Zach Matthews
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Wow, there is some amazing stuff here! Zach, here are a couple of images that I would love to get some feedback on:
California Corbina
Fishing the Slot
Will –
Even that $12 rod in the 1940s would still be $250 in today’s dollars, again based on unskilled wages figures.
Nice link JL. I checked into it and apparently the brick-and-mortar retailers have also been authorized to offer that same deal.
Zach
Will –
There are many ways to calculate present value of money in reverse, but based on the current value of unskilled labor as compared to the cost of labor from that year, that rod would cost about $2600 today.
Check the various results out here:
http://www.measuringworth.com/calculators/uscompare/result.php
Does that surprise you? My suspicion is that rods have always cost about the same. The majority of the cost of a rod is in the hand labor involved. The reason we can get rods that are decent for under $100 these days is that today we have access to people who are willing to work for wages that have never been–adjusted for inflation–comparable to American wage rates.
Zach
Hey Callum –
Anything that is long and lean like a rod can be difficult to photograph when you’re trying to show the whole thing. Manufacturers usually shoot their rod shots in clean room type environments with white backgrounds and then they lay those across the length of two pages, sometimes with a break in the middle to show all the features.
If you’re photographing rods in the field, in my opinion, you can only really zoom down on the butt section or on a specific component you are trying to show.
Here are some examples of how I tend to do it:
Zach
Whoa, Corey – I completely forgot about that thread. Thank you for digging it back up. No wonder I was getting deja vu writing this post. 🙂
We’ll use the shots submitted in the first thread as well.
Zach
NOTE: OLD THREAD CONTINUES FROM THIS POST ON.