I came across this little blurb about this pretty cool article. Of course, it was written like forever ago but still.
So, it seems us "MWAC" are making headlines. The NY Times no less! Is it just me or is anyone else somehow not familiar this acronym?
Anyhoo-just thought you all might enjoy that.
*****************************************************
Edited to add-
Thanks Stacy for the link you your comment about the article and I would encourage you all to go over, read her post and be sure to read the comments as they begin a dialog I think is interesting. And many of the readers of this blog are readers of Stacy's blog so it makes it even better since we know one another.
Personally, I have conflicting thoughts on the article. It was not well written (so dry too) but I don't find it offensive. I don't feel it's passing judgment on MAWC. I think it's stating the facts. I think much of what this article is saying is true. With the exception of the reason why mom photographers charge less. It's not because they "can" it's because they usually charge what they feel comfortable with and that is usually a lot less than other more established professionals. That is true. While you're building a business, I think that's normal. And if you you choose to do it for free than that's your choice too. And, if the more established photographers are feeling threatened than that is understandable. I don't really get it because there are enough clients to go around and each client chooses the photographer that meets their needs both financially and personally. I don't see it as a competition but I can understand it for those that might.
Although I recognize that the article focuses on the SLR cameras keep in mind that it is an article in the business section and that the category of "your money" so as much as it's about MWAC it's about camera sales. No harm there. But, if you get the vibe that this writer is trying to take the stance that it's the camera that makes the photographer, she balances it out at the end with lines like-
"...the photographer’s eye matters much more than the camera, and that the ability to use technology and respond to light is what makes an image come to life. "
and
“Good photography is more about the photographer than the camera,” said Ms. Dawson, who has just started her business in Boston. “It’s about making people comfortable and finding the emotion in their faces. The camera is just a tool.”
We all know you can take kick-ass photos with a point and shoot but no one would ever start a business using one, right? SLRs do take better shots than point and shoots for the most part. Technology has made it that much easier for people to take better pictures and afford the equipment to help. That's the truth. I will never say that just anyone has what it takes to be a really talented professional photographer because I know it takes a lot of many different attributes to make that happen (above and beyond even taking great photos) but I will say that if you have what it takes to shoot photos and get paid for it, then more power to ya. It's not a judgment call here, is it?
Does anyone have anything to add? I find it a very interesting topic. It certainly ruffled some feathers. That usually means it strikes a chord, huh? How did the article make you feel? I'd love to hear your thoughts.