Why Shooting Celebrities Sucks: A Reflection Photographing Julia Roberts on the Set of Eat, Pray, Love.
If you’re a reader of this blog, or if you’ve followed my work for a while, you’ll probably know of the dark secret in my time as a photographer. When I was right out of college, I had an extremely brief tenure with an agency as a celebrity photographer. One of my gigs was shooting Julia Roberts on the set of Eat, Pray Love which is now in theaters. The photos in this story were shot a year ago in Carrol Gardens in Brooklyn, New York where part of the movie was filmed. Though not my worst gig, it was a huge learning experience and began to solidify my exit from celebrity photography.
It was 8AM and my Gmail inbox has a message stating that I have a new assignment. Essentially, the cast of Eat, Pray Love needed to be photographed, “candid style,” which essentially means no posed portraits. It sounded simple enough.
And so at 9:15 AM, I’m in the Brooklyn area, seeing signs that the movie is being filmed from 9AM to 8PM the next day. So what does that mean? A stakeout. Literally, blend into the fabric of society again and get out of photographer mode. Less a stalker than the ultimate fan boy. Well, not really. That’s what you tell yourself to justify doing such a dirty deed when first starting out.
I didn’t do that. As a trained photojournalist, you’re always taught to be honest and up front about your intentions. Carry the camera with you, have it out so that people become comfortable with you. Little did I know that you don’t always do that on a movie set. And so after walking around and patrolling with the camera out, the cast becomes aware that there are photographers around and want to “protect the talent.” This is actually a gimmick for, “Let’s create controversy by perhaps having the talent act like they’re pissed off and assaulting the photographer so that they will get better press for the movie. It’s not like we won’t be able to compensate the photographer in the lawsuit, it’s brilliant!”
And so Julia hid in her trailer, forever and ever.
Until 7PM the same day, Julia finally comes out and ends up in a laundromat where part of the movie is filmed. As a Blind Photographer, I wasn’t clearly able to see her from across the street.
Why was I across the street? Because they literally fenced off an entire five or so blocks.
To make an ultra long story short, I ran across incoming traffic to try to catch a full frontal image of Julia and failed terribly. As you can see in the opening photo, the guard behind her looks like he’s about to punch me in the face. With Canon EOS 5D Mark II with EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lensin hand, that wasn’t about to happen and I wouldn’t let my recent investment be harmed in anyway, but I needed the photos. But in public, a photographer has every right to take a picture of someone.
This was all a mistake though, because a guy running across a street will always set off alarms.
Though some cast members did try to help me as they realized that I was just a kid right out of college trying to pay bills, the agency had the last word. And their words:
I mean, they were nice about it that time around. That was awesome. Once you start screwing up more though, it’s not.
So why did I get out of the business? Too many people in it and not enough of an audience. Also, there is way too much competition. Too many Brooklyn hipsters also had their Canon Rebels and 30Ds with big lenses to capture the celebrities. So when you’re not competing with other photographers, you’re competing with normal folk.
That’s not to say that the images aren’t viewed at all. Men and women alike regularly look at them. Women look in magazines, and men look online. Any man that honestly sits there and says that he doesn’t occasionally take a longer look at something like a photo a Kim Kardashian wearing almost nothing and walking confidently along the beach or her private pool is lying to himself as those photos were probably snapped by a celebrity photographer.
A lot of the gig required crossing my own boundaries that were instilled into me when training under a very admirable photographer.
And though I respect the work of celebrity photographers, it’s when they get vicious where I look down upon them as it makes all photographers look bad.
Either way, my advice to college students just getting out and wanting to make money is to instead try to do portraits or events or be a wedding photographer’s assistant.











Did this agency send you the list of rules before this assignment? My opinion is that if you are running a business, even if you are hiring people who have done this for many years, always send the rules.
I am in situations where I have to push back when photographers push me to get their shot. No way, and I stick to my spot and hold my ground. I never get vicious though, the pap’s go way too far and if they are this way on the sets where you have been sent then I can understand being turned off by it all.
You are right, if you can see something from the street you have the right to photograph it.
I read an article, a movie site had taken footage of Transformers 3 in Chicago while they were filming on the street. He was sent a letter form a lawyer warning them to take the footage down. He took it down, I would have asked for something in writing showing that I was breaking the law.
If you ever decide to try this again make sure to questions things in a polite manner, most of the time security doesn’t know that you know your rights and will try to intimidate you.
TheresaZphotography
August 12, 2010 at 2:14 PM
Security will try to intimidate no matter what in nyc. Also, there are rules to the industry? Haha, never sent me any rules.
Chris Gampat
August 12, 2010 at 5:54 PM
LoL I meant the rules in the letter they had sent you on what they wanted.
TheresaZphotography
August 14, 2010 at 1:19 AM
I figured you meant that. No, nothing of the sort. Hence, why I stated no.
Chris Gampat
August 14, 2010 at 9:18 AM
By the way, yes, NYC photographers are very vicious with one another. There is always a hierarchy in the pit, but it’s worse here than I hear it is in LA. I know what it’s like for women like you too. Us men place our cameras on top of your hear to get photos.
Chris Gampat
August 12, 2010 at 10:13 PM
I cannot tell you how many times I have been hit in the head with lenses, I’m only 5’2″ tall so I turn around and let them know that they don’t have to hit me, they are taller than me and to please stop. More times than not they will be more careful, when they aren’t I will push the lens away with my hand until they stop.
TheresaZphotography
August 14, 2010 at 1:21 AM
PS: Are you going to post some of the pictures form this shoot on your Phoblographer group at Flickr?
TheresaZphotography
August 12, 2010 at 2:17 PM
Yeah, I should be.
Chris Gampat
August 12, 2010 at 5:52 PM
Cool!
TheresaZphotography
August 14, 2010 at 1:23 AM
Chris,
From your letter, I’m assuming you were working for a paparazzi-esque agency and not as a still photographer hired by the production company. Was that the case?
-Travis
Travis
August 14, 2010 at 9:17 AM
That is correct. Paparazzi and Celebrity Photographers are different in my book though. Paps are the ones that will call in a bomb threat to a building to get talent to come out or stalk their houses. Celebrity photographers wait in public. In public, you taking a photo of a celebrity it legally no different than a tween taking a picture of Robert Patterson in Washington Square Park.
Chris Gampat
August 14, 2010 at 9:21 AM
Uh… On what planet? Celebrity photographers are people like Frank Ockenfels or Sam Jones who are commissioned to shoot portraits of celebrities. Both of your descriptions describe paparazzi.
brooksayola
August 14, 2010 at 11:26 AM
Fair enough, don’t forget Annie Lebovitz. I still just despise that term.
Chris Gampat
August 14, 2010 at 11:30 AM
They are different in my book also. Celeb photog’s done antagonize the celebrities. Talent sells the images. There are many agencies out there who send their celeb photog’s to events to shoot, they are supposed to be there.
Paparazzi for the most part aren’t so many have to do things in a vicious manner to get a shot that can have any story accompany it for sales.
TheresaZphotography
August 14, 2010 at 12:44 PM
Interesting blog..Thanks for that
Dean O'Brien
August 14, 2010 at 9:28 AM
Some observations.
The Canon 5D is too slow for this gig. You need a camera that’s going to shoot 5fps minimum. You needed another body with a 70-200 2.8 and or a 300mm. What was the payment deal with the agency, did you get a day rate or payment on results? Giving up at the first hurdle does not bode well for a long and prosperous career in photography.
Patrick Eden
August 14, 2010 at 10:58 AM
Very true, but I purchased the 5D Mk II because I was going to get back into photojournalism after graduation. When nothing was available, I went into Celebrity Photography. The 7D wasn’t around yet, but I’ve stated in my 7D review how much I wish it was. The 50D is not a camera that is suited for this type of work. A 1D Mk III, sure. But I couldn’t afford that and there are lots of photographers out there still doing this stuff with D200s. Hell, when I shot celebrity events for PCMag.com I was using an Olympus E-510 and delivered wonderfully publishable shots. Granted, these were more red carpet than candids.
Around this time, I didn’t have a 70-200mm F2.8. I now own an 80-200mm F2.8 L and it is wonderful and has shot a couple of celebs. The 5D Mk II shot at all 21MP raw images can deliver some very detailed crops when needed that are also very sellable.
I’m going to respectfully decline on commenting about my rate. I personally believe that’s between myself, the agency and my bank.
I surely did not give up on the first hurdle. I did the job for around four months before moving on to portraits, concerts, events and weddings.
Chris Gampat
August 14, 2010 at 11:04 AM
I was asking whether you got a day rate or whether you got paid on sales of pics, not how much. These celebrazoid agencies over in UK pay by percentage of sales price.
Patrick Eden
August 14, 2010 at 11:49 AM
They do the same here. I was told by Brad Eltermann of Buzzfoto.com that, “That’s the nature of the beast.” To be honest, if you know an editor at a newspaper or magazine, it’s just much better to rent the images out to them instead without the middle men.
Chris Gampat
August 14, 2010 at 11:52 AM
Question, why isn’t the 50D suited for celeb photography?
Is there a camera that isn’t a Mark series that will work well for this?
Thanks!
TheresaZphotography
August 14, 2010 at 9:29 PM
The 50D is a great camera, but the autofocus just really isn’t up to par with Canon’s modern focusing system. The 7D, I actually believe, is the ideal camera for this. It’s smaller than the Mark series, has a 1.6x crop for longer reach (which means you’re further away), a much more advanced autofocus system (especially in tracking mode i.e. AI Servo), shoots HD video if you need it, has wireless flash control built in, and more than enough ISO usability at the higher settings.
Though this may change soon. Let’s just say that I’ve seen and held the future.
Chris Gampat
August 14, 2010 at 10:55 PM
So even though the 50D has 6.5 fps the images will still have a chance of blur becuase of the auto focus not being able to keep up?
Thanks for letting me bombard you with questions = )
TheresaZphotography
August 15, 2010 at 2:43 PM