# How do you become so famous that you have assistants to do it all for you?



## GuyF (Mar 13, 2014)

I wasn't sure which forum to post in so decided this one might be best.

The BBC has a series of programs that show what various types of artist do on an average day - painters, sculptors, graphic novel artists etc. They just showed one on famous photographer, Albert Watson.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03y85dl/What_Do_Artists_Do_All_Day_Albert_Watson/

I've got a couple of his books and do like much of his work but the program just left me feeling rather sad. He spent the day driving 'round Skye in the Scottish Hebrides with 3 assistants in tow. One would set up the camera (a Phase One) and tripod, one would hold an umbrella to stop the strong wind shaking the tripod and the last one carried the tethered laptop and did all the post production. Time after time Watson was shown just pressing the shutter button while the assistants did everything else.

Clearly a half-hour program won't show the full story but I was quite saddened to see Watson do very little other than say, "yes, this is a good spot, the light will change in a moment". Meanwhile the assistants set everything up for him.

Before any of you leap on this post and say most top photographers use assistants, I agree - for a studio or location shot with lights, props and a human subject, that's understandable but this was straight forward landscape stuff!

Needless to say though, the results were superb. However, if you're familier with Skye, anyone could get excellent shots there - especially a Phase One.

For those not familiar with Skye: http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/creative/old-man-of-storr-stock-photos

Sorry for the grumble, it just annoyed me a bit.


----------



## IMG_0001 (Mar 14, 2014)

A tad off topic, but I for one managed to take mostly boring photos there.... although I loved the place. I just was not able to render the feeling of the Isles in my pics.

On the assistant thing, I'm not that troubled by the assistant thing. I think the assistants mainly provide the best possible environment for the 'star'. And honestly, many of the photographers from the film days did not develop or make prints themselves, although they provided inputs on the desired output. Even great painters from the renaissance (and before) had emules working for them and appropriated their work. I think that leaving the post processing to a 'specialist' in the tools while providing the artistic input is alright. 

Of course, I have greater considerations for those who do it all themselves, just as I have more admiration for singers accompanying themselves at the piano than for a singer that just stands.


----------



## Hillsilly (Mar 17, 2014)

C'mon, the guy is over 70 years old. Give him a break! At least he's getting out and doing something he enjoys, and if he's got the ability to have other people do the hard lifting, good on him.


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Mar 17, 2014)

All the professional photographers of any age I admire have several assistants setting things up for them. In fashion that is. Definitely. I definitely see them as useful and necessary for bigger projects. And in the upper echelons of fashion photography, you're doing lots more project management and direction. There are so many things going on.

However I never see sports photographers with assistants. I can't see where/how they would? Carrying their gear to the playing field?


----------



## drummstikk (Mar 17, 2014)

RGomezPhotos said:


> .
> However I never see sports photographers with assistants. I can't see where/how they would? Carrying their gear to the playing field?



Um…yes. Schlepping gear. I admit the last time I worked a pro game, I was still shooting film. In recent years I shoot sports almost entirely for colleges and conferences, but in my newspaper days, it was not uncommon to see at least one photographer at the NFL game who was equipped head and shoulders above everyone else. This was probably the Sports Illustrated guy, or maybe, in those days, Inside Sport (now defunct). These shooters often had an assistant who would hold the 400mm 2.8 while the photographer was shooting with the 600mm 4.0. At intervals, they'd trade. 

Perhaps more important at the time was having an assistant to hand you a body freshly loaded with film when a play was about to start and there were only about 6 frames left on the roll. 

But, as the poster observes, assistants in sports may have gone the way of the dodo in the age of digital and ever tightening budgets.


----------



## expatinasia (Mar 17, 2014)

I can't watch the video as it is "not available in my area. Pity as Skye does look like a great place to visit, and I will be googling it more later as I may be in Scotland (first time) later this year.



RGomezPhotos said:


> However I never see sports photographers with assistants. I can't see where/how they would? Carrying their gear to the playing field?



I never see any of the photographers at the events I work at with assistants as such, some do have assistants or colleagues in the press room who edit the pics and upload etc others may be writing etc., but not assistants in the true sense of the word. They would be useful at all day events though, especially when you are in need of a meat pie or such like!


----------



## Maui5150 (Mar 17, 2014)

GuyF said:


> Clearly a half-hour program won't show the full story but I was quite saddened to see Watson do very little other than say, "yes, this is a good spot, the light will change in a moment". Meanwhile the assistants set everything up for him.



And why is this bad?

For one, these three people, while mainly being gophers for all intent and purposes, are getting invaluable experience whether they know it or not seeing how Watson visions things and how he thinks. 

Perhaps he is more a DP than actual photographer, but it is far more to compose, frame, and recast the light to snap the picture. More of the upper end of photographers I have gotten to know do more outsourcing of a lot of their retouching, clean up etc. 

How do you become that famous? Take great pictures, and get a few lucky breaks... Having a wealthy patron or two doesn't hurt.

In the fashion world, if Anna Wintour say, "Get me Albert on the line" i.e. your are known by your first name, as well in her lexicon of artists, you pretty much are there.


----------



## sanj (Mar 17, 2014)

You do not necessarily need to be famous to have assistants. You just need to hire...


----------



## expatinasia (Mar 17, 2014)

sanj said:


> You do not necessarily need to be famous to have assistants. You just need to hire...


So true, and if you can afford it - why not!


----------



## jhpeterson (Mar 17, 2014)

Having worked as a photographer almost my entire adult life, I've run across a few of the most famous, several more near-famous and a good many who thought they were.
I started out in photojournalism, back in the pre-digital days. Perhaps because of my chosen path, the ones I considered at the top still processed their own film and made the final prints. I'm sure this shaped my views, that those who were the best earned their reputations the hard wayand mastered every aspect of their craft. To not do so was considered taking a shortcut and avoiding paying their necessary dues.
Even when I became one of the best in my specialty, I've almost always had to do all the work. It's still true to this day, perhaps even more so with digital publishing, market convergence and shrinking corporate photography budgets. This is probably why I have the most respect for photographers who still carry their own bags.
Yet I'll concede, in certain areas of photography, we can't all be one-man bands. Some disciplines require a group effort and great team skills. I know there are a few photographers who have achieved well-deserved fame, even when they do only a portion of the work. But, I'd like to think they earned their status because they can see the big picture and effectively communicate their vision to others. 

Unfortunately, I've found too many whose mark of greatness seems to be solely self-proclaimed. The more elaborate their set appears, the more subordinates running around, all the better. But, they seem to have mastered no more skill than that of the famous American, Tom Sawyer, convincing others to pay to work for them, at best. And, at their worst, charlatans and truly great... frauds.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 17, 2014)

jhpeterson said:


> The more elaborate their set appears, the more subordinates running around, all the better.


LOL - Everyone wants to be Annie Liebovitz  Her BTS videos show an impressive amount of assistance, but then again, her works speaks for itself.

I can't watch the video here in the US, but if I'm an old man, I'd like to have assistants if I could afford them, though for landscape photography assistants seems a little unnecessary unless they are tripod caddies.

For fashion/serious portrait shoots, the main reason I quit doing them is because you need assistants to get the best results. I got tired of dealing with unreliable make up artists, stylists, and assistants and wasn't making enough to afford better, more reliable ones.


----------



## jhpeterson (Mar 17, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> LOL - Everyone wants to be Annie Liebovitz  Her BTS videos show an impressive amount of assistance, but then again, her works speaks for itself.


There must be something wrong with me. I never wanted to be Annie. I wouldn't mind some of her clients, though!


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 17, 2014)

jhpeterson said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > LOL - Everyone wants to be Annie Liebovitz  Her BTS videos show an impressive amount of assistance, but then again, her works speaks for itself.
> ...


I didn't mean you, just the people you mentioned that think they need to have a ton of assistants and huge set to look like a serious photographer, and I'd like her client list, too!


----------



## GuyF (Mar 17, 2014)

Some interesting replies. I can't respond to all the points made but will add a few notes:

Albert may be 71 years old but that doesn't mean he is frail or unable to carry a tripod and camera. Skye is a relatively small island and many "views" are available without getting out of your car. Indeed, in one part of the documentary, he takes a shot through the rain-soaked windscreen of his car.

As I said in the original post, I can understand needing assistants for a fashion shoot or similar but landscape? "Yes, yes, you there, move that hill a couple of feet to the left...quickly now, we're losing the light!" 

The series of BBC programs is called, "What do artists do all day?" and can be found on Youtube (the Albert Watson one isn't on yet but I guess it's just a matter of time).

I still feel Watson may have taken the picture but he didn't _create_ it wholly by himself. That to me is what the whole creative process is about - my vision, my execution, my result. Of course artists collaborate all the time but, since it's landscape photography we're talking about, shouldn't it just be you with your camera and the vista?

So there you go; one question, many answers.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Mar 17, 2014)

I hope there are more posts on this thread. I'm reading with much interest.

I don't know too many actual pros personally. Heck, some people think _I'm_ a pro. (Yeah, right. I don't think I've earned that title yet.) But the pros I do know don't have assistants. Well, except for OFFICE assistants. They deal with everyone while the pro is travelling and on assignments. Otherwise everything would fall apart while they are gone for weeks at a time. But otherwise, all the photography is done using a team of ONE.

I can, however, understand the point that OP is making. There's a lot to be said for doing the whole process yourself. But I also see the other side where the 'assistants' may be working for free or for the experience so they have have themselves connected to a well known artist. All I know is that if someone wants to use assistants, I think it's just up to them. Their choice. I respect the drive and determination of independent guys/gals doing it all themselves but sometimes it may not be the best arrangement. Someday maybe I can comment from a more experienced and famous perspective. LOL!!

Me myself, I would love to have a helper sometimes and that's when I deputize someone and hand them something and say, "Would you mind holding this for 30 seconds?"


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 17, 2014)

Guy, it's too bad we can't watch it on the other side of the Pond, but I can certainly see your point, especially if they are setting up the initial composition and such. I have also heard similar stories (unsubstantiated, unfortunately) about several famous photographers who know next to nothing about their equipment or lighting and just show up and press the shutter. Was this always the case with them - or have the progressed to relying on assistants? Are they still photographers? What constitutes "taking a photograph?" All debatable with no answers. It sort of reminds me of the case where a monkey took it's own photo and the photographer claimed credit: Monkey Hijacks Photographer’s Camera and Shoots Self-Portraits



RustyTheGeek said:


> I don't know too many actual pros personally.


I know a decent number and I used to correspond with one of Vogue's top photographers and while he has many assistants, he was very involved in every step of his photographs, including scanning them (this was the early 2000s), which is how I got to know him. I just wish I had kept in touch with him...


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Mar 17, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> RustyTheGeek said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know too many actual pros personally.
> ...



I naively thought most artists (pros?) were insanely protective of their craft, the process and most of all the finished product. Now I can definitely see a gifted photographer that cut teeth on film maybe having an assistant to help with all the tech stuff and working magic on Photoshop at the behest and direction of the artist but I would think most 'old pros' would feel silly having an assistant place their tripod and camera for them.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 17, 2014)

RustyTheGeek said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > RustyTheGeek said:
> ...


He's definitely an old pro (born in the 40s) but was keenly interested in how to extract the best information from his transparencies using Silverfast (software) and his scanner. I helped him with that and he returned the favor by giving me advice on my work (I'm beyond embarrassed when I look at it today). I honestly had no idea who he was (other than a fashion pro) until years later when my wife was telling me how much she loved his work and his name rang a bell. That's when I realized how stupid I was to lose touch with him! I last saw him on a TV show crouching on the ground with a 5DIII/24-70 MkI shooting some models on the NYC waterfront and it looked like he was still very much involved in all aspects of the shoot.

The other pros I know use their assistants for location scouting, site/studio prep, organizing resources, grunt work and retouching. Most of them process their photos themselves or at least supervise the changes in LR/PS, etc. in post. And they would certainly feel silly having their assistants compose their shots for them.


----------



## Sporgon (Mar 17, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> The other pros I know use their assistants for location scouting, site/studio prep, organizing resources, grunt work and retouching. Most of them process their photos themselves or at least supervise the changes in LR/PS, etc. in post. And they would certainly feel silly having their assistants compose their shots for them.



You've missed out the most important function: loading film backs ! ;D

I've browsed through most of the thread and I'm surprised so many are taken aback by this guy having his assistant (s) set the camera up on a landscape picture. Producing this type of picture is very different from sports or press photographers, those guys never used an assistant in the field. But producing a landscape; what's it about ? The location, the light, the view. Who was the guy who instigated being in that place at that time ? I'm sure the photographer will have set up his exposure how he wants it and framed the picture. Then who actually releases the shutter doesn't matter. By and large I would expect the photographer to do his own editing; in another thread recently someone stated that post process work is editing, not photography, but this couldn't be further from the truth.


----------



## agierke (Mar 17, 2014)

it shocks me sometimes the narrow point of view that is expressed about certain subjects and how little knowledge there is on this forum about professional photography. i thought there were more professionals on this forum but it seems more and more there is not...or at least they remain quiet readers for the most part.

i still work as an assistant and 2nd shooter while growing my own business. been doing this now for 15+ years. most professional gigs benefit greatly from having a good assistant. 

as an assistant, i have been responsible for almost every aspect of the job, including gear management, setting lighting, loading film backs, processing and printing film, shooting casting calls, styling sets, digital tech, post production, and even taking the actual shots. heck, my shots are even on other professional photographers websites and have been published with their names on them. its all part of the job. 

in my network of photographers i am highly valued for the ability and knowledge i bring to the table. it doesn't trump the fact that its their job and their creative vision. the benefit to me is i constantly get to learn new methods and techniques as well as getting other perks such as contacts and support. when a photographer can't take a job they usually pass along the contact to me. i also have available to me the ability to borrow equipment at no cost when i have the need. 

over the last 5 years or so, the shrinking budgets for photography have made it more difficult for photographers to staff a job the way they once did. my response has been to widen my network so that i am covering any future losses by gaining more access to more photographers and their work. in turn my own business has grown year after year from additional contacts. 

the world of photography is not black and white for me (excuse the pun) rather i keep the lines blurred, stay diversified, so that my income comes from a variety of sources. its kept me "alive" in this business as i have watched many others business shrivel up and die. my goal, as a professional photographer, is to get the work and fulfill whatever requirement is asked of me, whether that be shooter, assistant, tech or post production. in the end...its all photography to me.


----------



## Lawliet (Mar 17, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> I've browsed through most of the thread and I'm surprised so many are taken aback by this guy having his assistant (s) set the camera up on a landscape picture.



We could take a look at the credit list on those moving picture thingies that came up recently - everybody knows names like, lets say Kubrick, Spielberg or Tarantino. Not that much work on the physical cameras from those I'd wager, yet they're the most strongly associated with the final product. Even their DoPs have a different job description then the camera crews. Just because one can do multiple jobs on smaller scale productions it doesn't make micromanaging trivialities mandatory. Doing a models makeup on my own would end in "epic fail" anyway... :-[


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 17, 2014)

agierke said:


> it shocks me sometimes the narrow point of view that is expressed about certain subjects and how little knowledge there is on this forum about professional photography.


If you're referring to "professional photography" of old or the the long-established photographers who still have big clients and can afford to hire multiple assistants, then yes, you're correct. As you say, though, that world is fading...


----------



## eml58 (Mar 17, 2014)

agierke said:


> it shocks me sometimes the narrow point of view that is expressed about certain subjects and how little knowledge there is on this forum about professional photography. i thought there were more professionals on this forum but it seems more and more there is not...or at least they remain quiet readers for the most part.



And with an opening paragraph like this, it's a pity you didn't remain one of those "quite readers for the most part".


----------



## IMG_0001 (Mar 18, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> ...
> By and large I would expect the photographer to do his own editing; in another thread recently someone stated that post process work is editing, not photography, but this couldn't be further from the truth.



This is because editing and post-processing are two different things. Post processing is adjusting white balance, cropping, leveling etc. Adjusting a single image or a batch.

Editing is going back over your work, choosing photos to keep and those to thrash. Building series, mixing images from different shoots to build up on their strength. Editing is as important as pressing the shutter because if you are not able to select your best photos or those that work best together, its like if you are not able to take great pictures. If you show all your images to the public, it will be overwhelmed, but not in a positive way. The viewer will judge your work on what is shown to them, not on what is on your hard drive.


----------



## Standard (Mar 18, 2014)

Albert Watson is one of my favorite photographers. He's well-known for his vintage silver gelatin, black-and-white portraits and his two books, _Cyclops,_ and _Maroc_ – both gorgeous coffee table books – are beautifully designed by an equally famous graphic designer, David Carson. Anyone familiar with Watson's work will not easily doubt his talent. I, for one, would be more than happy to be his assistant. The knowledge one gains from being around such masters is simply immeasurable.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Mar 18, 2014)

agierke said:


> it shocks me sometimes the narrow point of view that is expressed about certain subjects and how little knowledge there is on this forum about professional photography. i thought there were more professionals on this forum but it seems more and more there is not...or at least they remain quiet readers for the most part.



I'm a bit puzzled why you started an otherwise informative and enlightening post with such a condescending beginning. Having been such a respected and talented individual as you claim for so long, one would think you would have developed a better proof reading ability of posts such as this before you submit them.

I appreciate you sharing everything you did because it gives a great perspective into what jobs might be possible for others that might want to follow in that line of work. So often people assume that making a living as a photographer means you can only be the photographer. Your post shares an interesting alternative.

In future, perhaps when you observe a knowledge gap or ignorance of a subject, simply share your knowledge and let others benefit. Being ignorant isn't something to be ashamed of, it's simply what everyone is until they learn the things that make them less ignorant. Since you have been the receiver of so much experience and wisdom over the years, kindly pay it forward!


----------



## Taemobig (Mar 18, 2014)

RustyTheGeek said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > RustyTheGeek said:
> ...



Its actually the complete opposite, all the pros I've assisted are more than glad to teach me everything they know. They know the real secret to success is not just your creativity but your connections. Which leads me to the answer for the topic.

I was one of those assistants that you're talking about for 5 semi-famous/popular fashion photographers in L.A. I proved to all of them how hard I want to work by being the best assistant I can be (it also helped that I have a bit of talent). They notice, they pass on jobs to me that they don't have time for or don't want to do. I got published in a fashion magazine within 3 months, I got free access to 3 studios/lights/equipment in 6 months (they trusted me enough to give me keys), within 8 months one of my shoots was big enough to be nationally televised ( http://www.junmapue.com/view/Rwv/Videos#cPx3 ), by my 2nd year my 2nd mentor gave me a major client which let me shoot my first billboard, middle of my second year and I got hired to be Director of Photography for a couple of music videos (my first one debuted on BET). Currently on my 3rd year and I'm still surprised how I got here.

I rarely got paid for the assistant jobs I did but if I never did it then I would never have gotten the connections I have now. So now you see why us assistants do it. We know that's one of the fastest way to learn photography and get connections at the same time.


----------



## fatmanmedi (Mar 18, 2014)

Over the years i've shot just about everything that can be shot from landscapes to wedding to glamour and fashion, and yes even porn.

I've shot solo and with a team, i've shot stuff in the studio and on location.

Having assistants CAN make things easier but it can also make things harder, it all depends on the shoot and what they want to get out of the shoot. Some assistants are just there for the money, to them it's just a job that they do to pay the bills, those are the ones you want for the butt awful jobs, the ones where it's not so much about creativity it's about getting the job done, stock photo shoots, shooting products for advertising. The ones who want to be assistants as a way of learning the craft, to build a portfolio of material, those are the ones you want on the fun shoots, the shoots that you build contacts, build relations and expand their and your creative horizons. 

In relation to the opening question, "How do you become so famous that you have assistants to do it all for you?" You don't need to be famous, just be in the position to have the cashflow to be able to hire them.

I remember when i first started out, i was an assistant for a local photographer who was taking pics of art work for a book, i remember having to learn how to change film in film backs and do all the heavy lifting of art work so that she could just stand there and press the shutter release button, it's was hard work but it was the work that got me to understand what photography was all about. 

Hard graft!

fats


----------



## agierke (Mar 18, 2014)

> I'm a bit puzzled why you started an otherwise informative and enlightening post with such a condescending beginning.



the title of this thread and the presumptions made by the OP annoyed me. statements like "anyone could get excellent shots there - especially a Phase One." warrant a sharp response imo. it cheapens the often unseen efforts, experience and ability that many pro photographers bring to the table. 

i have generally steered clear of threads like these. the threads about Andreas Gursky's work are another example of presumptuous statements being bandied about that just exhibit ignorance. its one thing to have opinion...its another thing to marginalize a person or his work out of ignorance.

i carefully worded that opening statement so as not to completely disregard the presence and contributions of a number of members on this site and possibly jog a few more responses from professionals. i stand by the statement as i wrote it. there are many whom i enjoy and respect on these forums, both professional and amateur. Sporgon and Florian to name a few, as well as others.

and to be clear, i personally dont place myself anywhere near the experience and abilities of a great photographer. by my own estimation, i'm very far from where i want to be. but when all is said and done, i want to be able to say that i am a true expert in this field. someday. its because of this that i work very hard and keep an open mind towards others in my profession. i want to always be learning and improving and take pride in being able to contribute to the growth and success of those that i do work with.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Mar 18, 2014)

Hillsilly said:


> C'mon, the guy is over 70 years old. Give him a break! At least he's getting out and doing something he enjoys, and if he's got the ability to have other people do the hard lifting, good on him.


+1 I totally agree.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Mar 18, 2014)

GuyF said:


> Needless to say though, the results were superb. However, if you're familier with Skye, anyone could get excellent shots there - especially a Phase One.


Sorry, but that's just utter rubbish! Photography isn't just about doing donkey's work of carrying stuff and setting up etc ... I totally disagree with your comment that "anyone could get excellent shots there - especially a Phase One" ... that's like saying that all the special effects guys could have made the movie Jurassic Park and there was no need for Steven Spielberg ... any art (including photography) requires creative thinking, a vision and a plan to see the end product in your mind even before you go out there to shoot. In addition to all that you also need business acumen to market your work to be successful/famous ... no matter how many helping hands you have, they can never replace an artist's creative genius, vision and the ability portray that work in a manner that is appealing to the intended market/client.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 18, 2014)

Rienzphotoz said:


> GuyF said:
> 
> 
> > Needless to say though, the results were superb. However, if you're familier with Skye, anyone could get excellent shots there - especially a Phase One.
> ...


+1


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Mar 18, 2014)

agierke said:


> > I'm a bit puzzled why you started an otherwise informative and enlightening post with such a condescending beginning.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks *agierke*. That's a great explanation. This CR forum is the only one I mess with because most of the valued contributors like *Sporgon*, *Florian*, (et al, there are so many more) share so much good knowledge and the moderators do a good job of minimizing the BS and crap. Ignorance is why we all come here. To minimize it. And as I said at the start of this thread, this thread is interesting because it has the potential of enlightening me about something I've always wondered about. All we have are assumptions until we can replace them with facts.


----------



## wtlloyd (Mar 18, 2014)

Lemme 'splain it to you:

Glamour ON: Assistants!!
Glamour OFF: employees

wasn't that simple?


----------



## GuyF (Mar 18, 2014)

Crumbs, a variety of observations - thank you for them all.

However! I feel a number of comments have veered off course. I didn't dispute the requirement and value of having assistants in photography as a whole. My point was specifically aimed at _landscape_ photography by a respected professional. There is a clear destinction.

Every single one of us on this site will know of some corner of the globe that they would love to photograph. They can imagine the image they want in their head, they know what time of year to visit to ensure the type of light required (in the film, Watson visited Skye in October to ensure "heavy" skies and dramatic light). You may need a local guide to lead you to the ideal spot (i.e. assistance) but you would't let them set your gear up - perhaps some of you might!

I still stand by my original observation - landscape photography requires you to pick a spot, wait for the light, press the button. Did you apply the "rule of thirds" or do you subscribe to the "rules are there to be broken" school of thought? Finally, a medium format Phase One might give better results than your cameraphone.

It would seem a number of you wish to overcomplicate matters.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Mar 19, 2014)

GuyF said:


> Crumbs, a variety of observations - thank you for them all.
> 
> However! I feel a number of comments have veered off course. I didn't dispute the requirement and value of having assistants in photography as a whole. My point was specifically aimed at _landscape_ photography by a respected professional. There is a clear destinction.
> 
> ...


The replies you have received so far, from many CR members, do not "wish to overcomplicate matters", unfortunately it your complete ignorance of what it takes to be a professional artist/photographer, that is complicating things in your mind. First you say "_anyone could get excellent shots there - especially a Phase One_" , than you say "_a medium format Phase One *might* give better results than your cameraphone_" : ... you are either really that thick to understand what the other members are saying or you are deliberately trying to belittle a 72 year old senior professional photographer for not carrying/setting his big tripods, cameras, umbrella, laptops and what not  ... if you really think that anyone can get excellent shots there, why don't you show your images of Skye, next to the images made by Albert Watson ... so you can justify your claim of "anyone can get excellent shots there". :
FYI, one does not become a famous photographer for cribbing on online forums about other famous & successful photographers ... to be a famous and successful artist it takes passion for your art, even when you are 72 years old, to go out there and make awesome images and than have the business acumen to market those images to your client.


----------



## GuyF (Mar 19, 2014)

Rienzphotoz - okay, you've made it clear you didn't understand my post at all. Time to move on.


----------



## EricFiskCGD (Mar 19, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > GuyF said:
> ...



+1 more.

"...they can never replace an artist's creative genius, vision and the ability portray that work in a manner that is appealing to the intended market/client." If that's not true than Photography has no place for me.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Mar 20, 2014)

GuyF said:


> Rienzphotoz - okay, you've made it clear you didn't understand my post at all. Time to move on.


If you stop trolling, people will move on.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Mar 20, 2014)

agierke said:


> it shocks me sometimes the narrow point of view that is expressed about certain subjects and how little knowledge there is on this forum about professional photography. i thought there were more professionals on this forum but it seems more and more there is not...or at least they remain quiet readers for the most part.



I was not aware that CR was restricted to professional photographers. I thought it was a forum for people to whine about Canon gear.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Mar 20, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> agierke said:
> 
> 
> > it shocks me sometimes the narrow point of view that is expressed about certain subjects and how little knowledge there is on this forum about professional photography. i thought there were more professionals on this forum but it seems more and more there is not...or at least they remain quiet readers for the most part.
> ...



Yeah, it gets kinda cheesy sometimes too. ;D


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 20, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> I was not aware that CR was restricted to professional photographers.


For the US members: Only CPS is restricted to professional photographers


----------

