Photocritic photography blog

I get a lot of questions about how you should prepare your images for magazine submissions. Should you just whack all your images on a CD? Is it worth including the RAW files or should you only send JPEG files? Should you leave all the images in a folder, or should you organise them?

Obviously, things differ from magazine to magazine, and many publishers have guidelines - if they do, try to get a copy of them, and follow them. If you’re submitting unrequested material, however, there are a few things you can do to encourage the image editor / art editor to keep hold of your photos.

The most important thing you need to remember is that magazine production is hectic stuff. That means that decisions are often made quickly, and if you do your submission wrong, you may not get another shot… Read the rest of the article »

I was recently asked to be one of the judges in a photography contest run by Crestock. (more about the competition in one of my previous posts). It’s a pretty high-profile affair: The prizes are very good, and there’s a lot of judges on the panel, including some esteemed bloggers, experienced writers, and successful stock photographers.

When it comes to this competition, it works like this: As one of the judges, I choose the 10 photographs I like best. For round 1, that meant choosing 10 out of 491 photographs. In other words, for every 50 photos, I can only choose one. Words can’t describe quite how difficult that is: A lot of talent and creativity goes into competition entries, and a lot can be said about.

I won’t lie to you - while I am a moderately successful blogger (hey, you’re reading my blog right now, aren’t you?), a soon-to-be-published author (my book goes on sale in about a month and a half) and a washed-up freelance / stock photographer who decided that I could only do photography as a hobby, because doing it for the money was soul-destroying - I have never actually judged a competition before. While the guys at Crestock were quite helpful in offering guidelines and ideas as to what I should be looking for, it got me a-thinking: What can you, as a photographer, do to maximise your chances in the battle of shutter times and lighting, against the rest of the pack? Read the rest of the article »

I know I have a nasty tendency to keep rambling on about photographer’s rights, but it’s something I find quite interesting. On one of my recent posts, a full 64% of you (that’s 238 people!) told me that people tried to stop you from taking photos. Of course, 35% of you stuck to your guns (and your rights) and continued to take photos anyway - that thread has a lot of interesting comments in it, too, so it’s worth having a peek.

If you’re in Quebec, however, things might just be a little bit different… Read the rest of the article »

For photographers who sell microstock, or who sell a photo every once in a blue moon, getting serious pay-outs for a single photo may sound as a dream. For those of us who deal in licenced photography, however, serious levels of payment aren’t unheard of. Personally, my best-selling set of photos have netted me a fair sum of cash: They’re very specific, and get sold again and again.

Today, I stumbled across the work of Thomas E. Witte, in a brilliant article over on Sports Shooter. Witte managed to snap a couple of photos that turned out to be pure gold dust: A high school football player who doesn’t have any feet. The photos netted him $12K.

What makes me wonder, though: Could it be argued that the photographers have an obligation to their subjects directly? Should Witte give the football player some of the money he earned in this case? Or does the opposite apply — like for photographers who cover conflict zones — that if you get involved, you are immediately unable to do your job properly? Read the rest of the article »

A couple of weeks ago, I discovered that my trusty Canon Digital Elph S500 had gone walkies. “What?” I hear you ask, “Isn’t this guy supposed to be a proper photographer? What the hell is he doing with a compact camera?”. The answer to that, really, is quite simple: I often find myself in situations where carrying a full-size camera around would be uncomfortable, unnecessary, or even downright dangerous. As such, I decided to buy the then-top-of-the-line Canon compact camera.

Interestingly enough, in this round of research, I discovered that yes, if I wanted a shit-hot digital compact, I needed to shell out some serious dosh. I ended up paying (Yes! Paying! Obviously, the camera manufacturers haven’t noticed Photocritic well enough to send me free cameras yet. The scoundrels!) £300 for what is undoubtedly the best compact camera I’ve ever used: the 10 megapixel Canon Digital Ixus 900 Ti. It’s got lots of pixels, a battery that lasts and lasts, an amazing screen, and a body of titanium, so it can take the next few years of abuse.

Imagine my surprise, then, when I discovered on the T3 website that digital SLR packages have dropped to under £300! Read the rest of the article »