The NIKON Thread (Talk About Nikon Stuff here)
Feb 24, 2013 at 11:24 PM Post #5,236 of 5,895
Quote:
 
OMG...how do you market yourself for this?  Time absolutely FLIES when I am in photoshop or lightroom because I enjoy it so much......I can't sit still and read textbooks, but I can do this for hours upon hours while robbing myself of sleep.  I tend to use Lightroom way more since my computer lags more with photoshop.  I also have way more to learn about PS.  Sounds like the perfect side-job for me...  Here's an example of a photo I spent quite a bit of time on taking away like 10 years of age from this couple's face. I especially like the look of the black and white version.  The added catch-lights in the eyes might have been a little excessively done  :p 
 
So the photographer who took those pictures for the couple paid you $600 because that was more cost-time effective for him? 
 


 
I'll look for the before file. 

It really depends. Most of my marketing is word of mouth because generally I dont advertise myself as a retouch.
As for photographers paying for retouching I get 3 types of client.
1. Make enough profit and have enough business that they dont want to bother learning to retouch. (very rare)
2. Have no idea how to true perfect an image and would rather not have doo doo images
3. Photographers that want portfolio images perfected beyond their knowledge.
 
As for pricing it really depends on your relationship and the work that needs to be done, those particular images were for an engagement photoshop and the reason it was 600 is because it was such a large number of files (46) if I remember right. After speaking with her she really wanted them as nice as she could afford which ended up being about 14 dollars an image (which isnt a bad price for something from a professional) I hear allot of so so retouchers I know charging 70 dollars an hour and they are terribly slow so it would be nearly an hour an image to get the same results.
 
That being said I had photographer hire me for some work he got in vogue last month and to my knowledge he wasnt even being paid for the images he just wanted to make sure they were perfect since its more for his personal advertising than anything, but for the 3 images I spent about 15 hours total, and these are images with proper color and exposure (just to give an idea of how long it truly takes to retouch an image to be high caliber.)
 
I wish I had better advice for marketing yourself, but it was never something I advertised. Before I got my mfa I got my bs in computer engineering so when I started my bfa I already had a better grasp on computers than most of the other students and thus learned ps much quicker, and once people noticed the phone started ringing. When you help someone out and they love it, they tell their friends :p.
 
Feb 25, 2013 at 1:44 AM Post #5,237 of 5,895
Wow 5 hours for one of those properly exposed/color pics??? I'm guessing you do stuff like airbrushing or digital makeup...etc. I'd definitely like to see one of your before and afters.

On the previous page, I added a before picture for the images I retouched in PS and LR4. Feedback would be great! I realize the white balance for the colored retouch isn't correct, but I liked the peachy tones.
 
Feb 25, 2013 at 3:36 AM Post #5,238 of 5,895
Uh... OK. I'll take your word for it.
 
Feb 25, 2013 at 5:32 AM Post #5,239 of 5,895
Quote:
OOO I have a fun test for everyone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Tell me what time of day this image was taken (guess)
 

 
Have fun! free lessons follow haha

11:00 am
 
Feb 26, 2013 at 3:02 AM Post #5,243 of 5,895
haha dont think anyone else wants to guess, the image was taken at about midnight. I was showing a friend of mine how to create his very own window light.
This may seem silly but honestly its incredibly helpful when you want to shoot something that involves a window because you can create any time of day you want and it will stay that way!
I would never shoot a product and rely on the actual sun unless I absolutely had to, because its much less controland you cant do multiple setups :p
 
-Matt
 
Feb 26, 2013 at 4:45 AM Post #5,246 of 5,895
So I see you guys have not paid much attention to the new kid on the block. Since I have had my D90 for over 4 years now and was itching to upgrade to get even better high ISO performance and faster continuous shooting mode as well as a few other things, I pulled the trigger and pre-ordered a D7100. I hope to get it when I get back from leave on April 5th. I also added a Nikon 35mm f1.8 just for kicks as I have not hada prime in ages.
 
Feb 26, 2013 at 6:48 AM Post #5,247 of 5,895
Quote:
So I see you guys have not paid much attention to the new kid on the block. Since I have had my D90 for over 4 years now and was itching to upgrade to get even better high ISO performance and faster continuous shooting mode as well as a few other things, I pulled the trigger and pre-ordered a D7100. I hope to get it when I get back from leave on April 5th. I also added a Nikon 35mm f1.8 just for kicks as I have not hada prime in ages.

The 35MM prime is excellent and takes fantastic pictures. The new 7100 looks exciting. my intention is to learn the D7000 real well and then go full frame at some point
 
Feb 26, 2013 at 11:51 AM Post #5,248 of 5,895
Quote:
The 35MM prime is excellent and takes fantastic pictures. The new 7100 looks exciting. my intention is to learn the D7000 real well and then go full frame at some point

 
Before deciding to buy D7100 i did think about FX and D600. Looking at a lot of the low-end features of it I was not happy with it enough. It does output great image quality, but things like AF at f8, 51 point AF, continuous shooting mode speed, flash sync speeds discouraged me from getting it. Not to mention the fact that I would have to replace 2 out of 3 of my lenses and that I see no real reason right now to go FX as a hobbyist photographer.
 
Feb 26, 2013 at 1:49 PM Post #5,249 of 5,895
The main advantage of FX is a larger viewfinder, which is good if you plan to use manual focus lenses. But I don't know why someone would spend that much on a camera body and not take advantage of its autofocus ability. Some people enjoy it though.
 
Feb 26, 2013 at 2:20 PM Post #5,250 of 5,895
Well FX is a lens designed for a full frame body and has nothing to do with the view finder :p
If you plan on switching to full frame cameras eventually get FX lens so that way when you switch you dont have to replace all your glass as well.
 
While using a DX lens is possible on a FX camera you are degrading every image essential down to the crop factor of DX.
As you can see below this is a 10.5mm dx on a fx camera, Almost all nikon cameras will automatically crop out the black so you wont see it, but you still loose those pixels

 
Honestly DX lenses are only designed to get you wider angles on DX sensors because  they dont need to cover as large of an imaging surface.
Remember when using a crop sensor you are forced to apply the crop factor to the lens focal lenth to determine the actual focal lenth because all lens focal lengths are based on 35mm
Example: 50mm lens on a 35mm camera is 50mm // 50mm lens on a 1.3x camera is 65mm  // 50mm lens on a 1.5x camera is 75mm  // 50mm lens on a 1.6x camera is 80mm
So making a 10.5mm dx allows you to get the equivalent of 15.75mm on a full frame camera on a 1.5x sensor camera.
 
Make sure you know before you buy!
 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top