Herman Surkis wrote:

Sorry.

But, I must agree.

Socializing and marketing will LIKELY take you much further than talent.

Sad, but true.

No it won't. If you suck, no amount of ass kissing will get you there.

If you're good and don't put yourself out there HOW will anyone know?

But don't think an editor of art director will burn their hand by putting it out there de you if you're a crappy artist. They didn't get there by being stupid and recommending friends.

That's another lively excuse from mediocre people: you need to know people and have connections.

Well I have news for them: it won't work if you suck.

It's really that simple

If you think you're good and it's been ten years... Think again

You're either NOT tat good or you're doing something wrong, because in the way YOU make the connections.

Herman Surkis wrote:
Sorry.

But, I must agree.

Socializing and marketing will LIKELY take you much further than talent.

Sad, but true.

Its not sad at all, just levels the playing field a little and let's those of us who aren't as creative compete for a piece of the action.

Not saying a person dosent need talent, but that talent is sometimes overrated and social/selling skills underrated online.



Andrew Thomas Evans
www.andrewthomasevans.com

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:

No it won't. If you suck, no amount of ass kissing will get you there.

If you're good and don't put yourself out there HOW will anyone know?

Example; there are 5 good car photographers all quiet equal... who got the job  ? the one that paid for the art dir fun time... yep and she did suck.

WIP wrote:
Example; there are 5 good car photographers all quiet equal... who got the job  ? the one that paid for the art dir fun time... yep and she did suck.

Wow... Nicely done

Personally I know how I get work without sucking dick

I'm happy to know that's how you think woman get ahead in this industry so I can refrain from talking to you again.

Is this your excuse because you can't shoot more than plain images? That woman suck dick to get ahead? maybe you should give it a try and tell us all how you did.

I'm sure more than one art director is eager for you to try to suck your way up

Tho... With your photography and looks, I doubt it would help you.



Oh btw if it wasn't totally clear with my post

Fuck you

(Note for mods: you can ban my ass of this forum when ever you want but if ou allow his chauvinistic post expect some rage from people with half a brain)

Andrew Thomas Evans wrote:
Its not sad at all, just levels the playing field a little and let's those of us who aren't as creative compete for a piece of the action.

Not saying a person dosent need talent, but that talent is sometimes overrated and social/selling skills underrated online.

i don’t know if you’re being sarcastic but it’s a really really bad thing whenever mediocrity + good promotion trumps genuine talent. and to say it’s actually a good thing because it helps level the playing field - i don’t care if it’s photography or music or architecture - that’s a ridiculous, depressing position to take.

“look at that ugly building”

“oh, i don’t know. i think it’s kinda cool when someone with no talent gets a chance to design something for a change instead of one of those, you know, brilliant architects.”

and btw - i‘m not saying that hobbyists and dilettantes shouldn’t derive tremendous pleasure from their work. my guitar playing sucks but i love to play. does that mean i deserve to be taken seriously because i really wish i was great? of course not. it means i should keep playing for the sheer enjoyment of it, and bow by head and tip my hat when a real guitarist walks in the room.

WIP wrote:
Example; there are 5 good car photographers all quiet equal... who got the job  ? the one that paid for the art dir fun time... yep and she did suck.

Even if you can find one example from the post-80s crazy time of advertising (though I tend to doubt the story) you basically are saying that an Art Director is willing to put their livelihood basically in jeopardy (and the profit margin of the agency he works) for on the line for a brief good time. But wait…you said all 5 were qualified. Your logic is flawed and so I think your story is too.

Personally I have not met any art directors that I feel would be willing put their careers at that kind of risk. All it would take is one assistant telling one person on the client side to end a job and account.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:

Wow... Nicely done

Personally I know how I get work without sucking dick

I'm happy to know that's how you think woman get ahead in this industry so I can refrain from talking to you again.

Is this your excuse because you can't shoot more than plain images? That woman suck dick to get ahead? maybe you should give it a try and tell us all how you did.

I'm sure more than one art director is eager for you to try to suck your way up

Tho... With your photography and looks, I doubt it would help you.



Oh btw if it wasn't totally clear with my post

Fuck you

(Note for mods: you can ban my ass of this forum when ever you want but if ou allow his chauvinistic post expect some rage from people with half a brain)

+1

Dan Howell wrote:

Even if you can find one example from the post-80s crazy time of advertising (though I tend to doubt the story) you basically are saying that an Art Director is willing to put their livelihood basically in jeopardy (and the profit margin of the agency he works) for on the line for a brief good time. But wait…you said all 5 were qualified. Your logic is flawed and so I think your story is too.

Personally I have not met any art directors that I feel would be willing put their careers at that kind of risk. All it would take is one assistant telling one person on the client side to end a job and account.

This guy is always trying to stir things up in threads.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:

Wow... Nicely done

Personally I know how I get work without sucking dick

I'm happy to know that's how you think woman get ahead in this industry so I can refrain from talking to you again.

Is this your excuse because you can't shoot more than plain images? That woman suck dick to get ahead? maybe you should give it a try and tell us all how you did.

I'm sure more than one art director is eager for you to try to suck your way up

Tho... With your photography and looks, I doubt it would help you.



Oh btw if it wasn't totally clear with my post

Fuck you

(Note for mods: you can ban my ass of this forum when ever you want but if ou allow his chauvinistic post expect some rage from people with half a brain)

Next time I'll write it in big letters so you understand what I've written.

Ok one sentence at a time.
5 photographers all quiet capable.
One photographer pays for art dir to have some fun.
Fun came in the form of a prostitute.
Appeals to the art dir... photographer gets the job.

But it's kinda interesting how you read my post and showed your true colours.
Diplomacy is one of the keys of how to make it in any job and it's all a game, the game of golf with a client a lot of business is conducted that way, the odd meal ect ect.
The best don't always make its the ones that know how to play the game. Some do  ' make it ' without playing the game but they are very few and far between.

Most photographers can produce a pack shot all very similar... but one puts on a very nice lunch.... deal done.

Chuckarelei wrote:
Ok, I want to be an art director now.

:p

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5joO4EvH1PA

This might help.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:
No it won't. If you suck, no amount of ass kissing will get you there.

Lol is this a joke? Of course that works.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:
No it won't. If you suck, no amount of ass kissing will get you there.

If you're good and don't put yourself out there HOW will anyone know?

But don't think an editor of art director will burn their hand by putting it out there de you if you're a crappy artist. They didn't get there by being stupid and recommending friends.

That's another lively excuse from mediocre people: you need to know people and have connections.

Well I have news for them: it won't work if you suck.

It's really that simple

If you think you're good and it's been ten years... Think again

You're either NOT tat good or you're doing something wrong, because in the way YOU make the connections.

+1

This thread is taking a funny turn. We went from talking about model's measurements to talking about photographers who blame marketing on not being able to work with AD’s. I shoot an ad agency. AD's should be looked at as VERY talented graphic designers. Sometimes they finish the whole key art and sometimes they send it to a finisher (re-toucher). There aren’t no lame portfolios that get reviewed or get interviews. You really think they’re gonna risk their jobs or a major client relationship and pick a photographer who has a charming personality. LOL. As a matter of fact, AD’s are so busy that it’s a rare occasion someone gets an interview. They don’t have time to socialize. Interviews are reserved for photographers that already have major clients. Natalia does have a point. More people should listen to what she says….

Tony Lawrence wrote:
My apologies.   I thought you were speaking about my points.   Eliza.. if you see this.   Once you reach a certain level of skill and sometimes before who do.   Your models look is almost more important then your ability.   I've gone to agencies with friends who were told to not show certain models in their books and offered models from the agency.   As counter intuitive  as it may sound being creative sounds great but advertising directors and many clients want consistent professional work.   Chicago's; Jack Perno said it best.   Its about the girls.   http://www.jackperno.com/print-1

Several weeks ago there was a discussion about having more new members and some past members come back to the forums.   A member has started a thread that in my mind is not that controversial.   Many careers take around ten years to get going in.  For some its less.   For some its never.   After reading some of the replies I wouldn't return either and if I were considering starting a thread or adding to one.   I wouldn't.   MM has truly become a toxic place.

Have a nice day everyone.

If it's about the girls how did this,happen?




Steve McCurry campaign for Louis Vitton.


He also did the Pirelli calendar




With the top models.


If course, his portfolio was just choc a bloc with the best industry standard models before that wasn't it?


So there you go if you are brilliant you can end up shooting the top models and campaigns without even trying. Or is,some idiot going to suggest Steve McCurry goes in for ass licking and laying on lunches to these industry people?

Herman Surkis wrote:
Eliza, although I agree, I suspect that is even tougher. In my experience, and the experience of a few people I know, most AD's have the creativity of an army ant following the crowd. Thus you would have to be extraordinary to capture the attention of the 1% of AD's who would recognize talent that can be molded to their needs. I really like your example, but Tony's way is the easier of the two. They prefer to hire those that are doing what they understand, only perhaps better than the other person.

"In creative industry, sometimes success can happen through doing things differently to everyone else, not the same."

I agree, but it is rare.
The usual seems to be "more of the same".

Herman. With all due respect.
I used to go to Marcos exhibitions, and Steve McCurrys exhibitions in London.
The reason these ADs and campaign people and mag editors have no attention span is because they are inundated with people sticking stuff under their nose, by email etc. Then you go to these exhibitions, and they are there. You want to get noticed sometimes you have to go your own way until it's them chasing you.

Sure theres a long way to get to the top if doing things by climbing ladders. Other times, your creativity can be recognized via,other avenues.


It's particularly true in creative industry. The whole punk thing for example . There was a fast track to getting noticed across fashion art and music because it was happening as a movement without any ladders or arse licking or doing things the recognized way. The marketing people couldn't get enough of it.

As I said you are sometimes better off doing your own thing. Follow the crowd and you'll find an awful lot of people fighting to get on the bottom rung of the ladder following the crowd.

Keila Sone wrote:
Well, you left out hair or hair/beauty industry and yes we actually always called it that.

All OP post applies to hair,I totally see many,many,many out of school and self taught hairstylist...what...self taught...ok

in general in hair industry 5 years plus on the floor or set after schooling and assisting for a year or 3.Thats what it take to actually start to understand how to create,cut or color hair,it's a-lot of practice on different  texture & lengths the same techniques with different tools,and then doing other techniques until you don't most if want became great at it,color is even harder cause you need to understand chemistry and how it apply to all hair types in all condition and eviroments(like hard water,cold air,etc)
Second then there is latent: the ability to be able to visualize and conceptualize beauty without guide.

my one co-work is  mediocre at styling hair,she great as a cutter,but average at styling,she did a few bridal hair client at the salon,all look the same,all look 1980 cinciañera up-do,not modern. she done freelance 3 bride hair,same style as the salon,she know I do a lot bridal and also thats I take our co-work Amy with me on bridal and runway,because she is actually amazing...so now my mediocre co-work wants to have a bridal & special events glam team business,she thinks it so easy to just break into the bridal market and also going client for special events like MET's gala,lol with her style...I tried to tell her that the bridal business is saturated with so many amazing and published artist and that is not that easy to just build web site and expect people to book you,even if you have ad campaigns,in which kinda brush off and kinda told me with my published work and Amy's latent it would be easy,she's actually  counting on riding on AMY and I coat-tails to make money for herself,naturally take a percentage for having the ideas...this mentally seem to be everywhere,no one wants to actually work hard but have everyone just live with their desire to not work at it and step on someone talented to make it.
same does for editorial work,I worked with many hairstylists that think editorial hair will be easy because they can done bridal or regular styling for years at a salon setting and I'd taken stylists from work to do runway with me...not everyone gets it or can do...thats why it call art or talent,there somethings you can teach people like taste and aesthetic vision,because not everyone can do or gets it as easy. They might need more years of training under many different people,but more importantly the understanding the all artistic fields are a learning process that never ends that what make it fun and why most people give up as they think "oh Im this good,no need to learn anymore" or no need to understand other aspect of the industry. Just MUA working in producing need to understand lighting and camera lenses to understand how that will affect the visual on film.I think a lot of photographers and models would benefit in acting lesson,as to understand emotional connection with visuals expression,now I meet a self taught fashion & beauty photographer who is amazing,he told me he never when to school or train,he just read books and knows what look good,he's been published many times over,he is what we call talented,it's a gift that not many people are born with,however in big city like NYC/LA/LONDON you see more cause all great artists and latents are hovering together to great great art. and yes so people should just do for fun,why not...I wanted to be a singer since I was child,I used to make stages and play at latent show with my cousin,but as I got into my teens,I actually hear my recorded voice,not beautiful like my mom or aunts that have natural gift,I even took singing lessons;thought I need to know how to sign property and write music,but I only sound good in the shower,it still makes me sad that I suck,but I sing by my self so as not kill my B/F ears and I still write songs and poetry,but I have not voice ...

Im not crazy about social media or marketing,I find myself think about it as necessary evil in my life,as I hate tweeting and it takes so much time out my life,I still do it. I understand without marketing there not fame and with no fame,no fortune.I actually started reading books on branding. the fact is that you need all: branding to get the job,actual talent and skills to deliver the promise, and personally to get rebooked and recommendations,its the nature of the beast in all fields,true is that we humans value social interacting more than anything,its how we elect presidents for sakes,whoever is more likable will win.Ultamelly talented introvert or shy often can not express them self via conversation with other humans in upbeat and clear manner and are view as odd or unfriendly which unfortunately will affect the views emotional opions of the work. On other hang if your shy or introvert, the internet ages has free you as most humans now just view the work online and communicate via email and text.However once they worked with it will be obvious because everyone will feel odd in the room since you can tell your acting unti social or rude.
.
Its true that there is a lot work being offer for free or "exposure"specially in big cities,but as the saying does " you get what you pay for"  if I tell Starbucks that I think their bitter coffee is worth $1.00 they are happy to point me to Dunken Donuts and are basically saying, 'great than you don't get be part of our club,goodbye.'

ok end of rant

Interesting to hear a perspective from hair stylist.

I have worked a few times with one of the most well known avant garde  creative hair styling teams here. They do editorials, campaigns fashion shows and even movie work. UK industry people here will know who I mean. But while they may do their own creative visionary work themselves for love, they run a busy salon too. So they can and do charge for working in those areas. I imagine they get approached a lot for tf from people here but its not going to happen unless it's their vision. It's true you get what you pay for. Its taken them years to build up to that, but they are also both visionaries too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsK37F3GGdw

Alabaster Crowley wrote:

Lol is this a joke? Of course that works.

Sure it does. Keep telling yourself that

Alabaster Crowley wrote:

Lol is this a joke? Of course that works.

I think the most you can really say is that talent with personality will take you further than talent without personality. Anyone who makes proclamations that one route or another is a lock is fooling themselves.

Dan Howell wrote:

I think the most you can really say is that talent with personality will take you further than talent without personality. Anyone who makes proclamations that one route or another is a lock is fooling themselves.

I agree!

Dan Howell wrote:

I think the most you can really say is that talent with personality will take you further than talent without personality. Anyone who makes proclamations that one route or another is a lock is fooling themselves.

It's exactly like that.

I don't believe in "talent" as in innate quality but skills, hard work, education, culture and personality.

Alabaster Crowley wrote:
Lol is this a joke? Of course that works.

Well and social media marketing.

How do you think good/average retouchers are able to do all these workshops all the time? They make it sound like they are working in the "industry" get some followers and start to plant seeds for workshops and dvds and stuff. This all without working for a ad agency or anything really to do with any real work most of us would see. But, ask them about it and the ads they worked on (notice how they can't post or give tear sheets) are all over the place in large mags and stuff.

Like I said before, marketing can trump skills.




Andrew Thomas Evans
www.andrewthomasevans.com

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:

It's exactly like that.

I don't believe in "talent" as in innate quality but skills, hard work, education, culture and personality.

Some people have a natural talent for certain things.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

Some people have a natural talent for certain things.

True!
Some have talent for Mathematics or a talent for speaking or for music...etc.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:

No it won't. If you suck, no amount of ass kissing will get you there.

If you're good and don't put yourself out there HOW will anyone know?

But don't think an editor of art director will burn their hand by putting it out there de you if you're a crappy artist. They didn't get there by being stupid and recommending friends.

That's another lively excuse from mediocre people: you need to know people and have connections.

Well I have news for them: it won't work if you suck.

It's really that simple

If you think you're good and it's been ten years... Think again

You're either NOT tat good or you're doing something wrong, because in the way YOU make the connections.

Someone recently posted a phrase here about increasing one's perceived value. That's really what gets you work - charging a rate that's at or under your perceived value.

I can't cite anyone who sucks who has a high perceived value, but there's no definition of what creates the perceived value.

Did Brad Pitt's Vanity Fair photos run because he was good? No, it's because the name guarantees curiosity. When they happen to be good that adds to it.

Editor's are going to hire/select photos based on what will sell. If you have an exclusive set, if you have a name, or if they have an idea they believe will sell and they think you will deliver photos that are the closest to their vision, you get work.

You have to be just nice enough that people don't reject you because they can't stand being around you. If you manage to be nice enough that people want to be around you, that can make up of some deficiencies elsewhere - and you may get hired over someone better than you because the editor is simply sick of that person.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:

Wow... Nicely done

Personally I know how I get work without sucking dick

I'm happy to know that's how you think woman get ahead in this industry so I can refrain from talking to you again.

Is this your excuse because you can't shoot more than plain images? That woman suck dick to get ahead? maybe you should give it a try and tell us all how you did.

I'm sure more than one art director is eager for you to try to suck your way up

Tho... With your photography and looks, I doubt it would help you.



Oh btw if it wasn't totally clear with my post

Fuck you

(Note for mods: you can ban my ass of this forum when ever you want but if ou allow his chauvinistic post expect some rage from people with half a brain)

I read this totally differently. I read this as fun time meaning social/schmoozing and being liked and "suck" being an adjective to describe the quality of work, not a verb.


I may have totally misread it though.

Dan Howell wrote:

Even if you can find one example from the post-80s crazy time of advertising (though I tend to doubt the story) you basically are saying that an Art Director is willing to put their livelihood basically in jeopardy (and the profit margin of the agency he works) for on the line for a brief good time. But wait…you said all 5 were qualified. Your logic is flawed and so I think your story is too.

Personally I have not met any art directors that I feel would be willing put their careers at that kind of risk. All it would take is one assistant telling one person on the client side to end a job and account.

Some aren't at risk, or don't think they are.

People are human and have emotional needs that drive their behavior or things like drug addiction.

The vast majority will be people earning the work and not blowing their opportunities with their personalities, but there's no question that there are exceptions all over the place.

I'm sure there are people who've gotten jobs because the editor hire them out of spite for someone else.

But that only gets someone an opportunity, not a career.

Alabaster Crowley wrote:

Lol is this a joke? Of course that works.

It might get you an opportunity, but you're not getting rehired if you don't deliver.

Eliza C  new portfolio wrote:

Herman. With all due respect.
I used to go to Marcos exhibitions, and Steve McCurrys exhibitions in London.
The reason these ADs and campaign people and mag editors have no attention span is because they are inundated with people sticking stuff under their nose, by email etc. Then you go to these exhibitions, and they are there. You want to get noticed sometimes you have to go your own way until it's them chasing you.

Sure theres a long way to get to the top if doing things by climbing ladders. Other times, your creativity can be recognized via,other avenues.


It's particularly true in creative industry. The whole punk thing for example . There was a fast track to getting noticed across fashion art and music because it was happening as a movement without any ladders or arse licking or doing things the recognized way. The marketing people couldn't get enough of it.

As I said you are sometimes better off doing your own thing. Follow the crowd and you'll find an awful lot of people fighting to get on the bottom rung of the ladder following the crowd.

Exactly. They're so flooded that they have to ignore it all and search for themselves.

Or, they will accept submissions from qualified, trusted people who have a track record of making good recommendations.

Andrew Thomas Evans wrote:

Well and social media marketing.

How do you think good/average retouchers are able to do all these workshops all the time? They make it sound like they are working in the "industry" get some followers and start to plant seeds for workshops and dvds and stuff. This all without working for a ad agency or anything really to do with any real work most of us would see. But, ask them about it and the ads they worked on (notice how they can't post or give tear sheets) are all over the place in large mags and stuff.

Like I said before, marketing can trump skills.




Andrew Thomas Evans
www.andrewthomasevans.com

That's how they advertise, but what really gets them work is third party endorsements/word of mouth and making people feel like they've learned something.

When I say "feel" I mean you can teach people something but if they aren't distinctly aware that they learned something, they don't attribute it to you.


The most successful educators are successful because they're good educators.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

Some people have a natural talent for certain things.

I've never met anyone like that.

I've met some freakishly/jaw droppingly great people, but when you really get to know them you discover they've spent far, far more time than anyone else you know working on the most important aspect of what they do.

WIP wrote:

Next time I'll write it in big letters so you understand what I've written.

Ok one sentence at a time.
5 photographers all quiet capable.
One photographer pays for art dir to have some fun.
Fun came in the form of a prostitute.
Appeals to the art dir... photographer gets the job.

But it's kinda interesting how you read my post and showed your true colours.
Diplomacy is one of the keys of how to make it in any job and it's all a game, the game of golf with a client a lot of business is conducted that way, the odd meal ect ect.
The best don't always make its the ones that know how to play the game. Some do  ' make it ' without playing the game but they are very few and far between.

Most photographers can produce a pack shot all very similar... but one puts on a very nice lunch.... deal done.

It's very common in many industries to seal the deal by getting your customer laid. I once worked at a company where it was normal for the sales guys to add the words "prostitute fees" on a expense claim.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

Some people have a natural talent for certain things.

There's no evidence for that. That's why I said: I don't believe in talent.

Mikey McMichaels wrote:

Someone recently posted a phrase here about increasing one's perceived value. That's really what gets you work - charging a rate that's at or under your perceived value.

I can't cite anyone who sucks who has a high perceived value, but there's no definition of what creates the perceived value.

Did Brad Pitt's Vanity Fair photos run because he was good? No, it's because the name guarantees curiosity. When they happen to be good that adds to it.

Editor's are going to hire/select photos based on what will sell. If you have an exclusive set, if you have a name, or if they have an idea they believe will sell and they think you will deliver photos that are the closest to their vision, you get work.

You have to be just nice enough that people don't reject you because they can't stand being around you. If you manage to be nice enough that people want to be around you, that can make up of some deficiencies elsewhere - and you may get hired over someone better than you because the editor is simply sick of that person.

We agree

Mikey McMichaels wrote:

I read this totally differently. I read this as fun time meaning social/schmoozing and being liked and "suck" being an adjective to describe the quality of work, not a verb.


I may have totally misread it though.

Apparently he meant a prostitute, not that he stated that before.

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:

Apparently he meant a prostitute, not that he stated that before.

Details are such nuisances!