>In a message dated 1/17/01 3:21:19 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>writes:
>
><< It isn't the brandname or the bucks invested that count in the end, what
> does count is the person taking the picture. >>
>
>I like all the images. But how is she with "ordinary" subjects? Cute children
>lends the images an "edge." But the curmudgeon in me asks about the editing:
>did she do that also?
>Let's hope these images are but the beginning because one can sense the
>talent in the lady.
>
>Mafud
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Editing? I'm not following. At the time I scanned these, they were the best
shots she had with her. I'm sure she has lot a lot of stinkers too, but she
doesn't go out of her way to share those with me.
Actually, I saw her Tuesday AM and she's probably going to quit her
moonlighting as a portrait photog., which is sad. She's a much better
photographer than a house cleaner (though she is a decent house cleaner). I
think she's made some mistakes as far as a) having priced herself too low,
b)not charging enough upfront, c) allowing people to book all her free time
for months in advance, and d)giving people proofs of virtually every shot
(we're talking 50-60 individual prints out of the 72-96 she takes at a
sitting!) and trusting them to pony up their dough after they've got the
goods. It only takes a few people to burn you before you get burnt out.
Dan Scott
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
