewhere was for nothing.
Obviously, if a client cancels on me, I'm not going to be getting paid from them. But revenue loss can be even greater than what I was supposed to get from that client. Sessions can take up entire days, so I'll usually only schedule one a day. When a client submits their retainer fee, that whole day is usually theirs incase things run longer than I had anticipated. This means if another client wants to schedule something with me on a day I'm already working with someone, I'll most likely have to turn them away. Sometimes they can schedule something on a different day, but sometimes they can't. If I didn't charge a retainer fee, I not only don't get paid from the client who booked the session, but I also lose out on what the other client would have paid me.
A good example of why a retainer fee is necessary recently happened, and is a big reason why I'm doing this post today. As some of you know, I was supposed to go to Boston this past weekend to photograph the Head of the Charles Regatta. The client had submitted the retainer fee back in April, and I was supposed to be gone from about October 15th to October 22nd, so I blocked off that time and didn't take any clients. Unfortunately, the client had to cancel about a week before we were supposed to leave. Even worse, from the time the client submitted the retainer fee from the time they canceled, I had to turn away at least two clients because I was expecting to be gone for a week. One of the clients was able to schedule a different day, but the other wasn't.
At first, I wasn't sure if a retainer fee would be necessary. I had heard plenty of stories of clients canceling on other photographers, but I wasn't sure how common it actually was. I've had clients cancel on me twice since deciding to charge a retainer fee, and both times, charging a retainer fee was the right thing to do.
]]>
1) Creating photos takes time. The amount of time it takes to create photos is largely what affects my rates. Just because the person is a family member, doesn't mean it takes any less time. I'm still going to put 100% of my effort into creating a quality product for them.
2) The time I set aside to work for a family member, there are other clients out there that I could be working for at full price.
3) I can't really charge one family member and not the other. If I work for one family member for free, I'll most likely be expected to work for every family member for free. The most common things family members want me to shoot are weddings and senior portraits. Once you add up all of my family, plus Devan's, that's potentially thousands and thousands of dollars and probably days' worth of time spent editing.
4) I have bills that I need money for.
This post sounds somewhat negative and like I hate my family, but it's just an explanation of why I can't work for my family for free. I enjoy working with family members, and I usually give my family a discount of 50-75%. If I could work for all of my family for free, I would, but looking to the future, doing that much work for free would probably put me out of business.
]]>
Liking any post related to the giveaway will count as one (1) entry.
Retweeting any tweet related to the giveaway will count as one (1) entry.
The winner must like Dan Pomykalski Photography on Facebook OR be following @PomykalskiPhoto on Twitter.
Contestants may enter multiple times (they can like and retweet as much as they'd like).
The session will be 30 minutes and include five (5) edited photos.*
The winner must schedule the session within 60 days of being informed they have won (the session can be anytime, but the session must be set up within 60 days).
The session is transferrable, so if you'd like to give the session to a friend, feel free to!
If the winner is responsible for any form of cancellation, the session will be voided.
Winner will be drawn on April 21st at 2:00 pm.
Visit www.facebook.com/pomykalskiphoto for more information and to enter for your chance to win.
*Three (3) portraits
(Updated 3/23/15)
]]>
Another drawback to this system is these packages often consist of a predetermined number of prints. Often times, these packages include a number of different prints that are popular, but might not necessarily reflect what the client actually wants. The photographer might offer a package that consists of a certain number of 4x6, 5x7, and 8x10 prints, but the client might only want an 8x10 print. Again, the photographer might be willing to make adjustments for the client, but it depends on the photographer.
Ever since I began taking photos professionally, I've been somewhat opposed to offering packages when I give my clients estimates. When I first started, I remember charging my clients based off of how much time they were looking for, and then I'd just give them all of the photos. The two things wrong with this that caused me to change the way I charge my clients is that the client usually has no idea how long they need me for, or how long the session will take, and handing over all of the photos undervalues my work.
After I got some more experience and did some tweaking, I now charge my clients based off of how much they're looking to spend and how many photos they're looking for. After I find out these details, I take into consideration how long the session will take, how long it will take to edit the photos, how much time I've spent contacting the client, the wear and tear on my equipment, and how much gas is required to get to the location and how long it will take me to get to the location.* I then give the client an estimate based on this information and how much I want to make an hour. On a good day, this estimate will be less than the client is looking to spend. On a typical day, either the amount of photos or the cost won't match what the client is looking for. If this happens, either the client is willing to pay more, or I offer the client less photos. I also take this information into consideration when I determine prices for my prints. I put a lot of time and effort into my photos, so the prices reflect that. The prints are also printed on higher quality paper than drugstores or other places usually use. This means the photos will last longer and the colors will be better.
I kind of have a price list/package system typed up that I usually refer to to base my prices off, but the price list is extremely flexible. Since it's so flexible, I don't really count it as a package and it's really only there so I can remain consistent with my estimates and quotes. The way I figure out pricing takes a little more time and requires a little more contact with the client. If I were the client though, I wouldn't want to receive less than I was looking for, or pay a higher price for more than I want or need.
*The time spent contacting the client, wear and tear on my equipment, and travel costs aren't really "figured" into the price, but I take them into consideration when I decide how much I'd like to make an hour.
]]>
One of the reasons my clients don't get every photo I take is because some of the photos don't meet my standards. When I'm working, anywhere from 25-50% are keepers. This means that if I take 100 photos, anywhere from 50 to only 25 of those will most likely get edited. Photos won't be keepers for any number of reasons, but I usually delete photos because they either didn't look how I thought they would, or the subject isn't tack-sharp.
Once I've gone through the photos and deleted the ones that aren't keepers, I usually edit the ones that are left. After editing the ones that are left, I go through and look at ones that are so similar, they're almost the exact same photo. I compare the photos that look the same and usually narrow it down to a photo or two. After this process, I again lose about 25-50% of the photos I took, so I'm down to about 12/13-25 photos. My clients usually receive a predetermined number of photos, so there's no point in handing over photos that are almost exactly the same. If two photos are too close that I can't make the decision, I'll usually throw in both of them and count them as one.
Before any of the editing happens though, I'll usually give the client a few options for how many photos they can receive if they don't already have an idea of how many they want. This is usually where the butting of heads occurs, and here's why: I'll offer the client anywhere from five-15 photos and give them an estimate, but they expect hundreds, and sometimes even thousands of photos for the same price.
I'm all for getting the most bang for your buck, but, personally, I can't even imagine receiving hundreds, let alone thousands of photos. I run into clients who want way more photos than they need quite a bit, and I think the reason why is because there are a lot of photographers out there that don't know what they're doing quite yet. These photographers take any amount of money, don't take the time to edit their photos, and just drag and drop the photos onto a CD and hand them over. The client then receives all of the throw-aways that I would have gone through and gotten rid of. This means the client saves time with me and receives a much more refined product.
I've always worked with the mindset that the client is paying for the time and effort that goes into editing and taking the photos. Depending on the type of photos, it can take me anywhere from one to three hours to edit all of the photos from an hour of shooting. I feel the time and effort I put into editing the photos also makes them worth more. I like to make sure my clients receive the best results, and this usually means less photos than those who don't edit their photos and just push a button. Editing the photos takes more time and effort, but I can't imagine doing it any other way.
]]>
When I first started taking photos professionally, I thought that getting paid for doing something I love or being able to work whenever I wanted would be the best part. It didn't take long for me to realize that the greatest satisfaction comes from the overwhelmingly positive reactions I receive once the client and their friends and family see the photos, though. A strong, positive reaction has become my main focus when I work with a client over the years, because I feel that it ultimately means I did a good job and delivered a great product. If I didn't have boring things to pay for, like bills, I'm almost sure I would take photos for people solely to see them happy with the final result.
I used to tell people my favorite part of my job was "capturing that special moment," and although that's incredibly important to photography, I think a happy client is even more important and rewarding.
]]>
I'm not going to go into too much detail about the camera. If you really want more detail, you can go to this post here: http://www.danpomykalski.com/blog/2014/8/post-6-the-nikon-d750
I kind of feel like the Nikon D750 is more like a D620 (an update to the current D610, for those of you who aren't familiar.). The only thing that really separates the D750 and the D610, to me at least, is the D750 has a better auto-focus system with 51 AF points, and an LCD screen that can tilt. The two DSLRs even share the same battery. The D750 can shoot at a whopping .5 frames per second faster than the D610, and the D750 has slightly better ISO sensitivity. Other advantages of the D750 over the D610 are more movie modes, and built in wifi.
For the body, the D750 is about $2,300, while the D610 is about $1,800 after $200 instant savings. Assuming the $200 instant savings is temporary, that's only a $300 difference. When talking about spending $2,000, $300 isn't much, and I feel like the slightly better ISO performance, better AF system, and built in wifi would be enough for me to get the D750 over the D610, depending on if that $200 instant savings was still in play. Those few advantages aren't worth $500 to me.
I was hoping the D750 would also have a better buffer, since it was supposed to be a sports camera. Unfortunately, according to http://photographylife.com/nikon-d750-buffer-capacity, the D750 can only shoot 25 14-bit RAW files until the buffer is full. This means continuous shooting of only 2.3 seconds, which is exactly the same as the D610. I rarely shoot on continuous high though, which means I could shoot at about 3 FPS for 4.6 seconds. Shooting on continuous low over continuous high could have a lot to do with the buffer size on my current DSLR, though.
In my original post, I brought up that I wasn't happy about the tilting screen. It turns out, the screen only tilts though, and doesn't flip out like the D5X00 line. This means the button layout stays the same, for the most part. I think screens that flip and rotate, like the D5X00 line, are more practical and offer more advantages, but the screen of the D750 can still offer advantages.
The mode dial is also something worth mentioning. Although this isn't a huge point, the dial does look to be the same as the D610. Nikon's more professional DSLRs have a different dial than their lower end models. The Nikon D4, D4s, and D810 have the more professional dial, as did the D700. The D750 does not. I think this is a small indication of where this camera sits.
UPDATE: I forgot to mention this before, but the maximum shutter speed and maximum sync speed of the D750 is 1/4000 and 1/200, respectively. My current DSLR, the D7000, has a max shutter speed and max sync speed of 1/8000 and 1/250. It isn't a huge difference, and to be honest I barely ever shoot at 1/8000 (although I shoot at 1/250 every chance I get), but the fact is is that my less expensive camera can shoot faster than the D750. The D610 also shoots at 1/4000 and 1/200, which is better than Canon's equivalent, which has a maximum sync speed of 1/180. These are two things that Nikon could have improved that would have separated the D750 and D610 just a little more.
Here's what I think Nikon got right with the D750:
- Priced only $300 above the D610 without the instant savings
- The tilting screen
- Full-frame sensor
- ISO
- Built in wifi
- Uses the same battery as the D610/D7100
- 51 point AF system
Here's what I think Nikon didn't get right with the D750:
- Too similar to the D610. Seems more like a D620.
- Doesn't shoot much faster than the D610 at 6.5 FPS instead of 6 FPS
- Buffer is too small
- Same mode dial as the D610
- Not really a replacement for the D700
- Maximum shutter speed and max sync speed
Overall, I'm kind of disappointed with the D750. I feel the D750 is so close to Nikon's D610, they might as well have just called it the D620. Based off of Nikon's history, it kind of seems like the D750 has a lot of the things the D620 would have, which makes me kind of interested to see what Nikon does in the future with the D6X0 line. Rumors were speculating that the D750 would be more of a spots/action camera, but it only shoots at .5 fames-per-second faster than the D610, which will be hard to even notice. The buffer of the D750 as well as the 1/4000 maximum shutter speed and 1/200 maximum sync speed make the D750 even less of an action camera. A lot of shooters were hoping for a true replacement of the D700, but I think the name is the only thing these two cameras share. It seems the D810 is the real replacement to the D700, and the D750 was an attempt to satisfy those who were still asking for a DSLR that was more like the D700. I feel like Nikon missed the mark and didn't make a true replacement for the D700, but I think they still made a desirable DSLR. I'll definitely be considering the D750 and D610 when I upgrade, and the biggest factor will probably be if the instant savings are still around. I think that's saying something when that's the major determining factor.
]]>
The iPad wasn't my first tablet. A number of years ago when HP had their fire sale, my wife and I ran out and got two of HP's Touchpads. Those were okay for a while, but the OS and support for the tablet were too big of drawbacks. We ended up putting a different OS on them, but it still didn't do it for us. We sold both of them about two years later, and my wife bought an iPad mini, while I decided to wait. About a year later, I was back in the market for a tablet, and the iPad was the only tablet I was really considering. The only decision I had to make was which model, and what color.
I opted for the iPad mini because I figured it would fit in a camera bag better. The lower price also helped make the decision for me. I ended up getting a black 16GB mini, because they were out of white.
Before I got my iPad, I had envisioned somehow connecting my camera to my iPad and having the images pop up immediately as I took them (tethered shooting), and a small amount of editing. So far, I haven't found a practical way to do either of these.
There are two ways I know of to have images go directly to the iPad; either an eye-fi card or buy an app. Both of these options require wifi, and I just imagine myself at a shoot trying to frantically get connected and set up the internet every time I'm at a new location. Either of these options would probably work well if I had a studio, but since I don't, I can't see myself trying either one.
I purchased an SD card reader for my iPad so I could transfer the photos hoping I would be able to do some light editing while I was away from home/the iMac. However, I've yet to find a decent editing app, especially for RAW files. Adobe released a Lightroom app that seemed promising, but I could figure out how to even get started. So far, the only app I've had any success with is Instagram after their updates and improved editing options. It isn't ideal, but it's the only solution I've found.
So both of the things I was hoping I would be able to do on my iPad didn't work out. However, after using my iPad for a few months, I've been using my iPad in ways for work I didn't really think of.
One of the ways I've been using my iPad, is to show my clients the photos right after I've taken them. This is kind of what I had hoped would be possible, it just isn't instant like I had hoped. I usually import the photos from my SD card after a shoot, and show the client what the photos look like. The iPad is much better for reviewing images than the screen on the back of my DSLR.
Another way I use my iPad for work is I store my portfolios on it. I had heard of people doing this, but I never really thought I would bother with it. Showing clients my portfolio on the iPad actually works pretty well, and I can see myself continuing doing this. I imagine the regular iPad would work even better.
I also like to use my iPad when I'm meeting with clients to take notes. I have a terrible memory, so jotting down what my clients are looking for is always a good idea. A pen and paper would probably be faster, but also more cumbersome. I also use my iPad to jot down any ideas I think of that are business related, such as blog or marketing ideas.
The last way I use my iPad is for networking. My iPad is almost always within arms reach, so I know immediately when someone has emailed me. This allows me to interact with potential clients sooner and doesn't keep them waiting for me to reply. I also use my iPad for Twitter. For some reason, I was never a huge fan of Twitter on an actual computer and I have always liked the app a lot more. The Twitter app is even better on the iPad than the iPhone. Sharing photos on Twitter and Instagram is also easier on the iPad because typing is easier due to the larger keyboard. I'm not a huge fan of the Facebook app though, and a lot of that is still done from the computer. I use the iMac for email and Facebook, but I feel like I use the iPad more for networking overall. I had imagined using my iPad for things like Twitter, but not this amount.
Years earlier, the HP Touchpads were used for a few weeks until our laptops took over again. I was very afraid that this would happen again with the iPad, and I would waste $270 on a fad that would keep me interested for only a month or two. It's been about four months now, and I still use my iPad every day for basic internet and social media use. I only use my phone now for phone calls, texting people without iMessage, or when I'm not at home. I think there are two factors for my continued use of the iPad; the OS, and both of our laptops are dead and gone. Our only computer is our iMac, so being able to sit anywhere in our residence and use the internet is only available if we use our phones or iPads. My initial hopes and dreams for the iPad didn't pan out, but it ended up making work easier in ways I hadn't thought of. I don't think tablets are replacements for laptops, but having a tablet certainly makes a laptop seem less important.
I'm sure there are more ways I use my iPad for work. If I think of them, I'll let you all know.
]]>
I'm using a cropped sensor body at the moment, so all of the focal lengths are multiplied by 1.5X, so keep that in mind.
Nikon 18-55mm VR: Ah yes, the kit lens. My first DSLR was a D3100, and there was no "body only" option. Had there been, I would have definitely gone that direction. There wasn't anything necessarily wrong with this lens, but there wasn't anything great about it either. The primary reason I would have gone with the body only option was becasue I knew I was going to get rid of it eventually. Some of the things I hated most about this lens was how much of a toy it felt like, the way it focused, and the "focus ring," which was really just the end of the lens. Being able to shoot at 18mm for this cheap is a definite plus, though, and I've considered buying another one once or twice. However, the chances of me actually buying another one are slim.
Nikon 55-200 VR: The 18-55's bigger brother. I also received this lens with my D3100 in a bundle. This lens was okay. Like the kit lens, there wasn't anything to hate and there wasn't anything to love. I sold this lens mostly because I couldn't stand the variable aperture. Some less significant reasons I sold this lens was because it was smaller and didn't look professional (just being honest), and it felt too much like a toy. This is another lens I probably wouldn't buy again.
Nikon 35mm 1.8G DX: This was the first lens I ever bought myself and I loved it. After I bought this lens, the 18-55mm almost never came out. This lens was also my first prime lens, which started my love affair with them. I haven't really been able to pin down the quality of this lens yet. Some photos look great and others look terrible. I fine-tuned the AF on this lens a few months back, which I think will help. This lens was replaced by the Nikon 50mm 1.8G my wife bought for me, so it doesn't get used much by me anymore. It can be found hanging out on my wife's camera, though. I would probably save up for Nikon's new 35mm 1.8G or find a Nikon 24mm before buying this lens again. It was great before the new 35mm 1.8G came out and when I was first starting, though.
Tamron 70-300mm VC: I traded in my 55-200mm for this lens, and it was pretty good. The AF was really fast; much faster than the Tamron 70-200mm that replaced it. I still couldn't get past the variable aperture though, and I wanted that f/2.8 aperture. I couldn't see myself purchasing this lens again.
Nikon 50mm 1.8D: Before I had the 50mm 1.8G, I had the D version. This lens is almost legendary because of its price-to-performance ratio. It's one of Nikon's least expensive but, supposedly, sharpest lenses. I never really had the chance to use it much, though. I had it for two months at most before one of our cats knocked my camera off our desk and damaged the lens. I remember not being a fan of the colors of this lens though, so my cat might have done me a favor by breaking it and giving me a reason to get the 50mm 1.8G. Since Nikon released the G version, there's really no reason to buy this lens unless you really can't afford to spend the extra $90, or so. I would pass on this and, without hesitating, buy the G version.
Nikon 50mm 1.8G: I love this lens. So much. Before my 85mm 1.8G, I would use this lens 95% of the time. I would take this lens over the 50mm 1.4G because of the aspherical element the f/1.8 has. There's really nothing else I can say about this lens other than it's one of my all time favorites. I would buy this lens over and over again.
Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8: I traded in my Tamron 70-300mm for this. I was super excited to finally have a 70-200mm f/2.8 like all the pros had. I didn't realize at the time that the majority of pros don't shoot with third-party glass though, and I found out the hard way why. This lens was a bit of a let down. When I got it, I was about to start shooting the home games for the Janesville Jets, and this lens had trouble keeping up. I made it work, but the autofocus speed was a joke, and would often miss completely for whatever reason. The things worth mentioning about this lens was it focused internally, was made of all metal, and had a tripod collar. This lens was also pretty sharp. I probably wouldn't consider buying this, or any third party lens, again. If I didn't shoot anything fast paced, I think this lens could work. I used it for a few portraits and liked the results.
Nikon 24mm f/2.8 MF: I wanted to get a wide angle lens before I went to Utah with my wife and some friends for landscape photos. This 24mm was incredibly inexpensive as far as lenses go. It was recently replaced by an AF version only because the rear cap came off of this lens in my bag and the rear element got a little scratched. I also wasn't the best at focusing manually, so investing in an AF version was only a matter of time. The version I had was really old, and had been modified so it could work on DSLRs. I think it also got damaged when it shipped, because the aperture ring was pretty stiff and it would squeak when focused. I wouldn't have replaced this lens if it hadn't gotten scratched, but I'm not necessarily angry about that happening, either. I do miss the metal construction of this lens compared to the all plastic lens that replaced it, though.
Nikon 180mm f/2.8: If you're still reading this, wow... I didn't expect this post to be this long, but I've come too far to quit now. I bought this lens with the money I made selling the Tamron 70-200mm. I used this lens a lot and was pretty fond of it. I wasn't crazy about the colors or contrast, but the sharpness of the lens made me easily overlook those drawbacks. This lens was also metal and dirt cheap for what it was. The biggest downside of this lens was the lack of a tripod collar. Putting that much weight on the front of my camera when on a tripod didn't work out very well. The only reason I sold this lens was because I bought a 300mm f/4 and couldn't see myself using this lens much anymore. If I happen upon some extra money, I might strongly considering buying another one of these...
Nikon 105mm f/2.5 Ai MF: This is another very well known piece of glass from Nikon. I bought this along with the 180mm to fill the void left by selling the 70-200mm. I love this lens and the way it feels when I focus it. I also love the bokeh this lens produces and the price I got it for. There are a lot of lenses out there that are "obsolete" that can be had for a jokingly amount of money. I think I picked this lens up for less than $100, and I would probably do it again. I never used this lens much though, and that's even more the case after buying the Nikon 85mm. Before I had the 85mm, I would usually play it safe and use the 50mm with AF instead. I decided to keep this lens since I don't think I'll be able to get much for it, and I kind of feel like it's a piece of camera history.
Nikon 85mm 1.8G: This is my new favorite lens. I lusted over this lens for two years before I finally decided to pull the trigger and pick one up on rebate. I wish I had sooner. I love this lens. I love the bokeh it produces. I love the sharpness at f/1.8. I love the perspective it gives. I love the weight of it. I love the look of it. It's the best lens I've ever had. I might even like it more than my 50mm. I love shooting with this lens and I want to weep a little every time I see the photos I create with it. I wouldn't change a thing about this lens. I try to make this lens work in every situation and use it as much as possible. It's a no-brainer; I would buy this lens again.
Nikon 300mm f/4: This is the older version of this lens, and I love it. Not the same kind of love I have for the 50mm or 85mm, but almost. I bought this lens when I went though a slight wildlife photography phase and before my wife and I headed to Wyoming for our honeymoon. This is the most inexpensive lens you'll be able to find with this amount of zoom and performance. This lens was the perfect solution for someone who wanted more reach than the 180mm could offer, but didn't want to spend at least $2,000 (but almost certainly more) on a super-telephoto. I have the option of getting a teleconverter if I want more reach, but AF isn't supported with Nikon teleconverters and I haven't heard good things about the third party teleconverters. If I do decide to go with a TC, I still will have spent less than if I would have bought Nikon's 400mm, 500mm, 600mm, or 800mm. Actually, I would be able to buy nine 300mm f/4 with a teleconverter for the same price of Nikon's 500mm, which is the most inexpensive of the aforementioned super-teles. It'd be hard to beat the price for what you get with this lens, so I would almost certainly buy it again. I might save up for the newer version, but it's hard justifying spending almost twice as much. The 300mm focal length blurs the background effortlessly, and the f/4 maximum aperture isn't a problem for me. I'd like the f/2.8 version better, but I'd like not spending more than $5,000 more. Oh yeah, this lens has a tripod collar, unlike the 180mm; happy day. This lens is also all metal and pretty similar to the 180mm in construction, it seems.
Nikon 24mm f/2.8 af: This is the most recent lens I've purchased, and the conclusion to this novel (finally. I'm tired of typing). I bought this to replace my 24mm that was scratched. It's nice having AF again, and I can see myself shooting with this focal length more because of it. This lens is mostly plastic, so it doesn't feel anywhere near as good as my older 24mm. I also don't like that the focus ring turns when the lens autofocuses. I read the optical formula is the same as the older, manual focus version I had, which is a good thing. Fortunately, this lens wasn't too expensive, and I see it more as a temporary solution until I've saved enough pennies for the Nikon 28mm f/1.8. I would buy this lens again if I were in a pinch/didn't want to shell out the $700 for the 28mm f/1.8.
So there you have it. If you read this entire post, kudos. I should have split this post up into multiple posts, but then I doubt I would have ever finished the second part. Now that I'm done, I can't help but feel like I forgot a lens or two. If you have any questions about these lenses, contact me and I'll tell you more about them.
]]>
I don't know how accurate these rumor websites are, but they've seem to fairly reliable in the past. So far, the only things I know about the new camera is that it'll have a 24 mp full-frame sensor, be marketed as a "sports camera," be around $2,500, feature a tilting LCD screen, and feature a 51 point auto-focus system.
The 24 mp full-frame sensor is probably the most exciting part about this camera for many. At the moment, the options for a Nikon DSLR with a full-frame sensor are the D610, Df, D810, D4, and D4s. The D610 would be more attractive to me if it weren't for the specs. Clearly, the D610 is intended to be more of an entry-level DSLR based on its features, but I'm sure this was done to keep the costs down. The Nikon Df isn't really an option for me (or any professional photography, probably) because of the single SD card slot and button layout. The fact that the Df has a D4 sensor was extremely tempting for a few months, though. The D810 has nice specs, but its 36 mp sensor is a big turn off for me. I don't really need that much resolution, and I imagine the size of the files would really slow down editing and also require me to buy bigger, more expensive cards. The D4 and D4s are probably the best options if price wasn't a factor, but you know, life... Based on the expected price of this new camera, I, along with many others, are assuming the D750 will fall between the D610 and D810. This is potentially a perfect situation for me. I'm hoping the D750 will feature a higher sync speed and maximum shutter speed, and at 24 mp instead of 36, the file sizes will be a little more manageable (although, I honestly wouldn't mind less megapixels).
I don't really know what the D750 being marketed as a "sports camera" means exactly, but I'm assuming this means it will feature a faster FPS rate, and other features closer to the D4/D4s and further from the D810. This isn't really a huge point for me. I get by fine with 6 FPS, which is what the D610 can do. I'm hoping that a faster FPS rate also means a larger buffer. Preferably a buffer that can handle much more than 10 RAW files. A larger buffer would be pretty big to me.
$2,500. Not much to say about that. I think it's a pretty decent price for what this camera will possibly feature. The D600 was a big deal because it was an affordable, full-frame DSLR. I had hoped that the D600 was the beginning of full-frame cameras becoming more accessible, and based on the cameras that have been released since then, it kind of seems that way.
I'm not a huge fan of the tilting LCD screen, and I kind of hope this doesn't actually happen. I don't do a whole lot of video, and that's the only time I really use the LCD screen on my DSLR. I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing that a tilting LCD screen will require some of the buttons on the back of the DSLR to be moved around, like the D5X00 series. Anyone who is new to Nikon won't care, but people who have been using Nikon DSLRs for a while and are used to buttons along the side of the back should definitely notice. My ISO, WB, etc. buttons have always been in the same general area regardless of which Nikon body I'm using (except the D5X00 series, obviously), and I'm not that excited to have to get used to a new location for them.
The 51 point autofocus system is another thing I don't really care about one way or another. When I went from my D3100 to my D7000, I was excited to go from 11 autofocus points to 39. Then I began selecting my own focus points instead of having my camera do it for me, and I realized I could easily get by with 11. However, I'm hoping Nikon doesn't squeeze all of the focus points into the middle of the frame, like with the D7000.
Assuming this new camera is produced, I'm pretty excited. Nikon users have been begging for a D700 successor for years, and the Nikon D750 will probably be exactly that (if you couldn't tell from the name...). Nikon has released three full-frame cameras in the past few years, and honestly, none of them have really done it for me or been an answer to those who have been asking for a D700 replacement. Nikon users loved the D700 because it featured the same full-frame sensor that was in Nikon's flagship camera at the time, but for a much lower price. If Nikon still produced new versions of the D700, I probably would have picked one up already. The only way to get a D700 now is used. I don't mind buying used glass, but I've had bad experiences with used bodies in the past, so I probably won't go that route ever again. I really hope the rumors are accurate, and if they are, I'm interested to see what the actual specs of the camera are. I'll try my best to wait patiently until Nikon officially makes an announcement...
]]>
This recurring theme is the common complaint about how cheap these new lenses often feel. This "cheap" feeling is usually because lenses are often made out of plastic now. It makes me think back to the day when lenses were made of metal, and felt like the highest quality and bulletproof. I often think of my Nikon 105mm f/2.5 Ais and how much better it feels than my new lenses. It makes me wonder why a camera company would ever stop making lenses like this.
And then I realize it's because so many people were complaining about the weight of these metal lenses...
Obviously, a cylinder of metal and glass is going to be hefty; neither one of those components are light. So it makes sense that a company would change what the lenses were made out of, since that's really the only option. Undoubtedly, lenses are now much lighter than they used to be, with the trade off being a cheaper feeling product. Personally, I don't mind the weight of lenses. People often mention the weight of heavier lenses like it's a drawback, but there hasn't ever been a time really where I've wished a lens was lighter. To me, heavier lenses feel more professional and durable, and I'd definitely take a lens made of metal instead of plastic any day.
]]>
I've done a post like this before, but it was a while ago and my daily routine has changed since then. I have a fairly strict schedule that changes every couples of months that I follow religiously. This is what my schedule looks like at the moment when I'm not shooting.
I try to wake up sometime between 8 and 9 every morning. I hate sleeping in because I feel like I miss out on a large portion of the day, so I try to wake up sometime before the late morning. Waking up at 9 usually isn't too much of a problem, but if I happen to wake up earlier, all the better. I also feel somewhat more like a responsible adult if I wake up at a reasonable time every day, instead of sleeping in until noon or later like I used to in college.
For the next half hour, I play a game of NHL 14 (which will soon be NHL 15). My philosophy is that if I get playing video games out of my system right away and only play one game of NHL, I won't be as tempted to not do any work throughout the day and I'll be able to focus better. So far, this has worked out. I also like to have some personal time every morning, and that half hour allows me to wake up a bit.
After my game of NHL, I'll clean the coffee maker, and get a pot brewing. I used to work at a coffee shop when I was in high school, but since then, I didn't drink much coffee until my last semester in college. Now I'm one of "those people" and can't get work done without it. As the coffee is brewing, I take a shower so the coffee will be ready when I get out.
Once I'm out of the shower and have poured a cup of coffee, I turn the computer on, and begin my actual work day. This is usually sometime between 9:30 and 10:30 am on a good day. Sometimes I don't start work until noon, but that's pretty rare. The first thing I do is I look at my website and record the number of unique visitors that my website has. I just started doing this in July, and it really isn't that important to me yet. I used to check my website views whenever I thought of it, but then I could never remember what it was at the last time. It's pretty cool when I look at the views and see that I've had 10 new unique visitors in one day. On the other hand, it's not exactly a morale booster when I don't receive any new visitors over two or three days. Recording the views on my site usually takes me less than 10 minutes each day.
After I record the views on my website, I begin talking to people. From the time I first began taking photos until around January 2014, I was under the impression that I didn't have to reach out to anyone. I used to think that I would be able to create photos, people would see those photos, and then approach me and hire me. I also thought that someone would "discover" me, and pay me a large amount of money to do work for them. In general, I thought that I would be able to just sit around and do whatever I wanted, and people would come to me without me doing much of anything. It wasn't until around January that I realized I could be doing much, much more.
I'm not going to get very specific with this part of my routine, because I don't want to give away too much, given how much competition there is. But I will say that this portion of my routine is the bulk of it, and can take anywhere from half an hour to two hours. I imagine myself as those business people you see in movies or TV shows that are constantly emailing and calling people, although I probably don't look that cool and am not really that important. This is probably the most important thing I do for work during the day.
Once I'm done talking to potential clients, I usually check Craigslist. This is probably the most useless part of the day, because anyone looking for a photographer on Craigslist is usually looking for someone to do it for free or for way less that what I charge. I have gotten a couple of decent paying jobs from Craigslist, though, so I check it anyway. This usually takes anywhere from 15 minutes to an hour.
The next thing I do is jump on social media and try to build my social media presence. Social media is the only advertising I do really. The only other advertising I get is through word-of-mouth, which I don't have a whole lot of control over. I upload a photo of the day to both Facebook and Twitter, and also respond to any comments or mentions, and other fun social media stuff.
After this, I take my lunch break, which is usually a game of NHL 14.
Next, I get back on the computer. This time is basically dedicated to replying to any emails that I've received since the morning, to motivating myself, or to learning how to run a better business. This can take anywhere from half an hour to two hours.
And there you have it. This is what I do every day unless I'm taking photos. If I'm taking actual photos, I still try to do at least a little bit of my work routine. I've been taking photos professionally since 2012, but this is basically my first full year in business. School took up a lot of my time until I graduated in December 2013, so I'm still trying to figure things out. I think this routine is working pretty well for me, but I'm sure there will be changes sooner or later.
I hope this post helps people understand that although I'm my own boss and can take days off whenever and however often I want, I still have to put in work if I want to be successful. When I first started, I realized that most people have to apply for a job a handful of times, while I have to basically apply for a new job every day. It isn't as easy as people often think, and there's times I feel like my work is terrible and I'll never make it, but I can't imagine myself doing anything else.
]]>
When I see a really bad photo, I can usually tell what went wrong and what needs to be changed. Sometimes though, I don't always analyze a photo, and I find myself thinking, "wow, this house looks terrible." The chances of me sticking around and looking at that listing is pretty much 0%. Sometimes I'll look at the photos for a little longer and try to figure out what went wrong; it's usually on camera flash or too slow of a shutter speed. I don't know for sure what someone who doesn't know much about photography will think, but I can't help but assume they'll think the house looks awful, and go on to the next one.
The house might sell eventually, but do yourself a favor and hire someone to take the photos if you can't do it yourself. This doesn't only apply to houses, either. If you're trying to sell anything, it'll be much easier to sell if you can provide a decent photo.
]]>
I've never really taken photos that weren't headshots that were intended for a website before. Clients have used photos of mine on their websites before, but I've never done any work strictly intended for that purpose. When I was first starting out and I was getting some of my first jobs, I remember I would have trouble sleeping the night before, usually wake up pretty early, and then sit around and wait anxiously for the time to come to take the photos. I still get excited before every job, but not nervous like that.
I showed up to the clinic about 15 minutes early to set up and everything went about as well as it could from my end. The photos ended up turning out better than I had thought they would, and I'm pretty satisfied with the results. I was having a slight issue with the lighting, but I moved my umbrella around once or twice and got it into a pretty good position for most of the shots. Some of the areas were a bit tricky, but I was able to work with it.
It's a pretty big confidence-booster when you go in to take photos you haven't really done before and they turn out pretty well. I'm a firm believer that if you can take photos of one thing well, then you can take photos in similar situations pretty well if not just as good, though. I used to be the photo editor of the Royal Purple when I attended the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, and I had taken quite a few photos that were similar to the ones I took at Noble Choice Chiropractic, which I felt helped tremendously in this situation. A lot of people probably wouldn't have hired me because I didn't have enough "experience," so I'm pretty stoked that Dr. Jon and Steph Pinnow gave me the opportunity.
You can see all of the photos from the shoot here: http://www.danpomykalski.com/noblechoicechiropractic2
]]>
I've decided to try blogging from my website and see how it goes. I'll most likely post to both blogs for at least a while until everyone knows about this.
Update: I'm almost positive I'll be switching over to this blog permanently. It turns out I have the option to schedule posts, which I'm a huge fan of.
]]>