A funny job ad I found

[PruskiWawrzyniec]

Hi everyone

Newbie here.

I was interested to see how it is to be a photographer in the UK and was looking up some job ads (pure curiosity, I know my place 🙂 )

I came across this, it seems that they are asking for trouble from the start, as they are looking for someone experienced with “canon mark IIIs” 🙂

http://www.indeed.co.uk/cmp/Nice-Images-Ltd/jobs/E-Commerce-Photographer-3776f8ebb2d66734

I get that this is probably the gear the provide and that the ad is written by someone who doesn’t know photography, but this is exactly my point: why is the ad written by someone who doesn’t know photography? Couldn’t they give it to one of their photographers to read before posting?

Their portfolio looks nice (I wouldn’t know, but it is far from what I see on this site) so why post something that immediately makes them look amateurish?

http://niceimages.net/

P.S. obviously I didn’t apply, even if I was experienced I only know 600D 🙂

[EyeDocPhotog]

I think they have a pretty sophisticated site, and some fine quality work. It certainly seems they are high end and have the skills to deliver.

I imagine they asked for experience with a Mark III because they probably shoot with them and don’t want to change their editing workflow (and changing all their presets within Capture One version 7).

[PruskiWawrzyniec]

EyeDoc – like I said: I do get that, but I still think that it looks weird if the ad specifies the use of a very particular camera, instead of other skills.

In your opinion: how long does it take for an experienced let’s say Nikon shooter to grasp the differences when using a Canon camera? Genuinely asking here, as I don’t know myself.

However with all the “gear doesn’t matter” articles and posts that I keep seeing everywhere I would think that this is not really the main skill that should be sought after. I don’t imagine a lot of photographers would put in their CV “I know how to use Canon 5D Mark III”

[cameraclicker]

I don’t imagine a lot of photographers would put in their CV “I know how to use Canon 5D Mark III”

Perhaps they have the 1Ds Mk III?

How long does it take to change from Nikon to Canon, or from one body to another more generally?  Long enough to read some of the manual and shoot a couple of hundred frames to test features and get used to button placement.  An afternoon, give or take.

[picstop]

Nothing at all funny about the ad. Because, the only people who think “gear doesn’t matter” are those who have not held a high end camera. What people ought to be saying is, “it’s only part of the equation”. Certainly a 5D3 is useless to someone who has no training or talent while someone who does will certainly outperform them with a 40D.
In any case, I most certainly want my second shooters to use the same camera that I do, and that’s the 5D3 (at this moment anyway). I want output and consistency as I don’t need to spend extra time processing output from some other camera. I also have an expectation of the output and do not want to be processing images from a 10D. Gear does matter. If it did not, Canon would never sell anything over their Rebel line. I don’t follow the other brands but again, the same follows. Along with the body, there are lenses and flashes that come into play.
As far as getting used to another brand, I guess it’s possible. YMMV but for me it would take quite some time to get used to Nikon’s backward lenses and weird button placement.
Again, I see nothing wrong with asking for someone who is familiar with the gear so that there are no mistakes made or time wasted by someone unfamiliar with it.

[Don]

If you were applying for an accounting job, you’d be expected to know the common accounting software. No difference here.

 

This isn’t a high end job. They don’t want to have to train someone on a new system. It’s not odd at all to ask for someone that’s worked with exactly what they use.

 

In a side note, they do some STUNNING product photography.

[PruskiWawrzyniec]

Ok I must say I’m a bit surprised. I stand corrected.

My assumption came from analogy to the 3D graphics industry where I’ve read that major studios (like Pixar) say the same thing: we don’t care about the software you use, we care about your work. And in my opinion the difference between various 3D modeling softwares is much bigger than between cameras.

But then again it might be as Don said: this isn’t a high profile job and they need someone to get on the spot and press the shutter after 5 minutes instead of an afternoon, even if the 2nd option would produce better results in the long run.

[nesgran]

I’m surprised about the job ad given the clientele they have and the quality of most of the images. It might be a junior position shooting the dregs of the product photography world.

As for a experience with a MKIII, does a 1D MKIII count? 🙂

[ebi]

I think it’s pretty common for studios to request that their candidates have working knowledge of the systems they use. Most production studios have several shooting bays and use the same camera model in each bay for consistency. Especially if they are trying to churn out bulk photography in a fast and efficient manner.

The bigger question you should be asking is why are they ONLY paying 80 quid/day (that’s about $125USD, american folks!)??? That’s an absolutely horrible rate for photographers. The lowest rate I’ve seen in NYC at even some of the smaller studios is $500USD.

Their work isn’t actually the least bit impressive either.

[Don]

It’s not impressive? Looks pretty good for product photography to me.

[EyeDocPhotog]

Art is subjective. One man’s trash is another’s treasure.

That being said, I think their website and the images displayed evince a creativity and skillfulness in photography reserved for those who claim to be ‘top of their field.’

One look at this page http://niceimages.net/further-information/ and you get the sense these folks are not waiting around for the phone to ring. They’re making < dare I say it > REAL money in photography.

[ebi]

@don you haven’t seen great product photography, then. It’s…ok…not great. not even good.

@EyeDocPhotog – I think you need to up your standards. their work is shit. not “the shit”. they evince turds in a litter box…maybe slightly better than that (sorry, my cat just took a shit and it reminded me of their work, which is why I came back here in the middle of the night).  And I can guarantee you, if they are making “real” money in photography it’s only because they are gouging the fuck out of photographers who should be making more than $125 a day. Shit. I made more than that assisting. FUCK. i made more than that waiting tables a shitty diners in the midwest on a decent night.

cue RFP.

[EyeDocPhotog]

Ebi – could you point out a few of the photographs on their site which are so profanely distasteful and perhaps how they could be made better?

[Worst Case Scenario]

YAY ! Ebi is back……..Helmets on everyone.

Eyedoc, I don’t think you were here last time Ebi posted. He doesn’t take any prisoners but he does know what’s what!

[EyeDocPhotog]

No, WCS, you have it wrong. I am neither challenging nor disputing the claims Ebi made – I want to LEARN here. I don’t usually see WHAT I THINK is great photography and then later learn that the ‘powers that be’ above me think it’s awful.

I just want to know WHY it’s so bad, that’s all.

[Author]

Posts