No Such Thing as Quality Standards or Rules in the Photography World?

[ChrisAdval]

Many photographers think there are no rules or quality standards in photography... DEAD WRONG! Here is the only few exceptions...

1. You are a fine art photographer
   • Not all of the time and depends on what kind of fine art photographer, are you a fine art photographer trying to appeal to specific type of audiences? If not and you just want to do your own thing then don't worry about any rules or set quality standards.
2. You are a student or in the early learning stages of your photography journey
   • If you yet to understand and master your camera this means you're still in this stage.
   • If your goals is to be only a hobbyist.
3. You are serious/advanced Hobbyist
   And with no goals in the future to become a professional/open a photography business.

So this rule only applies to those who want to start their own photography business of any sorts.


Why there are standards and What are the standards..? e.g.


If you want to be a wedding photographer here is your standards... your top competition sets the standards, if they're getting over 20-30 weddings a year that clearly means they're doing something right. Look at their work; see what they're doing right in their finalized photos. Now I'm not saying copy/paste their style, no... just observe the competition and see what ideas you can come up with raising your level of quality in your photos. If you think your work is very good quality and are not meeting the same levels of business as your competition then compare the quality differences.


Now I'll tell you now, I'm not a wedding photographer nor I have much interests in them, but this was only an example of what I'm trying to say. What I'm saying is look at your target audiences... see what they all like and love. Generally speaking they will all like a set style... they set the standards, especially targeted audiences that are high end clients.


Here's another example, you want to get into Maxim, or FHM, or other fashion or glamour magazines as a photographer, fine... But look at the work that is displayed in those magazines. They all seem pretty consistent correct? Yes (at least for glamour [guy] magazines). Why does it look consistent you may ask? Because the audience is demanding that style of photography, and who knows the audience best generally? The publishing editor.... Look at the magazines you want to get into and understand that market very well before ever contacting the editor. Now I'm not saying they'll accept your photos, heck I have yet to been published, but researching the magazine you want your work published in will give you a leg up on the competition. I know marketing very well, and I know an editor will never accept anything that isn't near it's targeted audiences, so sending in garden photos to a Maxim editor, won't work, no matter how good the photos are to anyone it will just rejected.

If I'm incorrect please tell me and explain why, I'm very open to hearing you out.

[Niresangwa]

Originally Posted by ChrisAdval

If I'm incorrect please tell me and explain why, I'm very open to hearing you out.

"Quality Standards" are subjective, that's why.

[graciousness]

The standard is that you need to learn your basics before you start contemplating on possibly making money off your work. Passion is not enough to make you successful with this technical art/craft. Learn your gears and learn the basics before anything else.

[zona5101]

Originally Posted by Niresangwa

"Quality Standards" are subjective, that's why.

No you missed the point, the point was don't send images of gardens and gardening activity to Maxim.

[ChrisAdval]

Originally Posted by Niresangwa

"Quality Standards" are subjective, that's why.

You didn't read the body content...did you? Heck you actually motivated me write this blog article and topic because standards are set as I explained in the article but you read only the title and last line.

[Niresangwa]

Originally Posted by ChrisAdval

You didn't read the body content...did you? Heck you actually motivated me write this blog article and topic because standards are set as I explained in the article but you read only the title and last line.

Actually, you're completely and utterly wrong, as I read this on your blog on Friday.

However, if you'd care to point me towards the Universal Rules and Guidelines for Quality you seem to be alluding to, I'd be more than happy to check up on them and see how much I suck...

unless, of course, these 'quality rules' you're arbitrarily deciding upon only exist to you.

My point still stands. The criteria and threshold that determines whether some random level of quality has been met, depends upon not only the context, the field, but also the application and most importantly the viewer.

If such a measure could be determined, someone more talented than you or I would have figured it out by now, and we'd all be slavishly following it like some boring, mindless dissatisfied automaton.

Again, while I truly do appreciate your verve for your new found passion and career path, (and I"m being completely serious and not facetious at all), you're once again getting way ahead of yourself...

[ChrisAdval]

Originally Posted by Niresangwa

Actually, you're completely and utterly wrong, as I read this on your blog on Friday.

However, if you'd care to point me towards the Universal Rules and Guidelines for Quality you seem to be alluding to, I'd be more than happy to check up on them and see how much I suck...

unless, of course, these 'quality rules' you're arbitrarily deciding upon only exist to you.

My point still stands. The criteria and threshold that determines whether some random level of quality has been met, depends upon not only the context, the field, but also the application and most importantly the viewer.

If such a measure could be determined, someone more talented than you or I would have figured it out by now, and we'd all be slavishly following it like some boring, mindless dissatisfied automaton.

Again, while I truly do appreciate your verve for your new found passion and career path, (and I"m being completely serious and not facetious at all), you're once again getting way ahead of yourself...

okay explain to me why publications don't run their publications without a quality guide?

I didn't say there is or will there ever be a universal quality standard... its the viewer and in publications they follow very specific quality standards that is targeted to appeal to their demographics.. hence there are quality standards with the very few exceptions I've mentioned. I understand if you're a fine art photographer, but not all photographers are fine art photographers.

[Niresangwa]

Originally Posted by ChrisAdval

okay explain to me why publications don't run their publications without a quality guide?

No, no, no you don't. You don't get to move the goal posts like that.

If you're solely talking about publication guidelines for editorial work, that's a different story, and a very slender niche when your blog pst appears to be addressing quality in paid photography as a whole...

..otherwise why would you start out by discussing wedding photography, as well as letting fine art, hobbyists and students off the hook? The implication you made in your post was that if you're getting paid, you should meet quality standards.

My point was that it's impossible to assess with any degree of certainty such a standard.

You also make my point in your post, when you declare that the customer base sets the standard for quality. Look at the gambit of technical and creative proficiency in photography available for hire.

Also, I"d venture to volunteer that there's a world of difference between Quality (whatever that is) and between content set to apea to the readership of a particular magazine or a genre.

What I take from this blog post, if you want an honest critique of it, is that you're enthusiastically writing about a subject you have yet to get a firm handle on. It's excessively general to the point that it makes no point at all.

[Tito87]

Please, stop talking so much(specially when you're making no sense at all), and listen to the advice these people are giving you. You'll be a lot better off. Who are you to set any quality standards?

[ChrisAdval]

Originally Posted by Tito87

Please, stop talking so much(specially when you're making no sense at all), and listen to the advice these people are giving you. You'll be a lot better off. Who are you to set any quality standards?

Did I set any quality standards no... All I spoke about is the marketing aspect of what photographers who are getting paid should follow a set standard set by viewers/clients, as for me specially my clients and viewers are print magazines so there is a very specific guideline to meet if you want to get published.. I don't set them, I create my photos based on those standards if I didn't I'm a fine art photographer plain and simple. I'm giving advice to those who want to get published (not saying I have, but I have a much better chance when I appeal to what the editors want), those who don't want to get published clearly don't understand the marketing aspects of running a business.

Originally Posted by Niresangwa

No, no, no you don't. You don't get to move the goal posts like that.

If you're solely talking about publication guidelines for editorial work, that's a different story, and a very slender niche when your blog pst appears to be addressing quality in paid photography as a whole...

..otherwise why would you start out by discussing wedding photography, as well as letting fine art, hobbyists and students off the hook? The implication you made in your post was that if you're getting paid, you should meet quality standards.

Fine Art photographers, hobbyists, and students off the hook because they shouldn't be required to follow a specific guideline because they're not doing for any compensation of currency at all (or shouldnt). Fine Art photographers generally create their art for their own self-expression in the art, students of course are just learning, and hobbyists have no goal to becoming a business so they do not need to make anyone happy like a customers/client or any viewership only self-gratification is what matters. Quality guidelines are set by the viewers of people receiving the service/product.

Originally Posted by Niresangwa

My point was that it's impossible to assess with any degree of certainty such a standard.

You also make my point in your post, when you declare that the customer base sets the standard for quality. Look at the gambit of technical and creative proficiency in photography available for hire.

Also, I"d venture to volunteer that there's a world of difference between Quality (whatever that is) and between content set to apea to the readership of a particular magazine or a genre.

What I take from this blog post, if you want an honest critique of it, is that you're enthusiastically writing about a subject you have yet to get a firm handle on. It's excessively general to the point that it makes no point at all.

You know the point if you understood the basics of marketing. As a photographer would you create a photo with no meaning or reasons? Sometimes photographers shoot for a learning experience, some shoot for a job, some shoot for an artistic expression, and many other reasons. If you're being paid to create an advertisement for Calvin Klien how would you make it? By looking at past Calvin Klien ads or just making it up from scratch without looking at past trends of what Calvin Klien has published as there print ads. The best results is looking at those trends and knowing the audience BEFORE shooting the actual photo with no guidance from that trend to show you what works. A photographer who doesn't look at that trend as the set standard in quality work.