In the past year I’ve self-published four photo books. It cost me a little bit of money but honestly, I could have done it almost or 100% free.

I spent $50 for Affinity Publisher to help lay my books out. I purchase a proof copy before publishing. The price of the proof will depend on book size, page count etc.

For example: 8.5" x 11" @ 200 pages on “premium color” paper is less than $20 for a proof. Premium in quotes, because this is being printed by Amazon or Barnes & Noble and the Premium paper is good but not great.

So I’m in at $70 so far, but I’ve also ordered author copies to give away to friends/family etc.

You can forgo the proof copy if you like and go ahead and publish, and you can also just use Word or Google Docs, etc. to layout your book.

Doing it this way through Amazon or Barnes & Noble or a handful of other companies you can get your book printed, it will be out there for sale, and you can order author copies basically at cost to sell on your own or give away. You don’t have to have any inventory, you don’t have to manage shipping etc. The profit for books isn’t that much per copy. But if you’re just looking to get some copies printed this is a great way to do it, and also potentially get some sales, and get your photos out there.

It’s the little things that can make your day sometimes.

I’ve bought books online that were mailed in folded cardboard mailers designed for books. Something like this. They have scored lines so they can be adjusted/folded for different thicknesses of books. Even at that, I’ve had a few arrive with a dinged corner.

I don’t necessarily write about the photos. I shoot a fairly niche subject, and I hike/travel some to go out and get my shots. Every time I come home and dump my photos or “flicks” (hint), I do as long a write up as it takes to describe my little day long adventure, the weather, maybe set the mood and add a little color/humor.

I’ve done this for years, and when I decided to put out my first photo book, I used those write ups in my books.

This might end up being one of those /r/UnethicalLifeProTips :-|

If you have a bunch that are already scanned.

Sign up for a flickr account. Depending on the number of photos, in order to upload all of them you might have to buy a “PRO” account for the year. (Currently $72) Don’t set the account to auto-renew unless you think this will take longer than a year. There’s also a 2-year plan for $132.

Upload all of the photos, and add as many descriptions, titles as you want. I would do this in groups. Cambodia (1972), Tiajuana (1964), etc… Reason is you can add titles and descriptions to all of the items in that group as they’re uploading. You can upload more than one group of photos at a time, but sometimes just looking at the small thumbnails you might tag some wrong.

Also mark all of them as “Public Domain Dedication (CC0)” You can do this during the upload process. This makes them free for anyone to download and use, if that’s your intent. There are other options. https://www.flickr.com/creativecommons/

Anyway, once everything is uploaded and you’re happy with everything. You can set the account to “In Memoriam” This will protect all of the photos from deletion even after the Pro account expires. https://www.flickrhelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/4404071450516-In-Memoriam-Flickr-Accounts

Once the account is In-Memoriam you won’t be able to upload anything else or log in, so make sure you’re done with everything.

Not only a little weirded out by the post, but concerned about them finding it and possibly suing you, and possibly over some disabilities act thing. You can share photos and still blur out faces, and not share personal details.

The original discussion was about sharpness.

OP “How do some photographers get some insanely sharp shots?”

“it’s not that simple.”

But you made it sound that simple… “It is all in the glass. all my lenses are F2.8 or better.” And that’s the reason I replied in the first place.

“All my lenses are made by Nikon or NIKKOR.”

I own Canon “L” lenses, alongside cheap Chinese lenses, Fuji, Canon, and a boat-load of 50 year old Pentax Takumar, and other M42 mount lenses. They’re all fun, and can all be super sharp in the right conditions.

Is this you from 158 weeks ago… Unless this is you, you’re just talking. https://www.instagram.com/p/CF8x9dRAiN_/

“Every lens is made up of multiple different lens elements. Each element affects the light as it passes through. With expensive lenses, the manufacturers go to great lengths to use the highest quality techniques and materials to minimize any chromatic aberration, distortion or vignetting from how the elements interact with the light as it passes through. Expensive lenses also tend to be sharper across the entire image for the same reason. With cheaper lenses, manufacturers can’t afford to invest as much money in materials or research. They try to do their best, but compromises must be made, and #imagequality is one of the things that suffers. Your lens controls what you shoot.”

“The best camera you have is the one you have with you.”

Yeah, my shitty Google Pixel 3a

Depending on your pricing, I think the shots look fine, but…

Are you sure they’d be happy with you posting their photos here for us the internet to criticize their dislike of your style?

And… Also letting all of us in on their family/disability situations?

"All four are on disability support, and were chaperoned by parents "

If this reasoning was solid, my cheapest lens, a $125 7Artisans f/1.2 would be better than all of your f/1.4, 1.8, 2.0, and 2.8 lenses. And an f/0.95 would be the sharpest lens a normal person could afford, at only $400-$500.

If the opposite was true, and I had a lens that could stop down to f/64 it would be the sharpest lens a mere mortal could buy.

Neither of these statements is true. and “It is all in the glass.” is only partially true.