Proper etiquette when dealing with magazine guys???

Trust me, I have lots of friends in the photog business (some of which are on the HAMB), so finding a good photographer wouldn't be an issue... the thing is, THEY CALLED ME, and said they wanted to shoot the car. I don't really care if my car ends up in a mag, but if it DOES, I'd like it to be a good deal, ya know?

 

What the heck is an orcabetty? I don't even want to know about the Glossy Poodle.

 

I have a semi stray cat called Nitro, does that count?

 

Have someone re-shoot your ride ASAP locally, submit them in untouched ( his res ) to the editor with a letter that you'd like them to consider the shots for the feature.

Ask to see a proof of the layout. Yes, photoshop is a great tool, but if they are really shit well that equals "Shit in - Shit out".

I have been the art director for a biker publication for 13 years now and we get some serious "shit" turned in to us, sometimes you can work miracles ... but a bad angle is a bad angle and a bad pose is a bad pose.

If you don't care that your ride makes the cut, speak up now or forever hold your peace. If the editor / mag' doesn't give a hoot if your happy, then he or she are not worth your time anyway!

There's my 2 cents worth.
Lea, publisher of Still Runnin Magazine

 

I'd say cancel the whole thing, seriously. Your going to be even more disappointed when you see the mag.
If the "photographer" seemed unprofessional, and pics you saw looked bad, the magazine is probably going to suck as well.
OSR, CKD, Rebelrodzzzzzz....... Right???

 

As a matter of fact...

 

To sum it all up, it's kinda like gettin your hair cut at Supercuts...there's a chance you'll come out with a decent cut, but the likelihood is you'll be sorry you ever let a cosmetology school flunky lay a hand on you.

 

Not sure when your shoot was, but I've never seen a photographer use film to shoot a feature in the last three years. Digital SLRs have much higher resolution than a 35mm film camera. I bet most magazines don't even have the ability to deal with film anymore.

Also, it's not very common for a photographer to give you digital images from the shoot. What's to stop those photos from popping up in the 'ol interweb and f'ing up what was supposed to be an exclusive?

 

I have a pet peeve when it comes to taking pictures of cars: when the photographer deliberately holds the camera at an angle to make the picture look dramatic.

Take a look at the pictures in this Rod & Custom feature of George Poteet's stunning Deuce five-window:

http://www.rodandcustommagazine.com/featuredvehicles/135_0401_custom_1932_ford_deuce_coupe/



If I ever meet Rich Chenet, I'll ask him why he thought this was a good idea.

When I wrote about the car on http://www.roadsters.com/deuce/ I "fixed" the picture by rotating it.





Creative artistic self-expression is fine. Please remember that you're not just taking a picture. You are documenting history.

Dave
http://www.roadsters.com/

 

He was probably thinking, "If I tilt the camera I can give my art director room for the edit while still filling the frame with the car".

 

That photo perfectly captures the car's hillclimbing ability.

Angle doesn't bother me a bit. To some extent any debate about photography is a matter of if you prefer to load the toilet paper roll with flap up, or flap down. There is no right answer.

 

I think it's out of your hands and the editor will reject the photo's if there there bad. A good Pro will shot at the right time of the day and use professional models who know how to pose. The right time of the day for a photo shoot is in the Am or late afternoon with the sun behind you and no trees growing out of the roof of the car. A good background with no distractions. An over casted day can give good results too. If the guys a freelancer he won't be making any money off a poor shoot.

CRUISER

 

Not exactly true ... all depends on the ISO of the 35mm film you are shooting and the quality of the Digital SLR you have ... e.g., an image shot with Kodachrome 64 (color transparency film) can be the equivalent of a 10-12 Mega Pixel digital image.

Note also that a few professional photographers still shoot with medium format film cameras (Mamiya, Rolleiflex, Hasselblad, etc.) which, due to the size of the film used (2¼” x 2¼&#8221, can boast resolution many times greater than even the highest end digital SLR camera.

Probably very true ... it's just no longer cost effective.

Agree with this statement 100% ... it's one of the points I was gonna make!

My father was a professional photographer. In addition to his 9-5 day job at a DoD contractor in-house studio / darkroom, and to shooting the occasional wedding on the weekend; pop's also shot his fair share of articles and features for several different rodding magazines.

One of the most important things he taught me was to never let anyone see your "bad stuff" ... and certainly never give them copies of a poorly composed, un-cropped, and/or un-retouched proof or print ... the risks to your reputation as a professional photographer are just too great.

With the advent of digital photography, the "rules" have changed a bit ... but I'd say my father's advice about professionalism and reputation are still very applicable.

Perhaps this "professional photographer" thinks the shots were actually good ... or maybe (as others have already suggested) the Photo CD he gave to Hot Rod To Hell were actually the rejects that he was never gonna submit to the magazine.

 

I didn't know that about Kodachrome, by the time I started working for a magazine they had already gone 100% digital. When I was shooting film, I shot graduations when I was in college, we didn't use anything slower that 100, and I can't remember what that film was.
Most editors shoot with full-frame, 8-12 mega pixel cameras and that's plenty for a 300dpi magazine spread.

 

One of the most important things he taught me was to never let anyone see your "bad stuff" ...

words of wisdom I have repeated over and over to anyone who would listen. and with digital it costs the same to shoot 500 pics as it does to shoot 5.


while the subject of magazine photo pet peeves is here I'll give mine. guy does a photo shoot for a car and has 10 pics in the magazine and not one of them shows a decnt picture of how the car sits. bunch of artsy craftsy shit with the camera on the ground and other oddities.

same with event coverage. give me a nice standing up 3/4 view so I can tell what the car looks like

 

The Hard Way ... the Digital vs. Film debate is a controversial one ... and way to O/T for the HAMB ... but in a nutshell, you are correct ... a full-frame, 8-12 megapixel camera is the only way to go for typical magazine work.

I wonder what the TRJ photographers use for their studio shots?

NOTE: I currently don't have a full-frame digital SLR ... I'm saving up for the 21.1-megapixel full-frame Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III

 

21.1 megapixel! plan on making some 10 foot wide prints?

 

Just my .02-

Let them do what they want, and say nothing. I realize that the photos may be sub standard in your eyes, but atleast someone has recognized your car, and felt it is worthy of publication.


BTW Acrochicken, where can i find out about next years "LizardPiss Luau Rod Run"? Sounds like a kick ass show.

 

Your avatar is crooked. Please straighten it. Thanks.

 

Most big studios still have the same full frame cameras but with 30+ megapixel digital backs on them. They run 30k plus

 

one time a guy took a picture of my car, I was real excited until i found out he was doing a shoot documenting POOP!!! maybe he was just confused???? lol?

 

Now thats funny

 

Talking about days of long ago - you made me look at the dust on my professional camera from 30 years ago. Damn .... its so old ... I loved that 100lb beast. LOL

 

I would think after this 5 page rant you do not have to worry about the feature anymore anyway.


I have had a couple cars shot for some of the big mags. One turned out to be great exposure but I did not think the pics were good at all. In the end it was a great experience and an honor to be picked for a feature.

I also had pics taken that looked horrible that turned out incredible in the mag. Editing can do wonders.

All I remember is one of the photographers telling me how some guys would run the shoot, demand covers, want re-shoots, etc and what a pain in the ass they were. He went so far as to make a point of certain areas that were known for this. So I guess I would accept the feature as a honor and leave it at that. How bad can they be?? That is the dream of just about every builder you are about to blow off. Maybe you are the next Chip Foose and have serious connections?? Otherwise let it be and be happy!!!!!!!

 

Trouble is often a good writer and a good photog dont often come n the same body. When i wrote for chrysler power I had a problem with picture taking. i am not very good at it. Recently my last creation was in a magazine and the picture they used was a tiny one from my website. They just blew it up and i didnt know they were usuing it. It did not blow up well. If the article is not published hurry and take some good photos yourself with the digital camera and send them right away to the magazine. Tell the editor these are some additional photos you have and feel free to use them. If he has a brain he will. Otherwise just sit back and enjoy the fact that the car in in the magazine. Thousands never make it. Whatever you do dont critize the guy who did the article in the first place. That would be a sure way to make sure it doesnt come out well or at all.
You can slide a lot further on grease than gravel so spread a little rather than make it rough for the guy and will get you futher with the magazine.

 

Re: Proper etiquette when dealing with magazine guys??? ...ERR Ethics!!

Rebel Rodz October 2008 Issue

Old Stool Rods '29 Tudor, Incorrigible, is Featured as a build done by a certain Corri Buchholz. Read on as Corri tells of all of his curious adventures and triumphs in this fabulous fairy tale. What a creative little fellow he is. After all, he did add some cute decorations... did he even do that himself?? Hmmm... The tech specs are pretty funny too. Doncha' know what's really up in your ride? It is good for a few laughs.

This is a Jordan Nason build from field find in Northern California through the complete build. This '29 Tudor was then sold at auction on Ebay.

This story is pure comedy. Keep an eye on this page. The true story will be published here shortly.

http://www.oldstoolrods.com/morestuff.html

 

We called Rebel Rodz on this one....

They said, "It's this type of story that keeps hot rodding alive!! No one really cares about the truth!!"

WTF!!!???!!!

 

Guess that's one less magazine to buy.... oh wait, I hadn't anyways.

 

Never been on my grocery list either.

 

A "friend" of mine also had his car shot for a "possible" feature in some mag.......over a year ago......nuthin' yet.