FighterControl

So here's a topic for discussion this festive period.

I see that many folks describe themselves as 'Published Aviation Photographer' on social media. Now to me this means that they've sent an image speculatively to a magazine who have then published it. So why does this elevate one above the rest? And what difference does it actually make considering there are hundreds who do this?

And on a similar theme, why do people have LinkedIn profiles or Facebook job descriptions as 'Published Aviation Photographer' or 'CEO/MD' of 'XXX Aviation Photography' or the like? What do your family and friends think of this when they know you're job is something completely different and, dare I say, more mundane?

Genuine questions for good-natured debate!

In my opinion the acid test is do they make a living from it? If not then it's a hobby. Before the internet, digital age and social media there was a feeling of success in getting one's picture published as it would have been the result of the challenges of film, actively sending the slide to a publisher and awaiting a decision. Today there is little challenge in getting a decent image and posting on social media or emailing to a publisher.

I now do the occasional self-published book but just for my own satisfaction. I don't consider myself a 'professional' anymore since leaving AFM and the pittance paid for images by such magazines means the true professionals have little interest unless a commission helps them in other ways with major aerospace clients.

Twenty-five years ago it may have worked, but I'd hate to be a media officer today trying to separate the wheat from the chaff!

The 'good' old days of racing to get your film in the post in the hope you'd get it back soonest in order to send it to a magazine. I used Fuji as they turned films around within a couple of days unlike Kodachrome who could take up to a fortnight and often return the slides scratched!

I suspect there is a horrible scraping noise as these "Published Aviation Photographers" try to squeeze their huge swollen heads through doorways........

It's just ego. Nothing more. I've had pictures published in magazines (in fact on the cover of one), but I'd never make such a claim.

Maybe they should replace "Published Aviation Photographer" with "Lucky Shot".

In the world of model making, the equivalent thing (for me) seems to be those who bang on about doing commission builds. I'd go with a definition above - does the person make a living from it?

Regards the modelling ‘commission ‘ builds. If half of those that maintain to do commission builds build to their usual standard that they showcase on the various modelling forms, then I feel sorry for the person that paid them in the first place.

As said above ego ego and yet more ego.

Thunder wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 26, 2018 3:08 pm

As said above ego ego and yet more ego.

Careful there Thunder, large egos are easily bruised.

An amateur aviation snapper/spotter is what most people term themselves as, who take part in this hobby who tote a camera about.
Yes there are a few egos about who do this, and the ones who recognise this in another know the symptoms all too well, as they may have been there at one time or another .
As for what any near family or friends think of these people who have this "Complaint" most of them think they are potty for doing it, racing off at the drop of a hat
for what might be nothing.
Its more than this to all of us who are caught up and are involved in the pursuit of getting that long awaited "Holy grail" image, costing time and money in excess to try and succeed doing it.
There are those that wonder about with a self elevated view, that they may be the next big attraction to be discovered...These though have yet to discover who Walter Mitty is , but they soon come to
terms with him, when they understand the character and begin to see some of their own traits and habits in him, they have of their own!

There is no harm though in trying to get images published, its one way of trying to show you might be serious about the hobby and your intent and why you really do it. The upside to doing this is
it might open some doors which are otherwise closed, to bring you nearer to the subject you chase so much...We only live once, so why not let folk chase the dream, what harm can it do...

As a "published" aviation photographer myself, I personally wouldn't describe myself as such, more of an aviation enthusiast, who's had the good fortune to have had stuff published in a magazine. I haven't had anything published since 2006, although I was contacted in 2013 about a pic from the leuchars airshow, that I put on a forum, and someone wanted to use in some magazine. Funnily enough, when I insisted on payment, I never heard back from them. When I see that phrase, I expect the photographer to have at least been paid for the pic, none of this doing it for free to get "my name" noticed, and to make a living from photography. Also, published has to mean physically in print, none of this published on the internet guff.

The last pic I had published, in Combat Aircraft, in 2006, I got £25 for. Speaking to someone who recently had a pic in a mag, they got £15. I very much doubt if there is a living to be made from any kind of magazine photography, unless you were employed directly by the mag. Far to many folk with digi cameras or phones these days, who think they are David Bailey.

Yep the world is over loaded with Mr Baileys...

Working as a picture editor was fun in the old days of film. Sorting drawers of pictures for each article, then lugging endless parcels of returns to the post office. I suppose its more fun now.! Just hit the delete button.

I'm a "Published Aviation Photographer". A somewhat grainy image taken on an early generation smartphone of a bit of aeroplane. Still published mind, but I didn't cash the cheque.

I don't mention it on my FB, Twitter, instagram, linkedin etc!

It means didly squat now, anyone can buy a camera, take a photo and be published. Making a living out of it, now that is a different matter completely, its best to diversify as much as possible. I do wish though that the habit of "Joe Bloggs Photography" would go away though, yet again anyone can pick up a camera and be something something Photography. It is very pathetic.

Even I have had a couple of shots published

Just asked for a gratis copy of the mags involved

If I can do it ANYONE can

Typical social media saddos, IMHO

Paddyboy

Ghastly Whisper wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 27, 2018 12:45 am

I do wish though that the habit of "Joe Bloggs Photography" would go away though, yet again anyone can pick up a camera and be something something Photography. It is very pathetic.

I have a web site and a Facebook page called 'BAMarshall Photography' because it's where I put 'MY' photographs for other people to look at. What are you supposed to call a web site/Facebook page where you put 'your own' photographs for other people to look at then?.

I started my photographic career in 1971. On leaving school, I went to work for a firm of Architects and as part of the duties of an Architectural Technician I also learnt the dark art of photography. As well as taking photographs of architectural related subjects using a German Leica camera from the 1960’s, light meter and manual focusing, I also learnt darkroom procedure from rolling bulk 35mm black and white negative film into reloadable cassettes, processing the film and printing out the resulting images using techniques like dodge and burn before it became popular in processing software like Photoshop. I served my apprenticeship, on the job, in photography so tell me again I'm being pathetic for putting 'Photography' after my name.

Brian

I don’t think having a website is pathetic at all, it’s a free country, but I do query whether it’s worth the effort sometimes. Many sites just have shots of RIAT, Coningsby approach and the Loop which are somewhat ten a penny to be fair. It’s a bit like having a site for wildlife photography but just posting pics from Chester Zoo, Slimbridge and Longleat.

But my original questions haven’t been answered. Why the need to put Published Aviation Photographer and why pretend it’s your occupation when in reality you had a shot in a AFM ten years ago? I am genuinely fascinated, there are plenty on here who do this so let’s hear from you.

It does make me smile when I see fifty images, almost identical, of an F-15 on approach at Lakenheath, all sighed off with 'XXXX Photography', or "XX Images". I mean, it is hardly a unique shot is it? Fair enough if seasoned photographers capture something special that they want to try and protect, but every man and his dog is a photographer nowadays, it's no longer exciting however I do see a much better quality on these pages rather than the guff on social media, I get much more enjoyment looking on here. I admire the work of the guys who put in the hours and miles.

I see a similar thing in the angling world, so and so is "sponsored" by a bait company when in reality they just get 50p off a kilo of bait for making a boring nuisance of themselves on Facebook. There must be thousands of "bait companies" knocking about now, all run by a Director who mixes together some rubbish in his garden shed on a Saturday morning.

The model making commission thing is amusing, some people just can't help throwing in the C word in every other sentence when they were asked to build a model. Unfortunately I feel that some of their customers may have benefitted from shopping around a little bit...
As said above, it's all feeding an ego for the individual to feast upon and provides free entertainment to those of us who can see through it all.

The only ones who gain from this modern day complaint of the self diagnosed "Published Photgrapher Syndrome", are the magazine editors.
They just sit back , hands behind head and wait for the multiple submissions to arrive, after some kind of special or noted event.

They know that this quest for a published shot, is a badge of honour amongst the amateurs. So in a way the acceptance of the pittance price they pay
does in some way, make it a definite ego trip .The only way we might change things is to try and boycott them in some kind of way or not be so ready to supply at the
snap of a finger. Saying sorry to them and you can't use that image might make them squirm a bit(maybe) but the gradual drip , drip to them
might dry up, and they just might offer a better price, per image.
I wonder what would happen if they were forced adopted the acceptance procedure of such magazines as "Flug-Revue" and the like who often check on professional
status and official pay procedures before going to publish stuff.

I know what would happen, the" Published Photographer society" would dwindle and the magazine cretins would be forced to stump up proper prices to acknowledged professional's
I think its easy enough to see why many can be deluded into thinking they are a "Published Photographer", after one or two or more of their shots are chosen regularly,
they have in definition been published. Try not to let this self imposed status symbol situation worry you so much fighterfoto, its just a turn of events in the evolution
of the digital world, promoting the delusion ha,ha..chill out, I'm David Bailey...

Hi folks.
Interesting reading the comments.
Only photograph I've ever had used was one of those fluke shots where I happened to be in the right place at the right time.
Though it was a civvie aircraft, an A340, the fact it was skidding off the runway (Brussels 1997) that made it notable, so I sent it to Aviation Safety Network to be used at the time. Got a credit and that was it...or so I thought.

Years later I was contacted by a lady who'd been on the flight! She wanted the details of the accident she'd been in! I replied with the link to it and she was most impressed.

So that's my one 'claim to fame'.

Mike.

Been around Airshows long enough to have seen some very nasty happenings. My photographer friend and myself [video] had occasion to voluntarily surrender our results on two occasions to the NTSB in the States for their accident investigation. My friend, particularly could have made considerable money from his graphic shots, but chose not to, and I didn't even want my video returned. I don't find it a problem for people to call themselves 'published' if that's what they like. Each to his own. Just continue with the nice photography, Brian. That'l do for me.

e.g. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-s ... e-46693916