Commentary # 50: July 2011
Previous Commentaries
back to the main page


A Thousand Missed Photography Lessons, and Lasting Value


July 2011


- by Craig Wassel


It’s been a busy 2 months of portrait work. I’ve shot indoors and outdoors, newborns and a christening, small families and a large family reunion, and guys in tuxes. It’s been a quite a mix, and now I look up and see that I have been so busy I have also missed more than two months of columns. Oh well; being busy is a good problem to have, and now it is back to the keyboard for a column.

Just like all photographers, I get asked a lot of questions when I am doing a shoot. Many of them are very familiar, like “what is the best camera”, but some of them are less so. Here is one less familiar that I was asked at least three times over the past few months: Paraphrased, “With all you do during a shoot, have you ever thought about hiring an assistant?” That is a really good question, and there are a couple of interesting reasons why I don’t have assistants.

The first reason is economic. There is no such thing an industry without competition, but with the digital explosion it is even more true in the photography business than it was before. Assistants want to be paid, and often what they expect is much more than it was back in the day. That is an operating expense that must be passed on to the customer, and times have been tight for just about everyone for several years now.

The second reason is more my opinion and theory. Assistants seem much more difficult to even come by anymore. I have offered on any number of occasions for upstart photographers to come along on a shoot with me to assist. Hardly ever has any ever followed up with me, so I never even get around to the question of compensation. Why are there so few takers? My opinion and theory is that the way new photographers think of learning is very different than it was once.

It used to be the way new photographers learned portrait work was by assisting a more experienced photographer. The pay was never a windfall, but there was a mutual understanding between mentor and protégé’. Yes, the assistant was helping the photographer do his/her work, but the assistant was getting something invaluable in return: a thousand important photography lessons in real world settings.

So what happened? Two revolutions occurred at the same time, and changed the way people think about learning photography. The internet was born, and digital cameras were also born and matured along with imaging software like Photoshop. Undoubtedly, the internet provides a wealth of information and examples that could fill every square inch of anyone’s home. Digital cameras now provide instant feedback that film could not. It’s all great. Almost.

Someone could learn an awful lot about driving a race car online now, too, and I'll bet via eBay Motors a race car could even be purchased if one has the means. The problem is, though, that no amount of reading or money put toward a great car can equal the lessons an experienced driver can teach, or help avoid fundemental mistakes out on a real world track that result in crashes. The same goes with photography, although mistakes don’t usually have the potential to kill anyone. They do, however, have the potential to limit repeat business and future opportunities for a photographer.

The trend I see with too many new photographers is too much reliance on Photoshop, Lightroom and plugins, and not enough knowledge of the thousand little lessons that are best and most easily learned when assisting. For example, I am doing portrait work outside and choose to use fill light to compliment ambient light. My subject is wearing a white shirt. Do I choose a large umbrella or a small gridded softbox, and why? There are literally countless little detail lessons like this, and assisting is where so many of them can be learned. So much of quality portrait work is about having learned those important lessons and details, and recognizing them during a session. It’s not about what is done in Photoshop or Lightroom after the shoot. That is just the finishing touches. If quality work is not done behind the camera, in front of the lens, and around the subject, no amount of computer work will ever make it as good as it could have been.

I saw a photograph on a feed not too long ago from a natural light photographer. I wish I could post it here, but I do not have consent and must respect copyright. The photographer commented how he/she had brought the image into Photoshop, used layers to brighten the exposure on the subject, and the clone tool to remove and hide distracting elements. Instead of being impressed with all the Photoshop effort, I saw a situation where a different and more interesting angle could have been used to move the clutter out of view, and where some lighting and light modifier skills could have resulted in a much more inspired and captivating composition that the photographer could have impressed the client with right then and there on the LCD.

That shot is not too terribly different than the senior photo you see on the right, except that there is nothing Photoshopped about mine. I specifically chose an angle that would minimize elements that would compete with Miss Megan. The light in the portrait is what was in front of the camera when the shutter was released. There was beautiful diffused natural light that day, but I wanted her to outshine it and so I used fill light. There is a shine on her hair, even though the sun was not hitting it under the canopy of foliage. I added that not with Photoshop, but with a remote strobe. I don't claim to be some world class photographer; everyone makes mistakes and misjudgements and I am no different. There are plenty of photographers out there that are far, far better than I. However, I used so many of lessons I have learned from others over the years during that session and every session, and not lessons from the internet about Photoshop, and not from just booking customers and learning as I go.

Assisting used to be viewed so very differently. The lead photographer got valuable help to move fast and react fast during a session, and as a result sessions would yield more quality portraits and fewer discards. Assistants got to learn those countless invaluable lessons, and without spending thousands of dollars attending Columbia School of Photography or some other expensive program. When he/she would finally strike out on his/her own, the world would get a much more experienced and qualified photographer. Customers both then and now would get something too: work that has lasting value and appeal. What does lasting value and appeal mean? It means that the customer does not end up paying for work that could have been taken by just about anyone holding the camera.


". . . Once the amateur's naive approach and humble willingness to learn fades away, the creative spirit of good photography dies with it. Every professional should remain always in his heart an amateur . . ."

~ Alfred Eisenstaedt ~








To Subscribe to These Commentaries, Click Below:

Subscribe









" . . . It used to be the way new photographers learned portrait work was by assisting a more experienced photographer. The pay was never a windfall, but there was a mutual understanding between mentor and protégé’. Yes, the assistant was helping the photographer do his/her work, but the assistant was getting something invaluable in return: a thousand important photography lessons in real world settings . . . So what happened . . ? "











© All content Copyright 1978-2012 Craig Wassel Photography ©