Gig Photography advice or tips please

I agree that it's a real pain not getting paid. I think there's a general inclination to take the mickey out of photographers in general. Trouble is, it's hard for me to get demanding when the other end of it is, I get to do this stuff - this week I've shot Roots Manuva, tonight I'm doing The Charlatans, and on monday The Music. I don't get paid, I do get in for free, and I'm building a huge collection of work, sometimes I get a couple of free drinks. If I said "screw you guys, you should pay me or I walk" the venue would just find a student photographer who will do it for free - what you gonna do?

And yeah, they won't do as good a job of it, but I'm starting to think that 90% of people can't actually tell the difference between a good and bad photograph anyway.
 
yep hopkin, 90% of people can't tell the difference between a good or bad photograph!

I love shooting bands and events. I'm very lucky in the fact that I do get paid for photos but the money rarely comes from the bands themselves its through magazines and press work. Its getting harder, but I'm certainly not going to go and shoot weddings for a living!

I've seen the music photography scene change a lot over the last few years.
 
MJ Stebbings said:
Just thought id drop some shots in:

Enter Shikari:

2938479653_c7baf9746a.jpg


2938471963_0eae8587fe.jpg


2939316904_24b769d068.jpg
Click to expand...

Very good shots, im shooting Enter Shikari in...2 hours and 20minutes! Here's one from the last time i shot them..

IMG_3024.jpg
 
I've managed to secure a photo pass for the excellent King Tuts Wah Wah Hut in Glasgow next Thursday.

A brilliant local band, The Moth and the Mirror are playing, they're 3rd on the bill and the wonderful Tily and the Wall are headlining. I can't wait!

I got my pass through the support band, I assume that I will be allowed to photograph all the bands? Anyone have any experience of this?

Dave
 
sakura said:
carlukedave: depends on the size of the main act and the venue, i cant see you having a problem though, manchester apollo sometimes needs a pass for each band!
Click to expand...

Cheers Sakura, I think I should be okay in Tuts.

I'll find out soon enough and hopefully have some decent shots to post on here!

Dave
 
Was out last nite with my mate so I thought Id take the opportunity to take some photos of bands and get used to settings that have been put in this thread. I think i really do need some help as most of my photos were over or under exposed or just not sharp at all.

This maybe a bit of a daft question but I was using my 50mm 1.8 lens,

Used AV mode,Set aperture to f1.8, iso 800 (1600 was too much),WB Auto,in one bar I stood in same position just so I could concentrate on getting the right settings as the lights there didnt change much,just some yellow spotlights. I did the same in another bar which had blue/purple spotlights n again the lights didnt move much.Can someone please explain to me why given the above situation,when I kept aperture to f1.8, my camera would come up with different shutter speeds each time which meant some shots came out ok n some didnt. I then tried using TV mode and set shutter speed to 1/125 but then the camera started beeping at me saying couldnt get right exposure even for f1.8 :thinking::lol:
ps.I didnt use flash at all.

I did get some good shots but it was more luck than knowing what Im supposed to be doing. There was simply no consistency at all in my shots even at same settings,some would come out sharp and some would be not sharp at all. :help:
 
Alot of it can be luck.

If the camera is basing exposure on a shadow on the guys top, or a dark area of the guitar then that is probably whats wrong.

Seriously, use manual. Got to another gig or two and try setting both instead of using AV and TV mode.

Mike
 
MJ Stebbings said:
Alot of it can be luck.

If the camera is basing exposure on a shadow on the guys top, or a dark area of the guitar then that is probably whats wrong.

Seriously, use manual. Got to another gig or two and try setting both instead of using AV and TV mode.

Mike
Click to expand...

+ 1

Set it to manual, the only setting youll have to change in a bar situation is the shutter speed anyway as the rest of your settings will remain constant.
 
new venue for me last night

fat lils in witney i liked it great atmosphere etc.

couple of quick pics

1dea19eb.jpg



506f7abe.jpg



1752bd48.jpg



c0ebab88.jpg



64210b54.jpg
 
Ocean Rum said:
Was out last nite with my mate so I thought Id take the opportunity to take some photos of bands and get used to settings that have been put in this thread. I think i really do need some help as most of my photos were over or under exposed or just not sharp at all.

This maybe a bit of a daft question but I was using my 50mm 1.8 lens,

Used AV mode,Set aperture to f1.8, iso 800 (1600 was too much),WB Auto,in one bar I stood in same position just so I could concentrate on getting the right settings as the lights there didnt change much,just some yellow spotlights. I did the same in another bar which had blue/purple spotlights n again the lights didnt move much.Can someone please explain to me why given the above situation,when I kept aperture to f1.8, my camera would come up with different shutter speeds each time which meant some shots came out ok n some didnt. I then tried using TV mode and set shutter speed to 1/125 but then the camera started beeping at me saying couldnt get right exposure even for f1.8 :thinking::lol:
ps.I didnt use flash at all.

I did get some good shots but it was more luck than knowing what Im supposed to be doing. There was simply no consistency at all in my shots even at same settings,some would come out sharp and some would be not sharp at all. :help:
Click to expand...

Hi :) Could have been down to what metering setting you were using: Evaluative is usually not a good idea- too wide: neither is spot- too narrow. Something in the middle (depends on make of camera) often works best. I tend to go with partial. I agree with manual - takes a bit of getting used to, (and my courage sometimes fails me) but it generally is the best.
 
MJ Stebbings said:
.........Now then, let me look at this logically

I would say average band has 4 members (some with three, some with 5). There total earnings per week from their day jobs must at least total around £1000 after tax. What is £15 between them?

Mike
Click to expand...

I really feel I must reply to this remark.........

Some bands who are trying to break into the music business do not have day jobs......they are too busy with their music! They are often at a venue by 4pm, to sound check and set up (this can take ages if there are three bands per night) having driven for hours to get there; giging until midnight, then travelling home, falling into bed as the milkman arrives, grabbing a bit of kip then up to do some writing and rehearsing of new material. Grab a bite to eat, then its back in the van and on to the next gig........they often get no money unless they are the headline band; occasionally a meal from the promoter and a small amount of cash that barely covers the diesel for the van. They exist on the buzz they get from performing, and the massive support they get from their fans, friends and families.

Money for images?? Actually, yes, if they are good and the photographer asks a reasonable fee. Often depends on what is currently in the kitty.

Please don't bunch them all into the same category.
 
photostar_1 said:
I really feel I must reply to this remark.........

Some bands who are trying to break into the music business do not have day jobs......they are too busy with their music! They are often at a venue by 4pm, to sound check and set up (this can take ages if there are three bands per night) having driven for hours to get there; giging until midnight, then travelling home, falling into bed as the milkman arrives, grabbing a bit of kip then up to do some writing and rehearsing of new material. Grab a bite to eat, then its back in the van and on to the next gig........they often get no money unless they are the headline band; occasionally a meal from the promoter and a small amount of cash that barely covers the diesel for the van. They exist on the buzz they get from performing, and the massive support they get from their fans, friends and families.

Money for images?? Actually, yes, if they are good and the photographer asks a reasonable fee. Often depends on what is currently in the kitty.

Please don't bunch them all into the same category.
Click to expand...

The few bands that I know personally normally get one pound per ticket or per entrance fee paid, and if there is more than one band on then there is normally someone ticking off who you have come to see so the money can be paid out accordingly I can only agree that these bands are driven by the music, Buzz and possibilty of fame...the last time I went to see my mates band they got 75 quid in total for a whole nights work, this includes the 40 quid from the venue, that is 75 quid between 4 of them and only one of them has a part time day job because they like photostars sons band are trying to make a huge effort..so if they want friends and families pictures to use, then I dont see why they shouldnt and if and when they do become famous, then they can get the proffesionals in and after all, I reckon that these little bands are much more concerned with their music and instruments first and thier pictures second or may be even third or fourth.
MJ Stebbings said:
No offence ment here mate, but this is why there is no money in music photography...

"Alright mate, can i get one of your demos, in return ill give you the photos from the gig. This way you wont have to pay the official photographer anything for theirs"

Or as Sakura implied, it is too easy to get a DSLR these days, so everyone knows a mate with one. The fact that there pics are crap, probably shot with the onboard flash or focusing on something that isnt the actual band member, doesnt really come into the sum of it as it doesnt cost them anything.

Best way to make money is to get your feet in the door with music magazines and get paid to shoot a gig with free press passes because you are working for them etc
Click to expand...


now if U.2 or Oasis or someone like that was using pictures from a mates of a mates olympus trip I could then understand where Mr Stebbings is coming from in his earlier post particularly when the images are being used on tellivision, posters magazines and stuff...but MYSPACE nad FACEBOOK may be a little different.

If you are a pro photographer and struggle or you cant make ends meet doing your job then it may be time for a change of direction or career.

Technology that is now in the hands of consumers is changing the working practices of businesses worldwide and photography is no different, the way forward is to adapt or go under.
 
Im sorry, but i have to disagree with you Paul and Photostar. I know (not that personally) these guys in the bands. Most of them are lucky to play a gig a week really. Its not like they are touring. Most of them work. Some of the older bands are quite successful in their day jobs too. But the point is, its not just the small bands, its the larger bands too who get paid for the headline gig. Its annoying that they would rather use "fans" shots from the crowd that are crap and probably from a cheap P&S, or worse a camera phone! These are bands that are getting £500+ per gig they play when they are on tour!

It really is a poor showing from bands IMO. We are "professionals", but yet expected to give our work for free? Would you do your day job for free?

Im not ranting, its just a bit more of a sore subject for me! Haha!
 
paulc said:
Technology that is now in the hands of consumers is changing the working practices of businesses worldwide and photography is no different, the way forward is to adapt or go under.
Click to expand...

Quoted for absolute truth. Can this be pinned to the top of every single thread where pros complain about having their trade ruined by amateurs undercutting them? I shoot bands for fun, I've never made any money from it, I don't care. I supply my images to the bands and ask them to credit me if they're used. I've got this credit, the odd beer, the odd free gig and a fair bit of kudos, but that's it. I know a lot of people who do this. If there are any pros who have a problem with this way of working, well it sucks to be them, doesn't it? :p
 
Just how do you adapt? How do you undercut free? For me I basically refocused my main area of photography to more commercial clients. I don't really do much band photography these days. I just don't have the time to do lots and lots of free work on the off chance when I could be doing paid work. Its a real shame because I love it. I mean, whats not to like about seeing good bands, getting good photos to good live music and such. Its a very hard industry to crack. I'm hardly expensive, and there are people who hire me but its very easy to become disparaged after a while when people say they can only manage £20 between 5 people and you've got companies paying you a little more. So yes as a pro it does pretty much suck to be me.
 
petemc said:
Just how do you adapt? How do you undercut free? For me I basically refocused my main area of photography to more commercial clients. I don't really do much band photography these days. I just don't have the time to do lots and lots of free work on the off chance when I could be doing paid work. Its a real shame because I love it. I mean, whats not to like about seeing good bands, getting good photos to good live music and such. Its a very hard industry to crack. I'm hardly expensive, and there are people who hire me but its very easy to become disparaged after a while when people say they can only manage £20 between 5 people and you've got companies paying you a little more. So yes as a pro it does pretty much suck to be me.
Click to expand...

I suppose to stay ahead of the game you will need to be full of fresh Ideas and be different from the run of the mill photographer and adapt by exporloring other avenues, like publishing a book, but despite being prolific I reckon that at the end of the day the professional photographers who have a natural flair and a keen business acumen will win out, perhaps too many people move into photography because it is thier hobby but then realise that the whole business thing has to work as they hit the ground with a thud.

you cant undercut Free but you can sell them your pictures if they are better or different or something they cant get for free from thier mates.
 
I think the difference is to provide them with really top quality images, although their brother's best mate's sister might have a slr, chances are that they cant use it properly and wont be able to provide them with really quality images.
 
petemc said:
Just how do you adapt? How do you undercut free? For me I basically refocused my main area of photography to more commercial clients. I don't really do much band photography these days. I just don't have the time to do lots and lots of free work on the off chance when I could be doing paid work. Its a real shame because I love it. I mean, whats not to like about seeing good bands, getting good photos to good live music and such. Its a very hard industry to crack. I'm hardly expensive, and there are people who hire me but its very easy to become disparaged after a while when people say they can only manage £20 between 5 people and you've got companies paying you a little more. So yes as a pro it does pretty much suck to be me.
Click to expand...

Now there isnt really a truer word spoken.
The point im making is that photography gear costs more then a single persons musical equipment. Yet most of them wont play for free, they want petrol money. So why should i give them my images for free?
Photography equipment should be banned from venues unless you have a photo pass or are guest listed by a band!
 
"Pro" looking gear is banned at some gigs. I had security question me when I was at a gig with an SLR, a film SLR. But no-one questions the others with their 8mp digital compacts. You can shoot a gig on a Canon g9 as someone on TP does. You'd probably get in with that but anything that looks "pro" wouldn't.
 
MJ Stebbings said:
Now there isnt really a truer word spoken.
The point im making is that photography gear costs more then a single persons musical equipment. Yet most of them wont play for free, they want petrol money. So why should i give them my images for free?
Photography equipment should be banned from venues unless you have a photo pass or are guest listed by a band!
Click to expand...

Not necessarily.

But that's by the by.

Anyways, just thought I'd mention, last I tried switching to using shutter priority, as suggested earlier in this thread. Worked a treat, so thanks guys :)
 
petemc said:
"Pro" looking gear is banned at some gigs. I had security question me when I was at a gig with an SLR, a film SLR. But no-one questions the others with their 8mp digital compacts. You can shoot a gig on a Canon g9 as someone on TP does. You'd probably get in with that but anything that looks "pro" wouldn't.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's the case with all gigs at 53 Degrees, the venue where I do most of my shoots.
 
petemc said:
They still won't be willing to pay. Trust me.
Click to expand...

I have a friend who is a wedding and event photographer on the wirral and he charges 400 pounds a day and between 1500 and 3100 for a wedding and he has also published a book and he does very well out of photography so what is he doing so different.


also I could never see him selling one of his pictures for a quid as some professionals do like Mr Stebbings, as I have said before I think that this undermines your proffession more than anything else, that is being your own worse enemy.
 
Exactly. People talk and you could get known as the guy that does it for free or dirt cheap. Then you've got to spend time fixing that and explaining to people why your prices are now different. I know some gig photographers give away their images to unsigned bands but ask signed ones to pay. It seperates the ones who have no money from the ones that may. Its a valid distinction. You can explain that as they are signed you can't give away your work, and that they need a more professional look. Unfortunately I've had signed bands who can't afford to hire me.
 
paulc said:
also I could never see him selling one of his pictures for a quid as some professionals do like Mr Stebbings, as I have said before I think that this undermines your proffession more than anything else, that is being your own worse enemy.
Click to expand...

Not really as i work for the promoter anyway. The photos on offer to the bands are extra income for me. But what would be the point in charging more then £1 when they are not even willing to pay that?!?
 
Your image. If they're not willing to pay that then what does it matter what you charge?
 
Touche! :) Right, im upping my prices! :D
 
Seems there's quite a few of us on here - reckon it's enough to warrant it's own gig photography section? :)

Here's some more! The Charlatans - I was so happy to get a couple where Tim Burgess was looking straight at the lens, though you can hardly tell through his haircut :)



And The Music, one of my favourite bands, being made of purest win and electric. Tried dropping out of full manual and into shutter priority for this set, and it paid dividends.

 
I think there's definately enough of us who do it to have its own section, and im sure there's plenty of the other people here who do it ocassioanlly.
 
petemc said:
Just how do you adapt? How do you undercut free?
Click to expand...

You don't undercut, you create better images. If people aren't willing to pay then you don't have a market. It's simple capitalism really, and industries change. Should the industrial revolution have been stopped because automation put people out of business? If the market doesn't exist, create it or move into one that does.


MJ Stebbings said:
Now there isnt really a truer word spoken.
The point im making is that photography gear costs more then a single persons musical equipment. Yet most of them wont play for free, they want petrol money. So why should i give them my images for free?
Photography equipment should be banned from venues unless you have a photo pass or are guest listed by a band!
Click to expand...

Your first sentence is ludicrous. You can spend just as much or as little on an instrument as you can on a camera. You *don't* have to give your images away for free, you can choose to not go, not take pictures, whatever. What you're seemingly suggesting is that a band should be obliged to purchase your images. Why should they pay? As for your last sentence... words fail me. You want photography equipment banned from venues. Denying a band free publicity and audience members free memories at the expense of your trade? Seriously? If a band (or their agents) don't *want* you to take photos of them, fair enough. Otherwise it's fair game.


sakura said:
i saw one band stop playing and ask the audience to put away their phone cams and compacts...
Click to expand...

Like that. I bet that endeared them to their fans. Sounds like a Metallica thing to do.
 
yourapocalypse said:
You don't undercut, you create better images. If people aren't willing to pay then you don't have a market. It's simple capitalism really, and industries change. Should the industrial revolution have been stopped because automation put people out of business? If the market doesn't exist, create it or move into one that does.
Click to expand...

Think I said that I did pretty much right after the bit you copied.
 
Yeah sorry, I was trying to state the point generally rather than disagree with what you did. You did the right thing :)

If you enjoy doing it, why not do it anyway?
 
Hi everybody...I am new to photography and will be getting a Camara fairly soon.

I was wondering if you have any general hints and tips about getting great pics (particularly motor racing and water sports).

Your ideas and suggestions will be helpful.
 
Looks like you meant to make a new thread instead of reply to this one. This is a thread about music photography.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top