Photographer's Interview: Chris Lauritzen

Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:11 pm

For the second member’s interview here at Phototakers, we are lucky to be joined by Christopher Lauritzen from the windy city.

Chris serves as a moderator at Phototakers, has a site (http://www.claphoto.com), and is a successful, professional photographer who handles portraits and weddings while also pursuing his own artistic photography. Besides discussing the craft of photography from his perspective, Chris can provide a lot of insight for members who are considering starting their own business.

Welcome Chris, thanks so much for joining us!

CL: Thanks Keith, it's a pleasure to be a part of this. That looks like a strong table, I will put my RB67 there.

KW: Yes, by all means, go ahead and lay your burden down! First, some background information. How did you become interested in photography? Did you have a clear feeling that is was for you, or did you drift toward it as an advanced hobbyist?

CL: I became interested in photography because I liked to push buttons or at least that is what my parents always told me. They purchased my first camera, a Canon Ae-1 when I was ten. I liked taking pictures of friends and playing with the different buttons; get the connection? I didn't really start to develop an interest until years later in high school. It was there that I learned to develop film and basic darkroom work. This is when you can say the spark happened and I formed a real interest in the art. Photography stayed a hobby for many years even fading away at times but as I grew older I was in need of a more creative outlet to remove my mind for the daily world. So I guess you can say I drifted towards it.

KW: What’s your favorite photo you’ve ever taken? Can you show it to us?

CL: Sure, actually my favorite shot is this one I took just recently.

It's not the greatest shot I ever took and I will never make any money from it but every time I view it tears swells up in my eyes. I guess it's the daddy in me. There is 16x20 of it hanging in our living room.

KW: That's a treasure! You can't buy that kind of shot at any cost. I noticed that you do a lot of b&w work; are there particular genres that appeal to you most? And on what kind of work do you base your business?

CL: I find that I prefer shooting black & white along with landscapes more than I do portraits, but b&w and landscapes don't really pay the bills so I ventured into the wedding and portrait side of the biz. For portraits I will travel on location to shoot the images in the client’s home or any setting they choose. I have shot in basements, backyards, garage, swimming pool, office and etc. For weddings I will setup a small studio for the formals, my wife who is also a photographer and I will shoot the ceremony on 35mm. I shoot all the formals on medium format.

KW: When you set up for a wedding, how do you work the scenes? Do you attend the rehearsal and take it from there? And how do deal with the low-light situations, the candlelight ambience? To me, a wedding is such a total nightmare... and I am talking about lighting, let's not get into the other aspects ;)

CL: Most of the weddings I shoot are Catholic and being Catholic I know how the mass will go so I can easily follow along. I will also attend another denominations service just to get a feel for it. I will visit the place of the wedding be it a church or whatever a few days before and take some light readings, scope out different shooting locations within the building and surrounding grounds. This way I know what to expect and what to bring. As for dealing with low light I shoot fast glass, everything I use at a wedding is F/2.8 or faster. A wedding is probably the most stressful aspect of the biz. I have often said that the bride is insane and the groom doesn't want to be there and both can snap at any second. I won't even get into the families. This is the reason I am moving away from wedding work even though the money is good.

KW: When you did your first wedding, did you shadow a photographer, or did you just jump into the shark pool and hope for the best?

CL: Well I must say I did it the stupid way and dove in with both feet. I knew the bride from work but I didn't know her well so this wasn't like shooting a family member’s wedding. I don't want to make this sound like “I know it all” but I knew that from a technical standpoint I could get the shots, but I really had no idea what shots to get. What should I do? What I did was to look at my wedding album and copied those shots. My wife worked along with me and she was very instrumental with getting the people together for the shots, without her help I would have been sunk. I clearly don't recommend that anyone do it this way, I was stupid, as I said. On a high note I did have a ton of reprint sales and the both the bride and groom were very happy with the pictures.

Wedding work as I have said is incredibly stressful and it's not for everyone. Over the years I have had run ins with various family members, brides, grooms, groomsmen and of all people a priest. I had a priest pull me aside and say that I was disrupting the service, he wanted me to remain in one place and shoot everything from there. Well I tried to explain to him that I was being paid to shoot this wedding and if I stand in one place nobody is going to like the shots, well he didn't care and I stood in one spot. The couple were to say the least not happy with the shots but there was nothing I could do. I explained to them what the priest said and I gave them a discount on the pics. There is no re-shoot at a wedding! I also gave them a coupon for portraits which they used I am happy to say.

KW: Many members here are interested in starting their own photography business; it would be great if you could share a few pointers. First, the obvious question, "how do I know that I am good enough?" Do you think the photographer him/herself can determine that on their own?

CL: “How do I know I am good enough” - man, isn't that the $65,000 question! So how do you know? Well you don't, it's very hard to self judge your own work when you're just starting out, I mean really we all think everything we shoot is wonderful don't we? You start out by having friends and family tell you your work is good but and this is a big one, you need to have total strangers say your work is good or bad. Family and friends well always sugar coat the real answer you will never know if they are lying or telling the truth. Having a total stranger say your work is good or total crap is even better. One of the great things about the Internet is the abundance of photo sharing sites like Phototakers, Usefilm, Photosig and the others. Here your images can be viewed by thousands and sure you’re going to get the ones that always say everything is great but you will also get real criticisms. Once you start getting more positives then negatives you start to feel that you’re getting “good enough”. Once you start to see what is working then you will develop the ability to self judge your work, you will know what works and doesn't.

KW: Ah, that was only the first $65,000 question! The next is: how much money is involved in getting a professional photography operation off the ground? Do you have any idea what your net equipment investment was before you started to make sales and break even? Does it make sense for somebody to go out and get a small-business loan and plunk down 10 grand to hit the ground running, or do you think it's best to make a series of smaller investments and try to break even at each step?

CL: Well I am a cheap SOB so my investment in equipment is fairly low as most of the stuff I purchased is used. That being said there is still a lot involved that can eat up bank accounts quickly. For breaking even, well my overhead is low, working out of my home helps that. I think the idea of plunking down a lump of cash is the wrong way to go at it. When I started out I was selling at art fairs and craft events, my cost was prints, entry fee and the cost to construct the booth. I did this for a number of years and in fact still do during the summer and fall. I was asked if I shot portraits and then it went on from there. I am a firm believer in starting small and working up.

KW: Concerning the business aspects, how did you educate yourself on what you need to succeed- did you intern or take classes? Are you self-taught? Or some combination?

CL: I read everything I could on how to start and run a business. I didn't have a business background and I was sure that when I started I would fail (so much for positive thinking huh) but my wife was very positive and with her help we got things up and running. I also was lucky enough to work with someone who was a professional photographer. He was very helpful in giving business insights and strategies. When I launched the biz it was only a part time gig and I was sure to keep the day job to pay the bills. After a few years and a small nervous breakdown (kidding but there was some crying and screaming) I decided that I had enough of my day job and for my mental sanity I turned up the heat on the photography side to support us. As it is right now photography is not my only job, I still do IT consulting, my wife and I have several on-line business and we are looking to open a brick and mortar store soon. We are also looking to buy out a local photography store that is closing as well.

KW: Do you remember your first sale? Is it framed with a dollar somewhere?!

CL: Yes I do remember my first sale, when I first started out I would sell my work at local art fairs which is something I still do. It was quite a while before the first sale, there is something written that a person need to see you or your store thirteen times before they will buy. I don't remember if it was that many times but it was several shows. My first sale was a framed print of a local water fall. No that dollar is not framed anywhere, it was spent on lunch that day.

KW: Chris, you've been a moderator for several years at Phototakers, sometimes dealing with contentious topics and some, shall we say, strong personalities. What would you say to anyone who aspires to become a moderator?

CL: Phototakers is one of three sites I mod on and what I have found to work is you need to stick by the rules and always remember it's the Admin's site and at anytime they can do whatever they please. I have had a few interesting PM's with some users of the site who for whatever reason felt that they can do whatever they want regardless of the rules. I am a really easy going person and it takes a lot to get me upset but on occasions I have had to ask for some user’s access be removed. Overall PT' is a very easy site to manage, probably the biggest rule violation I see is posting more then two images per thread. I do think Phototakers is one of the best sites out there for the beginning photographer, there are plenty of friendly people who are more then willing to help. We have a good cross section of skill levels on PT, from rank beginners to season professionals.

One of the things that I wish would change though is the gravitation towards equipment talk. There is so much more to photography then the equipment, as a matter of fact the equipment makes very little difference when you get right down to it. This is one of the reasons I like having the assignment section back, it diverts from equipment and focuses on the image. I think beginners get caught up more in the equipment race and spend less time figuring out what works on their pics and what doesn't. It really should be the other way around. For example the question comes up everyday it seems what is better the Canon Rebel XT or the Nikon D70? It doesn't matter, both will take the exact same image if the photographer is the same. I like to tell people that millions of great pictures were taken before '85 when AF became readily available. Millions of great pictures were taken before digital became all the rage… it's not about the equipment.

KW: Amen! But since you opened the box and mentioned equipment, I do have to ask something about my personal favorite tools… rangefinders!!! This is a topic that's come up a few times on Phototakers. Do you use them for city and street stuff? What about at weddings, for handheld, low light situations?

CL: I love rangefinders as you know, I own several and I am always on the lookout for more. There is something about the simplicity of using one. Since I live near the big city and my favorite camera store is down there I get into the city quite often. I will always bring a RF with me, they are easy to carry, silent and most have very sharp glass attached. I must admit though I don't use one for wedding work maybe I should someday.

KW: Besides RFs, I know that you use a variety of film cameras for different purposes. What sort of equipment arsenal do you recommend for a basic portrait business?

CL: I do have a lot of equipment that has been gathered over the years but I also use what will get me the shot I desire. I have moved away from 35mm and focus more on medium and large format these days although I still use 35mm for wedding work. All of my studio work is shot using a Mamiya RB67 the lenses I use are 90mm, 127mm and a 180. The 127 is the primary lens.

With lighting I have four Alien Bee's B1600 and two JTL Versa 300's for hair and background. I use softboxes on the mains, barn doors on the others. Most of my portrait work though is shot using a single light source and reflectors. I like the look that gives and it's easily portable. For someone starting out you only need a couple of lights, either softboxes or umbrellas and a flash meter. You got to have the flash meter!

KW: Is that arsenal significantly different for an "art" photographer, i.e., someone who aspires to have their work hang in a gallery or appear in print?

CL: No not really, you need to find what works for you and become comfortable with it. I do a lot of fine art work and have a few pieces hanging in galleries. I have equipment that covers all formats from 35mm up to 4”x5”. Some formats work better for some subjects then others. My favorite formats are 6x4.5 and 6x7 with 6x6 coming in a close third.

KW: Your work flow consists of film capture and then scanning, correct? Have the recent DSLRs made you reconsider that work flow?

CL: Sure they have, scanning is not something that is easy to do, it takes time to learn how to get the most out of the software and hardware. I liken scanning to learning photography, it takes time. Shooting digital would eliminate this step resulting in faster turn around and higher profits. Hum why have I not switched yet? All kidding aside my biz is set up for film and at this time I really have no logical reasons to change... yet! I have been eyeing a digital that I think would work well for my biz and someday I may actually purchase it.

KW: Now the fantasy question! Let's suppose that you can have a stint shooting covers and layouts for a magazine, any magazine. Which would it be and why? And, uh, we won't tell the wife if that is a consideration ;)

CL: Well that’s easy, it would be National Geographic. I always wanted to be hanging over the side of a cliff by a rope taking a shot of a blue breasted hootenannies mating.

Alright, thanks very much Chris, this has been very informative. Now let’s open the phone lines for Phototakers members, who may ask any questions they wish.

Phototakers: please ask your question of Chris by posting a reply in this thread, and please show courtesy to your colleagues and do not post your question until the last one has been addressed!

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:55 am

Chris, a business/marketing question: Do you advertise? How, and where? What's your most important source of business? Referrals?

Followup question, regarding your favorite pic. That's not a 16 x 20. How did you crop it?

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:41 am

Rasputin wrote:

Chris, a business/marketing question: Do you advertise? How, and where? What's your most important source of business? Referrals?

Followup question, regarding your favorite pic. That's not a 16 x 20. How did you crop it?

You are correct the size of the image on here is not the correct ratio for a 16x20, the image is cropped just below his feet and a little off the top.

Yes I do advertise, I have ads placed in the local papers, in the local church newsletters, some radio and net ads. I have my work on display at restaurants with a business card attach. To be honest though most of my wedding and portrait clients come from word of mouth. The real problem at least here in Chicago is the shear number of photographers. In just my local yellow pages there are six pages of photographers. I do have an ad placed there, actually one of the bigger ones you can get but it's really hard to stand out in the crowd here. Advertising at least here is a huge cost, a small ad in the local paper is over $100 a week.

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:22 pm

ChrisL,
I used to shoot film before but that was long time ago, and It really never cross my mind about White Balance thingy, I will just use what ever film my father have (probably it doesn't matter since he shoot 90% Black and White) but when it come to color how do you determine what kind of Film to use to get a correct color, for example is there a different film for outdoor, indoor (using ambient light) and flash photography?

Thanks in advance, this make me think a lot if I have to move to Film and I think it's just a beginning of a million question =)

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 3:27 pm

The type of film I use will depend on the subject I am photographing. If shooting a portrait I will use film that is geared towards skin color. Fuji NPS 160 and NPC 160 are a good examples, both films are designed to give the proper skin color for causations when exposed correctly. The only difference between them is NPC has a bit more contrast. When shooting indoors under incandescent light you must do one of two things, either shoot tungsten film which has a higher blue count to over ride the yellow or use filtration. When using flash you don't really need to worry because the flash is corrected to simulate daylight so just about any daylight film works well.

For outdoor scenic shots a lot of photographers like to use Fuji Velvia, this film is highly saturated and fine grained. I am not a fan Velvia or Disney film as I like to call it. I think it tends to be a bit over the top and gives an unrealistic look to the image. When shooting landscapes in color I will use Fuji Provia 100F, this film is not as saturated as Velvia but is finer grained and sharper.

Overall if your shooting film you need to experiment and learn what films work for you and what don't. If you noticed I have not mentioned Kodak, I really don't like the look of Kodak color films. I have found that Fuji films work better for my style of shooting.

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 4:00 pm

Well Chris, I did read it all and managed to stay awake...:-)

When you were starting out, how did you come up with your pricing scheme and how long did it take you to come up with a somewhat final version.

Along the same lines, are you set up as an up front charger or on the back end?

Thanks.

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 4:57 pm

KurtSchneid wrote:

Well Chris, I did read it all and managed to stay awake...:-)

When you were starting out, how did you come up with your pricing scheme and how long did it take you to come up with a somewhat final version.

Along the same lines, are you set up as an up front charger or on the back end?

Thanks.

Glad you were able to stay awake :-D

When I was starting out I guessed at the pricing, no really I did! I knew what my built in costs were, film, processing, overhead and etc so I charges about 3X my overall cost. As I went along I found a lab that I could work with that provided cheaper print cost. I moved up my pricing to roughly 5x my cost. I was still in the ball park and below the cost of others.

My wedding packages are priced based the my labs cost to print and what they charge me for the albums.

I have a merchant account that allows my business to take Visa, MC and Discover. We also accept PayPal, checks and of course cash. I do have a back end account for my event work, they handle all the CC processing and print the orders. They even provide web space for hosting the event shots (which is funny because I own a web hosting company as well).

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 5:06 pm

It seems so many people want to take their photography down the commercial route. You're obviously someone that's managed to be successful at it. But, do you find the commercial constraints of photography take away the joy/passion? You mentioned examples like the stress of weddings, some nights screaming and shouting etc.

For me, after a long day or week, I turn to my camera for release. Can you still do the same? How much of your photography now is love and how much is labour?

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 6:00 pm

ciaranwhyte wrote:

It seems so many people want to take their photography down the commercial route. You're obviously someone that's managed to be successful at it. But, do you find the commercial constraints of photography take away the joy/passion? You mentioned examples like the stress of weddings, some nights screaming and shouting etc.

For me, after a long day or week, I turn to my camera for release. Can you still do the same? How much of your photography now is love and how much is labour?

I think this is the biggest misconception when it come to people wanting to do this for a living, photography is work just like any other job out there. Once you decide that you want to do this you give up the luxury that the hobbiest has, you no longer are able to shoot for yourself. There have been times when I wished I was back at my old job instead of photography. I used to work in the IT world (still do on the side) sitting in front of a computer all day. The last thing I wanted to do was come home and sit it front of a computer. Well photography is the same way, I have at times lost my love of creating the image preferring to sit and watch mind numbing tv.

The one bit of advice I give is if you really really want to do this for a full time living then be prepared to give up something in return. That something will be your freedom of shooting whatever and whenever you want. Everything you do is reflected upon you, you are constantly being judged and always know that there is someone who is better and who will do it cheaper standing right behind you. Years ago I worked in radio, yes I was a DJ and I worked for a few stations here in Chicago. I got out of that biz for the very reason I gave above. I still have a very deep passion for photography, I still strive to create the perfect print but sometimes it gets lost in the insanity of the real world.

Edit: I just re-read what I wrote here, I don't want to give the impression that doing photography for a living is bad thing. There is really nothing else I would rather be doing just some days are better then others.

Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 9:32 am

Chris, I think your comments support your suggestion of starting small and building up... testing the waters at each step, so to speak.

Do you take holidays from the business side of things, to recharge your creative side? And do you have any trips to exotic photo locations planned?!

:) keithwms

Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:16 am

keithwms wrote:

Do you take holidays from the business side of things, to recharge your creative side? And do you have any trips to exotic photo locations planned?!

I do take breaks away from the biz, actually when I travel for a holiday I rarely bring a camera with. I do have some trips planned but I wouldn't call the locations exotic. I am heading out to the Las Vegas area in the spring, planning on shooting at Red Rock state park and surrounding areas. My wife and I go ghost town hunting from time to time so we will be racking up the miles this srping driving around NV, CA an AZ. Oh I will have cams allong for this trip.. :-)

Posted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:23 pm

Ok I'm still curious and I need to ask this question =)

since you're almost (I said almost in this forum)the last person dedicated to be shooting film...

What's holding you up to switch or atleast get a Digital from?

Do you think the digital is not that enough to compare against Film?

Posted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:16 pm

Oh man I knew I was going to asked this question! Ok here are my thought on digital and why I have not switched. Yet.

First and foremost digital has clearly surpassed the quality of film if you have enough money to spend. The 6 to 10 mp digital SLR’s out there are equal to iso 100 print film in their resolution but do not surpass it. Cam’s like the Nikon D2x and the Canon 1DSmkII clearly surpass 35mm film and approach medium format. Here are some thoughts that I have posted before but I will add here. The difference between film and digital is a generational thing, when you shoot print film you create a negative, this is the first generation image. When you have your lab make a print your producing a second-generation image (actually a third). Now lets add scanning in here, when you scan the negative your creating a second gen image, now when you print that image you have created a third gen image. Each new generation of the image is degrading in quality. Even the best drum scanners on the market loose some detail in the scan.

Now when you shoot digital you are no longer add the generations to the images as you’re always working with a first gen image. This is why an image from a Dslr can be perceived to look better.

Now why have I not switched… well two main reasons. First is I don’t like the current crop of Dslr’s on the market. I currently have shooting experience with the Nikon D70 and the D2X. Both are fine cams but neither feels right to me. The D70 feels solidly made but with a viewfinder that is in my opinion totally useless. It’s too small to properly judge what you’re shooting. The D2x is clearly better built and has a much better Vf but I still don’t like the feel. I guess I am too used to my Nikon F5 and F4s. Actually the closest body that felt right to me was the D1 series because it’s based on the F5. I am sure someone is thinking what about Canon? Well Canon makes great cams but it is my opinion that Nikon makes better-built cameras. I shot Canon for 20 years so I very familiar with their equipment, I owned for a very short time a EOS 1V which is their top film body. The 1v is a great cam but the Nikon F5 feels better.

The second reason is I mainly shoot B&W, I personally don’t feel that digital reproduces the quality of B&W like film does. I like to develop film and produce prints; I feel that it helps me to connect to the image. I don’t want to plug in a memory card and press download, I want to smell the chems and have the magic of the photographic process happen before my eyes. There is a lot more to photography then pushing the shutter button and I feel that digital removes some of that. Photography is all about the printed image but I feel in the digital world that idea is getting lost, too many quality images are not getting printed and this is a disservice to photography as a whole.

For my portrait and wedding work film is still working out fine, all digital would offer is quicker turnaround and slightly higher profit returns once the equipment is paid off.

I will go digital, my business will require it to survive but for the time being I am more then happy to be in film land.

Posted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:41 pm

ChrisL wrote:

Oh man I knew I was going to asked this question! Ok here are my thought on digital and why I have not switched Yet.

Sorry about that LOL but no one is asking for such question so I have to ask for it (out of curiosity)...

and I thank you for that Chris, your answer was really good and very defined one…

I missed the smell of the chemical too and still remember how it feels like to see a picture coming out from a paper while submerge to a chemical …

If we were to build our own home darkroom, what enlarger (brand type) would you suggest for us to get and what lenses for the enlarger? Wide or Normal… (the last time I played with it was 20 years ago so I totally forgot everything about it).

Posted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 11:26 pm

adorski wrote:

If we were to build our own home darkroom, what enlarger (brand type) would you suggest for us to get and what lenses for the enlarger? Wide or Normal… (the last time I played with it was 20 years ago so I totally forgot everything about it).

I use a Beseler Printmaker 67 with a Nikkor 75mm lens. It's cheap and works very well.