Member of the Month

PartyBullshiit
March, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Published Photos

profile picture
davedinuzzo
Posts: 232 - Karma: 36
Sort of anyway...

Be-Mag

Got an online interview with a blader named James Short and spent a few days shooting photos with him, check it out!

all the photos are also on my flickr
Jul 13 2009 10:58AM
0 0
profile picture
davedinuzzo
Posts: 232 - Karma: 36
nobody? haha top
Jul 13 2009 4:56PM
0 0
profile picture
h.yfoskett
Posts: 285 - Karma: 219

thts sick bro

how u get on tht

Jul 13 2009 5:31PM
0 0
profile picture
1080ski
Posts: 4424 - Karma: 191
not bad. i like the use of more than one flash in some of the photos (or maybe i am a moron but it looks like it). the top one on your flickr is my favorite
Jul 13 2009 7:17PM
0 0
profile picture
davedinuzzo
Posts: 232 - Karma: 36
i use 2 flashes in almost every single one of my action shots
Jul 13 2009 8:18PM
0 0
profile picture
00000000
Posts: 11075 - Karma: 82,508
Very nice, I really enjoyed your shots
Jul 13 2009 8:58PM
0 0
profile picture
davedinuzzo
Posts: 232 - Karma: 36
thanks dude


also a clarification on above... clearly i did not use any flashes in the silhouette
Jul 13 2009 9:06PM
0 0
profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
man that last shot irks me.. hate the distortion. But I love the silhouette shot, so sick!


10.5?
Jul 13 2009 9:45PM
0 0
profile picture
b-ladd
Posts: 2300 - Karma: 48
I saw these on flickr, great shots. Makes me want to actually use the blades I bought last summer.
Jul 13 2009 10:06PM
0 0
profile picture
davedinuzzo
Posts: 232 - Karma: 36
yea it was the 10.5... im saving for a mid-wide angle... currently i have a MASSIVE gap between 10.5 and 35 so there arn't a ton of options in the wide department of my bag right now

its real odd... it seems that people really don't like fisheye shots nearly as much anymore as they did even 6 months ago
Jul 13 2009 11:21PM
0 0
profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
ha the fish eye fad will be back.. itll never leave. And I like the first 10.5 shot, fit the situation perfect..


BUT if your looking to sell for a cheap price I would love the lens! lol. Almost had one for $425 a week ago but the guy sold it the night before we were supposed to meet.
Jul 13 2009 11:25PM
0 0
profile picture
ChronicLines
Posts: 951 - Karma: 61
So sick man, added you on flickr too.
Jul 14 2009 12:16AM
0 0
profile picture
davedinuzzo
Posts: 232 - Karma: 36
im considering getting rid of it eventually... i'd like to add a 12-24 and get rid of the 10.5 at some point in time
Jul 14 2009 1:05AM
0 0
profile picture
LC.
Posts: 5952 - Karma: 2,423
What did they pay for online usage?
Jul 14 2009 7:39AM
0 0
profile picture
davedinuzzo
Posts: 232 - Karma: 36
rollerblading industry is tiny and doesn't pay for online content
Jul 14 2009 8:53AM
0 0
profile picture
LC.
Posts: 5952 - Karma: 2,423
Don't work for free, seriously. Or even for product. Someone has made money from your photos here, they should pay you for them.
Jul 14 2009 9:38AM
0 0
profile picture
Pippin
Posts: 4846 - Karma: 661
Yep, you spent money on buying all that equipment didn't you?
You spent a bunch of your time on this didn't you?

So why shouldn't they compensate you.
Jul 14 2009 11:44AM
0 0
profile picture
davedinuzzo
Posts: 232 - Karma: 36
i promise, they arn't making any money

and i work for fun, dude is a friend of mine, the mag didn't ask me to shoot it, he did
Jul 14 2009 6:50PM
0 0
profile picture
LC.
Posts: 5952 - Karma: 2,423
The site you linked to has banner ads so at a very minimum they have income from those. Someone is benefiting from your photos here. You're hurting your reputation and hurting the industry. Charge for your work.
Jul 14 2009 7:25PM
0 0
profile picture
davedinuzzo
Posts: 232 - Karma: 36
I charge when I deem it necessary. I know they dont pay for that type of stuff I'm not really worried about it. I'll consider them hosting my work on their site payment enough. I've had more than double the typical traffic on my flickr due to those photos. If thats what it takes to get my name out there than so be it. So the tradeoff would be to refuse to do the work, not get known and be stuck shooting photos and have nothing to do with them. I know for a fact that I shoot an industry in which videographers are LUCKY to break even on their videos. I know that getting a shot in a magazine pays somewhere in the nieghborhood of $50. You can lecture me all you want, but being high and mighty and denying a good friend shots for an online interview is just being a dick. It isn't skiing where dudes win $35,000 for a comp and photogs get $1500 for a photo.

I have other work coming out which I am getting paid for that isn't online content, but unfortunately for me thats how the industry works right now. I've heard it from multiple companies, from multiple photographers. Denying the work because they don't pay me when they don't pay anyone else is just dumb. Thats basically saying well fuck you I would rather not have anyone know me or my work because I think 4 photos for a twice a week online interview are worth more than a printed shot are
Jul 14 2009 7:57PM
0 0
profile picture
LC.
Posts: 5952 - Karma: 2,423
It's the principle. You're contributing to the devaluation of photography. From now on that magazine will expect photos for free from everyone. Well done.
Jul 15 2009 5:37AM
0 0
profile picture
davedinuzzo
Posts: 232 - Karma: 36
considering they havent paid anyone for online photos in years...

they were NOT published in the mag, nobody in the blade industry pays for online photos, its a poor industry thats how it works. Aparently you have issues reading or comprehending this idea because its how shit works. Its not something I'm thrilled about, but I also don't play on pursuing a profressional rollerblading photo career because theres no money in it.

but you're right, I just ruined photography for the world because I didn't change the way the rollerblading industry has worked for the past 5 years... good call on that one
Jul 15 2009 10:38AM
0 0
profile picture
LC.
Posts: 5952 - Karma: 2,423
No, they don't pay for online photos because they know there's people like you they can exploit and get free stuff from.
Jul 15 2009 10:48AM
0 0
profile picture
davedinuzzo
Posts: 232 - Karma: 36
lets do some math

if a mag pays $40 for a full page PRINTED photo

what ask them for $1 for putting a shot online? Top phototogs in the industry have their shit online for free, I know the principles, i read wheels and wax as well. I'm not worried about putting some shots online for free so that a friend can have a solid interview. It was either I shot it and helped him out or he didn't get an interview, I did what I felt was right and its done. You can disagree or try to preach to me all you want, but once again, I read wheels and wax too and you might as well be hitting the copy and paste button with everything you are saying.

I'm done posting in here because rather than putting a few minutes of intelligent thought into talking about the specific scenario, you are just trying to preach and be high and mighty and quite honestly it isn't worth my time. Go be upset that I "killed photography" and have a good day
Jul 15 2009 11:07AM
0 0
profile picture
LC.
Posts: 5952 - Karma: 2,423
Whatever, you don't get it.
Jul 15 2009 11:24AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)