Today we have a conversation with world-class Dutch photographer and Kelby instructor Frank Doorhof. Join us as we explore his unique vision and delve into the strategies that brought him the success so many aspiring photographers crave.
DP: Hi Frank, maybe you can start this conversation off by telling us how you got into the photography business, and what kind of work you do.
Frank: I got started in photography at a very early age. My parents and grandparents were all into photography and video. So you could say I grew up in the darkroom with all the analogue techniques. I just love making images — especially the creative part. So I first did a little sidestep into video, but I found I didn’t like that very much, so I eventually turned to digital photography.
To be 100% correct, it was actually September 11, 2001… At that time we were in Indianapolis, and I was there only with a video camera. My main problem was — and of course everybody knows what happened then, and I really wanted to capture that — but I was unable to capture stills which I thought would be much more powerful. So as soon as I got back home, I delved into digital photography. Up until that time, I had only shot analogue. With digital I eventually ended up with the Canon 10D, and it grew from there into shooting medium format, as well as with the Canon 5D mark III.
So, what is my business? I started out as a sports and nature photographer; but that wasn’t really a business; it was more of a hobby. When I decided to go into business, I understood that with photography, it’s very hard to earn money. Even when you’re in the semi-high-end, it’s still very difficult to do what you want and earn an honest living with it. So, I started a computer company.
Then in about 2003 or 2004, I got a big client for photography — a famous Dutch piano player. He was a personal friend and asked me to do some portraits. I was like “Oh no problem at all, I can do portraits…” Then I hung up the phone and thought “Oh my God, what did I just do?” I’d never really shot portraits before. I’d done a little bit of model photography, but nothing like a famous person. So I just went for it, shot some portraits and everybody just loved the images. After that, we got a lot of emails from people saying “Well if you can shoot something like that, you can certainly shoot us; so, can you give us some quotes?” So before I knew it, my wife took over the computer company, and our studio grew and grew.
For a time I was shooting for a monthly magazine, but I was never 100% satisfied with the way they printed my images: the staples were in the wrong place, the colours were wrong, they cropped it differently than I would have liked it etc. I told them specifically not to use a particular image for a cover, and as you can imagine, there it was in the stores on the cover. So, when that magazine stopped production, I also got a lot of questions asking “Do you teach?” So I was at a crossroads: do I go to other magazines and offer myself as a photographer and see if I can make some money doing that, or should I just try teaching one or two workshops? Well I decided to do the workshops and they were totally sold out! After that I did four or five more with the same result, and I never looked back.
At the moment I still do fashion work of course and we do a lot of artists, actors, singers — whatever, and I love both. But because I teach, that’s my main focus at the moment, and I have the opportunity to just choose my assignments. So when I have the opportunity to shoot a famous person, I can just do it — but I don’t have to work for a magazine which I am not content with how they publish the images.
As you can see from my work, I’m very perfectionistic; I love to see my work the way it’s intended to be. So no changes in the crop, no changes in the colour… I’m really very picky about that. When you work for a magazine, the publication very often determines how your images come out; and that really frustrates me. So with what I do now, I make my own images and I see the whole world. I teach my workshops everywhere people want me to, so we travel a lot. Of course when I’m on location teaching, I’m always trying to get good models and great locations, so my own portfolio is growing every time. I think I am in the best part of the business — especially for me; I love what I’m doing. And what I see from the response is that a lot of people like the way I approach the business, so, yeah, I think that’s our business in a nutshell.
DP: That’s great! I see you do quite a variety of things in your business including doing instructional videos for Scott Kelby’s Kelby Training… how’d you get involved with that?
Frank: That’s a really nice story actually. You know Scott saw an advertisement from Elinchrom about the D-Lites, and I had done that advertisement for them. The only thing I asked for from Elinchrom was to please put my website in the advertisement. Ever since, Scott has been following my work, and a few years ago there was an exhibition in the Netherlands called Professional Imaging, and he was the guest speaker there.
Like for many photographers, Scott Kelby was my absolute hero. I owned a lot of his books; and I knew Kelby Training and hung out at that website to see all the people I admire in one place. During the exhibition, I got a message on my blog that said “Frank, I’m a huge fan of your work. I see you will be attending Professional Imaging — I will be there and hope to meet up.” and it was signed Scott Kelby. The first time I read it, I wanted to delete it because I thought it was some kind of prank. I know that a lot of people that I know understand that I like Scott’s work, so I thought “somebody’s pulling my leg”, you know? But somehow a little voice in my head said “leave it there.” So, I left the message there (and it’s still there on my blog if you search for it), and when I arrived at Professional Imaging, I saw Scott and approached him, and indeed it was very clear that he had posted that message on my blog.
We started talking and he saw some of the demos I had done for Elinchrom; and though he didn’t speak any Dutch, I think he got something out of it that he was looking for. So the next thing I saw from him was a segment on channeling light, the way I teach it — and this is why I love Scott Kelby by the way — he immediately said he had been to the Netherlands, seen a photographer named Frank Doorhof, and this is his technique. Any other photographer of his stature might think, “Well, you know, Frank Doorhof, he’s a guy in the Netherlands, he will never find out… I’m just going to sell this as my own technique.” Not Scott Kelby. Now that I know him a little bit more (having done Photoshop World, the Light It, Shoot It, Retouch It tour in Amsterdam), I see he’s a real honest guy — one of the best in the business I think. So when they asked me to join Kelby Training I was totally blown away, and of course I said yes. Ever since it’s been a roller-coaster for us!
DP: That sounds fantastic. I see that you also sell your own DVDs; what are these all about?
Frank: Oh, yeah. One day we started one of the workshops and a friend of mine videotaped it. It was still shot in SD at the time. The only reason I taped it was to see what I was telling people and to see how I can improve. Some people will just go in front of the group, do the workshop and that’s it; but as I told you before, I’m a perfectionist, so I wanted to see how my performance was, and if it all made sense… you know, if there was a structure to it so that people wouldn’t lose track. I edited it down and sent it to my Elinchrom agent in Amsterdam, and they saw it and said “Frank, you have to release this!” I said “It’s just a simple recording that wasn’t intended to be released”. But of course the little voice in my head again convinced me that maybe I should release it.
So I showed it first to 10 or 20 people to see their response… which were very positive. So I decided to release it, and to be honest, after about three or four months I already grew tired of it because it was a live recording and we were getting a lot of questions from the States about whether we were going to teach workshops there — this was way before the Kelby stuff by the way. So I decided to make a DVD called “A Guide to Model Photography”, and we filmed that in HD on location in both English and Dutch. That has been a huge success for us. After that, we released An Inside Look I&II which are live DVDs shot on location and in the studio in which I explain stuff about lighting, metering, styling of the models, why we choose certain makeup and so on. We always try to keep it 50% on location and 50% in the studio. After making Inside Look II, I wanted to stop making the DVDs because at that moment I was a little bit burned out and wanted to focus on the workshops.
Then my grandmother passed away two weeks before we went to Los Angeles to teach. We didn’t have time to mourn so what we did was fly to LA, and my wife took over the cameras and filmed the workshops. When you come back after something like that, you know, nothing interests you. So what I did was sit down and edit a new video called Light I, then Light II, Light III… then I joined Kelby. Last year we released Live in Boston and that’s the whole workshop. Then we filmed two days of workshops live, including live voice and we did Dutch subtitles this time. That has been a real best seller and at the moment, it’s selling like hotcakes… so that’s what’s forced us to do downloads for the DVDs.
DP: Well that’s interesting as I was actually going to ask you what kind of traction you were getting these days for DVDs given the push for online video. Are you looking at transitioning it to the online sphere?
Frank: Yeah, at the moment you can download all the DVDs. So on our web store, you can order the DVDs now by download.
DP: That’s great! So we’ve been talking a lot about your live seminars, can you tell us a little about the “Why Fake It When You Can Create It?” tour?
Frank: Sure. It’s an ongoing tour, and what we do is explore my motto, which is “Why fake it when you can create it?” So it sounds a little bit funny; but for me it’s reality. Of course I still do a lot of Photoshop though… After meeting up with Matt Klowskowski and reading his great book by the way (Compositing Secrets), you can’t ignore compositing anymore. It’s actually quite hilarious because I was totally against compositing; and after hanging out with Matt for some time I was totally addicted to it.
DP: If I can just interject here, some of our readers are not necessarily going to be aware of what compositing is, so maybe you could explain that.
Frank: Oh yeah, of course! Compositing is when you shoot a model against a background… in the early days you’d use a green or blue background, but nowadays it’s better to use light grey. Then you cut your model out and place him or her onto another background. So in fact, you are creating the whole scene. You’re shooting in the studio, and you’re adding elements from other shoots into one art piece. So that’s the real distinction — it’s not a photograph any more, it’s an art piece. So while I do a lot of compositing and Photoshop work, the ‘why fake it when you can create it’ model comes from a belief that when you shoot, and you understand what you’re doing, you know how to manipulate your lighting, and you know how to meter your light, and in fact if you see the light and how it falls upon your subject, then you shouldn’t have to fake it in Photoshop. There are way too many photographers out there at the moment and it’s one of the most heard remarks on-set “Oh, we’ll fix it in Photoshop”. That’s something on my team that will get you fired, because there is nothing that will really get ‘fixed’ in Photoshop that will produce the same results as doing it right in the first place. Only things that I ‘fix’ in Photoshop would be something like removing a light pole if necessary — because if I cut it down I’d go to jail! But only if it’s necessary, because if it’s possible to choose another angle, the pole will be out of the images. We won’t fix anything in Photoshop that we can fix on-set.
So what we do on the tour is small seminars or large workshops and it all fits under the same tour.
DP: Ok, well we spoke a little bit about metering, and I understand you’re a big advocate of using light meters… can you explain to our readers why you feel strongly about this when so many other photographers forego their use?
Frank: Yeah, well to be totally honest, I really don’t understand why anyone shouldn’t meter. I also read the forums and I read the magazines that say with digital you don’t need to meter anymore. That’s like saying “Well you know, since we’ve got digital, and we’ve got Photoshop, we don’t need to photograph anymore.” During the seminars I will always pick out one person — and you always know that guy… he’s the one with the biggest mouth — and he’s also the one that doesn’t use a light meter. I will ask him why and he will say “Well, I look at the histogram”. Then I say “Well, can you give me the numbers for your skin?” Then he will be quiet and look at me as if to say what do you mean? Then I say “Well if you want to have an accurate image of your model, and you are only biasing this on the histogram, you should know what the model’s skin numbers are”. He’ll say “Well it should be in the middle”. I’ll respond “Well what if he has very dark skin?” He’ll say “It should be a little to the left then”. “What if his brother comes in and he’s even darker than that? And his other brother who is lighter?…” He’ll say “Oh, well I can see where you’re going with this — you need a light meter.”
So that’s what I try to tell people. You know using a light meter won’t slow you down; in fact, it will speed you up incredibly. What if you have a client, let’s say it’s Beyoncé, and she’s giving you 5 minutes (and that’s a lot of time for her), and you shoot — then you have to go to your computer and check to see if the skin tones are ok and if your lighting is ok. Well, it’s not ok. You go back. In the mean time, Beyoncé is giving you way way too much time already. If you make sure that when you meet her — before the talent comes on-set — you’ve got your exposure, let’s say f/11 or f/8, and you set your camera, and the first image you make is already perfect, your customer will look at the monitor and say, “ok, this is a professional photographer”. The thing is they’re used to people fooling around at the moment. They don’t even look strangely anymore when you screw up the first six or seven images… and that’s ridiculous. A photographer should take his first image, and the exposure should be ok; that’s what you can do with a light meter.
Imagine that Beyoncé comes back the next day; and you deliver the images to her press agency, and on one image she looks like Beyoncé after a tanning salon, and on the other ones she looks like she’s been very sick. You can’t deliver that stuff. So when you use a light meter, every day she comes in, she will have exactly the same exposure. It’s not about being an advocate for using light meters, or being against people that use histograms, it’s just about common sense. You want proper exposure, and there’s one tool for it — and that’s the light meter.
DP: Well that’s some excellent advice. Now you’ve been talking about all the things you’ve been doing with your business; how much of your time is actually devoted to photography these days?
Frank: Actually shooting? I think I teach 60% and shoot 40%.
DP: Ah, that’s a better ratio than I had expected given how much additional stuff you’re doing!
Frank: Well we have very long days in the Netherlands. Don’t know about you guys over in America, but here we have 40 hours a day!
DP: Well, we’re in Canada actually, but I think our days are generally 24…
Frank: Ah, you’re still on the old timetable!
DP: Well speaking of shooting, you guys are over there in your studio pretty much using medium format cameras; is that correct?
Frank: Yeah. I want to add something to that also… you’ll find this funny. You know at the moment I am more and more telling my students that photography is simple: it’s about a nail that has to go into that wall. I need a hammer for that; and it doesn’t matter if your hammer is from brand x or brand y, as long as the nail goes into the wall. From the nail, that’s where your image is going to hang, and that’s the story you are going to tell as a photographer. Even in the old days, it didn’t matter if you wrote your novel on a typewriter, a Macbook Pro, or using a pen and paper. If the novel is good, it will be read and it will be a best-seller. You can write a lousy novel on the newest Macbook Pro with an ergonomic keyboard, but the only thing that will come out will still be a crappy novel. Of course, you can write the most beautiful poems or whatever you want to write on the oldest typewriter you can find, and that’s the same with cameras.
A while ago I made a pact with one of my students. I said “You know what, for the next three workshops I am going to shoot some images, and I am going to limit myself to a maximum of four images, with a Canon G9”. Now that’s a really small point-and-shoot camera — I believe it’s now 5 or 6 years old. So I posted them online next to the medium format files, and the only thing I said was “Testing a different camera.” You don’t want to know how many emails I got from people asking whether I was testing the new MK 3 from Canon, or the new Nikon… or “no, it has to be a medium format; look at those skin tones — it’s amazing!” So I kept it up for about two weeks and then I posted online that it was all shot with the G9. I hoped that people would open their eyes and just see that it’s about the guy pressing the shutter and it’s not about the camera.
So, Frank, why are you using medium format cameras? Well, it’s very simple. I strongly believe that when you are progressing in your art or in your photography, there will be a point when you reach the borders of the technical capabilities of your gear. And for me, with the DSLR in the studio, I was running into problems because I wanted very shallow depth of fields in certain locations. So, even with the full frame Canon and with f/1.2 lenses, I wanted to use strobes outside and I couldn’t do it! So what I did was change to medium format; because with Leaf shutter lenses we can sync at 1/1600th of a second, and of course we can lower the ISO to 25. So I may be shooting at f/11, but because the sensor is twice as big as a full-frame sensor, my depth of field will be approximately 2 stops lower. So now I have a camera with which first, I can shoot at 1/1600th of a second — which is huge for strobes outside — and I have a bigger sensor and smaller depth of field. Also the pixels are better. You can push them around in Photoshop more… the lens quality is better… but in the end, for me it’s the story. When I can tell the story with medium format and I think I can’t tell the story with a DSLR, I will switch; but that’s the only reason.
DP: Back to the business end of the photography world, I’m wondering, over the years the industry has changed fairly dramatically I think you’d agree. What would you say were the major effects on your business, and what were the most striking differences for you?
Frank: I think the funny thing is that, for the business I am in, teaching, will flourish from the downfall of photography. I’m really negative about that. I don’t know if I put a lot of people off from doing photography because I think it’s the best job in the world; but recently I got an offer from a company and don’t laugh: they wanted me to shoot 26 dresses, four models, on two separate locations, and two studio setups… including makeup artists, and stylists. They wanted to licence the images for use in four countries. I made an offer for them for four days of studio time and kept it really low… incredibly low. I think it was €5000 including licensing. That’s a crazy price, but because the dresses were really nice I wanted to do it; so decided to do it for almost cost.
They called me back and said “Well Frank, we really want you to do this assignment; but you have to do something with the pricing”. So I was like “Well, ok I do have some space, but what do you want?” They replied “We have an offer for €250.” So I said “I am paying my models more than 250 euros; you want four different models… I have to pay my makeup for four days more than 250 euros…” He says “Yeah but we have 6 or 7 quotes” and he also told me (which almost made me cry) “We also have about 10 people that want to do it for free, but we don’t take them seriously.”
That’s where photography is going now. People can go online and buy stock images for one dollar. The magazines… let’s be honest, if you look at the images in magazines (and I don’t want to say Vogue, because I love those images), but in most normal fashion magazines, for the Netherlands anyway, it’s been many many years since I was really impressed by a fashion spread. When I see the images in let’s say the TV Guide over here, I’m just frustrated because half of my students can shoot images that are 10 times better… and those are the guys that are getting paid, but probably not enough to do full-time photography. They have to be at Burger King or MacDonald’s flipping hamburgers to do photography — and that’s totally wrong. Photography is being downsized to the point where it’s ‘just give him some money and he’ll go away’ and we’ll keep the images. And after that the images are worthless.
That’s where the market is going to. People buy a camera and they’re ‘photographers’. When you buy a violin, you are just somebody who owns a violin — you are not a violinist. That’s something that people should realize. Photography is art; and people should hire you for your art and not because you can take an image.
For me that’s great though, because a lot of photographers starting out need workshops because they can’t shoot, and I am teaching them. So, in one way I am also benefiting from the decline of photography, but I think that’s normal. If I don’t do it, somebody else will.
DP: What do you think in terms of the quality of photographs that are being offered commercially these days — do you think digital has been the death of the real artist as far as the working photographer goes?
Frank: No, of course not. Digital is great. The death of the real artist is not about the photographer, it’s that magazines are run by people at the moment that don’t want to spend money on photography. I’ve heard stories (and I don’t know if they’re true), that a lot of photographers shooting for really great names in fashion are often investing their own money just to get the cover of a magazine. In other words, they don’t earn money from it; but they have the cover of a big brand magazine. That’s totally wrong I think. When you go back to the ’70s or ’80s, of course there was no digital, so photographers were really into the technical stuff of photography; because they didn’t have the big polaroid on the back of their cameras. So they would meter the light, make 100% certain the image was there, and then they would develop it. When they got the prints back they’d have to be sure they were 100% perfect, otherwise they’d be out of a job.
Nowadays, people just look at the back of the camera: “Oh yeah I got it” or otherwise, “I’ll fix it in Photoshop”. That’s somehow seeped through to the magazines, and the magazines will say “Ok, well we’ll just go one quality level below because we don’t have money for this, as we have to stay alive in the struggling digital environment.” So they don’t pay photographers anymore. That I think is the main downfall. It’s not due to digital; it’s due to the whole economic situation of magazines.
DP: Ok, but do you not think that that’s been dramatically affected by the advent of digital, given the fact that you can look at your image on the back of your camera, make a few corrections, and have something that’s kind of ‘good enough’… versus art?
Frank: Yeah! Without a doubt, you’re 100% right. But I think it’s wrong to say that digital is the downfall of great photography. A lot of great photographers are still there. When you look at guys like Jay Maisel, for me one of the greatest street photographers, and he’s shooting digital. He’s still an artist, and he’s still earning money from it. However, where you are right — and I think you point to that — there’s a lot of people out there who simply own cameras and call themselves photographers. That’s 100% due to digital.
DP: I would agree with you there too. The other thing is, given the state of the industry, there’s so many people that have to — like yourself — spend so many hours outside of shooting, that it might be difficult to attain the level of artistry that you might. Let’s say back in the 1600s, as a composer for the court, where you know, all you’re doing every day is that one thing, and honing your craft. Now you have to be all over the place doing this and that if you’re going to be a working photographer. How do you think that affects the overall quality of art in the field?
Frank: My friend, it’s a timing issue. As I told you, we have 40 hours a day here, and that was a joke of course, but what I do is I always plan at least every two weeks one shoot that’s my shoot. I will not let anything get in the way of that shoot; not even if there’s an assignment — that will be my day of shooting. During that day I will try new light setups, new concepts etc. That will be my day where I can be creative.
Of course, because I teach workshops, I can create my own themes. So when I do workshops in Boston for instance, I could do one of two things. I could say “Ok, people want to learn? No problem. We’ll hire a studio, we’ll get two models, and we’ll just do everything we normally do in the Netherlands. I’ll show light setups 1,2,3,4 – 10, I’ll explain some stuff, and after that I will be done.” I will let my assistant do the retouching while I fly back to the Netherlands and keep on working. Instead, I have a friend living in Boston who is scouting locations — ones that I really like. I choose the models myself, and I choose the models that I think are edgy… that I think are fashionable, or weird, or just plain different… models that attract me. I have a great makeup artist that also does the styling, and the only assignment I give my team is: “Awesome. It has to be awesome — a real addition to both your and my portfolio.”
The funny thing is that normally, you would pay your models to do the workshop for you, and you pay a lot of money. Now I can get my models much cheaper, especially from agencies as they love the stuff I am doing with the workshops. So they will give me models for like 50% off because they know the images will rock. So when I come home, I have some great additions to my portfolio. So that’s my creativity.
I agree with you: when you are a working photographer and you are doing seniors, and you are doing weddings, it’s hard to be creative when you are doing the same thing over and over again with people that are not models. But as a wedding photographer for instance, you could just hire models… do a whole fake wedding and let that be the shoot you use to promote your work. When you are doing seniors, you see so many potential models. Just pick one out and say “Ok, you’ve now just paid for your senior images, I would love to invite you back, but we have to do something completely different. So I’ll give you an assignment. You can’t come back in normal clothes. You have to think of something that’s really extreme — that’s pushing the envelope.” That way you’re making your model be creative for you. Then you shoot that senior for free. At that moment, you have some great additions to your portfolio which will enable you to attract more customers.
On the business side, a while ago I had a meeting with two female photographers who were both running studios in an ‘A’ location. I don’t know if you know what that is, but that’s in a shopping centre. One of them said “Well, I’m going to close shop very soon”. I looked at her and asked why. She said “To be totally honest, I haven’t had any clients in the past few weeks”. The other one said “Well I’m in a more difficult town and I’m so busy I don’t even have time to do stuff for myself”. After speaking with them, it was very clear that one of them bought a posing stool for let’s say $300… that’s it. The other one went to junk stores where she bought a little wagon for let’s say $5. Then she got an old chair for $10… and then another one… and then other props. Every time she renewed the images in her display window they were constantly changing. So she drew the old clients back in as well as new clients. The other photographer had the same images over and over. The only thing that changed was the model. So there is a huge difference in investing $300 for a posing stool upon which you can do nothing more than pose your model, and being creative and designing your own backgrounds… using an old chair you bought for $5 or maybe got from the trash. In the end you will earn a lot more money and spend a lot less. So by being creative you can grow your business.
DP: That’s some great advice. Now, what excites you about being a photographer these days? We’ve talked a little bit about some of the problems in the industry; but what makes you get up and get excited about what you’re doing every day?
Frank: What’s not to get excited about? We have the most beautiful women who are in front of my camera, we have some famous people who are choosing you for your work. I love to teach, and soon I’ll be back teaching at Photoshop World. Man, it’s all one big Disneyland for me! It’s like whatever you dream of, and then even more. When you are working in photography, always remember that you are working with people and you are very privileged because you can do for a job what other people do as a hobby. I think people should cherish this.
The only thing I think I teach my students is that if you really want to do photography, be prepared to work long hours and earn little money. But if you are prepared to do that, you will not go to work one day in your life… you will just practice what you love. Let’s be honest: we are in this world for let’s say 80 or 90 years at maximum — 50 years of that you are probably active (though with the way the economy is going now, probably 60.) You can go to work every day and hate your job, being in your cubical and earn like let’s say $10,000 a month… and you can have a big house with rooms that you do nothing with, and no time for your hobbies. Or you can just live in a normal house, have a nice family, and go to your work, loving every day that you are there. You may drive a Ford versus a Mercedes, but what’s the difference if you love what you do? I don’t think a lot of people realize that. With photography, you can be creative, you work with nice people, and every day is different, so, what’s not to love?
DP: Well that’s great! You’ve been giving a little bit of advice to aspiring photographers; what would you think would be the main things to bear in mind for someone who’s thinking about making the transition from an enthusiastic amateur to actually starting their own business?
Frank: Ok. Be prepared to take risks. Don’t give up your day job yet. If you could get 6 months off paid leave, take it and try to build things up, but don’t burn your bridges behind you. Be different. That’s one of the main things that I always say to people because you’ll be hired if your style is unique. If you visit forums, you’ll see a lot of people asking how to achieve a certain look, and of course it’s fun to know how to do it, but you want to create your own look. Make sure people hire you for who you are, and not because you have a low price. That’s what you see a lot of now… you know the whole Dave Hill look (and I love that look). There are a lot of people who can emulate that style and as soon as they do they can get hired… but after that look becomes less popular, they won’t be able to get work anymore. Or they will go for the next copycat style. The only one who is really making money is Dave Hill; because he’s the guy who has all the creative knowledge, and he can change. Because he created this look, he can create another one. I think that’s important. Be different; be yourself.