Sign in to follow this  
IanDavidson

London Fashion Week

Recommended Posts

Does anyone else on here cover London Fashion Week?  I have applied for accreditation again (my 4th year) but always debate on if I should do this.  It costs £65 to register (and there are two lfw's per year) but there is no guarantee of getting in to shows as many of them are invite only.  I also apply to Fashion Scout that runs along side had actually has more interesting shows/Celebrities. https://www.iandavidsonphotography.com/london-fashion-week-2017-ss18  

 

I do not sell a great number of photographs - I guess the specialist photographers have this market well covered.  

 

I also cover the demonstrations that take place outside as well as the Fashionistas who try to show off their designs outside the event venues.

https://www.iandavidsonphotography.com/single-post/2017/09/26/Beauty-and-the-Beast-–-London-Fashion-Week-September-2017 

 

It is good fun, if stressful and highly competitive - and I am not sure it makes financial sense.....   What do y9ou think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IanDavidson said:

Does anyone else on here cover London Fashion Week?  I have applied for accreditation again (my 4th year) but always debate on if I should do this.  It costs £65 to register (and there are two lfw's per year) but there is no guarantee of getting in to shows as many of them are invite only.  I also apply to Fashion Scout that runs along side had actually has more interesting shows/Celebrities. https://www.iandavidsonphotography.com/london-fashion-week-2017-ss18  

 

I do not sell a great number of photographs - I guess the specialist photographers have this market well covered.  

 

I also cover the demonstrations that take place outside as well as the Fashionistas who try to show off their designs outside the event venues.

https://www.iandavidsonphotography.com/single-post/2017/09/26/Beauty-and-the-Beast-–-London-Fashion-Week-September-2017 

 

It is good fun, if stressful and highly competitive - and I am not sure it makes financial sense.....   What do y9ou think?

If your primary interest is making money, and that isn't happening, (even covering registration fees) - I guess you've answered your own question.

However, if you enjoy doing it, and profit's not the main objective - why not?

:)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TeeCee said:

If your primary interest is making money, and that isn't happening, (even covering registration fees) - I guess you've answered your own question.

However, if you enjoy doing it, and profit's not the main objective - why not?

:)

 

 

Absolutely, 100% agree with this! And I think for many of us, it can be applied to stock photography generally!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I am cynical. But I notice that the fun factor often diminishes with the idea that I am working hard covering an event where I anticipate little or no returns, and so I try and avoid such possibilities, picking my battles. Lets not forget its not just the work of pressing the shutter. If I cover a football game I reckon I am looking at about ten hours of work. I have spoken to agency colleagues who reckon about the same.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most pics that actually sell are those of celebrities attending. If you go to the big shows or Fashion Scout, you might be able to catch some. Even if you hang out outside.

 

Edited by vpics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, funkyworm said:

Maybe I am cynical. But I notice that the fun factor often diminishes with the idea that I am working hard covering an event where I anticipate little or no returns, and so I try and avoid such possibilities, picking my battles. Lets not forget its not just the work of pressing the shutter. If I cover a football game I reckon I am looking at about ten hours of work. I have spoken to agency colleagues who reckon about the same.

 

 

 

I agree. Most sports fans would find shooting their favourite sport very disheartening because you don't get to watch it. My son was a very good sportsman and when I was at his games (rugby, football and especially basketball) I could either photograph it (and find out what happened later;)) or watch and enjoy the game live!

 

As you say, it is not just the event itself, it is all that time in front of a computer.

Edited by Martin P Wilson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/01/2018 at 23:03, funkyworm said:

Maybe I am cynical. But I notice that the fun factor often diminishes with the idea that I am working hard covering an event where I anticipate little or no returns, and so I try and avoid such possibilities, picking my battles. Lets not forget its not just the work of pressing the shutter. If I cover a football game I reckon I am looking at about ten hours of work. I have spoken to agency colleagues who reckon about the same.

 

 

Think this points up the difference between commercial work/commissioned editorial work and stock

For a living, someone books me,  I shoot it, they pay me.

The world of stock is very different, as it's entirely speculative.  No-one books you, you shoot it anyway, you may (p'raps) sell something and get paid.

If you're doing something speculative, you might as well shoot stuff that you enjoy doing, be that sport/fashion/music gigs etc etc.

My main choice for stock is a walk along the seafront here, but I'm an extremely boring bloke indeed...

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2018 at 22:57, Matt Ashmore said:

 

Absolutely, 100% agree with this! And I think for many of us, it can be applied to stock photography generally!

 

Thats one reason that the stock industry is in the poor state it currently is. Too many photographers willing to work at a loss because they "enjoy it". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, andremichel said:

 

 

deleted

 

Edited by TeeCee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, andremichel said:

 

Thats one reason that the stock industry is in the poor state it currently is. Too many photographers willing to work at a loss because they "enjoy it". 

 

I can't argue against that point! Unfortunately that horse has bolted and shutting the stable door now won't change it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to disagree with a lot of what is written here.

 

I was a news agency photographer for decades and

early on I would only shoot stories after my agency got

a magazine assignment for me.  Then I realized that we

could make much more money shooting stories that my

agency would sell or license over and over to the

magazines worldwide.  Keep in mind that if you are working on

assignment for a publication there is an embargo period

where you cannot license images shot while on assignment.  

Alamy now licenses images every month that I shot on my

own dime and time.  While most of the major News Photo

Agencies are gone, I’ve been impressed with Alamy Live News.

 

I also disagree with the statement that : “Thats one reason that the

stock industry is in the poor state it currently is. Too many photographers

willing to work at a loss because they "enjoy it".” 

 

There have always been people who give their images away

because they just want to see their name in print.  The first

problem with “the stock industry” are agencies or libraries

that have not held licensing prices and micro stock.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/01/2018 at 22:52, Chuck Nacke said:

I have to disagree with a lot of what is written here.

 

I was a news agency photographer for decades and

early on I would only shoot stories after my agency got

a magazine assignment for me.  Then I realized that we

could make much more money shooting stories that my

agency would sell or license over and over to the

magazines worldwide.  Keep in mind that if you are working on

assignment for a publication there is an embargo period

where you cannot license images shot while on assignment.  

Alamy now licenses images every month that I shot on my

own dime and time.  While most of the major News Photo

Agencies are gone, I’ve been impressed with Alamy Live News.

 

I also disagree with the statement that : “Thats one reason that the

stock industry is in the poor state it currently is. Too many photographers

willing to work at a loss because they "enjoy it".” 

 

There have always been people who give their images away

because they just want to see their name in print.  The first

problem with “the stock industry” are agencies or libraries

that have not held licensing prices and micro stock.

Absolutely agree with every word Chuck!

Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Tony,

 

Really like your old (God, I hate saying that) motorcycle B & W's

Like a lot of you "file" images, Steve Baker was my neighbor in

Bellingham, WA, USA in the 80's.  I wish Alamy would put more into

promoting some of the great historical images that Alamy has.

 

Just remember my motto: "Old age and Treachery always wins over

youth and impruousness"

 

Best,

 

Chuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this