Solas wrote:
You replied directly to my comment about art, you called it out as people who did not "understand commercial rates" .. bullshit.

I did no such thing, I responded to another.  You are conflating two different posts.

Solas wrote:
It's not ignorance that you photographers need to make money to recoup your fancy hasselblads, it's the fact that you can get the same look.. anywhere else.. as a headshot client *.. for a lot cheaper. The lighting is not unique, hence why I said a college kid could do it for $80 with 4 reflectors, an overhead softbox and a continuous light.

You're wrong.  The fact that you don't understand why you're wrong, does not make you right.  As has been pointed out by myself and others in this thread, his work sells for more reasons than his lighting.

Giacomo Cirrincioni wrote:
5) I'm tired, I'm not feeling well and I apparently should stay off this site for a while.

Solas wrote:
That's cute.

Why don't we just play a little game I like to call "Hide and go fuck yourself."  I'll hide now...

Giacomo Cirrincioni wrote:
5) I'm tired, I'm not feeling well and I apparently should stay off this site for a while.
Why don't we just play a little game I like to call "Hide and go fuck yourself."  I'll hide now...

...and go fuck yourself?

All right then...you have fun with that.

Giacomo Cirrincioni wrote:
Why don't we just play a little game I like to call "Hide and go fuck yourself."  I'll hide now...

I will remember this line... it's an instant MM classic, as it was theda's "Go play in traffic!" back in the days... 


P.S.: Solas, my comment has nothing to do with you, btw.!

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Yikes!   Things turned ugly fast. 

snip

/quote]

That's the MM.

Solas wrote:

In 30 seconds I found about 5 photographers who do the same look as you do, the same over-photo shopped "cinematic" look. I bet if I contacted them, and said.. hey I'm working with so and so motors, we want you to do an ad. What do you think would happen? I'd likely get a medley of responses. Someone would send me an excel template of a budget. Another would be "$1500/day" and maybe a few more would ask for more info (ding ding).

Not for one second would the price matter as much as the interpersonal skills and attitude of the photographer.

Maybe something to think about.

Your work is not unique.
His work is not unique.

His market: is photographers, with the desire to make their work sellable.. like his.. without recognizing that THEY ARE HIS MARKET. Buy my $300 DVD. I'll teach you to be me. NO.. because his brand, his work? It's nothing to do with his photography. It's his interpersonal skills, it's who he knows, it's his marketing and influencer position as HIM.

You? All I know your work for is for your comments on model mayhem. That's all I think of when I view your work.

I agree for the most part.
Please be careful, I suspect the "you" is a generic you. Someone will take it personally. This has come back to bite me on more than one occasion, so now I always add "you (generic)", unless I am really taking a shot at somebody.

Despite the fact that in certain areas I will put him down, mostly because his self-promotion is now coming off as arrogant now, I have learned some stuff from his free videos.

My comment about his connecting with his subjects may have come off as a throwaway, but was far from it. That is the most important part of an artist. I agree that technical skills are secondary, especially in this area.

In many ways he reminds me of Tony Robbins and the "Shamwam" guy on late night telly.
His marketing is amazing. If I were going commercial, I would take his courses to learn to sell myself.
(marketing and business is probably the greatest failing of photographers)

In some respect his headshots work because they are identifiable. The producer/director/casting agent recognize a Peter headshot, and know this actor is serious enough to spend top dollar on his shot. This person is serious. Anybody remember "Dress For Success". Similar. The telling everybody about all his expensive equipment makes him sound like a success, therefore he must be good.

I admit to being jealous of how good he is at branding and marketing. And of course the more famous he becomes the easier it is to relate to, and connect with actors for whom dropping $1300 on a new headshot is no big deal. And for those who struggle, if you see the big guys go to XYZ, if you can scrape up the money, who are you going to go to? "If so and so uses him/her, then they must be good".

"His market: is photographers, with the desire to make their work sellable.. like his.. without recognizing that THEY ARE HIS MARKET. Buy my $300 DVD. I'll teach you to be me. NO.. because his brand, his work? It's nothing to do with his photography. It's his interpersonal skills, it's who he knows, it's his marketing and influencer position as HIM."

yep, yep, and yep. Especially the first sentence.

Want to see something funny, watch him trying to teach the "squinch" to a roomful of people.
Reminds me of Tyra's "shmize".
Interestingly the both are somewhat valid. Tried a bunch of that with a model wearing A gorgeous Venetian mask that showed only her eyes. Subtle, but noticeable.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
What saddens me is the lack of support we give each other.
//snip//

I often wonder how successful some of us would be if instead of spending time putting  each other down we invested that energy into our work.

Funny thing is... I have made a thread about this, including the put-downs of famous photographers and MM'ers in the fora...

...TEN YEARS AGO in 2006:  What's with the "What's with the [...]?" threads?   

There is something to be said about the "stability" of the general behavior of many photographers on here...

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I often wonder how successful some of us would be if instead of spending time putting  each other down we invested that energy into our work.   Certainly looking at Hurley's work its professional but not memorable.   https://peterhurley.com/photography/womens-headshots    He sells videos.   He teaches in person.   He's constantly building his brand.   Tyler Perry is a horrible director yet he continues to make films.   He is tireless.   There are much better Black directors around but how many have their own production companies?   How many own studios?   It all started with his Madea plays which were pure crap.   John Singleton is a much better director.   Where are his films?

One of my personal favorite shooters is the late Arnold Newman.   http://arnoldnewman.com/content/portraits-0    In my view Hurley is focused on making money over producing works of art.   What saddens me is the lack of support we give each other.

why do we have to automatically like something because they make money? Because they are photographers? That makes no sense.

What about cars? Just because tesla's sold out till 2019, we have to all like tesla? How about Ford ? ford has made cars since 1903.. they still have a company today. Millions of their cars on the road. Not everyone likes ford, buys ford, etc. lot of people purely don't like nor will ever drive a ford.

It's called having preference.

udor wrote:
There is something to be said about the "stability" of the general behavior of many photographers on here...

I wonder about the stability of many photography careers on here myself..widespread technical faults littering their portfolios, nothing unique or stand-out-ish at all, images so photoshopped they may as well be graphic designers, embossed logos designed in 10 minutes in paintshop pro, fruity borders and digital frames on their images.. yet they'll be all "full time pro in the big city for 20 years" .. despite a million people in the city do their type of photography, often for a lot cheaper.. they still get around.

whatever, just because they're successful doesn't mean you have to automatically like their work. Good for them that they do that. In peter's case, that isn't him (nor anyone in particular responding).. he has a fairly solid presentation look that is simple, not highly technical, a style that can be taught (for $300 a dvd).

Marketing. Reputation. Interpersonal skills. Sales. Relationship management..  Maybe just enough people in just the right market telling everyone they're the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Lifetouch? Been in business since 1936, shooting school portraits. Probably successful at what they do but there is nothing in particular that is unique about their product. You can't even really call them photographers, the camera is all set up and dialed in by a standard SOP for every shoot. Like at any department store

Herman Surkis wrote:
He is good...
Not as great as he thinks he is.
Not as innovative as he thinks he is.
Worth $1000 a sitting...no.

But damn it all, he is a great self promoter.
And he really hits it as a motivational speaker (even if it often comes off like a late night K-Tel sales pitch).

He is established and doing his thing. Are you asking for a string of unsolicited critiques here? Any particular reason?

For what its worth Sue Bryce advocates charging well for her boudoir shoots and when I first came into modeling, looking for tf shoots, there were a couple women photographers in Fairbanks, Alaska who were willing to shoot me, for about 1500 a session. WTF? Not what I was looking for but, hey, that was 4 years ago even. So, a market is a market. So..those ladies, I'd gladly critique the heck out of for charging.

As for Mr. Hurley, I enjoyed watching his videos for free on B&H youtube, found them informative and he is a good speaker funny, confidant but not too cocky. What is wrong with that?

Now, would "I" pay him? I don't need headshots so no but, if I did and if I could afford it??? I dunno.

Jen
edit: heck yes, I would... if I needed acting headshots I'd put it in my budget to get them done by him.

Brian Diaz wrote:

Have you ever seen a movie or a TV show where a good actor gives a terrible performance?  In many cases, that's caused by bad directing.

When you're shooting headshots, it's your job to get a performance out of the actor.  You have to direct.  They're playing the part of themselves, and frankly, that's something a lot of actors got into the business to avoid.  It can be a terrifying and highly emotional experience, especially considering that many actors are flat broke and headshots are an absolutely necessary investment if they want to be taken seriously enough no to be flat broke anymore.  They have 2-3 hours to give the single performance that will determine the next 6-12 months of their lives.

That's a lot of pressure on the actor, which means a lot of work for the photographer.

If someone pays $1,000 for a headshot, and that headshot gets him and audition that leads to a $50,000 commercial, wouldn't you consider the price of the headshot to be extremely affordable?

++ Wonderfully put Brian.

Jen

Zack Zoll wrote:
Let me put if this way:  most agree that your average Porsche is better than your average VW. I'd take a Boxter over a GTI any day, unless I had a dog.

But is a cheap Porsche better than a high-end VW? The Cayenne and Toureg are almost identical. I think the interior might be different.

But lots of people buy the Cayenne, even though they pay more for the same vehicle.

And that is why Peter Hurley gets his rates. Trying to break it down by value misses the point, because people with that much money aren't generally value shoppers.

I did' t want to speak about someone's work , I was only curios why many people think that $1000 is expensive for that kind of photography.

I will tell you average cost of one good studio in cities like NY, London, Paris, Geneve etc.

1. Rent of large space if you want great location in the city - around $4000-$5000 per month
2. One employee, your assistant who knows job perfect  , photography, who can answer on phone, etc at least $4000 per month
3. Electricity, one zillion other cost from $500-$1000
4. Your own salary as a photographer /owner with only $4000 per month ( which is nothing by the way if you live in such a expensive cities) .
5. What about taxes?
6. What about serious investments in interior, , guest rooms, kitchen ,cameras, lenses, lighting, computers , softwares?

So your cost will be around +/- $14000 per month if you want to run any serious business with your own studio.

$14000 divided with 22 working days per month - your daily cost is around $600 per day.

So if you shoot with $1000 per day you are dead in business .

Or another comparation, these above is to own just an average good . solid studio.

If you want to hire large high end studio with equipment like Hasselblad , Phase One, where you will be able to shoot automotive, cars, tracks  etc  , daily rent is from $3000-$5000 , just for studio

That is a professional commercial photography business , rates and how things work .

That's why I ask why so many people think that $1000 day shooting rate , especially with post production including is expensive.
Actually it is very cheap.

Best

Nico Simon Princely wrote:
If you're getting paid $XXXX then you are worth $XXXX it's as simple as that. The market will determine the perceived Value/Value. Contrary to what the average person believes. Some people have money, and want what they believe to be the best, and will not be happy shooting with someone else. There are also people that do not liked sales or discounts and enjoy paying prices that are high just because others can not afford to.

+1

Solas wrote:
I've never cared for his work, mildly curious how he stands out in a big market shooting the same boring headshot and making it appealing, when any college kid with the same set up could do it for $80 anyway. The most unique thing about his headshots is the fruity-catchlight in the eyes of all his subjects, mostly caused from those near softboxes surrounding the model.

His work says nothing, but I guess it's not meant to. It's meant to be a staple .. not really art at all.. something reliable that is needed, or well.. i guess in the land of the hypercommercial you kinda get made to think that.

Commercial headshots are not meant to be art.

And it doesn't really matter if you like his work -- as long as his headshots get his clients work and the casting directors like them that is really all that matters.

If he can command $1000 for a headshot more power to him.

Solas wrote:

why do we have to automatically like something because they make money? Because they are photographers? That makes no sense.

What about cars? Just because tesla's sold out till 2019, we have to all like tesla? How about Ford ? ford has made cars since 1903.. they still have a company today. Millions of their cars on the road. Not everyone likes ford, buys ford, etc. lot of people purely don't like nor will ever drive a ford.

It's called having preference.

Wow.... who peed in your cheerios.   You have every right to not like Hurley's work.   What I don't feel is helpful is when we put each other down.   ..." In 30 seconds I found about 5 photographers who do the same look as you do, the same over-photo shopped "cinematic" look. "    This illustrates why some of the working shooters don't post at all in the forums.   Who wants to be insulted.   Personally I'm happy for Hurley.   I wish he'd join MM and give us tips.   Of course he'd have to possibly hear from you about how shit*y a photographer he is.   I'll assume your having a bad day though.   Shame about the cheerios.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
Wow.... who peed in your cheerios.   You have every right to not like Hurley's work.   What I don't feel is helpful is when we put each other down.   ..." In 30 seconds I found about 5 photographers who do the same look as you do, the same over-photo shopped "cinematic" look. "    This illustrates why some of the working shooters don't post at all in the forums.   Who wants to be insulted.   Personally I'm happy for Hurley.   I wish he'd join MM and give us tips.   Of course he'd have to possibly hear from you about how shit*y a photographer he is.   I'll assume your having a bad day though.   Shame about the cheerios.

The title of the thread is determining whether people like him or don't. So, I have very right not to like his work. Then you berate me for saying he is a shitty photographer (which I never said)

Then you talk about how you don't like being put down
And proceed to put me down.

You're incredible. You want tips? On how to shoot? How to light? How exposure works? How to sell? What precisely?
Start here, keep reading:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutori … posure.htm

The "working shooters" are too busy selling workshops and DVDs to photographers..

and I am having a lovely day, thank you very much.
I hope you are as well

Solas wrote:
So, I have very right not to like his work. Then you berate me for saying he is a shitty photographer (which I never said)

Then you talk about how you don't like being put down
And proceed to put me down.

You're incredible. You want tips? On how to shoot? How to light? How exposure works? How to sell? What precisely?
Start here, keep reading:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutori … posure.htm

The "working shooters" are too busy selling workshops and DVDs to photographers.. on how to create workshops and DVDs for photographers.. ..

I guess the air is thin in Canada but where did I put your work or you down?   You put a member down not I.   Mr. Hurley isn't a MM member so put him down as you see fit.   Reading is important because I didn't say you said he was a shit*y photographer.   I said if he joined you might POSSIBLY  call his work shitt*.   As for his instructional DVD , etc.   It might be helpful.   You really seem kinda angry.   ...and here I thought Canadians were all chill.

Edit:   Saw you're okay.   Whew a load off my mind.   Its all good Solas.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I guess the air is thin in Canada but where did I put your work or you down?   You put a member down not I.   Mr. Hurley isn't a MM member so put him down as you see fit.   Reading is important because I didn't say you said he was a shit*y photographer.   I said if he joined you might POSSIBLY  call his work shitt*.   As for his instructional DVD , etc.   It might be helpful.   You really seem kinda angry.   ...and here I thought Canadians were all chill.

....

You should be a mod.

You win. I'm gone. Bye bye Model Mayhem.

R Bruce Duncan wrote:

I'm only allowed my opinion, if it agrees with the forum mods ? The status quo of MM's finest? If it doesn't, my portfolio and location works against me? Ok......I legit have no idea what you're on about.. Tuareg.. North African what?

I applaud PH for making money, good for him for being successful. But I don't have to like his work just for that. No, I don't have to like your work, or the moderators' work. Or anyone else's, just because they're successful for what they do. That's ridiculous. You don't have to like mine either.

Giacomo Cirrincioni wrote:

Giacomo Cirrincioni wrote:
Because they don't know any better.  This forum is not comprised of commercial photographers or those who even have an understanding of commercial photography.  They think if they're making $50,000 a year taking photos they're doing well (hint, in the commercial realm, you're not...)

Solas wrote:
Wow, how pretentious and mouthy.

It's because of this, actually. It has nothing to do with our income level..aren't you supposed to be a forum guide? Direct the peace and all that? Not intentionally start fights ?

Garry k wrote:
Not really familiar with him so I had to google

IMO - there are local Head Shot Photogrpahers who charge half of what he charges and are twice as good

Just my opinion

I thought I was supposed to call out ignorance when I saw it and try to correct it (which has become so rampant on this site, I rarely bother anymore).  Believe me, I was being nice, I could get a lot "mouthier."

+ 1    But didn't work for me neither...

E H wrote:
RBD

I legit have no idea what you're on about.. Tuareg.. North African what?

....
The VW Touareg Luxury SUV

The Volkswagen Touareg (German pronunciation: [ˈtuːaʁɛk]) is a mid-size luxury crossover SUV produced by German automaker Volkswagen since 2002 at the Volkswagen Bratislava Plant. The vehicle was named after the nomadic Tuareg people, inhabitants of the Saharan interior in North Africa

As for Peter Hurley, he's way the fuck better than me, but then most photographers are!

R Bruce Duncan wrote:
How much fun is this?

Mayhem at it's best.

Priceless.

Here's the deal, Solas:

It's empirical.

If a major market shooter gets a lot of money for headshots, you're more than free not to like them, but… given your location and your portfolio, your opinion reflects poorly on you, and not those who choose to patronize the photographer.

In addition, you've chosen to directly contradict accomplished and successful photographers who frequent the Mayhem.

Once again, you're allowed your opinion.

As usual, this thread is probably worth what Mayhem paid for it, but…

Oh no…

Someone disappeared into the Northern Lights?

Just when I was joining in the fun?

My only other comment is to Zack: The car is a Tuareg.

It's named after a nomadic North African tribe.

I know this only because a friend of mine, an upper middle class boy from Los Angeles, went there with the Peace Corps.

How much fun is that?

RBD

MY BAD TRIED TO SHORTEN IT UP, the deleted post.
The VW Touareg Luxury SUV?? maybe

E H wrote:

MY BAD TRIED TO SHORTEN IT UP, the deleted post.
The VW Touareg Luxury SUV?? maybe

I stand corrected.

RBD

R Bruce Duncan wrote:
I stand corrected.

RBD

Me too.

At any rate, I hate it. My dad has one - he got it because it was classier than a truck, and less showy than a Porsche. It's a really well-made car, but I feel like I'm driving a sofa down the road.

Not that my Taurus is much better.

Also, this thread really imploded. There was clearly a lot of stuff that was building for a while ... but Peter  Hurley was the straw that broke the camel's back? I would expect that if we were discussing Richard Prince, or Arne Svenson, or Terry Richardson, or drones, or even editing ethos. Even Nikon vs. Canon.

But Peter Fucking Hurley? Why do people even care that much?

... good or bad?

insignificant

Zack Zoll wrote:
But Peter Fucking Hurley? Why do people even care that much?

Some people or just envious/jealous.  They think they are better.  Apparently, they are not.

Dan Howell wrote:
His 'title' is a pretty low bar if you think about it. Kind of like the fastest runner in the consolation bracket. whoopee... And it's pretty much self-titled and not really any metric to substantiate it.

There are seriously better portrait photographers. There are seriously better studio photographers. There are seriously better beauty photographers. etc...

Full disclosure, I'm a a member of Peter Hurley's headshot crew (not that any of that work is here).

I think you're doing him a dis-service here. He's not claiming to be the world's best photographer by any means. He has a system, it seems pretty good, it works for me, it definitely works for him, and he explains it in great detail, and people like the result, and he makes a good living from it. Why is that a bad thing?

Yes, his personality goes a long way, but that's probably true for most successful photographers. If you don't like his methods, that's a personal choice, but to attack his work as "low brow" or "I could do this at home with 50 bucks worth of lighting" sounds a lot like sour grapes to me. Could someone else do it, sure, but he actually *is* doing it, and there's no denying he's successful at it, so, why all the negativity, trying to bring him down? (and I'm not just referring to Dan's post, it just happens to be the one I quoted).

And honestly, if it's really that easy and cheap to do, everyone should do that. It won't take long apparently, make lots of money, and that will allow you to do whatever else it is you wanna do.

DespayreFX wrote:
I think you're doing him a dis-service here. He's not claiming to be the world's best photographer by any means. He has a system, it seems pretty good, it works for me, it definitely works for him, and he explains it in great detail, and people like the result, and he makes a good living from it. Why is that a bad thing.

You are overlooking what I think is the most critical point. His claim cant be substantiated. It is a self-proclamation. If you want to carry his flag that's fine just don't expect me or people who really work in the industry to salute.

Dan Howell wrote:
You are overlooking what I think is the most critical point. His claim cant be substantiated. It is a self-proclamation. If you want to carry his flag that's fine just don't expect me or people who really work in the industry to salute.

I guess we just disagree what the critical point is. I'm not suggesting you need to salute, or anything else, but he's doing a good job (based on clients that are paying him) and everyone's happy about it, what's the negativity for? I'm not waving any flags or suggesting anyone else should either (if this topic hadn't come up, I'm sure you'd never know I was sorta/kinda affiliated, so I wouldn't say I was championing his cause by a long shot), I just don't get the hostility on this one.

And again, just to be clear, I'm not pointing those comments at you Dan, you just happened to be the last person to post something like that before I got here today.

Dan Howell wrote:

You are overlooking what I think is the most critical point. His claim cant be substantiated. It is a self-proclamation. If you want to carry his flag that's fine just don't expect me or people who really work in the industry to salute.

Which claim can't be substantiated?  That he's worth the price he charges, both for photos and for photography education?  The validity of that claim can be determined by whether he has clients--especially repeat clients.  The market determines his value, and if you don't think he's worth the price, you're not part of his market.