Photographer
Ray Cornett
Posts: 9207
Sacramento, California, US
FemmeArt wrote:
Why the negativity? Seriously, do you guys have nothing better to do than denounce others?
You guys remind me of the movie, "Grumpy Old Men..." (regardless of your actual age) Eat my shorts ;-)
Photographer
studio36uk
Posts: 22898
Tavai, Sigave, Wallis and Futuna
Jason McKendricks wrote:
I don't know how common they are, but yes, they often try to pass themselves off as pros. Trevor Snyder wrote:
And since many budding models are naive, they often succeed. All you need is a really big lens. And a check book.
Studio36
Photographer
Gary Blanchette
Posts: 5137
Irvine, California, US
Ok, time for a definition again.
I know what a Pro is more or less. He is an individual that gets paid to lug around a camera and take pictures, right? Can a GWC be disguising as a Pro simply because he has conned models out of money by sweet talking them into a paying gig?
Are all non Pros (or those that haven't been paid yet) considered GWCs even though their work might be superior?
And how about a guy with a camera that has been fortunate enough to produce quality images, yet his alternative motives are just to get women naked?
Just how does an individual pin point a GWC?
Photographer
Michael Barrett
Posts: 1149
Upland, California, US
Hmmmmm...I hardly doubt any photographer shooting today is taking the same quality images that he was the first day he picked up his camera. So...as good as 'he' may be now, at one time wasn't he a GWC?
My point being is that I have no allusions that I'll ever work for Playboy, Stuff, Maxim or any magazine really, BUT..I love photography, I love seeing what we can create together.
So...since I might never publish anything, might never even think about going that direction, since my choice of subject is scantily clad women ( is there a more beautiful sight?), does that make me a GWC?
Hmmmmmm?
Photographer
Meech Creative LLC
Posts: 97
Frederick, Maryland, US
Although I am sure they're out there this seriously is a lame and tired topic and extremely derogatory, sexist and stereotypical. Side note: I must be a GW3C because I own 3 cameras!  I used to model and I have loved taking pictures as long as I can remember. Oh noes!!! I always have at least one camera with me in my shoulder bag due to the nature of my day to day job. Creepy huh!?!? LOOKOUT! GUY WITH A CAMERA!!!! I have only just begun to get back into shooting with more drive as a "professional hobby". I don't need to do it "professionally" to make a living. My real job fills that niche nicely, affords me 3 days off a week to expel creative energies and its a great way of networking and meeting new people. Simply assuming every guy who does not chose to make a living taking pictures of or for people is a pervy GWC is a shame. Having seen many photog "hobbyists" on this site with amazing portfolios should say something contrary to that belief...especially when also seeing so-called professionals who do this for a living with horrendous ports full of pics that make Glamourshots look like a better viable option for getting shots done. /rant
Photographer
That Look Photography
Posts: 1581
Clearwater, Florida, US
I think it's funny how people rip on GWC people. Theres not a single photographer on MM that picked up a camera and was a pro 1 minute later. I think what happens is some go on and become very good shooters. And others fade away after they get tired of doing it.
Mike
Photographer
Halcyon 7174 NYC
Posts: 20109
New York, New York, US
Michael Barrett wrote:
Hmmmmm...I hardly doubt any photographer shooting today is taking the same quality images that he was the first day he picked up his camera. So...as good as 'he' may be now, at one time wasn't he a GWC? GWC isn't just "guy with camera," it refers to someone who will never be more than that.
Photographer
Meech Creative LLC
Posts: 97
Frederick, Maryland, US
Ched wrote:
GWC isn't just "guy with camera," it refers to someone who will never be more than that. Ok, so to play Devils Advocate are you saying that because (for example) I don't aspire to do this professionally yet still strive to take pictures of an elevated calibur or have strong artistic value (regardless of the subject) I am a GWC?
Photographer
Halcyon 7174 NYC
Posts: 20109
New York, New York, US
Ched wrote:
GWC isn't just "guy with camera," it refers to someone who will never be more than that. J Douglas wrote:
Ok, so to play Devils Advocate are you saying that because (for example) I don't aspire to do this professionally yet still strive to take pictures of an elevated calibur or have strong artistic value (regardless of the subject) I am a GWC? No, I'm saying that because you "still strive to take pictures of an elevated calibur or have strong artistic value" that means you are not a GWC.
GWC does not mean amateur, it means idiot with camera, shrub with camera, perv with camera, etc.
It does not mean "beginner" or "weekend warrior" or anything like that.
A GWC is someone whose only interest in photography is for its relation to naked women.
A comparrison might be a guy who owns a guitar but cannot play. He bought the guitar only to attract women and has no intention of practicing.
Photographer
SKPhoto
Posts: 25784
Newark, California, US
Shrubs like naked women?
There goes my outdoor shoot.
Photographer
Meech Creative LLC
Posts: 97
Frederick, Maryland, US
Ched wrote:
Ched wrote:
GWC isn't just "guy with camera," it refers to someone who will never be more than that. No, I'm saying that because you "still strive to take pictures of an elevated calibur or have strong artistic value" that means you are not a GWC.
GWC does not[/]i mean amateur, it means idiot with camera, shrub with camera, perv with camera, etc.
It does [i]not mean "beginner" or "weekend warrior" or anything like that.
A GWC is someone whose only interest in photography is for its relation to naked women.
A comparrison might be a guy who owns a guitar but cannot play. He bought the guitar only to attract women and has no intention of practicing. Ohhhhhhh, ok! Thanks for the clarification.
Photographer
Luminos
Posts: 6065
Columbia, Maryland, US
That Look Photo wrote:
I think it's funny how people rip on GWC people. Theres not a single photographer on MM that picked up a camera and was a pro 1 minute later. I think what happens is some go on and become very good shooters. And others fade away after they get tired of doing it.
Mike Not entirely true. In the fall of 1971 at the age of 18 I was sitting outside the student union at college, minding my own business, when a young woman of about 21 walks up, shoves a camera in my hands, and says, "I understand you were your high school's photographer. We want you to shoot for the college. We need a photographer."
I had to tell her that I was never a photographer, in high school or anywhere else. She reached for the camera, but I told her it sounded like fun, and I'd do it. From that moment forward I was paid to be a Public Relations photographer (the position was actually paid, it wasn't a volunteer spot.)
Photographer
Jason McKendricks
Posts: 6025
Chico, California, US
Michael Barrett wrote:
Hmmmmm...I hardly doubt any photographer shooting today is taking the same quality images that he was the first day he picked up his camera. So...as good as 'he' may be now, at one time wasn't he a GWC? That Look Photo wrote:
I think it's funny how people rip on GWC people. Theres not a single photographer on MM that picked up a camera and was a pro 1 minute later. I think what happens is some go on and become very good shooters. And others fade away after they get tired of doing it.
Mike A photographer's skill level or years of experience are not what earns the moniker of "GWC". It's a mindset relating to why he is doing this in the first place. Per the link that Ched provided, a GWC is one using his camera in hopes of opportunities to date women, have sex with them or see them naked.
Yes, the term has been used by a few to refer to those whose skills are not par with the professionals. In that context it is completely inaccurate.
The reason we "rip" on GWCs is that the perception they help to foster spreads to all of us. I met one young lady while shopping at the mall with my girlfriend. I didn't have a book with me, but I stopped her, introduced myself and gave her my card and asked her to check out my work and get in touch with me if she was interested. She appeared uncertain until my girlfriend caught up with us and then she relaxed.
After I finally shot with her, she told me at first she wasn't sure if I was sincere or not and that she has had a few guys offer to photograph her and then reveal other intentions.
Photographer
Jason McKendricks
Posts: 6025
Chico, California, US
Luminos wrote:
Now I'm a hobbyest. I finished college and additional degrees, and went into research. Now I shoot for the fun of it.
So, when I'm shooting a scenic, and it's just me and the landscape, does that make me a GWC? Nope. I'm not a pro either. I have a career outside of photography, though I do make money on the side through clients and a few product sales.
Model
UnavailableNonExistant
Posts: 294
Columbus, Ohio, US
NC17 wrote:
I know plenty of them. They consist of a substantial amount of my market and bring in a high percentage of my profits through modeling.
I have no problem with that.
Many of them think so highly of themselves and their own work. Being able to get girls naked makes them feel powerful and incharge. "I photograph naked (or semi naked) girls because _________" whatever reason they come up with. Part of the problem is that several of the ones that I have met are actually successful photographers. They are able to market their images to eye-candy types sites, since that is all that they are taking images of. Unfortunately, that success blows their own egos way out of proportion.
They are often the ones that you find with lists of girls that they have photographed in their ports that are MILES long. It is rare to find any one of those girls working a second time with that photographer.
They prey upon new girls because the new girls can easily be swayed by flashing several $$$ signs. The girls don't know whats going on, and fall for it, thinking that because the photographer is offering to pay that it means that they know what they are doing.
Let me also clarify that many GWC's do go on to become very good photographers that don't fall into the GWC category anymore. For many of them its the excitement of just starting out, they get ahead of themselves and want to run out and take pictures of pretty girls before they really understand how the camera works and what the difference is between a snapshot and a piece of art. They simply often enter the photography arena not being aware of what they don't know. Hopefully their head isn't over inflated to the degree that they can't ever get past that point.
By the same token, models often begin that way too. They don't know what they don't know, and all they do know is that they're a model. Many of them simply fade after a short time, but there are others, including myself, that stuck around long enough to figure out how this works and make it work for them.
Its not blatant negativity, FemmeArt, its the truth. There is a VERY large group of photographers out there that are only involved in this for the abililty and capacity to get girls naked. Most of them are entirely harmless, they just enjoy what they do.
There is nothing wrong with that in the world. Frankly they support a good deal of my modeling income, so don't knock them too hard! Great post.
|
