Several months ago, I was at a meeting of the local genealogical society. I thought it would be a good opportunity to offer my services.
Coincidentally, the guest speaker gave a presentation on creating a family photo album. During the lecture she showed some otherwise excellent photos which were "restored" in a very mediocre manner. She said she bought some software for $69.99 and used it to "restore" the photos. She said, "I don't know how it does it, but all I have to do is click the mouse, and it's done."
After this statement, I knew my services would be a hard sell.
Just this week, an ad in Popular Photography touted the new Microtek scanner which "restores" photos while it scans. Included in the article was an inset of a help wanted newspaper ad for a photo restorer with knowledge of Photoshop 7 and 20 years experience. A large salary range was offered for the accepted candidate.
The message was clear: "Buy our scanner, or hire a highly-paid specialist."
And this message of trivlialization is not limited to photo restorers.
A friend of mine is a graphics artist. He is degreed in both art and photojournalism. He once told me in exasperation, "Anyone who buys a copy of Adobe Illustrator thinks he's an artist."
Part of the problem, I believe, is that many don't know what a good photo looks like. They don't know the work that goes into a well-done restoration.
As a consequence of these misapprehensions, when we say we'll restore a photo for $100 or $200, we look to some folks as scam artists. All we're doing, after all, is just clicking a mouse button.
Your thoughts on this?
!
Coincidentally, the guest speaker gave a presentation on creating a family photo album. During the lecture she showed some otherwise excellent photos which were "restored" in a very mediocre manner. She said she bought some software for $69.99 and used it to "restore" the photos. She said, "I don't know how it does it, but all I have to do is click the mouse, and it's done."
After this statement, I knew my services would be a hard sell.
Just this week, an ad in Popular Photography touted the new Microtek scanner which "restores" photos while it scans. Included in the article was an inset of a help wanted newspaper ad for a photo restorer with knowledge of Photoshop 7 and 20 years experience. A large salary range was offered for the accepted candidate.
The message was clear: "Buy our scanner, or hire a highly-paid specialist."
And this message of trivlialization is not limited to photo restorers.
A friend of mine is a graphics artist. He is degreed in both art and photojournalism. He once told me in exasperation, "Anyone who buys a copy of Adobe Illustrator thinks he's an artist."
Part of the problem, I believe, is that many don't know what a good photo looks like. They don't know the work that goes into a well-done restoration.
As a consequence of these misapprehensions, when we say we'll restore a photo for $100 or $200, we look to some folks as scam artists. All we're doing, after all, is just clicking a mouse button.
Your thoughts on this?
!
Comment