Lit Photography around the ship

However, that does not you the right to set up equipment and shoot pictures of others regardless of whether you charge or not. They have paid for the right to shoot "professional" pictures on the ship using "professional" equipment. You have not.

What on earth are you talking about? The ship photographers are employees of the cruise line (or a sub-agency contracted by the cruise line). They didn't pay a dime for the rights to a captive audience, they simply work for a pittance (most likely) to be able to do their craft aboard the ship. It's ship-owned (or agency-owned) gear, period. And you got something wrong in your claim: THEY aren't using professional equipment. They're using a basic 50mm or 85mm lens to do that work, a lens that costs less than most people's point&shoot.

The ship is private property, and therefore the ship can invoke whatever rules they wish (which I'll honor, as long as they can demonstrate that they are fair, and that they're enforcing them consistently). However, it is not a 100% captive playground for professional photography by the ship photographers only.

As someone who has made a $$$ with a Camera I must agree with Don.

donaldsc: The ship's photographers are set up in fixed locations with backdrops. Their lights are stuck wherever they're at. I agree that it's wrong to ask to sneak into their setup and mooch off their backdrop' date=' worse if you slap a Pocket Wizard on your camera and attempt to use their lights. However, unless they're willing to be mobile to another spot that I prefer, shoot in RAW (even if that means paying $150+ for the digital files), and bring in lighting gear that's got a lot better color consistency, their work just doesn't cut it. I would [b']agree that shooting photos of others for a fee would be considered stealing business from the ship's photographers[/b], if they offered a similar vista, real or fake, at one of their stations, or if they were mobile. However, as soon as any of those elements disappears, it's no longer anti-competitive, and offering a grade of picture above what they offer is also enough to differentiate (in my opinion). I have no stock in the ship's photographers. They do lousy mass production work with limited or no retouching. I never buy stuff from them. It basically stinks. However, that does not you the right to set up equipment and shoot pictures of others regardless of whether you charge or not. They have paid for the right to shoot "professional" pictures on the ship using "professional" equipment. You have not. Whether you can set up your equipment and take pictures for yourself is not clear although I am also uncomfortable with that. It is the act of shooting free pictures for others where the OP went over the line. DON

peety3: it is not a 100% captive playground for professional photography by the ship photographers only.

Don expressed a number of points and opinions. Agree that the photographic work by many ship photo shooters leaves much to be desired and you should not "MOOCH OFF" of their background and lights. Strongly agree on the great value for shooting RAW and having more to work with in producing better pictures. BUT' date=' disagree with this statement:[i'] "shooting photos of others for a fee would be considered stealing business from the ship's photographers . . . that does not you the right to set up equipment and shoot pictures of others regardless of whether you charge or not. They have paid for the right to shoot"[/i].

Agree with peety3 that these ship photographers do not enjoy a special "monopoly" control to be the only folks being able to take pictures on the ship.

Digital has changed the world and the "value/need" connected with what this ship photography used to be about. Many of the smaller, luxury ships have done away with this photography "hustle". As many people do more and more cruises, less folks value these such ship photo packages. Personally, I am a big believer in "FREEDOM". If you are NOT intruding on others and/or causing any safety problems, then . . . you should be able to DO YOUR THING and ENJOY!!

THANKS! Terry in Ohio

From our Jan. 25-Feb. 20, 2015, Amazon River-Caribbean combo sailing over 26 days that started in Barbados, here is the link below to that live/blog. Lots of great visuals from this amazing Brazil river and these various Caribbean Islands (Dutch ABC's, St. Barts, Dominica, Grenada, etc.) that we experienced. Check it out at:

http://www.boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=2157696

Now at 24,306 views for these postings.

Shooting photos w professional equipment for yourself was marginal. When you started taking pictures for other people, they should have confiscated your equipment or certainly your memory chip as well as the memory chips of the people you took photos for.

 

I hate to say it but people like you give photographers a bad name. There are professional photographers who have paid the cruise lines to take pictures on board. You do not have to buy stuff from them but you do not bring professional equipment w lights on board and steal business from them.

 

DON

Wow I see some one is cranky.......You are making it sound like I had a line of people wrapping around to the state rooms. The original photos were of the group of people I was traveling with, I also wasn't in a high traffic area. We were all sitting and drinking and got the idea to to it, I happened to have a shoot through umbrella and 3 sb900's with me so why not........NO ONE HAD ISSUES with it that passed by, we politely laughed it off that we did not work for RC but were simply having a good time. I had no issues letting people put there memory cards into my camera and tripping the shutter for them, after all they tripped the shutter for my group photo.

Give professionals a bad name HA you are quite the comedian, if anything it made a handful of peoples day who possibly couldn't afford the ships photos.

I saw ZERO professionals who paid the cruise line to take photos on board. The only people walking around the cruise ship with camera were the cruise photographers.

I would have loved to have run into you, I am sure it would have made your day to see a fun group of people having fun for about 30min before dinner. Or would have that completely ruined your day/cruise?

If I want to walk around with big heavy "pro" equipment I will, its just my point and shoot on vacation.

But either way I respect your opinion, it all takes a little common sense.

To the OP, take what you want just don't cause a commotion or block any walk ways and HAVE FUN.

Greg

Hard to say if the tripod is worth it. We've booked a private photo tour in Haines (ferry from Skagway), so not only do I plan to bring our tripod/ballhead so my wife can do macro stuff that she enjoys, I'm planning to rent another with a gimbal head for bear/eagle photography.

 

I'm also a little surprised you'd leave your 70-200 home. If you're going with one body, obviously you'd have to change lenses for anything/everything, but I just can't imagine having to choose between the 300 and at best an 85 prime as your only option before an 18-35. Whales are big animals, and last year I felt that the 200-400 (on FF) was almost too much and I was reaching for my 70-200 occasionally.

Sounds like you have a great plan. My wife is not a photographer... If she gets into the moment, she will grab 1 of my backup cameras. But she will just get frustrated with me, if I let heavy gear slow us down. And an 8-year-old and 10-year-old, so I can't make it an "all photography" trip. That said, my 10 year old will use his Nikon J3, and my daughter may use a camera as well.

Yes, I'm limited by focal range, making compromises to keep my size and weight in check a bit. But I know how I shoot. I'll have the RX100 (28-100) as a backup, and can borrow my son's J3 if necessary.

I may bring the 50/1.8 AND the 85/1.8.

Then I'm basically covered 18-50. Have a bit of a gap between 50 and 85 though I can use the RX100 between 28 and 100. Then I have a huge gap from 100 to 300. But realistically, while I commonly use that focal length, this may be a trip where I need it less. Indoors, on and about the ship, I'll be keeping it under 100mm. Outdoors, I can cover wide angle vistas, and telephoto wildlife with the 300. Those are the most interesting types of shots to me, and I may be able to trade away those in-between shots.

Yes, I might lose a shot being "too zoomed in" from time to time, and I may have to think much more carefully about composition when using a prime. But that's often pretty rewarding.

Personally, I'd try to take the zooms, plus the 300mm with the TCs. The 70-200mm would be a shame to leave home, as it covers quite a range and is generally thought of as one of the best in Nikon's stables. The 50mm and/or 85mm should be compact and light enough that you could tuck one or both into your kit without sacrificing a lot of weight and space.

 

Is your tripod aluminum or have one of those big gimbal heads? I picked up a Sunpak carbon fiber that fits in a suitcase like a champ and weighs next to nothing. I recall it was less than $150.

It is a shame to leave the 70-200 behind, but it is relatively big... I don't like carrying it AND the 300.

And knowing how I shoot: I tend to either use the 70-200 in the 70-100 area for portraits, which are better done with the 85. Or I use it as a telephoto at 200, always wishing I had a bit more.. in which case I'm better off with the 300mm.

The 70-200 is my walk-around event lens, when I may want a bit of telephoto reach.. Good portrait session lens when I'm on the move, using 70 for full body and then 200 for the close crop headshot. (Though if I have the flexibility to not rush, I just stick to my 85 for portraits).

I tend to pick between my 70-200 and the 300.... Don't like carrying both. And the 300 is more valuable for this trip.

 

I hate to say it but people like you give photographers a bad name. There are professional photographers who have paid the cruise lines to take pictures on board. You do not have to buy stuff from them but you do not bring professional equipment w lights on board and steal business from them.

 

DON

I won't comment on cruise line policy. It may very well be against their policies, and when you cruise, you agree to follow policy.

That said, I disagree that it is "stealing" or inherently immoral. I disagree that it gives photographers a bad name.

If one photographer wants to charge for a product, especially when they have a monopoly -- And another "amateur" photographer is willing to give stuff away for free -- The amateur isn't "stealing" business. Quite the contrary, the "professionals" need to offer a product that is WORTH paying for.

Here is what is giving photographers a bad name: People who hold themselves out as "professionals" but are actually just "guy with camera." Producing marginal images, leading consumers to believe that anybody can be a professional, and thus impairing the market for professionals with real talent. The talented pro finds him or herself having to compete with some guy who picked up an entry level dSLR and is now selling "$50 per hour."

Here's the quick follow-up: I "dragged out" the studio light and softbox three times, with great success each time.

We used it the first formal night, outside on deck 16 in a back corner - it was a dead end so minimal traffic, and got us great light with sunset behind us.

We used it on our balcony for Ultimate Balcony Dinner, which includes one free photo from the ship's photographers. A night or two before, while several ship's photographers were drooling over the 600 f/4 with 1.4x TC on it, I asked if they could use our LIGHT on their CAMERA for their UBD photos, and he said they could not. He also said that they couldn't take pictures with our camera, but any ship's staff outside the photo department could. As it turns out, a different photographer came to our cabin to do the photos, and she was beyond willing to use our light, since the sun was almost completely behind us and we were completely in shade. Unfortunately, all three of her photos were misfocused, so we took the best of the three and were very glad we had the waiter take a few on our gear.

We also used it in the main dining room on the second formal night. We had a table at the window, and I had the camera in manual (but the flash in TTL) so we could see out the window and include the sea/waves in the shot, yet we were still well lit. Our waiter was able to take several with our friend the Maitre D' Hotel, and another waiter was able to take several with us and our waiter.

All in all, I'm glad I took it, and I truly had no challenges in using it.

Here's the quick follow-up: I "dragged out" the studio light and softbox three times, with great success each time.

 

We used it the first formal night, outside on deck 16 in a back corner - it was a dead end so minimal traffic, and got us great light with sunset behind us.

 

We used it on our balcony for Ultimate Balcony Dinner, which includes one free photo from the ship's photographers. A night or two before, while several ship's photographers were drooling over the 600 f/4 with 1.4x TC on it, I asked if they could use our LIGHT on their CAMERA for their UBD photos, and he said they could not. He also said that they couldn't take pictures with our camera, but any ship's staff outside the photo department could. As it turns out, a different photographer came to our cabin to do the photos, and she was beyond willing to use our light, since the sun was almost completely behind us and we were completely in shade. Unfortunately, all three of her photos were misfocused, so we took the best of the three and were very glad we had the waiter take a few on our gear.

 

We also used it in the main dining room on the second formal night. We had a table at the window, and I had the camera in manual (but the flash in TTL) so we could see out the window and include the sea/waves in the shot, yet we were still well lit. Our waiter was able to take several with our friend the Maitre D' Hotel, and another waiter was able to take several with us and our waiter.

 

All in all, I'm glad I took it, and I truly had no challenges in using it.

Looking forward to seeing some of those shots!

:rolleyes:

:rolleyes:

:rolleyes:

Looking forward to seeing some of those shots!

For those that wish to see:

(If you're just going to roll your eyes, don't bother commenting...)

For those that wish to see:

 

(If you're just going to roll your eyes, don't bother commenting...)

Don't post them if you do not want comments. Most of the foodie closeups are out of focus and many of the landscapes are boring. You do have a few decent animal pictures.

DON

I'm contemplating taking my battery-powered studio light and a 1'x3' softbox on our upcoming cruise so we can do some private/independent formal shots without having to pay ship prices and/or wait in lines, etc. Has anyone done this before or seen anyone doing this before?

I’ve never seen anyone do this before.

We avoid ship photographers and feel it’s inconvenient to have to navigate around them at every turn. Having passengers set up equipment just adds to that inconvenience.

We’ve been on several cruises where there are no ship photographers. What a breath of fresh air not to be encouraged to have our photo taken with a giant lobster or pirate at the bottom of the gangway.

C'mon folks...these aren't the DPReview forums!

Dave

We're already taking five DSLRs and 10+ lenses, so "one light" and a fold/roll-up softbox is not a significant add-on. We live 35 minutes from the cruise ship dock, so we can take as much luggage as we wish.

 

Bouncing a speedlight is at the mercy of the room. Aiming a softbox is a lot more predictable. There's also the matter of power - if, perhaps, we wanted to get pictures taken on the patio outside Sabatini's with an Alaskan sunset behind us, the only way a speedlight can try to keep up is direct and harsh light. An off-axis softbox, perhaps with a grid to avoid lighting the shiny panels of the ship, is going to create much better results.

Seriously 5 DSLR and 10+ lenses... :rolleyes: