I think that it’s often difficult for people to understand or see the real struggles that female and nonbinary creatives face in the photography industry. If you’ve been keeping up with current news, Canon has faced some criticism recently. They aren't the first and won't be the last to make a huge diversity misstep.
On July 14th, Canon announced that they would be relaunching their Crusader of Light program in the Philippines. Once all of their brand ambassadors for the program were announced, many readers were shocked. Not a single member of the 11 Crusader of Light team is female, non-binary, or LGBTQ+. This is not the first time that this has happened with a big name brand, and if you look across most of their ambassador lists, you will find that they are mostly male.
According to an article on The Phoblographer, here are the stats:
Number of Female Canon Ambassadors
• Canon Philippines: 0/11 female ambassadors
• Canon Hong Kong: 1/14 female ambassadors
• Canon India: 1/10 female ambassadors
• Canon Mexico: 1/6 female ambassadors
• Canon Malaysia: 2/10 female ambassadors
• Canon EMEA (Europe, Middle East, and Africa): 34/113 female ambassadors
• Canon Canada: 9/29 female ambassadors
• Canon USA: 12/38 female ambassadors
This is a real problem, and it is not just Canon; it is industry-wide and deep-rooted. In 2017, Nikon did the same thing when announcing the D850. They launched a campaign and made this statement: “Meet 32 creative individuals from Asia, Middle East, and Africa, and join them as they embark on an experience with the latest FX-format D850 in their respective genres of wedding, nature, commercial, and sports. With their expertise in photography and videography, the D850’s technology, and Nikon’s craftsmanship, this is one DSLR ready to set a new world of limitless creative imaging possibilities.”
Not a single photographer out of the entire 32 member ambassador team was female.
Olympus UK did the same thing in 2016 when they announced their Visionaries and ambassadors. Out of 13 photographers selected, only one was female.
DIY Photography made a whole article on this topic in 2016, listing all of the stats for the big brands' ambassador programs, and apparently, not much has changed.
As a female photographer, I can tell you as a matter of fact that the issue is not a lack of female photographers who are qualified and capable. Instead, it is pushback and a real choice made by organizations and companies in who they hire and promote.
In my life, I have had multiple occasions where I was not given opportunities that I felt were based on my gender or age. Here are a few examples.
There is a local photography club that I have been a member of on and off for many years. A client of mine told me that he once asked their president why, as a local photographer who has an arts degree, traveled and worked on large campaigns, and won international awards, I was never asked to speak for them. I was told that the response was “why? She has nothing to offer. What would she even have to teach?” My website then and still to this day lists my accomplishments, magazine features, articles, gallery features, and more, including my favorite, when I won the National Geographic Travel Chase Adventure Competition. The prize for that was a luxury vacation with National Geographic to any of their destinations. I chose to go to Grand Teton and Yellowstone National Parks with them. I still treasure my National Geographic badge and the gear that they gave me.
Well, in October 2020 the club reached out to me to speak for them, but said that speakers are not financially compensated. This was odd to me, as I know many photographers who have spoken for them and been paid. I reached out to a male photographer friend who had spoken for them and asked him if he was compensated for his lecture. He told me that they did pay him without issue. I went back to the club with this information and another board member contacted me to discuss it. I was told that they wanted me to do a Zoom presentation but “unfortunately, I don’t have the ability to pay you.” I politely declined. She apologized for any miscommunication and confusion. I just checked their website, and on the page listing the entire 2020-2021 speaker lineup, only two of them are females.
In October 2017, a large camera brand, who we will call Brand A, approached me to become an ambassador and instructor for them. I was so excited to have this opportunity to work with a well-known brand and felt like I was finally having a huge career breakthrough. In emails and then phone calls, we discussed the details of joining the program and made plans for me to start with a podcast and several photo workshops. They invited me to meet with Brand A team members at a large photography convention.
I met with the rep at the convention and was introduced to several other company reps where we discussed my upcoming work with them. It was then that I was invited to go to their convention afterparty, which was held at their main stage once doors, closed to the general public. This party was open to any member of the Brand A professional service program. This is one of those programs where anyone who owns their gear and is a professional can pay a yearly fee to join and get specialized gear service, loaner gear, discounts, and support. They had big banners advertising the member’s afterparty and prizes that would be given away at it, including a recently announced camera kit.
It ended up being a pretty big event and very crowded. I was super nervous. I didn’t personally know many of the people there. In the corner, by the stage, I saw a familiar face. It was a well-known photographer that I had met a few years prior. As a member of the Brand A service program, I had borrowed a camera from the local sales rep. After my project was completed, I let the rep know, and he asked me to return it at a video shoot that they were having. It was there that I met this photographer, had a brief friendly chit chat, and then left. So now, years later, at the party, I approached him, relieved to see someone that I kind of knew in a sea of complete strangers.
I was surprised to be met with immediate disdain. When I approached, I said hello and got looked at funnily right away. I thought that he didn’t recognize me. Fair enough, we had only spoken for a few minutes one time before. I reminded him of my name and that I had met him a summer or two ago at the video shoot. He said that I was wrong on the year, that it was three years ago, which is more than several, which means two. Okay.
He asked me why I was there and how I deserved to be there. I referenced being invited by the manager of their instruction program because they were hiring me. He didn’t believe me. He wanted to know my credentials. It felt like an interview where I had to prove myself. I always feel like a jerk if I say things that I have won or done. I am not sure how to bring up accomplishments without coming across as boasting, so I usually just don’t. However, there are times like in this article or at that moment it is relevant, such as when I am directly asked. So, I listed some recent competitions that I had won. I also referenced winning another photo competition by another company that he also works with so maybe it would click for him. I also reminded him that the party was open to any member of the pro service program. I did not understand why this mattered to him or why I was being interrogated.
I was straight up told, loudly: “you don’t belong here.” I was so embarrassed. People were staring. He told me that he was going to text the other company to try to get proof that I wasn’t “lying about winning” and pulled out his phone to do so. I literally went to another country with this brand as the prize. I still have all the emails and photos. I was so shocked that in minutes, this man was trying to tear into me just for being invited to a brand afterparty. I didn’t understand his angle. Why be so nasty to me? He said that the company didn’t text back right away to confirm my story. I said okay and that I wasn’t lying and didn’t understand what his problem was. I walked away into the crowd, feeling so small.
I should have stood up for myself more, but I just avoided him for the rest of the party. I didn’t know this person well, and he is a long-time ambassador of Brand A. I saw no reason for him to react this way to me saying hi to him at an event. I went from being so nervous and excited meeting with the brand and being invited to the party to being completely crushed.
Not long after the convention, I got an email that the brand “was a little behind” and they wanted to reschedule our plans. I was informed that they were having a different division schedule me to speak in California instead. I was told to wait to hear from the Ocean County division. I never received contact from that division and reached out to follow up with no response. I still have all of the emails. They just ghosted me.
In December 2020, I decided to be bold. After years of hearing nothing from Brand A, I reached out to the manager that I had been working with. I asked him directly for any insight into why things didn’t work out. I wasn’t sure that I would get a response or what it would be, but it was something that haunted me. In March 2021, he emailed me back. He was very frank and open that it boiled down to the company getting wrapped up in the mirrorless announcements, “so we kept booking people we already had in the system.” He apologized to me and explained that over the years since that happened to me, the brand had downsized its educational division until it was completely dissolved.
So, why does this matter? If you reference the statistics that I listed for the big brands, you will see that existing talent for their programs is very heavily male-dominated. So, if the choice is to keep and recycle the same people over and over, it is obvious who that leaves out.
There are also many instances when in polite company, someone asks what I do, I reply photographer. They assume instantly that I photograph weddings, and I explain no, I'm a nature photographer. They ask to see my work. They look at it and are skeptical — flat out do not believe me. I get the same comments from random strangers online: "you took all of these photos? These are really yours?” They are shocked, but I have grace towards them and gently explain that it is all my work. More often than not, I am asked to prove it, so I send them a video or a photo of me in the field. Usually, they don’t respond or block me after receiving a video showing me photographing. People don’t like when you prove them wrong.
Why do non-male genders always have to prove ourselves? Why do people not believe that females can be photographers? I have learned from this to say: “I am a nature photographer. All of the work on my site and in my portfolio has been taken by me in my travels over the years. In reality, it isn’t as luxurious as it sounds. When you see a photo of an animal in the snow, I am out there freezing, but I love what I do.”
One time, I was at a gallery opening where some of my pieces were displayed among other local artists. A woman recognized me and approached me. I knew of her as a local college art teacher. She said to me: “Don’t you think it is interesting how if you are attractive but bad, you can just get into any gallery?” I said: “What? Do you mean me?” She laughed in my face. I said: “Well whoever you mean, this was a blindly judged jury to get in here.” I let her know that this was my first time in that gallery, that multiple artists were represented on the walls, and that I had never met them in person before being selected. She just laughed again and left.
Apparently, even when you work hard and earn things, even some of your own gender just assumes it has to do with anything but your own skill. It is not the first time that a stranger has made a nasty comment when they see that I earned something — “oh it’s because she is female.” My Instagram has 273 posts, 5 of them show me, usually in the far distance. I am not advertising my body or self-image to get ahead. I am actually self-conscious and usually hate photos of myself. It is something that I am working on and has nothing to do with gender, yet people find it hard to believe that a non-male can be “good” at photography, so they just make a sexist comment.
I am speaking on my own experiences, but I have heard similar stories from other female or nonbinary photographer friends. I won't speak for them, as their stories are not mine to tell, but I will address the facts and reality of a deep-rooted issue in our industry.
When I enter photo contests or gallery competitions, most of the time, there is an impartial jury. They are shown the artwork and know nothing of who created it. They select and award their favorite based on the judging criteria and merit, and that is that. Wouldn't it be great if the ambassador programs, directors of photography, outlets, news agencies, etc. had blind hiring based solely on your portfolio?
Overall, it is difficult for women to be taken seriously and hired. What strikes me as odd is that according to CareerExplorer.com, in the United States “65% of photographers are female and 35% are male.” There is a huge disconnect here.
It is not just big brands holding onto old boys' club values making misogynistic choices time and time again, it is magazines and news outlets who hire for covers and photo stories. An entire website, Women Photograph, exists to hold accountable the companies who hire photographers and where they are choosing to give their money. There are spreadsheets of data month by month and year by year of facts showing the dismal numbers. Women Photograph looked into EOY tallies: “At the end of every year, news outlets compile galleries of their favorite images from that year.” In 2019, only 21.31% of the photographs were taken by women. Why does this keep happening every single year?
In 2018 Photoshelter looked at gender equality and compared magazine covers that year to see the percent taken by women:
• National Geographic: 0/12 (0%)
• Sports Illustrated: 0/12 (0%)
• TIME: 2/12 (16%)
• Cosmopolitan: 1/12 (8%)
• Vogue: 5/12 (41%)
• Condé Nast Traveler: 3.5/12 (29%)
• Entertainment Weekly: 0/12 (0%)
• AARP: 0/12 (0%)
The first comment to that thread reads “Don’t care.”
Look, I get it. A lot of people just do not care. This does not affect them directly, or the system as it stands works in their favor. Well, this is not for you then, this is for everyone else who does care and wants to see real change.
The industry as a whole is not giving non-male creators a fair chance.
I am just one person. I am not a well-known photographer or big name. I can only speak on my personal experiences and the statistics and ask for change. I challenge the big brands to catch up on representation, pay rates, and opportunities for nonbinary, females, POC, varied age groups, and all people. I am no one to ask, but I do so anyway. Those who refuse are making a choice for all to see. Rather than after the fact apologies when you get caught making clearly misogynistic choices, choose the COVID times to revamp your programs and hiring practices. It is 2021, and this is a time of change.
If you are reading this and care, please raise your own voice so that the outlets, brands, and companies know that you want this change. As a female creator, the 65% want to be heard. If you are a member of an underrepresented group, let them know you exist.
If you are a non-male professional photographer, have a resume of work, and want to be hired by any of the big companies, brands, or outlets, post your portfolio in the comments below. Let’s show them that there are candidates ready and waiting. There are so many talented, awesome people who deserve a chance. Don't let them have any more excuses.
I can't say for the others, but I do know one of the Canada Ambassadors very well. Her work is quite good and how she goes about it pretty impressive.
As an editorial comment, there are six ambassadors shown on the Nikon Canada page, 3 of which are ladies. Just sayin'......
Well the actual story is that there were 6 total then they dropped 3 and 1 quit as soon as he heard that they were going to a "diversity and inclusive lineup"...he didn't want any part of any organization that chooses people by skin colour, sexuality, or sexual preference. That was 2017...then they added the newest 4 between late 2018 - and now. I will let you guess what they did.
The NPS peeps like myself are pretty livid as 4 of these people were hired for "diversity and inclusiveness"...I work with two of the former members every once in a wile and one of them is now with another camera company as an ambassador and the other one is an "advisor".
We will just say the new additions are not up too snuff...
Fuji in Canada is doing the same thing and can't find any female photographers who are good enough. Yes I also work with a former x photographer who was dropped as well but is considered "Alumni" now.
So basically, I am going to say I am a different race and change my gender and start using the pronouns "zip / zap", and start sleeping with anybody that comes along, and change my hair colour even 2 days...and put a multi colour flags all over my car to be inclusive and get one of these plumb jobs.
"So basically, I am going to say I am a different race and change my gender and start using the pronouns "zip / zap", and start sleeping with anybody that comes along, and change my hair colour even 2 days...and put a multi colour flags all over my car to be inclusive and get one of these plumb jobs."
That is your statement?
Yes, you have a problem with that? are you challenging my reality? or do you think I am delusional and possibly have a mental disorder listed on the DSM? Can I not be a woman? Can I not sleep with anyone I want?
The real question is are you tired of everything being about racism, sexism, inequality, pronouns and wokism? I am. Let's stick with photography, please. I really enjoy this site but will go elsewhere if it turns into another mainstream media outlet. Enough is enough.
Not a single mention of autistic photographers. Typical Neutral Typical Ableist discrimination.
It is tragic...
Obviously your sarcasm was wasted and lost on at least one person.
Edit - was supposed to be a reply to Chris Bryant
You make an argument based on inequity, not inequality. Ratios of male/female, black/white, etc in themselves are not proof of the cause(s) or the differences in anything. That's a much abused statistical method that assumes a cause and then looks for data that would appear to be consistent. Whether your claim of bias is true either in your case or in general such an argument is faulty. We have become a society obsessed with victimhood to the point that victimhood is it's own sort of privilege. The fact that you feel like you deserve more opportunity career-wise is not proof of bias.
Thats simple...when you let people who have an illness that occupies a position on the DSM-5 scale....
It took a Ph.D.Zach Goldberg, the doctoral candidate in political science posting about the study on Twitter for it to garner even a smidge of attention.
The study, which examined white liberals, moderates, and conservatives, both male and female, found that conservatives were far less likely to be diagnosed with mental health issues than those who identified as either liberal or even “very liberal.” What’s more, white women suffered the worst of all. White women, ages 18-29, who identified as liberal were given a mental health diagnosis from medical professionals at a rate of 56.3%, as compared to 28.4% in moderates and 27.3% in conservatives.
consolidated the study’s info in a set of visuals and posted them to a thread on Twitter. But it’s important to note that he clarified the following: “I didn't write this thread to mock white liberals or their apparently disproportionate rates of mental illness (and you shouldn't either). Rather, this is a question that's underexplored and which may shed light on attitudinal differences towards various social policies." He’s right.
Dr. Lyle Rossiter, a board-certified psychiatrist who’s treated mental disorders for over 30 years, agrees and adds that white liberalism thrives on supposedly championing “workers,” “minorities,” “the little guy,” “women,” and the “unemployed,” who they continuously see as “wronged, cheated, oppressed, disenfranchised, exploited, and victimized” with little to no agency of their own (A view that often mutates into the infantilizing and patronizing of certain groups within a narrative).
Very interesting and consistent with my own observations and conclusions about liberals vs conservatives. I don't know that psychiatry has any remedies for this mental health issue.
This is a article that could land me in Facebook Jail if I "fairly" commented on it's contents........... "Wouldn't it be great if the ambassador programs, directors of photography, outlets, news agencies, etc. had blind hiring based solely on your portfolio?"........ Nope. Example Jared Fogle is probably still real good at eating Subway sandwiches, but he also like child pornography..... not a great brand ambassador. Just because someone's portfolio is good, doesn't mean they can sell the product to other people.
"sell the product to other people" That is all these "superstars" are supposed to do. Carry the company flag and push the merch. Hopefully they bring a influence a lot of "followers" to buy stuff.
The author doesn't want blind hiring, she wants to see a disproportionate number of people like her to be influencers. The percentage of LGBQ people worldwide is about 3%. She wants to see a couple of them as ambassadors. But if there are only 10 positions, then 3% is less than half of one. What about Negros, they comprise over 20% of the population, but there are none in that group of ten. We should see two. White European males also comprise 20%, yet there was only one. Spanish males? didn't see any in that photo.
The writer refuses to see the foolishness in her whining and complaining.
She wants what she wants and really doesn't care if it is fair.
Martin Luther King said it best "I dream of a day when a man is judged by the content of his character and not the color of his skin."
This is a very interesting subject and is therefore subject to a lot of opinions and hurt feelings. That being said, there may be some room for the recognition that, generally speaking, men and women make different life and career choices. Women are more likely to make career choices based on security while men are more likely to take risks. Men are more likely to start a small business like a photography business while women are more likely to choose a career path that provide more security. The answer to the question about whether the percentage of any marginalized group are underrepresented in a given field may lie in the percentages of those marginalized groups that are actively seeking employment in those career paths. These questions are worthy of answers as are the questions raised by kate in this article.
I do bristle at one piece of this article. She looks at the list of photographers and assumes gender and sexual orientation of the photographers in "ambassador" programs. Just because someone is not "out" doesn't mean they aren't part of the non-binary or LGBTQ+ community. It is very wrong to use a person as an example while assuming they fit the theme of your article. I don't publish my gender or sexual orientation because I believe some things are precious to me. Maybe some of the photographers in that list feel the same way and don't discuss their personal lives in public. There is much more acceptance than ever before, but the closet is still real and it has a door.
I can't think of anything which would better support the position of this author, than a straight male who has attained a top industry position, and is willing to share concrete anecdotes about how he benefited via his advantage over females and non-cis/het males, rather than his skills and talent.
No, a better example would be a middle class white male who didn't get the job because a pretty girl got it even though she was less qualified. Instead of complaining about it, I just continued my endeavor for a better life. I didn't hate her, didn't wish bad things to happen to her or the company, I just moved on. Life is full of disappointments. Life is a challenge. Life is not fair, never has been fair and never will be fair; that's life.
The write's generation has a severe problem with entitlement. They think they are entitled to whatever and whenever they want it. Life doesn't work that way; never has and never will.
It's an interesting article but for the sake of truth I'd like to give a bit different perspective. Of course sexism is real, lots of people especially born in the 20th century (mine included) were tought in the childhood that women are not "suited" for many tasks including serious art. We "learned" that science and art (and most crafts) are "mens" territory and it sometimes difficult to make yourself change your mentality when you are a grown up person.
But that stereotype also has a foundation in reality. Here in Russia it's a common knowlege that most photographers are women. And not just women but young women, that have a husband able to support them and buy their first set of gear. That women do photography basically to escape a way of housewife and have independent income. They also almost universally shoot weddings, children and bodour ('cause that's what female freinds ask them to shoot and what gives steady cash flow). So an image of "female photographer" is a young 20-something woman with an Instagram full of brides, grooms and toddlers. Sometimes they shoot nudes of even fetish but usually only "family friendly" stuff is presented for public.
So if you've never ever seen a female wildlife photographer in your life it's extremely easy to assume they don't exist. We all are hostages of our life experience. It's said that wise man can deduce an ocean from the drop of water but there are not many wise people among us.
The truth is I have no clue about this subject. But what I do know is that I never thought about if a photographer is a female, gay, or whatever. I see their port, and if it matches the style I need, they are hired. What they are means little to me. Their character and what they offer are what I care about. Frankly, I am one of those who don't care, and I am not going out of my way to see a photographer's gender, political views, orientation, or whatever.
There are many creative and art directors in all markets that think the same as I do. We want talent and results. Period.
I've worked with a lot of publications and know a lot of the pro talent they hire. I can tell you for a fact, Vogue, Sports Illustrated, Nat Geo, Times, George (RIP), Playboy, Rolling Stones, among others, work with some of the top talents in the creative industries, and a lot are women. Forty years ago, I can see your point clearly. But now and days, I just don't see it being the same. All that said, sexism does still exist within the industries. I have been looked over because I am not a woman or gay enough. Truth, I was told that by the CD of a famous international brand. But I move forward and hope my progress will help the gens to come break thru where I couldn't.
Just one thing. Don't let your frustrations blind you from the progress made because there has been much progress over the years, especially in the past 10.
I’m Tired of Gender Inequality and Sexism in the Other Industries and facets of life. Are You?
For example...
Nearly 100% of people who work down mines are men - I would like to see 50% of mine workers being women.
Nearly 100% of construction workers are men - I would like to see equality there too.
Nearly 100% of front line soldiers are men - come on women, join up for equality's sake.
Women generally live longer than men - that gender inequality here needs addressing.
Most suicides are men - that is a tragedy that desperately needs resolving.
The Western World has been built, largely, by the efforts of white men. White men have done all the shitty things to get us here. War, saving us from the Nazis, fighting for rights, mainly done by white men. Throughout the history of the Western World women have had a pretty easy ride. When men where dying on the beaches of Normandy, where were women?
There is inequality everywhere and at all levels. It is all unacceptable.
It seems that women/liberalists cherry pick the best parts of the man's world and are not prepared to do all the shitty things that have to be done. They want equality in government but they don't want to fight. They want equality in the boardroom but don't want to dig coal, sweep the streets, clean the sewers or build houses.
They want an easy ride whilst all the shitty jobs and roles in society will continue to be done by men. As they always have been. At some point, men may have the balls to stand up and say "No, we're not having this anymore".
Finally, the author, women and liberalists can be thankful that the rights they have to say all this has been granted to them by the blood, sweat and tears of mainly white men.
BTW, as ineptly expressed as it is, I don't believe any of the above, but I do firmly believe in equality of opportunity. Equality of outcome is appalling.
And now think one step further: What do you think a physically strong woman had to and must experience if she wants to apply as a construction worker, for example. There are countries where it is quite normal for women to work in the construction industry or as road workers (e.g. in the former GDR). This was not the case here in my home country for a long time. Only when companies could no longer find painters, for example, did they start recruiting women. You talk about women in the army? Why don't you look at Israel, where it is long time common that women serve.
Please stop with your pseudo-arguments. They just look uninformed and naiv.
I may be mistaken, but isn't everyone required to serve in Israel? That would remove the preference or choice from the equation and make that example ill suited for your counter argument. Demographics also enter the equation. I'm unfamiliar with the situation in the former GDR, but I must ask if there was some externality that drove am imbalance in the number of men and women? The market of qualified candidates carries a significant weight in this discussion. If most of the qualified available painters are women and I'm looking for a painter then more likely than not I'm going to hire a woman; not because she's a woman, but because I need a painter and there are more women painters than men.
You approach the topic from the wrong direction. Think it over. Read about the matter. It is not about _all_ the women or men. It is about a single person.
I don't live in Israel and stop trying to assert your superiority.
It feels like you didn't read the article. The argument being that there are more women than men in the industry, but they are not presented equality of opportunity.
I did read the article. Essentially you can apply the same reasoning too many other industries including those where the roles are reversed. Inequality and discrimination can be found in most places to various degrees. That doesn't make it acceptable. Life isn't fair. This current trend of equality will blow over and then it will be back to business as usual with the World being run by ageing white men. I don't agree with it, but that is the way it is. Do you think these elites, the 10% who own 50% of the World's wealth will relinquish their power and privilege without a fight?
You probably do not realise, as a matter of logic, saying these practices are widespread reinforces the author's thesis, as opposed to serving as a rebuttal.
Have a good day.
Well spoken. Too bad the complainers didn't read your entire post to the end. Or maybe their reading comprehension is as limited as their tolerance for opposing view points or opinions. The writer of the article wants equality of outcome. Equality of outcome always oppresses other more talented people. The results of it were seen in the old USSR back in the 60's, 70's and 80's. But most of these people responding to your post are too young to understand. The ones that are old enough to know and understand but still support the writer's ideas are just foolish or ignorant.
Oooooh dang these comments are guaranteed to be a disaster. I’m one comment in and there’s already an Old White Man moaning about how there isn’t inequality in photography, actually. 🤪 Weird how it’s almost never a woman making that argument.
The comments on these article are always the best proof positive of the problem discussed by these article.
Good on you fstoppers for being cognizant enough to feature these kinds of articles! And good on you Kate for stepping up to the plate with an excellent, well researched article knowing the shtstorm you would face from the leagues of WhinerMen.
Also, tangent, but wtf is with that one terrible photo of the white guy in the Canon Philippines ambassador lineup? Like, could that be more out of place considering the level of photographic competency expected from the position, in an Asian country… like damn it’s almost as awkward as the lack of any women.
What old white man?
Chris, who ever this troll is, suggest you pay no attention. This is what he/she wants. By the statement she/he writes is prejudiced and bias in her contempt for "old white men". Laughable.
I caught one! I caught one! Lol
Look me in the eyes man. Right in my googly choo choo train eyes….
Ok, boomer.
Mate, I hesitated to pull this one on you because it is needlessly dismissive, but you’re deserving of it.
I am a 37 year old white man, and am tired of watching my more distinguished “peers” make arses of themselves.
I’m not sure what your origin story is, whether you were just raised in an environment where women were subservient to men, if you perhaps had a religious conservative upbringing (which is never good news for women), or if you (just like so many other men) have built the castle of your ego around some serious insecurities, but in this day and age it would be easy to win a ton of money betting on who would moaning in the comments on a well researched article about sexism in photography.
It’s old, white, dudes. People with your face.
And you know what? Given that you’re a white guy, probably American (but maybe not?), there’s one thing that I can count on: in a couple decades you and your opinion won’t be around anymore, and the world will be a better place for my daughter to raise her kids in.
Your daughter's kids aren't going to be left with much of a world, apparently (maniacal laughter).
ok come out of the backwoods mate. 37 years old, the fresh upstart, " know it all". You write like my son when he was your age. Join the rants, love having you here. When you hit 46, you might hear a popping sound. Your might hear pop out of your ass. I was just like you when I was 37...please keep it up, make for great fodder for my horse and buggy stables.
Lol, “Kids these days” huh? Thanks oh Wise Oldy from… (checks your profile) Kentucky. 45/50 in the US for both education AND life expectancy. Average of 75.96 years. So I guess regardless of the arguments put forth, I just have to wait, what, 10 years and my position wins by default?
Have you looked through the comments, mate? Have you seen that every single staff account supports this article and it’s findings? You know what that means?
It means this isn’t a place for you, and your out of date views. Which, thanks to the steady march of progress *will* go extinct, just like the dinosaurs…
Oh, wait, you’re from Kentucky. Now I’m gonna have to hear about how the world is actually 6000 years old and dinosaurs are a satanic hoax 🦕 😈😂
Nikita, he is a troll, no photos on FS. I love being an old man. Color is a non sequitur. Playing the white card is only meant to divide. So , his mind is divided. He was not potty trained correctly or his inner child divorced him
I’m not a photographer.
I’m a choo choo train
There are extraordinary levels of stupid on display here.
Fstoppers never fails to disappoint.
As an aside, I note you down voted the video I posted; do you realise he is asserting these issues are multifactorial in nature, and can not be reduced to singular notions of patriarchy, whilst expressly stating the patriarchy exists and is a factor?
You're all as bad as each other.
I don’t care, it’s a bad faith argument.
I made sure to downvote a wider selection of your comments so that I could be truly non-partisan about it. I hope that resolves your concern.
I was amused by your strategy of trying to seem superior by using as much flowery vocabulary as possible. Further reinforces my decision not to take you seriously based on you trying to use JP to bolster your views.
*Start to tip my fedora, only to realize you’re already mid fedora-tip, your lips pursed, poised to start forming the first syllables of “milady”*
The funny thing is I've been dumbing down my vocab; I always do during the increaingly rare occasions I interact on social media; apparently most of you people don't understand high school level English.
I don't think "bad faith" means what you think it means ; it's certainly not asserting that something which is multi-factorial requires multi-variate analysis. But pro tip, all psychological and sociological phenomena are complex.
It really must suck being stupid.
Yeah being dumb is a drag. Just ask Jordan Peterson! A man who - despite also suffering from flawed reasoning and an addiction to logical fallacy - is just a religious bigot on a quest to uphold his supposed “judeo-christian values” while trying to convince people of some vague notion that “the west” is under attack. Let me define bad faith argument as understood by the dums like me: he says objectively false things on purpose to further his personal goals and philosophy.
I am critically unworthy of you and in danger of being crushed by your massive bachelor’s degree, so I will leave you with this:
If you want someone to debate who is worthy of your obviously massive, throbbing intellect maybe you should go “umm, actually” yourself in the mirror for a few hours, until you realize through your sweaty brow, belaboured panting, and bloodshot eyes that you’ve got your hand down your pants gripping your donk so hard that you’re in danger of self-castrating.
Kisses!
You really should compare notes with that other guy on this thread, who insists I am a "simp", which I understand means I am trying to obtain sexual favours. I did inform him that posting Peterson was probably not the way to go about that in this crowd.
I'll let you guys sort out exactly what I am.
It may surprise you to know that I neither especially care about you, nor do I mind sexual favours as a general concept.
Ironically I think I’m playing with that guy in another part of the comments section. It’s funny because it seems like you two would make great friends under different circumstances.
But now it seems like you don’t want to play anymore and are looking for a way out.
I wonder if JP has some kind of genital deformity? It’s usually that kinda thing that puts the spurs to these guys. Or who knows, maybe he’s hung like a horse?
Neigh 🐴
Yes, you got me, I am desperately trying to extricate myself from conversing with the guy who has nothing of substance to say.
How are you doing? Things ok with you? Seems like maybe things might be tough. It’s been a tough few years, no shame in that.
There is a cat sitting on me right now and she’s very insistent that I pet her, so I have to go. Just remember, the world might be a tough place but we can all make it better by trying to help each other.
And because I just realized it: is your name supposed to be “Jack Me Off” or are you more of a “meh Jack off”?
I would worry that I may be trying to hustle a hustler, but given your meagre showing I’m not convinced that’s the case.
Kate, thank you for your courage in writing this. I was heartbroken reading about how you were treated. It's so wrong. I checked out your feed and I'd humbly say that the merits of your work should absolutely award you deserved commissions.
I'm trying to bring a little more attention to this issue as well. I specialize in Architecture, which traditionally was quite a male-dominated arena with egos like Frank Lloyd Wright's. I'm extremely fortunate to have had clients of both genders recognize my talents and hire me even though I'm not the cheapest. But I have at times also felt passed over.
Currently the majority of excellent architectural photographers working for large firms are male. And their work certainly merits their commissions. But there are a good number of amazing female architectural photographers too that are simply not as well-known for whatever reason. So I created a feed to feature their work and give them a little time in the sun.
https://www.instagram.com/women_arch_photographers/
I posted some snippets from your article there. Thank you again.
This isnt courage this is just complaining to gain sympathy because they did not get a job or whatever...its complaining..
"Currently the majority of excellent architectural photographers working for large firms are male. And their work certainly merits their commissions. But there are a good number of amazing female architectural photographers too that are simply not as well-known for whatever reason."
You know why this is...marketing, who you know and who knows you (networking), does the potential client want to even work with you, credibility...who will vouch for you in that industry, and the clincher is...do they like you as a person....clients work with people they like period.
These are the basic and overwhelming reason clients find you and hire you...clients don't care what gender you are, what colour your skin is, or who you have sex with.
1. Clients are not calling...do they know you exist. (marketing) not on facebook or instagram...no reptuable client looks for photographers on these platforms..no one.
2. Who do you know in that specific market that wants your work...if you don't know anyone then no one knows you.
3. Do they even need your work...pitching to clients that dont need or want your work is just stupid and a waste of time.
4. Who in the industry will vouch for you and your work? If no one in that industry is talking about you and your work...you don't matter...its that simple.
5 If a potential client doesn't like you why would they want to hire you?...seriously why...clients will check your professional and private background before working with you...and if they find something...anything they don't like...you are out before you even knew it and wont give you a second chance (so scrub your social media, blogs, anything that doesn't portray you in a good light....twitter, FB, instagram, fstoppers...everything.
Bonus.
6. Your site had better show you as a professional in your specific photography field and in what you want to get hired for...if you have a bunch of different areas on your site....you are not getting the job. You are not seen as a professional and the best in your field.
So your work is nice and from what I see is good (I know nothing about architectural photography) but no one deserve to be hired just because thay are black, a woman or any other special reason.
If the client picks you to work with them great if not move on and get on with your life...you will most likely get another chance another time.
If I was a client and came across this photographer or any photographer in this blog whining about me not hiring them because of (reasons)...you can be rest assured i would never hire them or other photographers that associated with them if I knew.
If it makes you feel better, I wouldn't hire you based upon your attitude.