Look at her website.
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
An interesting article in the Guardian
- Thread starter jonoslack
- Start date
V
Vivek
Guest
Stuff on her website does look to be rangefinder type work ... and even if it isn't, so what? We use what we like, and apparently she likes the Leica ME.
-Marc
V
Vivek
Guest
Indeed. My point is that this does not allow anyone to diss the images posted here or to say something negative about appreciative comments unless they have specific reasons to be critical of the images they see here. Sarah Lee's images alone do not warrant such blanket statements.
jonoslack
Active member
HI Chris
I quite agree - and I also know a number of seriously impoverished pros in the UK - but actually, the point here is that NB23 is simply trying a wind up job - he wound me up first, then Shashin, now he's winding you up. Perfectly legitimate, but ultimately rather tiring.
Vivek - I don't think that Chris was dissing the images posted here specifically- rather images on the internet generally - although I'm sure he can clarify
all the best
topoxforddoc
New member
The digital era heralded the end of many pro photographers' careers in the UK. When people still shot film, pro photographers did quite well in the UK (don't know about elsewhere). Now it's digital, the newspapers and media here expect top quality images almost for free. Lots of people send in the shots taken on their iPhones or compacts, hoping for a moments limelight. Alternatively they get pictures from agencies. As a result, the prices paid for PJ images has fallen through the floor. One of my friends (a pro) was offered £5 by a National newspaper for a series of shots at a pop festival, that they were writing up!
I dont think any national newspaper in the UK now has any staff photographers. They're pretty much all freelancers. That ain't easy.
I dont think any national newspaper in the UK now has any staff photographers. They're pretty much all freelancers. That ain't easy.
Shashin
Well-known member
I thought being badly paid was part of the thing about being an artist. That, and cutting your ear off. We kind of don't recognize that many of the artist in history had another way to pay the bills.
But that is really the crime of trying to work in a creative discipline, especially one that does not involve selling stuff, you don't get paid very much. Sometimes you get better pay serving at restaurants. But having bad pay has an upside--you don't get taxed much either.
Bring me poverty that I can afford...
V
Vivek
Guest
Interesting, isn't it? The quality of phone images have gone up amazingly well.
Also, how many printed newspapers (the ones that are not free) will survive for how long is open to speculation.
We have come a long way in terms of some of the newspapers supporting real explorations (of the likes of Charles Darwin, or of the Egyptian Pyramids) to 5 UKP/picture pop-festival images.
jonoslack
Active member
HI Vivek - I quite agree. . . The Guardian though is a good example of a paper which is reputable, intelligent, has good writers, excellent photographers, is still printed, and also has a respected and vibrant internet presence.
I hear it doesn't pay it's photographers very well though
topoxforddoc
New member
Jono,HI Vivek - I quite agree. . . The Guardian though is a good example of a paper which is reputable, intelligent, has good writers, excellent photographers, is still printed, and also has a respected and vibrant internet presence.
I hear it doesn't pay it's photographers very well though
I don't think they have any staff photographers any more. My friend, Lara (with the M9 & 24 lux), told me that her friends, who were Guardian staffers, were laid off some years ago. I think they now rely on freelancers and the usual agencies eg AP, Reuters etc (like the other national papers).
Guardian News & Media (essentially The Guardian and Observer operations) is losing almost £1m per week and is only kept afloat by the profitable parts of the wider Guardian Media Group (e.g. Auto Trader magazine). Even so, GMG as a whole still made a substantial loss last year so it is questionable what the future holds for The Guardian as print sales decline further.
Wind up job? Not really.
Well, it appears that I was absolutely right: she indeed was paying back a favor to Leica. A blatant marketing stunt. It's funny that instead of acknowledging this you are trying to pass me as a troll. it doesn't work.
And about the poverty issue it's clear that it would have taken the same amount of money that it took her to buy that Leica then to buy a Pro Nikon Kit. So I don't understand the monetary arguments that are supposed to make her look brave in her poverty.
Maggie O
Active member
I'm dreadfully sorry to point this out, but unless you've got documentation that proves that she was paid or given promotional consideration for her blog post, your post is, sadly, at best, defamatory and possibly libel. Of course, if there's evidence backing your claims, then no harm, no foul, but I think it's best if we consider our words carefully and treat other photographers as we'd like to be treated.
Obviously, this post is not legal advice and is for entertainment purposes only. Please, consult a licensed attorney for any legal questions or advice.
Someone in this thread that knows her personally already let the cat out of the bag. I'm simply amazed that you and others are so enamored and hypnotized by the Leica brand that you all lose common sense when it comes to rationalizing. I'm portrayed as the "big bad Leica basher". I'm such a bad boy.
jonoslack
Active member
Sorry - I missed that - please can you point me to the message? Are you muddling up Lara with Sarah?
I thought you were libelling Sarah Lee? - obviously Leica would (quite legitimately) hand cameras around to people wherever it seemed to be to their advantage . . . .just like they did for topoxforddoc's friend Lara on page 2.
The issue is not whether it's legitimate for Leica to give people cameras (of course it is) - it's whether you have the right to accuse Sarah Lee of lying in a Guardian article (by her saying that she bought a camera that you say she was given)
Last edited:
edwardkaraa
New member
I'm a day late looking in to this thread. But my reply, if a little late, is exactly the same as Marc's :
Look at her website.
............... Chris
Hi Jono - Us old Camborne Tech. boys sticking together eh? Thanks for the support, but I long ago stopped being wound up by people on forums, however I did feel a need to state my contrary view to Mr. NB23's. Sarah Lee has talent, I find talent invigorating, I know that talent needs support, I'm happy to be supportive and thank you for bringing her work to our attention.
............. Chris
IWC Doppel
New member
Nice article, okay cake, nice camera
I believe her
I believe her