|
Forums >
General Industry >
GWC's, should they be shot
or should they shoot. If so with what camera? Sep 05 06 10:36 am Link Bob Randall Photography wrote: I thought they all used webcams Sep 05 06 10:51 am Link Hey, I use a Kodak Digital camera and a Sony Digital 8 camcorder! Oh, wait. I don't try to bang my models, so I'm not strictly a GWC. Sep 05 06 10:53 am Link Bob Randall Photography wrote: Camera? What's that? I take pictures with my phone. Sep 05 06 02:35 pm Link personally, I dont like the term GWC, because in reality, we all start somewhere, and more than likely our pics sucked when we started. I'll be the first to admit, my stuff sucked really really bad when I first started out 30 years ago, now I think my stuff doesnt suck anymore, its just bad. ( lol ) But I really think we should give the so called GWC's a break, let them learn, give them a chance. Someone with ill intentions toward a model is definitley not a photographer, but I also dont think he/she is a "GWC" they are predators, plain and simple. Sep 05 06 02:44 pm Link I don't know Bob, what do you use? Sep 05 06 02:48 pm Link Some are better than the guys who say they are Pro's  Sep 05 06 02:52 pm Link Gorilla's wearing condoms!!? Christ Bob, that's sick! Sep 05 06 02:52 pm Link Kevin Bargeron wrote: LOL! Sep 05 06 02:56 pm Link If you shoot all the GwCs who will make everyone else look personable and professional ? (Aside form your portfolios ofcourse). Sep 05 06 02:59 pm Link ok, that last one was a jab, but seriously, if the model approaches you to do nudes, are you stil a GWC? Sep 05 06 03:00 pm Link Bob Randall Photography wrote: D00d! Why R U being such a h8ER? Sep 05 06 03:25 pm Link How about just a spanking? I can deal with that. LGL Sep 05 06 03:31 pm Link Has anyone looked up whaqt GWC means? https://www.modelmayhem.com/faq.php#q16 It doesnt mean a beginner lacking good equipment or talent. It is a term in regards to MOTIVE..not ability or professional desire.. Where is that dead horse gif? LMAO Sep 05 06 03:48 pm Link Someone call for a horse?  Sep 05 06 04:02 pm Link *yawn* Sep 05 06 04:07 pm Link I'm a GWC (girl w/camera) too! Sep 05 06 06:45 pm Link I used to think DWF in the singles ads were a bunch of Dwarves that were lonely. Sep 05 06 06:55 pm Link Bob Randall Photography wrote: Leave them along, for God sake! GWCs are also people, the too wanna get laid. Sep 06 06 01:18 am Link You have to wonder about some of the pros, too. I have heard stories about some who have slept with a model or two. Does that turn them from being pros into GWCs? As an admitted wannabe (pro, not GWC), I worry that someone will try to pin the GWC label on me. I don't have a lot of experience. I don't even have a reliable connection to a studio (though I have friends who recently rented space in which they're trying to learn the craft; he photos, she models for him until there are other opportunities). I *do* have more than a Nokia, though. In fact, I *don't* have a Nokia! I have 4 Novatron heads, softboxes, umbrellas, booms, a nice Minolta IV F meter an "almost-pro" digital (Minolta Maxxum 5D) with several lenses and my Mamiya RB67 Pro-S. I have had some classes and a workshop or two (including one in LA on shooting nudes from someone who allegedly frequently shot for Playboy and Penthouse). I *don't* try to sleep with my models, although I have been known to sleep with one of them regularly. (She's my wife.) And I don't just shoot nudes. It *does* tick me off when people (well, guys, actually) see some of my nudes and start in on the "oooooo, can I help?" routine. I take what I'm doing seriously. I want people to look at the photo and be impressed by the photo because I did something right. (And those of you real photographers here are welcome to tell me what I did wrong, too -- I actually value that even more, because it's the only "instruction" I'm probably going to get.) I sure wish it wasn't so hard to get started. Everyone seems to assume that you're a GWC. I'm not. I'm an APA. (That was a second "A", not an "E"!) Sep 14 06 02:09 pm Link I should add that in the late 1980s, I did paid work: indoor/outdoor portraiture, weddings and "boudoir" (a local photographer rather snobbishly pointed out to me that these days this is called "intimates"). And one of my pieces came close to winning a contest when I was a member of the local branch of the PPA. But I know I'm not (yet) pro quality, even though a lot of my photos please people and I'm told by some that I have a good eye. (I wish I could figure out which one it was, though -- lately I've been using the right one a lot. I hope that is the correct choice.) Sep 14 06 02:14 pm Link SensuousEye wrote: So big guy, where can I come tak errr.... see all this equipment. Sep 14 06 02:15 pm Link Kevin Bargeron wrote: Any answer I give is going to sound smug, so I figure I'll give you the smuggest one I can. Sep 14 06 02:19 pm Link Bob Randall Photography wrote: I guess that's why so many of the pros save money by shooting with Nokia. Sep 14 06 02:24 pm Link |
lol
