[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Rollei] A Few More Questions for Bob Shell
- Subject: Re: [Rollei] A Few More Questions for Bob Shell
- From: "Bob Shell" <bob >
- Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:15:29 -0400
Personal?? Whazzat? You think this is personal, you should see some
of the other mail I get!!!<G>
>From: Aaron Reece <areece >
>To: rollei us
>Subject: [Rollei] A Few More Questions for Bob Shell
>Date: Tue, Jun 27, 2000, 10:00 AM
> As long as we're on the subject of model compensation, I have a couple
>of questions for the Bob along similar lines. To wit:
> 1. Of the professional photographers you hang out with, what would you
>characterize as the typical ratio of actual photography (making
>pictures) versus photo-related activities (writing, reviewing, giving
>workshops, etc.) in the average workload?
What makes you think I "hang out" with professional photographers????
For the most part they are pretty boring. I like to hang out with
models, stylists, designers, physicists, and folks like that. I like
have my mind stretched.
Among the professional photographers I have gotten to know via the
magazine, most spend about 1/3 of their time making photos and the
2/3 dealing with the business side. That's why I always tell students
to take business courses in school. Without a head for business and
the basic knowledge of how to run a business, you're doomed in the
pro photo business.
Very few people make any serious money from writing, reviewing,
and such. One of the few I know well who makes any money from this
of thing is George Lepp. Lepp and I have been buddies for years and
is one hell of a self-promoter and hustler. He gets 400 - 600 people
his seminars! But he still makes more from his shooting. He's up in
Alaska right now for a three-month shooting trip.
> 2. Ok, I finally visited www.bobshell.com, and find myself wondering
>"For what market are these photos intended?" Whatever their aesthetic
>value, it must be admitted that most of your images are not going to be
>published by McCall's, but they're not really pornography, either. Who
>is publishing your photos?
These days they mostly appear in books, magazines, jigsaw puzzles, CD
cassette covers, advertising, etc., in overseas markets. My type of
glamour is not a hot seller in the USA right now. However I also am
a content provider for CompuServe and have a gallery there in their
Photo Forum, and we've done a Bob Shell Screen Saver which has become
somewhat of a hit. That brings in a nice monthly check. The pendulum
though, and things go in and out of fashion, so I am patient. Maxim
magazine is having a big influence these days in swinging the esthetic
pendulum back toward more of a glamour look in its photo spreads on
women. Maybe my stuff will come back into fashion.
I won't shoot porno, and that puts me out of step with the internet.
am constantly getting proposals to shoot for web sites, but I'm not
interested in the sort of stuff they want me to produce. So I have
declined all such offers.
> If this is too personal, I shall certainly understand and respect your
>right to privacy on these issues. Thanks.
As I said above, I'm pretty open about things.