Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Klinko bankrupt.....  (Read 11875 times)
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #40 on: September 07, 2009, 11:44:39 AM »
ReplyReply

[quote name='Dustbak' date='Sep 7 2009, 03:43 PM' post='308826']
 


She was able to make some fantastic images and this nobody can take away from her.

Actually, these they can and probably will; life's a bitch. But I hope she makes it through.

Rob C
Logged

rogan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 135


« Reply #41 on: September 07, 2009, 11:52:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bcooter
Alot of photographers opens up Vanity Fare or Vogue looks at the cover or a spread and says "I couldaa done that".  Sure because it's already road mapped and been done, so that's not that difficult.

The trick is not taking the photograph, the trick is having the juice it takes to get into the room to take the photograph and they juice may come from talent, knowing how to hire the right crew, buying the right dinner or having a relative that works at a publisher.  

It doesn't matter because the Vogue/Vanity Fare photographer is in the room and shooting the job.

I don't think anyone in their right mind rejoices at the problems of AL, at least if they are a working photographer.

If Annie is at the top, then it's the trickle down theory.  If she does bad, everyone down below does bad and considering the economy, nobody should feel warm and fuzzy when another photographer has problems.

What do you want to hear, Annie shoots for $500 or shoots for $100,000,000.  I'll go for the $100,000,000 routine because it raises our profession and believe it or not raises everyone's rates.

As far as the personal attacks, we've all heard them and though some may have validity, it is still second hand information and in my experience the assistant or crew member that screams about
one photographer treating them poorly is usually the assistant that proceeds to break every piece of equipment they touch, so all of this can be taken with a grain of salt and I can promise you if you do this business with freelance crew, own your own equipment and do a yearly inventory, you'll be shocked at the amount of lost or broken equipment.  

So it's kind of hard to keep your cool when somebody drops a new powerbook off a table, on an editorial shoot with a $500 per page rate.

How is a photographer suppose to react when an assistant ships $2,500 worth of camera supports and doesn't attach a FEDEX label?  Thanks, and let me pay you that double overtime?  Though is you call the assistant a dumbass, he will tell everyone he knows what a prick you were to work with.

The Klinky thing is different, mostly because of the body of work he produced and a lot of the self generated PR that seemed purposefully placed.

The one and only thing that Annie and Klinky have in common (other than money issues) is their works now relies heavily on post production.  

Not that it doesn't take talent or an eye to get the basic image, but one or two soft lights does not make patterns and shadows like the final images suggest and there are no digital cameras I know of that get close to the color pallets they both present.

I love it when I hear the praise or complaints that a dalsa chip looks more film like than a Kodak sensor, or ccd is more film like than cmos, when in reality none of them look remotely close in final reproduction like they looked on screen during the shoot.

At least not any work of importance, because everything that the public sees now goes through many multiple rounds of post production.

I personally like Annie's earlier film work because even though most was staged, it had more reality to it.  You honestly believed that whoopie was in that warm milk where today it probably would be cg and whoopie would be squeezed and retouched to look like a 18 year old.

Staged or not, you knew it was John and Yoko in that bed and today it would be four pressers, two seamstress, 2 makeup artists, a week of propping and 3 personal managers on set to approve the final image.

In fact I think professional photographers have shot themselves in the foot, relying so heavily on post production, to produce an image, because so many images have gone from photography to paintings and drawing something is usually a lot cheaper than shooting it, but once you draw it, a photograph looses a lot of it's validity.

Photography on most levels has just become over managed and I blame most of that on digital, because the upside is you know you have the shot before the day is done, the downside is everyone wants to see the shot in micro detail and offer up an opinion at every stage from polaroid, to shoot, to final retouch.

We start this with casting, wardrobe, locations and props and the committee think doesn't stop until the final head swap, eye change, smile moved, wrinkle smoothed image is taken down to the level of one of those Japanese CG models with the big round eyes and it takes a strong personality to keep the comments to a minimum and get to something special.

(Maybe the "challenged"  lcd previews that medium format cameras produce could actually be marketed as a plus.  You can show the client the image, but they don't know what the hell their looking at.)

I read that stuff in those articles that said AL did "lavish" shoots moving Kristin Dunst as Marie Antoinette, and a crew to Paris for a shoot at the Versailles.

Where the hell are you suppose to shoot Marie Antoinette?  At the Sav-On parking lot in New Jersey?

Until you've stepped out on set with 200 e-mails, 12 conference calls jammed into your head about what you can't do, vs. what you can do, it's difficult to understand the pressure a photographer is under and yes, sometimes that pressure leads to a few sharp comments when the photographer sees an assistant standing there holding his wang in one hand, talking to his girlfriend on his iphone with the other while your screaming give me the 85 1.2 because the sun is falling and he runs over and hands you a 35 1.4, the sun drops, end of story.

A few years ago one assistant said to me he knew he will be a great success as a photographer because he always "sees" better photographs than the photographer he is assisting.  I replied, ok, maybe that's true, maybe not, but let's be realistic, the only pressure you have on this project is to try and not break my camera.  

So my suggestion is to take all of these comments with a very tiny grain of salt and never believe anything you read or hear about money (good or bad) until you see someone's bank statement.


BC
Great post Mr Cooter. I couldn't agree more
Logged
Frank Doorhof
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1524


WWW
« Reply #42 on: September 08, 2009, 01:28:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: rogan
Great post Mr Cooter. I couldn't agree more
+1
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #43 on: September 08, 2009, 02:27:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Frank Doorhof
+1



Add another!

+2

Rob C
Logged

mcfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 938


WWW
« Reply #44 on: September 08, 2009, 06:55:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: rogan
Great post Mr Cooter. I couldn't agree more

We were doing a presentation in Melbourne to wedding & portrait photographers. One fellow AIPP member said to me" I worked as a photographer 20 years ago in Melbourne for a top wedding/portrait studio and the thing I learned the most was not to go broke." This photographer today runs a very successful studio in Melbourne & is an award winning photographer as well. We did our presentation, listened to other presenters & judged but this comment has not left me.

Denis
Logged

Denis Montalbetti
Montalbetti+Campbell
www.montalbetticampbell.com
jfwfoto
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #45 on: September 21, 2009, 12:24:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Lisa should go to PDN and read the comments from people who actually worked for them to see how mild the comments on this forum are. I think photographers get a bad rap for being difficult because of people like Klinko. He is just another sad case of pride going before a fall. I do not think jerks should get a break just because they can take some good pictures.    
Logged
Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1004


WWW
« Reply #46 on: September 21, 2009, 01:36:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jfwfoto
Lisa should go to PDN and read the comments from people who actually worked for them to see how mild the comments on this forum are.
Sure, you might write off a percentage of the comments here and on PDN as kicking someone when they are down, but you don't generate the pervasive animosity found in the comments on PDN by former employees just by being in the wrong place at the right time.  Wow.  Those two have some serious bad karma to bring out that type of vitriol.  Even the two semi-defenders on that list had bad things to say about them.  As someone who was seriously stiffed by a production company this year that knowingly ran up debts with me that they knew they couldn't repay, I can understand where many if these people are coming from.  The fact that these two seem to have piled huge egos on top of harmful actions surely put a bull's eye on their backs.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2009, 01:38:04 AM by Colorwave » Logged

Dansk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 153


« Reply #47 on: September 21, 2009, 02:07:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Cant say I'm overly shocked really. The first jobs to go in tough times are the big budget, high profile gigs. Mine have all dried up too and which is what brings me to post here. I dont know Klinko or Indrani nor have I known anyone who actually worked for them BUT... a lot of talented people do and when times turn around ( which they will ) and the big gigs start rolling in again Im sure Klinko and Indrani will be hungry and well rested after being sidelined for however long this mess takes for them to sort out and they will be on many peoples list to work with again. Its my guess they will rise again rejuvenated and fresh ( and hopefully watch the bottom line this time ) or this skid will drive them ( perhaps just one ) into a pit of despair and misfortune so deep and dark that the light will never shine the same again and they end up as has beens which happens very easily to any business or person in high profiles who fall hard.

Regardless of my own guess on their next moves its sad to see some of the icons of our industry falling down. It sets a type of "standard" if you will that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. For instance lets say that during these hard times maybe Klinko did some work that benefited not only his business but something good and truly beneficial for his clients instead of going under. Whether he deserved this or not it might have garnered more respect on the whole for our art and craft than the examples being made of him ( and even Annie sadly ) in the media that they ( which pretty much means "we" as in all of us pro shooters ) are a bunch of control freak money grubbing over indulgent self absorbed ars'holes who deserve to get shafted.

So considering that. The next big name in photography which may be any one of you should hopefully learn from the mistakes of the previous shooters such as Klinko and remember to exude some class and honor along the way. Doing so might be just enough to get you through the hard times we all face now and then. He who cannot recall history is condemned to repeat it.

I still think the guy was over the top personally but to each his own



Logged
SecondFocus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 474


WWW
« Reply #48 on: September 21, 2009, 10:17:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Well said! And it is appreciated that you took the time to write it!!

Quote from: bcooter
Alot of photographers opens up Vanity Fare or Vogue looks at the cover or a spread and says "I couldaa done that".  Sure because it's already road mapped and been done, so that's not that difficult.

The trick is not taking the photograph, the trick is having the juice it takes to get into the room to take the photograph and they juice may come from talent, knowing how to hire the right crew, buying the right dinner or having a relative that works at a publisher.  

It doesn't matter because the Vogue/Vanity Fare photographer is in the room and shooting the job.

I don't think anyone in their right mind rejoices at the problems of AL, at least if they are a working photographer.

If Annie is at the top, then it's the trickle down theory.  If she does bad, everyone down below does bad and considering the economy, nobody should feel warm and fuzzy when another photographer has problems.

What do you want to hear, Annie shoots for $500 or shoots for $100,000,000.  I'll go for the $100,000,000 routine because it raises our profession and believe it or not raises everyone's rates.

As far as the personal attacks, we've all heard them and though some may have validity, it is still second hand information and in my experience the assistant or crew member that screams about
one photographer treating them poorly is usually the assistant that proceeds to break every piece of equipment they touch, so all of this can be taken with a grain of salt and I can promise you if you do this business with freelance crew, own your own equipment and do a yearly inventory, you'll be shocked at the amount of lost or broken equipment.  

So it's kind of hard to keep your cool when somebody drops a new powerbook off a table, on an editorial shoot with a $500 per page rate.

How is a photographer suppose to react when an assistant ships $2,500 worth of camera supports and doesn't attach a FEDEX label?  Thanks, and let me pay you that double overtime?  Though is you call the assistant a dumbass, he will tell everyone he knows what a prick you were to work with.

The Klinky thing is different, mostly because of the body of work he produced and a lot of the self generated PR that seemed purposefully placed.

The one and only thing that Annie and Klinky have in common (other than money issues) is their works now relies heavily on post production.  

Not that it doesn't take talent or an eye to get the basic image, but one or two soft lights does not make patterns and shadows like the final images suggest and there are no digital cameras I know of that get close to the color pallets they both present.

I love it when I hear the praise or complaints that a dalsa chip looks more film like than a Kodak sensor, or ccd is more film like than cmos, when in reality none of them look remotely close in final reproduction like they looked on screen during the shoot.

At least not any work of importance, because everything that the public sees now goes through many multiple rounds of post production.

I personally like Annie's earlier film work because even though most was staged, it had more reality to it.  You honestly believed that whoopie was in that warm milk where today it probably would be cg and whoopie would be squeezed and retouched to look like a 18 year old.

Staged or not, you knew it was John and Yoko in that bed and today it would be four pressers, two seamstress, 2 makeup artists, a week of propping and 3 personal managers on set to approve the final image.

In fact I think professional photographers have shot themselves in the foot, relying so heavily on post production, to produce an image, because so many images have gone from photography to paintings and drawing something is usually a lot cheaper than shooting it, but once you draw it, a photograph looses a lot of it's validity.

Photography on most levels has just become over managed and I blame most of that on digital, because the upside is you know you have the shot before the day is done, the downside is everyone wants to see the shot in micro detail and offer up an opinion at every stage from polaroid, to shoot, to final retouch.

We start this with casting, wardrobe, locations and props and the committee think doesn't stop until the final head swap, eye change, smile moved, wrinkle smoothed image is taken down to the level of one of those Japanese CG models with the big round eyes and it takes a strong personality to keep the comments to a minimum and get to something special.

(Maybe the "challenged"  lcd previews that medium format cameras produce could actually be marketed as a plus.  You can show the client the image, but they don't know what the hell their looking at.)

I read that stuff in those articles that said AL did "lavish" shoots moving Kristin Dunst as Marie Antoinette, and a crew to Paris for a shoot at the Versailles.

Where the hell are you suppose to shoot Marie Antoinette?  At the Sav-On parking lot in New Jersey?

Until you've stepped out on set with 200 e-mails, 12 conference calls jammed into your head about what you can't do, vs. what you can do, it's difficult to understand the pressure a photographer is under and yes, sometimes that pressure leads to a few sharp comments when the photographer sees an assistant standing there holding his wang in one hand, talking to his girlfriend on his iphone with the other while your screaming give me the 85 1.2 because the sun is falling and he runs over and hands you a 35 1.4, the sun drops, end of story.

A few years ago one assistant said to me he knew he will be a great success as a photographer because he always "sees" better photographs than the photographer he is assisting.  I replied, ok, maybe that's true, maybe not, but let's be realistic, the only pressure you have on this project is to try and not break my camera.  

So my suggestion is to take all of these comments with a very tiny grain of salt and never believe anything you read or hear about money (good or bad) until you see someone's bank statement.


BC
Logged

Ian L. Sitren
SecondFocus
geesbert
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 551



WWW
« Reply #49 on: September 22, 2009, 03:46:58 AM »
ReplyReply

anyone cares to post a link to the PDN thread, I can't find it.
Logged

-------------------------
WWW.RANDLKOFER.COM
rethmeier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 780


WWW
« Reply #50 on: September 22, 2009, 04:26:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Stefan,
I just got hold of it.
http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/content_displ...09c2377097362a1

Boy some people hate this guy!
Read the remarks,
« Last Edit: September 22, 2009, 04:27:09 AM by rethmeier » Logged

Willem Rethmeier
www.willemrethmeier.com
Sydney Australia
geesbert
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 551



WWW
« Reply #51 on: September 22, 2009, 07:02:56 AM »
ReplyReply

thanks willem!

wow, what goes around comes around....
Logged

-------------------------
WWW.RANDLKOFER.COM
ThierryH
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 409


« Reply #52 on: September 22, 2009, 07:09:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Like your "alias", Stefan!

 

Best regards,
Thierry


Quote from: geesbert
what goes around comes around....
Logged

Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad