Is Underwater Photography Becoming Irrelevant?

I wonder how the move towards smaller devices will effect things?

In my view its a lot easier to make a picture look impressive on a full video screen or a printed page than it is on 3 by 4 inch screen. So I do see shorter movies as probably the next big up and comer, bite sized chunks that show something.

I think its also getting harder to show something 'new' at the image level, with the huge increase of good quality amateur content, photoshop and the more forgiving nature of computer screens I think a lot of change is going on.

Still a ways off though, magazines dont run out of batteries, dont cost you a few hundred if you lose them on the train, roll up, and can be dropped,and dont label you as a bit of a nerd.

I wouldn't take a kindle for free, but google seems to be gearing up to take them on headon, the next 5 years or so will be interesting.

Otara

...North Americans generally have short attention spans....

Well, true enough that "queuing" isn't one of our primary school subjects. We tend to expect to be 'doing' things more than sitting around waiting for others to do unto us. But reading counts as doing, as well.

Would be curious after a little while has passed to see how Edge's 4th edition book sales go in the US vs. the UK. Even adjusted on a percentage of population basis, care to bet which country bought more copies? Of course you'll just counterargue that we bought it but couldn't understand it.

Really John, normally I find you quite charming and funny. But this one felt rather like a low blow. There's a lot to hate about the US cultural and educational mindset, in bulk. Don't forget to point and laugh at how gluttonous and over-consumptive our lives are too, while you're at it. But we're no where near as homogenous as all the other populations Britain tried to rule at one point or another as if they were monolithic societies. And eventually learned otherwise. It also goes without saying that the members of the US population that tend to frequent this site - and read underwater magazines, or begin to choose not to - don't fall too much within the middle of that average 'ugly American' stereotype bell jar.

I mean, I don't for a second think you're just a shopkeeper because you're British.

And with that, I must depart. I have a soccer game to go to. (Really. Daughter plays in college team.)

As one working in the "dying" newspaper industry, and being forced to shoot video, here is my take. Printed media is struggling for a variety of reasons right now, but chief among them is the lousy economy. If people aren't advertising papers and mags are forced to layoff people or close altogether. I think this just happens to be coincidentally at a time when social media is on the rise.

To me its just as wrong to blame the internet for the troubles of the printed media as it is wrong for publications to look to the internet to save them.

Sure the internet is having an affect but there will always be a need for quality reporting and quality still photography.

I love to read. Having said that, I wish none of it was on paper. Newspapers and magazines all end up in the recycle bin (or trash can) and only serve to further deplete the world of wood which could be used to make nice guitars instead I understand the value of a printed first edition book and I think that value will always be there, but if I could get every single publication I read in PDF format, I'd be happy. Magazine publishers are missing the boat. Charge me 75% of the cost of your 12 month paper subscription and I'll personally download your magazine in PDF every month and be totally happy. Just think; archived copies of all your favorite magazines.

Newspapers are a bit different animal and haven't found their profit model as an online business yet, but I have faith. In the meantime, I read my print newspaper daily and am glad to have it. I would just prefer to have no physical paper at all for daily or monthly information.

Right now on most "news" websites, many of the stories are served up as video instead of hard copy with photos. It annoys me. It takes extra bandwidth and I have to put it through my speakers or headphones. I prefer good photos and well-written copy and it doesn't have to be on paper.

I know UWPmag is free, but I love it and would pay for a subscription if I had to. I DO pay for Undercurrent and I can't wait every month for new issues of those online magazines.

Oh and the Kindle -- it's great! My wife is a voracious reader and when we go on a dive vacation she used to carry about 10 pounds of books with her. No more. Instead, she buys 2 or 3 new books, loads them down to the Kindle and has not only all of her favorite classics already loaded, but several new choices. The Kindle's battery will usually last all week. The perfect lightweight accessory for a dive trip in my opinion. I usually download all my manuals for my dive computer, camera and what not in PDF on my laptop; I don't carry anything in print form. It's hard enough carrying 40 pounds of camera gear as is. I also re-read all of my downloaded UWP mags on my laptop while I'm on a boat.

Maybe Martin Edge's new book will be available in PDF format.... I'd certainly buy that!

</soapbox>

Be careful on the ecology issue. Paper is low tech and without bleaching - sustainable. Your computer and its batteries are as polluting as the manufacture of a Toyota Prius (very).

On yer bike!

Sure the internet is having an affect but there will always be a need for quality reporting and quality still photography.

Agreed...... but who is willing to pay for it? And how can a paid-for model reward the creator, not the content provider?

I suppose you could get upset by this thread.

 

But the assumptions are beyond ridiculous, so all you can do is laugh at it.

 

Let's see. A bunch of guys run around in shorts for about an hour an a half and the game ends Zero Zero. This means that Europeans have a better attention span and thus read more magazines?

 

I would argue that because there is no action in a Soccer match that the Europeans must be reading those magazines during their soccer matches.

 

They then look up when the game is over and see the Zero Zero score and say "Great Game"

 

By the way my spell checker says that Zero Zero is a double word. The programers must not watch soccer either.

We must try to explain to you about cricket!

There are several changes happening in print media & technology that could prove impactful to our chosen past time.

If its a 'past time' - that is something that you enjoy doing for its own sake and not for profit - then I'm not sure how these changes can impact on your enjoyment.

If you intend taking underwater photographs in order to make a profit then the key is marketing and shifts in market requirements will dictate changes in your image production - which has happened many times before.

I reckon that if America wants to continue using IMPERIAL measurements then they should have the decency to become part of the British Empire

The British Empire is long gone as has the Roman Empire, that of Alexander the Great , and many others. The empire of the USA is alive, well and kicking quite hard!

Agreed...... but who is willing to pay for it? And how can a paid-for model reward the creator, not the content provider?

Great questions and ones were're still trying to answer. The Associated Press and other content providers are now looking to charge Google and other content aggregators for their content. The days of profiting freely off of others work is endangered.

But the free content "horse" is out of the barn and it is going to be hard to put it back.

Great questions and ones were're still trying to answer. The Associated Press and other content providers are now looking to charge Google and other content aggregators for their content. The days of profiting freely off of others work is endangered.

 

But the free content "horse" is out of the barn and it is going to be hard to put it back.

It will indeed be interesting to see how Mr Murdoch et al manages to put the online-content-is-free genie back in the bottle. The advertising supported web model seems to have served the content providers well. I'm not sure their days are numbered... but perhaps, just a little, the tide is turning. Interesting times ahead I think and one I will watch closely.

One thing I am considering is self-publishing. Not in the magazine market, but elsewhere that does not compete with my existing clients. It will mean more work and I will have to understand a little more about the chosen market, but at no time in the past has the opportunity been quite so open.

Simon Brown

Be careful on the ecology issue. Paper is low tech and without bleaching - sustainable. Your computer and its batteries are as polluting as the manufacture of a Toyota Prius (very).

On yer bike!

John, another thing about "reading", regardless of whether it is paper or electronic, is don't automatically believe everything you read. There has been a lot of disinformation on the Internet concerning how much pollution is created in the build of a Prius and the disposition of it's batteries when worn out. If you will do a little more research, you will find it to be propaganda without basis in fact. I do agree there are sustainable paper products. I like it when I see a sack or book which has been made from reclaimed or easily replaced materials, but the simple truth is most magazines and books are made from non-sustainable woods like Spruce trees.

Of course, the ecological point of view to using electronic documents is beside the point for me; I'm just a geek and would rather use my computer for everything!

I also agree I am Saving The World when I twist the throttle on my Triumph Speed Triple (heehee).

Cheers,

John

I like it when I see a sack or book which has been made from reclaimed or easily replaced materials,

I'd like to agree, but.... I was given a copy of a book the other day which was a paperback with a flexible cover made from recycled car tyres. All very laudable but I'm not so certain that I really do like the rather pungent smell of rubber which accompanies the book and remains on my hands afterwards.

Thanks for some excellent feedback.

Quite frankly, many cultures like to sit down for a good read yet do not have the disposable income for what some would call capricious technology. Hence the Russian diving magazine market is massive and American diving magazines almost demised. Some cultures are cash rich but time poor and vice versa.

 

So what am I saying? The new technologies are complimentary. Once people are happy to watch movies on their mobile phones, the big screen cinema will disappear. Once everyone has the technology. Maybe printed material will disappear too. I used to have a paper diary but now it's on my Mac so it's actually less accessible.

 

I just picked up a paper magazine off the seat in the train and enjoyed reading it. We will have to wait for similarly disposable eBooks for them to be really successful as a substitute. The StarTrek way of life isn't with us quite yet!

John, I completely agree. I've been in tech too long to succumb to the notion that the old way will completely disappear. And you raise a very good point about different cultures will consume media in different ways and at different rates. I found your Russian vs. American diving magazine example particularly interesting. One could imagine a similar scenario in China and India with the rise of the middle class there. However, one scary question to ask is - From what regions are the bulk of print media revenue derived? If its from the US or Western Europe, then a change in business model in those markets will influence what content is available in other territories, Russia included.

Point your camera at the correct subject. Press the shutter at the right time. The world will want to see what you have created. And pay for the privilege of doing so.

No doubt. This always has to be the case, or there would be not innovation in the image making space. What I am trying to open the debate to is that the mechanisms and distribution points may change radically over the next 3-5 years. Musicians are still getting paid for the music they create, but now its not in the form of CD, its concerts. I suppose a better way to have started this thread would be to ask

1) for professionals - do you see your customers changing radically over the next 3-5 years?

2) for aspiring professionals - is the way to "break into" the industry changing?

3) as consumer behaviour is changing, what role do still photos alone provide? This is why I brought up the fact that Esquire are pulling still images from Red One cameras. If, at some point in the future, stills are derived from video, then that has major implications, no? I accept there will be a role for still images but will it be commercial!?

On topic! As I watched a fellow pull out his Kindle on a plane the other day I was thinking why can't they do this with magazines. I usually carry several underwater and photo mags with me on the plane to read. I guess I'm a throw-back..or maybe that's the Brit inside me screaming for some me time. In any case, my thoughts drifted to a Kindle on steroids. One that could download the full beauty of photos to look at and articles to read. Yes, I know computers can do this but not with the simplicity of how Amazon does this. If I could get a device like a Kindle that downloaded my monthly subscription and displayed it in all its grandeur, I would. One small device with all my mags inside.

Exactly!!! Let's for argument's sake, assume this is now reality. The entire publishing business model would get turned on its head b/c of the extended capabilities vs physical print. LCD screens, E-Ink, etc are all poor replacements for paper. So if this world were to exist, the devices would have to sell themselves what they can do well beyond what a physical copy could do. Things like video, interactivity via internet connection, archiving, etc.

My fear is that the likes of Amazon and Google or for that matter a completely new player yet to enter the market, those who are the content providers and facilitators, will take the lion's share.

Simon. I think you are spot on here. One only has to look at what Apple has done with its App Store to see the devaluing that can occur. There is a race to the bottom in application pricing. On one hand, its great for the consumer and more applications are being bought - some 35 per device - than ever before on mobile devices. On the other, developers are really struggling to make money. The same game on the iPhone costs a third to half as much as on the Nintendo DS. Same game, but to compete with the other 22,000 games on the App Store, pricing has to come down. In a world where everyone can theoretically capture images and potentially self publish, this is surely going to devalue the market for images too and especially so if a big corporation takes the view that scale in content (i.e. lots of it for a little price) is critical to their devices' or services' success.

I suppose you could get upset by this thread.

I read this about being upset regarding the soccer debate. but wanted to add, I'm not trying to upset anyone. Just to open a debate on where we are going with this. Using the music industry as an example again. Some artists just didn't make it. Those that cannot perform live, generally aren't getting paid. Many people on this board are the key influencers in the underwater photography/video world. Having thought through some of these issues before some future reality sets in, will let them have a say on how this industry reshapes.

Sure the internet is having an affect but there will always be a need for quality reporting and quality still photography.

Andy. No doubt. But then that quality reporting and photography does become a much smaller market where only the truly exceptional get paid, if that? Fair point about the economy but does this not accelerate the inevitable?

One thing I am considering is self-publishing. Not in the magazine market, but elsewhere that does not compete with my existing clients. It will mean more work and I will have to understand a little more about the chosen market, but at no time in the past has the opportunity been quite so open.

Simon, I think this is interesting. I'm sure its somewhat sensitive on what you mean by this, but this is what I mean about adapting in the face of this new paradigm. The challange lies, not in just ensuring our art progresses but that it remains commercial.

Thanks for some excellent feedback.

 

Andy. No doubt. But then that quality reporting and photography does become a much smaller market where only the truly exceptional get paid, if that? Fair point about the economy but does this not accelerate the inevitable?

That's the way it used to be. There were only a handfull of people shooting underwater professionally or on the sidelines of an NFL game. Then the hobbyists started to gain access and sell pictures. It's to the point where you have people from all sorts of professions selling images and degrading the market to the point where only the "truly exceptional get paid." Kind of a circular thing. I'm not saying it's bad or good it just is what it is.

I know a guy I run into at sporting events. He is a very nice person who was laid off of his automotive job. He has all the gear, Canon MKIII's and fast glass, and is trying to make a go shooting sports for an unheard of wire service, getting paid on spec. He's a hell of a nice guy but has no clue what he's doing. He always is asking questions and I don't mind one bit helping him out because I like him so much. There are thousands out there like him. He can shoot a good image on occassion so people will use his pictures. But they don't pay livable wages. Some don't pay at all.

If publications can get photos that are "good enough" for free from people who do it for the love and not the paycheck, well, the people who depend on the paycheck have a lot to worry about. I've always told myself that if I'm creative enough and work hard enough I won't have to worry about getting paid for my work. Maybe I'm stupid but I still believe this.

I don't know if the economy is accelerating the inevitable or not. Maybe were in the trough of a publishing wave where the jobs will come back when the economy strengthens. Maybe not. I do know that people are far to quick to announce the death of anything let alone the publishing trade. In newspapers anyway, much of the trouble began with large corporations who know nothing about the newspaper business buying newspapers because they were so VALUABLE. Then they tried to make them more profitable by downsizing to make them lean and generally screwing around with the product. The newspaper industry is not like any other profitable business and it didn't tolerate this. And it all fell apart when the economy tanked.

I'm lucky in that I work for a family owned newspaper with deep pockets. Yet we've still lost more than half of our newsroom and half of our photo department and it's not getting any better. How can we expect people to want to buy the paper when 1) it's not as good as it used to be just a couple years ago (we won a Pulitzer in '04 and were a finalist in '05) and 2) we give away the content free on the internet. Why do we do this? Because everyone else is and we are trying to get news out as fast as TV and radio. But this is dumb in my opininon. We newspapers always did well playing to their strengths - in depth stories. We can't do that now with such a limited staff. We've essentially cut our own throat. Magazines are in the same boat IMO.

Let's face it, it's the Wild West out there as far as publishing is concerned. But for me, I'll pay to read good stories done by professionals. I could give a rat's you-know-what about most bloggers and wanna-be's. There is far more untrust-worthy information available right now than ever before. Bottom line if you take a picture somebody wants they will buy it.

Thanks for some excellent feedback.

.....

 

Simon, I think this is interesting. I'm sure its somewhat sensitive on what you mean by this, but this is what I mean about adapting in the face of this new paradigm. The challange lies, not in just ensuring our art progresses but that it remains commercial.

Not sensitive at all. I won't share yet what the subject is with the forum (Ideas are my golden goose.....I will say where I have been, but not necessarily where I am going......) but the self-publishing idea is nothing more grand than a book. Like all content - electronic or paper - the content is valuable, not the medium of transmission. What form it will eventually take has yet to be decided. It might even be a paid-for download... 12 months from now this could be the most cost-effective way of getting one's published work to the consumer and earn a living.

That's the way it used to be. There were only a handfull of people shooting underwater professionally or on the sidelines of an NFL game. Then the hobbyists started to gain access and sell pictures. It's to the point where you have people from all sorts of professions selling images and degrading the market to the point where only the "truly exceptional get paid." Kind of a circular thing. I'm not saying it's bad or good it just is what it is.

 

I know a guy I run into at sporting events. He is a very nice person who was laid off of his automotive job. He has all the gear, Canon MKIII's and fast glass, and is trying to make a go shooting sports for an unheard of wire service, getting paid on spec. He's a hell of a nice guy but has no clue what he's doing. He always is asking questions and I don't mind one bit helping him out because I like him so much. There are thousands out there like him. He can shoot a good image on occassion so people will use his pictures. But they don't pay livable wages. Some don't pay at all.

 

If publications can get photos that are "good enough" for free from people who do it for the love and not the paycheck, well, the people who depend on the paycheck have a lot to worry about. I've always told myself that if I'm creative enough and work hard enough I won't have to worry about getting paid for my work. Maybe I'm stupid but I still believe this.

Part of the problem is photographers failing to value their own work. This can be true of both professionals and amateur alike. Sharing pictures is part of the joy, the thrill, the passion and I do give my work away, sometimes for a deserving cause (shameless plug - HMS Royal Oak prints - limited edition. Signed by survivors of the sinking) and as prints to those who help in the creative process. But these freebies are for personal use, or to give something back for a worthy cause rather than take take take. The line I draw is those seeking commercial use - magazines, newspapers, websites, television etc who are using my work to promote their goods, products or services for their commercially driven ends. Not every photographer sees it the same way, or fails to realise the benefit to the consumer of their work, and so gives away the image for nothing. Is it morally right for a business to take anything and make money from it and not share the rewards?

An example; on the anniversary of the sinking of HMS Royal Oak the phone rang. It was a television company asking if I had images of the wreck. Yes, plenty - what do you need? They reviewed the images in a protected gallery online and the phone rang again. They wanted to use two images and offered "£50 for all rights". All rights means they can broadcast the images over and over again, to misuse, to re-sell or print, to give away to newspapers and generally do what they like with them. There are only three photographers, perhaps four, that I know of who have images of HMS Royal Oak. At this point I laughed and told them that if they wanted to buy the copyright ("all rights" = "Copyright") then please put three 000s on the back of that number. For each image. The TV producer spluttered and said "That's what we pay for a shot of a criminal coming out of the high court". And my response was "That's why I don't point my camera at the high court steps - its value has been eroded by those who think it's worth £50". In the end I quoted them a fee for up to 5 seconds broadcast, with the option for 2 repeats. It was a long way off their £50 but still not a fortune. They declined and I felt a lot happier turning them down than giving my work away. Incidentally, another TV company paid the full fee for the same images.....so I think the price was not unreasonable.

Making money is down to many things but the subject I choose is the key step. John Bantin's top ten dive sites posting makes interesting reading. Look through the postings and see the familiar dive sites pop up time and time again. It can be difficult selling the idea of a subject to an editor when he knows, has seen, or even dived the very location you have just covered. Unless you have chosen a fresh, vibrant angle (Think Alex Mustard) or have captured something unique and unexpected (Doug Perrine) then you are already on the commercial back foot. It's not a mistake that I have been diving for 10 years and have only visited the Red Sea once.....there were perhaps one or two entries in my personal top ten that were repeated elsewhere. Access to HMS Royal Oak took 4 years of patience. A story I'm still working on has taken 5 and I still don't know if I can pull it off......when I do the material will be truly unique. Nothing gets the attention of an editor faster than telling them something they don't know......

I have delivered a 2700 word feature to Peter Rowlands for UWP magazine on the subject of copyright and the value of images. I won't dwell on it here but would encourage every photographer - underwater or not, professional or amateur - to have a read. By all means dismiss the work as the ramblings of a nutter if you see fit.

I have delivered a 2700 word feature to Peter Rowlands for UWP magazine on the subject of copyright and the value of images. I won't dwell on it here but would encourage every photographer - underwater or not, professional or amateur - to have a read. By all means dismiss the work as the ramblings of a nutter if you see fit.

Simon,

I saw your presentation at BSoUP a couple months ago. Was very interesting. I'm sure UWP readers will get a lot out of it, as I did. Sounds like it a bit more involved. so will be sure to check it out.

Jason

I have delivered a 2700 word feature to Peter Rowlands for UWP magazine on the subject of copyright and the value of images. I won't dwell on it here but would encourage every photographer - underwater or not, professional or amateur - to have a read. By all means dismiss the work as the ramblings of a nutter if you see fit.

I'll have a look. And good on you for not essentially giving away your images. I had a similar incident this summer. A magazine called wanting images of a wreck in Lake Erie. I asked what their rates are and was told " we don't have a budget for photography." Wow, they have the balls but not the budget. I politely declined even though I was promised a byline. Gosh, I'm sure a byline will feed my family.

Another place wanted long term rights for some photos. I quoted them a price and they balked. Almost one year later they relented and paid. They needed the pictures and I had them.

An interesting aspect on digitizing articles that would otherwise be in print is that untoward things can happen at the source. All the articles I wrote for Diver Magazine were archived on divernet.com but recently we found that the company managing the site had employed some clever children who have 1) lost lots of material and 2) corrupted many pages. So the only solution is to go back through old issues of the printed magazine to try to identify what's gone missing. That is a big job.

It's like when I started digital photography, young people who knew told me that it would be safe to archive pictures on CDs because they would last for ten years! I was hoping for a bit longer!

The digital world seems to be a throwaway world, which is fine when you are young but may not be so good when you think ten years ago is yesterday.