RAW vs. JPEG

JPEG vs. RAW?

I had to make this blog post after looking into this ageless debate's senseless progression and, sad to say, continued momentum. Yes, this silly spar is still going on with folks still sharing their thoughts so... why not share mine, eh?

My first problem with the debate clears the air of any debate: there is no debate! Get over it! Camera RAW data is the data that has been recorded by the camera's sensor. This is written to the disk. End of story. Whether or not I shoot in .jpeg mode in-camera or process my resulting .raw files afterwards in post, we are all shooting RAW data. Meaning: we are all shooting the data that our sensors are recording. The quality level of that data is determined by the type of gear we are using but ultimately ends up being directly related to our skill level with that said equipment. No matter what mode we shoot in. So what is the debate really about? And how come no one seems to understand?

ANSWER: TOTALLY DIFFERENT FILES

The argument is really not about files as these are two completely different types of files. It is comparing a goat and a cow. We could compare .gif to .png to .jpeg because those are all image archival file storage formats. RAW data, including .dng, is not. These are files containing original data from the camera sensor the instant the exposure was made. So we cannot compare the file types.

I saw one moron post something about if you printed off both images, you could not tell the difference between the RAW and a JPEG image. Dude: what in the world are you talking about?! Do you even know what you are saying? Have you performed this test yourself? Did your printhouse? Cuz I'm sure they loved setting up the machine for a 65MB image to print and use all of their ink! Now, I do not know if that is what would happen. I do know the only way you could print RAW data would be to print a .dng copy of the RAW: and that would just be stupid. Perhaps some folks do this but I do not see why you simply would not use a TIFF instead. I'd rather use a .jpeg. So, yea, I don't think there would be any difference in image quality if you printed side by side. That is not why we shoot in the RAW mode as opposed to the JPEG mode. It is not for a gain in printing quality. And since the .jpeg is actually what 98% of all my finished images will be saved as (not archived but finalized), the quality better be the same or I'll be finding a different file type, believe you me!

Another one of the common theories that is sung by the JPEG crowd is that the 'RAW shooters' claim to get more detail shooting RAW as opposed to .jpeg. This is true. But not how they think.

Shooting in a full RAW modus will get you a bit more detail but mostly in data and not in an actual image per se. Sound complicated? Not really. The sensor retained all of the data it captured in the original exposure. My RAW file will have more detail AVAILABLE should I choose to access it than compared to if I had shot in a straight JPEG modus, where I would throw all the extra data away from the RAW and keep only the converted image as the camera interpreted it based upon my predefined settings. Whoo. Glad it's so simple.

Personally, the point where RAW shooting is superior to JPEG shooting is simply in bit depth. I know the JPEG guys reading this are all going, Oh, c'mon, not another one of those! Forget them, they don't get it anyway. But their point is: what does bit depth matter when you are eventually going to produce an 8 bit image anyways? Uh, it matters EVEN MORE! Have you guys not thought this through or do you simply refuse? Here is the problem. If I shoot in straight JPEG, I save an 8bit file to the disk. When I edit this in post, I edit an image with 8bit depth. No more, no less. I get color banding, artifacts, you name it. IF I push too far in editing. Therefore, I ease back and stay safe. But I am still limited. If I shoot RAW and convert in post, I am now working with a 16-bit image. I can now make an HDR picture. I can do all of my editing, resizing, etc., with 16 bit depth. So I can really push the curves, go crazy with edits and manipulations and still maintain image integrity. When I am done, I save to an 8 bit color depth. But all of the EDITING was done at the 16 bit depth, maintaining higher quality. Try it, it works. Now, the difference is slight and not vast and that is where most JPEG folks argue. But it is still noticeable in print, especially on HDR images.

The truth is that we are all shooting RAW images. We capture what hits the camera's sensor. Then, we primarily have 4 different options. Those options are as follows:

• JPEG mode
• JPEG + RAW mode
• RAW mode
• RAW>JPEG mode

Many do not even know about the last option but I will lay out each option as is and give my reccomendation and my own testimony at the end.

JPEG Mode

• ADVANTAGES
  • minimal storage space
  • high throughput
• DISADVANTAGES
  • lossy compression applied
  • no possibilty for adjustment of RAW data

Some folks will misunderstand the last bit. This simply means that the actual RAW data itself cannot be further manipulated at a later date or time: when we press the shutter, it's a done deal as far as that image is concerned.

JPEG mode is a modus in which you can set your DSLR. This mode, despite popular belief, is actually still shooting in RAW format, as that is the only data any DSLR can glean until something new is invented. In JPEG mode, however, the RAW data is immediately converted from the sensor using the in-camera chipset. Sophisticated firmware converts the data instantaneously into a .jpeg file: none of the data captured by the camera's sensor is stored or saved. ALL of it is converted and compressed and saved into the resulting .jpeg file. This file is defined by presets which can be set from many different, tiny menus inside the camera's LCD screen which may be hard to access in certain shooting conditions. Luckily, you can assemble these settings and save them as profiles and call them up easily so it is quite handy when high throughput is top priority without a huge sacrifice in image quality. I will cover this stuff later in depth but, for now, this is a concise and accurate description of the mode.

This mode is very handy in a studio situation that will maintain the same white balance and high throughput is desired as well as a large number of images. Since the RAW data WILL NOT be saved, it is highly advisable to make sure to 'get it right' at this point and try and shoot for your finished product or as close to your end vision as possible since post processing options will be somewhat limited as OPPOSED to a full RAW workflow. You should still be able to achieve quality images with a proper skill set in this mode.

In defending this modus to the death, the blowhards do not even understand what they are defending. They are still shooting in RAW but simply converting the image simultaneously to the writing of the data to the disk. The camera manufacturer's have installed quality converters into the camera's firmware and the conversions should be top notch.

JPEG + RAW mode

• ADVANTAGES
  • all bases covered
• DISADVANTAGES
  • large file space requirements possible

I say possible because with this modus, different combinations of quality can be chosen, affecting the file size.

This combo modus is inherantly attractive to some due to its versatility: you literally have the best of both worlds. You can still post-process the RAW data as it is NOT thrown away with this option. You also have a converted .jpeg on hand, saved to disk as well.

The benefit to this mode must be the assurance of a speedier post workflow. You can transfer the images to your computer back in the studio and peruse the images. Images with satisfactory .jpeg's could have their RAW data thrown away at that time OR archived for further use, eliminating some RAW converting. If you missed an exposure or two or more, you can use the RAW file to correct it and possibly save the image.

My personal thoughts on the modus is that it is defenitely overkill and actually may make for a longer workflow rather than a shorter one. To ensure proper in-camera conversion, careful attention must be paid to camera settings for the .jpeg conversions which will happen instantaneously. Then, you still have to peruse all the images and decide what you like and what needs help, adding more time. If we go with a straight .jpeg workflow, we get what we got and that is it. If we go with a straight RAW workflow, same thing. Still, I feel this mode is great for beginner's and when I first began using DSLR's, this was the mode I shot in for a couple weeks before going full RAW. Your memory card may fill quickly if you set all of the quality settings to maximum with this modus.

RAW mode

• ADVANTAGES
  • all original data stored
  • no additional data stored
  • no additional settings in camera required
• DISADVANTAGES
  • large file space requirements
  • no image file created; only data is stored

This last point is the reason why some pros opt for a full .jpeg workflow: when you're working with that many images, it can seem to increase our workflow to have to still process the images. This crowd feels that one of the biggest advantages to digital is the removal of this step in the process. They are somewhat correct. However, those still shooting on film may not find the process any slower. Also, RAW converter software is amazingly intuitive and workflow orientated nowadays: large batches of RAW files can be quickly and accurately reviewed and processed in a very streamlined and efficient manner.

This mode is highly attractive to the fine arts folks and others who will be doing massive tweaking or variants of images. Also, high end fashion clients and other super technical niches will benefit from this precise and under-the-glass approach. The process resembles the dark rooms of the film days. Basically, when shooting in a full RAW workflow, you are taking the conversion process of the data into an image away from your camera and putting it into the hands of software specifically designed for the job. In theory, the software should produce more vibrant and accurate images then the camera software. In theory. There are a number of high-end software converters for RAW files that feature amazing workflows for large batch processing, allowing you to take settings applied to one image and, with the click of a button, apply them to several hundred others, if you wish. You can then review the individual images quickly and make adjustments as needed. Once finished, large batch output can be handled to maintain efficiency. With a professional setup, I highly advise a very capable and modern computer setup and build.

The benefit to this mode is the assurance of versatility and not being pinned down in any one direction. I personally use Phase One's Capture One Pro 7 software, which offers support for tens of hundreds of cameras sold on the market and thousands of lenses. This software can also shoot tethered, meaning, you take pictures with the computer hooked up to the computer and control the camera from the machine itself. This is the most viable option for high end professionals. Capture One Pro 7 also outperforms competitors like Apple's Aperture and Adobe's Lightroom for RAW conversion quality. In Photoshop, I can now edit with a 16-bit image instead of 8-bits. When I save as a JPEG in the end, my colors are smooth with no artifacts.

Another benefit to shooting RAW is during shooting. In RAW mode, all settings, like, D-Lighting, Sharpness, Contrast, White Balance, etc., are not recorded. White balance is recorded but can be changed. The rest are not even recorded into the RAW file. This means that when shooting, the photog no longer has to fiddle with the menus in the LCD screen: simply set the camera to RAW mode and shoot. Beautiful. Shooting RAW also requires a bit different approach. While you still need to get the shot right in camera, it is highly advisable to shoot for a more neutral and prime exposure with RAW. The more prime the exposure, the higher quality the digital data will be. This is beneficial later in post processing when different levels of detail are being pulled out of different areas of the composition residing in different exposure levels. Also, RAW works best with the bracketing shots used to make HDR images. RAW shooting frees the user to focus solely on shooting, like in the days of film.

In film days, your ISO was set by the film you used. Your camera determined the type of shot you could go for. So, you had different gear for different jobs. With DSLR's and RAW mode, you can now focus more on capturing great images and not have to also juggle the task of simultaneously converting your images when you depress the shutter button. This is the reason we 'RAW shooters' prescribe shooting in RAW: photography should be about capturing images. Post processing should be about developing said images. Photography SHOULD NOT be about capturing AND developing said images simultaneously: I do not care who you are, there is no way you can convince me that you can do as accurate a job when juggling both processes simultaneously: the work has to suffer. And I feel this is where digital photography has hurt the art itself. For beginning photogs, I advise shooting in either full RAW mode or a RAW + JPEG mode: this will help you learn more quickly what you did wrong in camera so you can do better the next time. This should NOT be a way to approach photography sloppily, I might add. Your work will still suffer and while RAW files can recover details that a .jpeg file simply does not possess, there is only so much data in the file and only so much of it can be recovered. RAW is NOT a safety net, even though that is what the jaundice JPEG jerks like to scream.

RAW>JPEG mode

• ADVANTAGES
  • all original data stored
  • no additional data stored
  • no additional settings in camera required
  • workflow may be improved due to in-camera processing
• DISADVANTAGES
  • large file space requirements
  • image file must still be created manually

This modus is not that well known and not talked about very much. In the RAW > JPEG mode, you shoot in RAW mode. Then, from your camera, you convert the images yourself to JPEG, applying different settings for image conversion. The mid to high-end DSLR's include in-camera RAW converting software, allowing the user to create image files completely inside the camera.

This mode may be attractive to folks who are on the go and need a faster workflow or need to get something into the clients hands immediately. While the in-camera converter is nice and handy, it may not be as capable and full of features as software alternatives. While this may not be a great option for pros, it is defenitely a plus for enthusiasts, hobbyists and semi-pros alike.

COMPARISONS

With these four options, we can clearly see that JPEG and RAW files are nothing to compare. JPEG's are the PRODUCTS of the RAW data itself, not competitors. When we adopt this kind of thinking we can start to better understand digital photography and all of its implications.

It cannot be argued that shooting straight JPEG (converting AND capturing simultaneously) is superior to converting after with more input from the user after the exposure has been made. It's like developing the image BEFORE it has been taken. Nevertheless, the technology not only allows for this to be done but produces very keen results. So why not do it this way? Well, that is exactly how the JPEG shooters feel. And that is fine. For a seasoned and experienced photog who knows his/her equipment, they should be able to produce work that would not be distinguishable from a RAW shooter. Should you then shoot straight JPEG? You betcha. However, I cannot for certain say that straight shooting, as I call it, will work in every situation. But it will work in many of them. For those who feel more comfortable with this workflow or pros with little spare time, this might be the most viable option and it is fine. But this does not make JPEG's superior to RAW. Why? Because JPEG's are still the PRODUCTS of RAW data!

For those more comfortable with shooting RAW, continue to do so and have fun knowing that you are truly free. Free to be as creative as you like with your work and not have any worries. You may wish to look into the issue of RAW file formats for archival purposes. Click HERE to read up on that. But shooting RAW will give you the most creative flexibility, no doubt. That is not to say that you will not also have creative flexibility with JPEG just keep in mind that you longer have the original data but a compressed version. However, the way digital works is that if you get the most prime exposure possible, you will be better off in post no matter which route you go.

For those who wish to test everything, I have put some thought into that as well. The real question shouldn't be 'Is JPEG as good as RAW?' Let's look at images side by side. That makes no sense since the product of RAW data IS a JPEG, PNG, GIF, or TIFF file. Instead, the question is really what is the best method for conversion? In-camera or post software? To do this test, you will probably want to do a shot on a tripod. You will need to get your camera set to take the highest quality exposure (most prime) you can set it. Then, go into your camera and set all the image settings (contrast, sharpness, saturation, D-Lighting, Profiling, etc.) to a neutral, standard setting, as neutral as possible. Now take a JPEG + RAW. If you have the most standard settings selected, your resulting images should be the same. Then, take the RAW into your software of choice on your computer and convert the RAW data into a JPEG. Compare both JPEG's to see which conversion yielded the more desirable results.

I have not yet conducted such a test but I would hope that the images are fairly similar in quality. Good. Now, go to the JPEG you captured in-camera. Be sure to make a copy of it first. Then, develop it. Load that JPEG into your RAW converter software and develop it just like you would the RAW file. Get the image looking just the way you like it. Now, save all these settings and export your JPEG. Next, load the RAW file into the converter. Apply the settings from the JPEG you just did (remember, you were supposed to save the settings so you should be able to apply them with one click). If the images were similarly captured, these settings should also fit the RAW. I would suspect the result would be that the RAW file will look more desirable with less color banding and artifacting. But I have yet to conduct this test. I will post my findings when I have. I suspect that this is the test we all must take to finally decide (at least for ourselves) which is superior: shooting straight (JPEG) or shooting RAW.

Freelance Income : A first Hand Affair

So my freelance affair continues and, after a week of sending tens, if not hundreds of "bids" or applications to prospective clients looking to hire contractors to perform their tasks (unfortunately, most of the time, for mere peanuts) I landed my first gig! Woopee!

Now, before I begin to describe my experience, I must inform you that I am working mostly off of odesk.com at the moment, as this seems to be the simplest and more active of the bunch.  There are many other websites to try but I am just learning, so, slow is fine.

Okay. So I got my first job.  Interstingly, it was a job where I was the only contractor who bid: a gentleman needs 3 unique telemarketing scripts for selling mobile apps to businesses to expand their marketing reach. Simple enough:  I have first-hand experience in something like this, I'm the perfect candidate.  He doesn't offer a whole lot of money, but not peaunts, either.  I'm looking at earning $15 per script.  I'm satisfied. 

His initial response to my application was that he would "try" me by paying individually for each script (meaning, he had a total sum that he wished to pay. Contractors then can bid lower, higher, or even to his request and then the client will choose the best contractor proposal based upon his needs and budget).  He would pay me up front for the first script and so on.  Great, we were in total agreement.

So, I write up what I think will be a killer first script.  I don't stop there: I throw in some manager notes for the training manager who will be explaining the campaign to the agents who will be doing the actual calling and a brief letter to the CEO/founder who hired me in the first place.

Anyway, get that done, send that to him, first script complete, then wait. He reviews it and loves it. Success! Wonderful.  He says, great, go ahead and continue with the other two.  I wait perhaps fifteen minutes for the next script payment to be recieved to my account.  Never comes.  So I message him.  He says he will pay for the next 2 scripts AFTER they are completed and states his reason for this is that this is simply how business is typically done on odesk.com, quote: "Usually, people do not pay for work up front but after it is complete on odesk."  Hmm.  Now that's confusing.  Because in this situation, it was the CLIENT, not I, the contractor, who stated, "I wish to make three installments for each script; I will pay you the 33% up front, you write the first script, if I like it, etc."  I also added in my reply that paying upfron for each subsequent script should then not be a problem for him, once he has the first completed script in hand.

I explained that I understood normal odesk procedure but that I become very nervous WHENEVER  an employer or client suggests one deal, we agree on it and then changes half way through.  These exact circumstances are what made me so sick of the show cattle industry.  And here, with no one to really govern anyone, hey, anything goes, right?

So I stated my reasons for standing my ground and said we can discuss it more so we can get the job finished and go our seperate ways and have not heard back from him since Friday evening.  Now, he may be away fro the weekend with his family: I hope this is the case and that we can complete our business on Monday.

But basically, I'm left with two options.  I can write the scripts and send them to him and wait for his final payment.  This would be the easiest to do, because he already paid a portion up front. My problem with this option is that he already has one script and I'm at his mercy now to get paid the rest while he is holding all the completed work.  Not a very favorable situation for me. 

The other option is what I am curently doing: waiting.  I have not begun work on his second script nor will I until we at least have some kind of short discussion on the subject and resolve the discrepancy.  My reason for this is mostly on principals: I become vary wary of any businessman or woman who states the deal to the contractor, they both agree upon it and THEN decides they want to change it half way through, and acts as if it was the contractor who suggested such a deal and not them. To me, that's shady. That sounds like the old slate-of-hand trick. I'm not buying.

Especially on $15 scripts.  I could see if he were paying $100 per script. Because then, I would have made it 100% clear that the only way a script was getting written was if the money was put up FIRST.

What do you think?  Am I wrong here?  I am not sure so I have dealt with it using simple logic: I have no money in my hand, which was agreed upon.  I can spend my time looking for new jobs that may or may not pay or spend my time completing a clients job who I now have reasonable suspicion he is planning not to pay out on. 

Are you starting to see the slippery world of freelance writing and business in general?  It's always a treat.  But also, it is always a great learning experience.  I'm not sure what the correct course is here but for such minimal amounts of money, if you cannot pay up front, I feel there is more going on or you are just cheap.  Feel free to leave your thoughts and any suggestions and good luck in your freelancing adventures!

The Growing Wage Gap

THE GAP (not to be confused with the overpriced clothing line)

This may seem like an ambiguous title. What I am referring to is an interesting phenomenon, which, like all trends, facts and realities taking place all around them, the majority of Americans are completely and totally unaware of. Just like they are unaware of the fact that they're beloved "Land of the Free" is slipping into 2nd World nation status.

The growing wage gap is the ever widening gap between national minimal wage, which, has risen yet failed to rise to a level that is actually satisfactory for sustaining one's existence in an economy which is on the edge of hyper-inflation and the accepted wage by those desperate for work and financial means.

I came upon this realization whilst performing research on ways to make passive income.  Sure, passive income has been a viral thing that seems like a complete scam to most but what many do not realize is "Where do all these stock websites come from?"  What I mean by stock websites is these, learn to blog, learn to sew, learn to trim your nose hair type sites that share more in common with infomercials than actual, legitimate web sites of yester year.  What is going on here?



HOW THE INTERNET DESTROYED THE EARTH

I believe the majority of Americans answer was similar to mine, that large companies own many smaller, daughter companies which likewise own smaller companies and these push their products, services and other cheap crap like the old model we either believed we were familiar with or simply accepted as fact.  I had a fair knowledge of the workings of the web but never really investigated very far into the business side of things.  Frankly, it had never interested me nor did it seem particularly relevant to my life.

It wasn't until a few years ago when I really began to understand where the internet was headed and what it was becoming that I also began to see its value as the greatest marketplace ever created.  And sadly, today, that's what the internet has become: one giant marketplace.  Instead of being a virtual library of sorts the world wide web is turning into a world wide market place and actually has been for quite some time.  Although many of us seem to be in denial of this fact it is there in front us everyday whether we like it or not.

Just try to research something.  The information that used to be provided for free (i.e. legal advice, legal text, laws, etc.) now are only available by joining particular sites and paying astronomical fees for monthly memberships just to read some trivial information which you do not have access to preview or peruse before purchasing said membership. Simple example, nothing more.

We can say that this was inevitable.  If we look at the history for the past 2 centuries, it becomes vacantly clear that something similar to the internet was coming along (tying all members of humanity into one society, connecting the entire globe, prophecies of Revelations fulfilled.  I won't preach to you, just pointing out the obvious.)

Anyway, with such a simple system to dominate the world and eventually further the one world ruling power which the United Nations is the blueprint infrastructure of, what will become of America?



THE BIG PICTURE IN LITTLE WINDOWS

Because the vastness and scope OF this picture is so wide, it helps to view smaller, incremental pictures of it to help digest it and piece together the entire canvas.  Although being aware of the global agenda and what it truly means in terms of reality is irrelevant for most people, I do find it interesting that from a skeptic's perspective, all the windows' views were accurately described in a book written more than 1,000 years ago (speaking about Revelations in the Holy Bible).  At least now I can SEE why the church does not want to touch on the book of Revelations. It's bad for business.

Anyway, a global scope has become apparent and has been around since the thirties and introduction of the Federal Reserve, virtually America's death warrant.  Any president who attempted to stop the Fed Reserve has been assassinated.  Over the last 40 years we have seen job after job outsourced to 3rd world nations because the work is cheaper and profits can expand. Great.  Hooray for 3rd world countries.

What most of us do not realize is that in those 3rd world countries, the reason they work those 16-20 hr days 7 days a week is so that after 1 week, they HOPEFULLY may purchase a loaf of bread. Hopefully.  But how does that affect us?



BRING IT HOME

New window. Full circle to the subject of this article: the Gap. A new trend in America called passive income via the web has been in full swing since the mid nineties.  Sure, passive income has always been around. But the internet provided a new, better, self maintained and automated way to do this.

For the majority of bloggers and folks who 'fiddle' on the web, passive income is an elusive and imaginary entity. For the growing number of thousands of folks making their livings based off of passive income through the internet it is a grizzly and cut throat reality.  The biggest nightmare to deal with is Google, their ever changing policies and newer and stricter rules concerning SEO (search engine optimization) tactics.

After that, it's simply the amount of competition as more and more folks lose jobs, lose interest in their jobs, discover ways to make money off the web and so forth.

While this article will not touch on HOW to make money off the web, I will give some keywords for you to begin your searches while omitting any direct links because personally, my dear, I don't give a damn.  You're probably too young to get that. ;)

KEYWORDS: passive income, blog to make income, web based business, how to earn web based passive income

Beyond that, by crunching numbers, doing hard research and reading others success stories we see this is not an overnight thing: that's good for most of us, because that weeds out a lot of the chaff.  There are folks making passive income which is web-based and is the sole of their bread and butter. My advice: don't quit your day job.


MY DISCOVERY

I find that presenting a lot of interesting material to chew on is a great way to present the bulk of an article and then we can have a build up and climax at the end. So now the scope of our window will narrow to my perspective, which is a very tiny window in the global picture.  That's good because at the cellular level, we can view how the core elements of the system interact and affect one another as a whole rather than a series of seemingly random and meaningless events.
What I am getting at is that, through good old fashioned logic and scientific simple evaluation, we can come to form some hypothesis of what America's future may or may not hold. Read on.

It began this week when I got really serious about passive, web based income and began to do research and begin some test runs of concepts in hopes of forming some hypothesis and observations with which I could form some sort of loose strategy for the next phase of setting up a firm infrastructure of passive income. 

In case you are still lost on this term it simply refers to the unique ability for the web to automatically sell and collect payments for you or your products with little to no work or involvement at all.  While many read that and think either 'easy money' or a 'lazy way to get out of work' it actually is a great alternative to those who are interested. Stocks are still a dangerous game and with the knowledge I have and the hypothesis I have come to form, I would not put my money anywhere near the markets, though, if I am right, it won't matter a hill of beans.  For now, don't worry about it.  If I'm right, you'll know exactly what I was thinking without me saying it. If I'm wrong, we'll be okay at least for the time being.

Anyway, while I'm still researching and testing out some different programs and blog strategies, I also stumbled upon a great 'side' income.  I refer to it as 'side income' because it is not truly passive income.  I am talking about freelance work.  And, due to my ability to crank  out 1000 words in 60 minutes and (sometimes) stick to a structure that both makes sense and is informative, I could see that this would be a great, new experiment. 

There are needs for content writers on blogs, article writers on niche sites, how-to authors on educational sites, fiction writers for scam sites (I mean, sites that sell genuine "fiction books") and also academia papers, technical papers, etc.  I know this is also a frustrating and cut throat industry so of course, I will investigate.

So I began by visiting the most popular free lance sites and, sticking to the ones that do not charge an upfront fee, wrote some articles, pitched some proposals and prayed for some feedback as to why I was rejected.  And I began noticing things I hadn't really anticipated but should of thought of beforehand.

Despite my lack of credentials and work experience, these sites offer 40 question tests which assess your competency and knowledge on hundreds of different areas of expertise.  For the majority of the tests, I scored in the top 20%-30% range in areas of English vocab, grammar, word usage, etc. with several tests placing in the top 10% of folks who took the test, including one in which I was ranked number 197 out of 20,000 people for the highest score.
There are also specific tests testing knowledge on certain softwares and products, some of which I fared above average as well. Great.  So with this and hopefully, an impressive cover letter, I can now apply for freelance gigs that clients post in hopes of attracting folks that can perform with quality and punctuality within their given budgets and time frames.  And this is when the unprepared dismay set in.

I tried to stay detached, I really did.  But I always see a bigger picture, whether it is in focus and whether it is even accurate at the time.  And the picture frightens me. 
What I was seeing is that despite my outrageously high scores and polite, informative cover letters, it was not my inexperience or lack of sample and portfolio materials that held me back: it was price.  Now, I went in being sensible and figured, ah, my price is close to $8-$9 per hour: I'm at home, no expenses beside electricity (public internet can rock when working), I have no experience, why not.  But I was not being cut by say, a $1 or more.  Try by sometimes as much as 99% more.  And I wish I was joking.

One job I had applied to ended up hiring someone from Indonesia to write the article. Well, good for that guy, I thought. But it wasn't . That guy was gonna write that article for $0.50 an hour.  And he agreed that he would be paid for no more than 2 hours, whether or not his amount of time exceeded that.  I know that, even in those countries, they can't survive on that.  The situation is the same in Kenya, Belize, China, Singapore, Philippines, etc.  The lowest I saw someone working for was $0.0005 per word. I wish I was making this up.  The size of the article was 1500 words, no more.  And they're thankful to have the work.



WHAT'S THE BIGGER PICTURE?

This got me thinking: okay, economy is eventually going to crash in America.  In the first depression (which I truly believed was purposefully manufactured by the same people, the Big Banking families and the global banks -with the purpose of introducing the Fed Reserve to the U.S.- due to the fact that when you place graphs of the economy crashing in 2008 over the graphs of the 1930's, there is absolutely not one variation whatsoever, and the next lines on the graphs are the ones that plummet into nothingness 5 years after the first plunge) freelancing was how a lot of people tried to make ends meet. Whether or not they were successful was inconsistent.
Again, as the U.S. economy heads toward an inevitable breaking point with the complete devaluation of the U.S. dollar gaining momentum every day, free lancing markets are at an all time high.  The only problem is we're competing with folks in 3rd world nations willing to work for less than a penny an hour.  You cannot compete with this.

You can try.  You can try writing for $0.50 an hour.  Now, do you take 2 hours to write it and make $1 or do you cram and finish in 1 hour and hope to get the next job, the one you bid $1 an hour for because, dammit, this is America and we're progressive around here?

What happens when Americans finally come to this sort of acceptance and begin to resort to freelancing for this kind of money?  Right now, there are still jobs available, though not as many as there were before 2008.  But there are still way more opportunities here than in Sari Lenka. For today, anyway.

What about tomorrow?

What about when hyperinflation hits our shores and the price of gas climbs to $1,000 per gallon?  Think that's insane and impossible? Research hyperinflation in eastern Europe and in southern Africa between the late 70's and the year 2000.  One tiny country in Africa with an irresponsible and selfish government much similar to our own devalued their own currency to the point that 1 gallon of gas ended up costing $2,000,000. For 1 gallon.  A loaf of bread in a European country near Chekoslavakia had bread priced at $100,000 a loaf.
And it wasn't gradual. Sure, there was a gradual pre-inflation. Maybe gas was $4 a gallon than, 10 yrs later, $8 a gallon. But after the year of $8 per gallon, sometimes it was only 6 months before it could hit $500,000 a gallon.  Its the way hyper inflation works: there is a cascading, tumbling effect as the ponzi bubble finally bursts.  Its unstoppable.  What about when that bubble finally bursts containing the world's standard for currency?

America is now being considered a 2nd world country, at least, economically, in many parts of the world.  As more folks lose jobs or have to rely more on internet based freelance work, where do you draw the line? What happens if, as in other parts of the world, it gets so bad that $1 an hour looks good because there is no other sign of hope?  Yes, there are minimum wage laws in this country but that doesn't apply to contractors.  If there are no jobs, we all become contractors, more or less.

There is the majority who honestly, somehow believe that 'this could never happen in America'.  Folks, Rome was around a LOT longer than this little ho-dunk nation.  And it fell in a day. We've only been a nation for a little more than 200 years.  My grandma is almost half that old.

I'm not sure what it means.  I know it isn't good.  I know there are those who scream, oh, we just can't work for that low of wage.  But tell me this: are you going to sit around drawing comic pages for free because you refuse to work for less than $50 for a page of pencils when you could get paid $30 per page instead? You're getting paid, right? On the other side of it, the lower the bar goes, the cheaper the expectation becomes.

It's a snowball effect that, sadly, has been moving strongly since the Carter administration and neither you nor I are going to stop it.  We weren't meant to. God has a plan. If you don't believe in God that's your decision. But things are changing on a global level that has been accurately described and predicted by countless religious prophets, philosophers and historical and economical professionals for centuries.  One of these ambitious groups will globalize this planet.  It's just a matter of which one.

And that's all fine and dandy but the bottom line comes down to what can we do today to try and secure a strong tomorrow?  I think we have to find an even balance.  I think we have to turn off the damn televisions ( I LOATHE those things), do some research, diversify our incomes and stock up on necessities and try and follow closely the day to day shift.  Because like president Obama said, "this is no longer a Christian nation: we are a nation of many faiths and tolerate many ways of life.  And we are no longer a sovereign, independent nation who can turn a blind eye on it brothers and sisters in the United Nations, for we now live in a global society where our neighbors now reside on different shores and among different peoples."  I'll stop there before I throw up on my computer.

Keep an eye open for your own evidence of the gap.  This article isn't meant to scare.  It's meant to make you stop and think. To get you to turn off the TV. To get you to spend time with your kids.  To investigate real ways you can save money and open undiscovered streams of income INTELLIGENTLY (not with scam artists get rich quick crap) and build them upon good, solid infrastructures that can weather the politically motivated storms Google will inevitably throw out with each new, passing, insane policy change and whatever else may come.  The future is ours.  It may be inevitable but you can still make a choice on which side of the coin to remain.

Professionalism

Today I would like to speak briefly about professionalism.

I believe one of the biggest downfalls of our modern, American civilization IS a lack of professionalism in every aspect of life, not just business.  Professionalism can also be associated closely, often hand in hand, with common courtesy, another thing that is greatly lacking in today's society.

But this is something we all realize, whether consciously or subconsciously, correct?  Agreed.  So:  how do we remain professional and for how long?

I say, remain professional at all times.  And this does not come overnight.  It is something you have to work at day after day.  I have burned many bridges but have learned from each mistake:  even when things do not go as planned (or even, God forbid, when things are downright mean) maintaining a level of professionalism in every instance will not only better you as a person, but as a business person as well.  And these things are learned through trial and error.

If you can leave without a fight or conflict, do.  Even if it means simply disappearing.  If you can later explain your actions, great.  Sometimes you can't.  But better to leave before the top blows than letting it.  Again, learned from personal experience. 

Do not mix business with pleasure.  That is, go out and celebrate with your associates or coworkers ONLY if you are good (and I mean GOOD) friends. Even this is discouraged against (don't make a habit of it.)  Again, simply by experience.  Engage your down time spent with associates in a positive manner, one where you don't see each other losing control.  It's simply better for business.

Upon meeting new folks:  be professional!  Be polite, be very clear and concise, upbeat and most importantly, be very open and clear in your communications.  Often, this will be with someone who does not conduct themselves the same way(busy people can get rude, that's just the way it is.)  Handle them calmly, despite how they handle you.  In this instance, turning the other cheek works.  If they cross you and you treat them fair, on what ground can they stand?  None.  This one is a VERY hard one to master.

And also, professionalism is GREATLY founded on keeping word.  Or deadlines.  Awhile back, I faded away into oblivion on a pro bono ad simply because I got too caught up in more interesting opportunities.  No one seemed real concerned or followed up, so I simply let it be.  Problem is, down the road, that person may remember that and be in a position where once, a door may have been opened, and now it may not.  Now I am not TOO worried with this individual, because they are quite easy going and have even seemed to have forgotten about it, but I'm sure they haven't.  Would you?  Point is,  even if it's a pro bono deal, it is NOT okay to simply slough it off.  My advice?  What I NOW do is ask myself:  is this SERIOUSLY something I can commit to from beginning to end and see it through?  If there is the SLIGHTEST doubt in my mind, that means I am not prepared and should back away to maintain professional integrity.

Hopefully, this helps.  Because if others can avoid making the same blunders I have (there is quite a list, let me tell you!)  then the experiences weren't for not and can be a blessing for others.  Have a great day and remember:  if you're unsure how to remain or act professional in a situation, simply revert to good old common courtesy:  how would YOU want yourself to act if you were the other person?

See ya'll later.

A LATE NIGHT BLOG ENTRY

Due to insomnia and duration time since my lase entry, here's another!

In an attempt to make interesting entries, I would like to invite you to check out a piece of manga art I made at deviant art

http://nsterken7983.deviantart.com/gallery/#/d32w3il

this graphic is also available for print on deviant art if you like.  Also, I want to give a shout out to another great artist I have the privilege to work with:  Mr. Matt Northrup!
Here is a link to his deviant art profile as well (he's an amazing artist, soon to be world renowned, I hear)

http://northrup.deviantart.com/

Well, once again, that's all for now and much more to come!  See ya folks and be safe!

FIRST BLOG

Well, it's been awhile since I've had a blog (google AdWords or something, long story!)

Anyway, I will have lots of different things to talk about, though I'll save my political ranting for Facebook!  This blog will be dedicated to my work in comics.

So for today, I would like to say to anyone here interested in comics, please comment and check here regularly.  I am currently coloring a book with creator Adam Wilson!

http://asplashpage.blogspot.com/

Above is his blog here on blogger.com!  Adam is a very talented young man and very easy and fun to work with!  You can also find how to obtain his work "Brian & Bobbi"  here:

http://215ink.com/site/

Well, that's all for the first post.  See you all again real soon!