Skip to content

Commercial Photographer Income

I decided to move the updates from the post on “How Much Money Do Commercial Photographers Make?” here and add a few more that have been submitted:

Photographer 1:
My individual gross revenue* from assignment and stock photography was $362,000
I had $57,000 in out-of-pocket assignment expenses*
I had $120,000 in fixed overhead* costs
My net profit* on my photography was $185,000 ($362k – $57k – $120k)

I’ve been in business for 24 years (started out as a photojournalist working for newspapers and wire services, now I shoot portraits for magazines, corporations and ad agencies). I share facilities, staff, equipment, supplies and insurance with a number of other photographers. The number I quote above was my share of the fixed overhead.

While it’s useful to know what “the budget” is for a particular project, and to know your “cost of doing business” as background when you’re putting together an estimate for a job, those numbers don’t have any impact on the value of a project for a particular photographer. They simply determine whether the photographer is going to be too expensive for the client, or whether the job is going to be too cheap for the photographer.

The value of commercial photography is dynamic. It changes moment to moment, and varies widely depending on who the client is, how unique the photographer is, how busy the photographer is, how badly the client wants that photographer, how badly the photographer wants the project, how much time, energy, and money it will take to accomplish, and of course what the usage is. A smart photographer is going to take a fresh approach to each estimate, just as they would expect to take a fresh approach to the assignment itself.

gross revenue* is the total amount of money you collect in a given tax year
out-of-pocket assignment expenses* are your actual costs for subcontractors, travel, props, rentals (that are specific to an assignment)
fixed overhead* are the costs for your rent, utilities, business insurance, supplies, portfolio, advertising, accountant, etc.
net profit* is what’s left over after you pay all of your business expenses in a given year – it’s what you pay income tax on

Photographer 2:

2009 kinda sucked, I made 30% of 2008!
My billings were $90,000
My net was $54,000
I am an advertising & editorial photographer, lifestyle & portraits
stopped assisting in 2002, so been in biz 8 years.
2010 is starting out much better……… knock on wood.

Photographer 3:

as a commercial photographer who has made between $600,000- 1,000,000 in fees every year for the past half dozen years, i think there are aspects of how you run your business to keep it lean and minimize overheads. as previously talked about, running a corporation allows you to fund and write off capital investments, cars, flights, employees, production and even some ‘entertainment’ pre tax. so it becomes very difficult to judge the true bottom line of where your company expenses end and where your personal income begins. the lines are perfectly and legally blurred. so determining your actual salary is not an exact science.

again, as stated, we all try to make it look as though we make as little as possible and write off as much as is legal, but be for warned, when you then go and try to buy your 2 million dollar dream loft in tribeca, it will really work against you as although your company has billed much, your personal salary will appear to be much smaller. this is a good catch 22.

keeping it lean and not ‘doing an annie’ is critical. for example, i run a still life studio where we have preagreed flat rate fees on studio, cameras, digital capture. so if i use 1 flash head or 20 it is the same price. clients love it cause there are no surprises, but i love it cause there is no cataloging of what was used. no studio manager spending endless hours logging in equipment and then making invoices. people cost money.

i also suggest not doing your own production. in my experience, there simply is not enough of a margin to be made (if at all these days) in doing production and it is a waste of a photographers time to attempt to suck 10-15% out of a budget. you are a photographer. be a photographer. if you are making 50K fees on an ad job and the production is say another 50K, it is simply not worth trying to make another 5K out of the production. as you are holding a lot of overhead which if it goes wrong and/or over budget, you and your business will be held responsible. not to mention the headache. production is for producers.

Photographer 4:

I am a commercial photog in Brooklyn shooting editorial, publishing, some advertising and now doing video producing with partner. I have been in business for myself for 6 years. I do not have a studio, or employees, so overhead is fairly low. I still feel like an “emerging photographer” :) This year has been better a bit because of video work, which is new to my business.

2009 – gross fees: $113k, net will probably be 40-50k – hopefully I can get all my deductions so I am not taxed crazily. I am not incorporated. The past few years have been approx gross 70k fees and net 30-50k.

Posted 08 February 2010 † A Photo Editor § Ask Anything ‡ Comments (12) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

Ad Agency Guide To Photography Usage Terms

BASIC INFORMATION
With the current US copyright laws as they are applied now, artists own all rights to their created images and sell/transfer rights to agencies and their clients. All questionable negotiations have historically defaulted in favor of the artist. Technically, even minor modification of the art requires the artists’ permission. You are RENTING, not buying an image unless explicitly stated on the contract.

Generally, think of usage costs reflecting the amount of exposure a particular image may receive. The more exposure, the higher the price. Exact terminology may differ, but the semantics remain the same if all of the information is included in each negotiation. You can phrase it any way you want, but be clear about the INTENT by including information from all categories outline below. Talent usage is similar, but there are differences in how each medium is priced out: talent usage tends to be much more specific. Again, it is based on exposure. European terminology will differ from US terminology, particularly in the “Print” category. In Europe, “Print” includes anything that is not broadcast.

Usage is defined by the following:

TIME PERIOD or LENGTH OF TIME
This is the length of time an image or images will be used: one year, two year, one time, etc.. It is best to specify “from date of first use” when negotiating a contract for an image. Standard use generally defaults to one year use {from shoot date} in a specific medium unless terms are otherwise negotiated.

RIGHTS/QUANTITY
This is the number of times within the time period that the image will be used.
Limited: A limited number of times such as “2 insertions” or “run of 5,000” within the time period purchased. By the time you reach multiple insertions in publications such as People or USA Today, you may as well buy unlimited rights.
Unlimited: Can be used an unlimited (unspecified) number of times within the time period purchased. This does not allow a transfer of copyright to you or to your client, nor does it mean the same as “unlimited time.” You both have only the rights to use the image, not to resell it or allow a third party to use it.
Total Buyout: You have purchased the copyright to the image and have full rights to do whatever you want with the image. You own it, basically. In the case of illustration, you own the rights, but you do not necessarily own the final art. That usually requires a very specific, carefully worded purchase agreement. Expect to pay dearly for this usage!

EXCLUSIVITY
I recommend purchasing exclusivity of all images to prevent the resale of any images during the time period you’ve purchased. Unless otherwise stated, an artist has the right to sell an image to another client at any time—even if it is one currently licensed to your client. Usage defaults to non-exclusive of the selected images only if not otherwise stated.
Exclusive: The image (and the outtakes, if specified) cannot be sold to anyone else during the time period purchased.
Exclusive to Industry: The image cannot be sold to anyone else within the same industry (Liquor, Banking, etc.)
Non-Exclusive: The image (and the outtakes) can be sold to other clients at any time

GEOGRAPHIC REGION
This is the area in which the images will be seen.
National: US only. Includes provinces of the US such as Puerto Rico and the Caribbean.
North America: Includes the US and its provinces, Canada and Mexico.
Global or International: Throughout the world (internet is automatically global).
Local: Specific city or area (San Francisco Area, etc.)
Regional: Specific region (Midwest, Southeast, etc.)
Europe: Europe is often negotiated as a neat little package that includes Great Britain, Spain, France, the Netherlands, Scandinavia, Germany, Italy.
By Country: Specific countries can be purchased, but if the exposure is large, such as Europe, it may be wiser to go with Global to make sure you are covered.

MARKET
This category also gives the artist an idea of the degree of exposure. Consumer advertising generally receives more exposure and at a premium cost. Trade is not as expensive, nor as far-reaching in exposure. Editorial is relatively cheap.
Consumer: Markets to “people who buy things”; it is purely commercial (sells things) in nature and the artist want a piece of the action because of the high degree of exposure.
Trade: Markets to “people who sell things to others”; it is lower down on the food chain, and therefore not as expensive.
Editorial: Informational in nature, not commercial. Magazine layouts and textbooks fall into this category.

USAGE REALM
This category further defines how the images will be used. These categories are then segmented even further by defining specific mediums for each.
Advertising: A medium that sells something, like an ad or an outdoor board.
Promotional: A medium that promotes something, like a poster for an event like a concert.
Public Relations: Similar to Promotional, but more awareness-driven and less commercial.
Corporate: Annual reports or internal materials like sales kits.
Editorial: Again, informational in nature, not commercial. May accompany an article or be included in a textbook.

MEDIA
Media usage describes where an image will be seen and can be defined as precisely as you choose. As with photography, when negotiating with talent the specific media included will directly affect your price. Broadcast use is seldom needed, but can be purchased if necessary. Remember that sometimes being TOO specific may come back to bite you later.
Any And All Media: Covers EVERYTHING: all print, OOH, POS, Electronic and Broadcast. “Any” and “All” are somewhat redundant, but it drives home the idea that everything is covered.
All Print: Generally, anything printed onto paper that you can hold in your hand: newspaper, magazine, collateral, direct mail. You may expand your negotiations to include POS or OOH by adding it specifically, otherwise they are generally not included under this category. Exceptions may include GO cards or similar limited exposure items.
Newspaper: Use this category in conjunction with Geographic Region. Size also plays a role.
Magazine: Use this category in conjunction with Market and with specific publications.
Collateral: Includes anything in print that “goes along with” the campaign but is of secondary importance. Things like brochures, some mailers and bill stuffers fit under this category.
Direct Mail: Pieces that are mailed to people. Quantity of pieces and Geographic Region affects pricing. Where the image is seen also makes a difference, whether it’s on the cover, envelope, etc.
Point-of-Sale (POS) or POP (Point-of-Purchase): Things that will be seen where the product is sold. Banners, signage, counter cards, displays, in-store posters, table tents, hang tags.
Out-of-Home (OOH) or Outdoor: Virtually anything seen outside of your home: outdoor boards, bus sides, trans stops, rail cards, GO cards.
Trade Show: Trade show booths or materials used in a trade show. Show attendance and how the image will be used must be discussed.
Electronic: Media that is not printed: Internet, C Ds for distribution, Asset Management System, screensaver. Unless rights are specifically purchased, images cannot be resold.
Internet: Global internet use. Where it will be seen (home page or inside page)may affect pricing. Sometimes numbers of hits makes a difference also.
Miscellaneous: Things like Ad Planners must be negotiated apart from the other media because of the potential for wide-spread, undetermined use.

BODY OF WORKS
This means all of the images shot for the project, not just the selected image or images. Some photographers will automatically sell you the rights to the entire body of works, but most will sell you the rights to only the selects. You will need to clarify at the beginning of the negotiation because usage will default to the selected images only if not specified. You will also want to include a clause that outtakes may not be sold as stock until the rights on the selects expire.

REUSE
It is in your best interest to include verbiage in your initial use statement that covers future reuse. Legally, unless otherwise indicated, an artist can sell an image to another client at any time, with an increased risk after the original use expires. Because the exact date of first use may not be known at the time rights are purchased, it follows that the date of expiration may not be exact. With the proper verbiage, you can create a checks-and-balance system to at least have an opportunity to decide if you want to purchase reuse before your client sees it in another ad. I recommend stating that your “client reserves first option of reuse upon expiration of current rights.” If you and your client do not renew your option, then there is a possibility that the image will be purchased by someone else.

MISCELLANEOUS
You will want to include the right to use images for your agency to use in self-promotion. Those rights are technically not granted past the original usage period without express authorization. Although usually not a problem, it doesn’t hurt to have it stated officially. To get the maximum amount of usage time of an image, include the phrase “from date of first use” or “effective date of first use.” That way, if an image is not used for several months, your usage won’t begin until then. Otherwise, it may be a point of contention a year from the shoot date. This is especially important with talent. If the photographer is coordinating the talent, do not automatically assume that the usage for the talent matches the usage you are contracting with the photographer. You must clarify talent usage at the estimate stage.

EXAMPLES OF USAGE VERBIAGE
Here are some samples of how to phrase your usage statement:
One year unlimited exclusive international advertising and promotional rights and usage in any and all media for entire body of works, effective date of first use. Artist retains self-promotion rights forever, as does the agency. Client reserves first option of reuse upon expiration of current rights.

Two years unlimited exclusive regional (Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois) advertising and promotional rights and usage in any and all media for entire body of works, effective date of first use. Artist retains self-promotion rights forever, as does the agency. Client reserves first option of reuse upon expiration of current rights. Image will be
digitally enhanced in post-production.

Unlimited exclusive global advertising and promotional rights and usage in any and all print for an unlimited time. Includes entire body of works. All images, including outtakes, may not be sold as stock until all usage expires. Client reserves first option of reuse upon expiration of current rights. Artist retains self-promotion rights forever, as
does the agency. Total buyout of rights, usage and copyright. Artist retains self-promotion rights. {The word ‘buyout’ by itself is meaningless and will not hold up in court}

This information was provided to me by Former Art Buyers and current photography consultants Amanda Sosa Stone and Suzanne Sease. Usage terms guide created by Kat Dalager.

Posted 05 February 2010 † A Photo Editor § Advertising Photography ‡ Comments (41) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

Ask Anything – Should Photographers be Unionized?

Former Art Buyers and current photography consultants Amanda Sosa Stone and Suzanne Sease have agreed to take anonymous questions from photographers and not only give their expert advice but put it out to a wide range of photographers, reps and art buyers to gather a variety of opinions. The goal with this column is to explore more of the commercial side of photography (not my area of expertise) and to solicit honest questions and answers through anonymity.

Established Photographers

Photographer 1:

I don’t think photographers could ever pull off a Union type situation. Never in a million years.

It is like trying to organize a million man march of independents. They are too much the loner mentality.

Many can’t even follow loose guidelines for rates or usage.

Photographer 2:

I would even love it if we could just get some standard licensing language and standard estimating forms like the film industry uses. Art buyers are already use to standardized forms from the film world. Why can’t we at least do that?

I am a member of the Director’s Guild, and the company I work through is a member of the AICP, which is a very strong and effective union. They have fantastic representation, and they are well respected by the Advertising agencies. They have a very strong voice, and they are quite successful at getting their voice heard and their agenda’s addressed. Witness the whole dust-up when a few of the agencies announced that they were no longer going to approve advances and they were going to go to a third party payment guarantee. The AICP President immediately announced that they would not support it, and that their members would not abide. Photographers on the other hand did nothing. In short it is a very good model, and there are many benefits for their members. Most of the (National) commercial on air … are Union spots. Most of the advertising agencies are Union Signatories, and therefore CAN NOT shoot non- union spots. Usually, only very small shops, and local companies can get away with non- union. So that said, I have no idea of the history, or how it got started. But one of the reasons that photographers are always dealing from a point of weakness is because they have no good solid representation. Here is a quick, off the cuff summary of issues that are already resolved by the AICP:

1. They have a standardized bid form.

2. Mark-ups are accepted and the norm- therefore when the scope of the job is increased, there is some additional profit, even if the fee is not increased.

3. Billing for Payroll tax and Insurance are standard.

4. AICP looks at and approves contracts.. No weird indemnities and other issues being passed off will nilly by the agencies to the backs of the photographers.

5. Payment is customary advance and final payments are scheduled.

One issue for sure is shitty purchase orders with indemnity clause, and work for hire clause written in. Which I ALWAYS STRIKE, I might add successfully. I have two previous employees that have recently struck out on their own, bad timing huh? But even though they were worried about being a small fish, they are usually successful at getting amended p.o.’s

Another huge issue as you know, that I have been railing on about, it is how hard it is to get insurance, how expensive it is, and how many people in our industry go with out it. If photographers were banded together they would have more clout in this area. Health insurance too…

Well off my soap box for now. I feel real compassion for those starting out now.

Photographer 3:

Only employees can form and be represented by unions.

Independent contractors can be members of unions but cannot be represented by unions. No collective bargaining by independent photographers. Illegal.

The one way around it is for photographers to work as employees. But if photographers work as employees, their employers are the “authors” and copyright owners of any images created.

Short answer: unions are a not the answer.

Art Buyers – International Ad Agencies

Art Buyer 1:

I’ll be honest with you. I would be against a union for Photographers. Right now, print is in a precarious place. We fight to convince clients projects need a print aspect as well as web and broadcast. In my experience, unions bring fees that would deter our clients from entertaining print. I’m not referring to photographer or crew fees. We know what the industry standards are and do everything we can to ensure they increase with the changing times. The fees I’m referring to are union dues, insurances, 10 – 20% production costs.

Unions would also create an uneven playing field. Photographers of different calibers would have the same fees. This would eliminate work to those photographers whose skill set does not match the norm.

This could also negatively impact our local market. Sorry to ask this, but how could I keep some jobs local? My local photographers allow me to of bringing work to the area because they’re fees are less than a New York based photographer. The proper term for this is not “under cut.” It’s “lower cost of living.” I’m fortunate to have amazing talent in my backyard. If they had to meet a National Rate, my creative would ask to see all National photographers right for a project instead of me being able to convincing them to stay right here.

Art Buyer 2:

This would be a terrible mistake. Unions within the Broadcast industry are having a terrible time keeping members. Agencies all over the country are dropping their union signatory status and actors are taking non-union jobs just to stay alive while unions look the other way. This is NOT the right time…

Amanda and Suzanne:

To Summarize, a union would not be approved in our current times. But believe us, something needs to be done to encourage talent to charge appropriately and to be taken care of properly on the client side. We need Insurance for our talent (I “Amanda” paid $2k a month for a family plan under a group plan – Highway Robbery). Photography is a demanding career and takes a toll on the body, emotionally and physically. Union is not the answer, but comradery and other creative collectiveness is. Standardized forms and usage and creative fees across the board verses underbidding fellow photographers. It is crucial to understand Agency Advances and fee structure, to know the tax laws in the city you live and the cities you shoot in as tangible property has become very grey. It is important to understand payroll services, since freelancers are not true independent contractors and the potential liability to the photographer on taxes and workman’s comp. The question we have to ask ourselves: “Are we print photographers running our business as if we were in a Union, are we running our business not only effectively but lawfully to protect ourselves?”

Call to Action:
Brainstorm with your colleagues, organizational groups and create ideas that can be shared and eventually (possibly) manifested.

If you want more insight from Amanda and Suzanne you can contact them directly (here and here) or tune in once a week or so for more of “Ask Anything.”

Posted 04 February 2010 † A Photo Editor § Ask Anything ‡ Comments (44) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

The Other Side Of Fair Use

Most discussions about fair use revolve around people wanting to use photographs without paying or obtaining permission for the use. Of course there’s another side to fair use that photographers benefit from, which is when a picture has copyrighted or trademarked material in it.

Seattle photographer Mike Hipple found himself in the latter scenario when in February of 2008 he received a letter from the lawers of a sculptor named Jack Mackie. Apparently a photograph that Mike took 10 years previous and was selling as stock, featured a woman dancing along the sidewalk with a portion of Jack’s sculpture “Dance Steps on Broadway” visible. Mr. Mackie claimed copyright infringement in the letter.

My source for this information is a blog called “Mike Hipple Legal Defense Fund” (here) where Mike describes what happened and describes what he’s up against:

Interestingly, his brief flirtation with settlement came before my lawyer mentioned fair use. As soon as it was brought it up, Mr. Mackie refused to negotiate any further. Now I’m forced to fight this battle on behalf of myself and photographers everywhere—amateur or professional—who take pictures out in public. I don’t want to be here, but I can’t let Mr. Mackie bully away our important rights.

I should note that apparently Mike’s stock agency quickly settled with the sculptor using their insurance for these types of claims.

Without seeing the photograph in question this seems like an absurd case, but the problem with fair use as it exists now is that only a court can determine what constitutes fair use. That leaves Mike with the option to either fight it in court or settle. In an era where photographs are easily copied I think fair use needs a stronger definition.

More discussion on this case over at Photo Attorney. If you want to help Mike out, visit the legal defense fund blog.

Posted 03 February 2010 † A Photo Editor § copyright ‡ Comments (34) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

Photographer Louie Psihoyos Doc “The Cove” Nominated For An Oscar

See the list (here).

Posted 02 February 2010 † A Photo Editor § Photographers ‡ Comments (11) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

Restrepo Wins Sundance Grand Jury Prize for Documentary

Interesting to see that several films at Sundance were centered around photography.

Restrepo

In 2008 Sebastian Junger (The Perfect Storm) and Tim Hetherington dug in with the men of Second Platoon for a year. Afghanistan’s Korengal Valley, a stronghold of al Qaeda and the Taliban, has proven to be one of the U.S. Army’s deadliest challenges. It is here that the platoon lost their comrade, PFC Juan Restrepo, and erected an outpost in his honor. Up close and personal, Junger and Hetherington gain extraordinary insight into the surreal combination of backbreaking labor and deadly firefights that are a way of life at Outpost Restrepo.

Ever wonder what it’s really like to be in the trenches of war? Look no further. Restrepo may be one of the most experiential and visceral war films you’ll ever see. With unprecedented access, the filmmakers reveal the humor and camaraderie of men who come under daily fire, never knowing which of them won’t make it home.


Smash His Camera

Paparazzi might be the norm in our celebrity-infested times, haphazardly snapping every movement of the rich and famous. Ron Galella, though, is the original paparazzo. He elevated the celebrity snapshot into art and, at 78, remains a stalwart in the business. Dogged in his quest to photograph celebrities in unguarded moments, he defines his passion for his work by the ups and downs of his career—documenting the parade of stars at a thriving Studio 54 and having the dubious honor of being sued by Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis (his favorite subject) and having his jaw broken by Marlon Brando.

Leon Gast (When We Were Kings) masterfully profiles Galella and places him at the center of the debate about the First Amendment right to privacy. Galella’s work and tactics have their critics, but his influence is undeniable. In a career defined by perseverance, he has created some of the most lasting, iconic photographs of our times.

Teenage Paparazzo

When precocious 13-year-old paparazzo Austin Visschedyk snapped a photo of celebrity Adrian Grenier (HBO’s Entourage), little did he know his life was about to change. Turning the tables on the juvenile paparazzo, Grenier stepped on the other side of the lens in an attempt to mentor a teenager obsessed with the lure of the Hollywood lifestyle. Grenier develops a meaningful relationship with his camera-clicking young friend as he attempts to reconcile their mutual exploitation. Indeed, Grenier puts himself on the line here, trying to make sense of his own recently acquired fame.

Given the success of Entourage and its place in the Zeitgeist, Adrian Grenier is the perfect person to explore our preoccupation with celebrity and the adolescent desire for fame. Exquisitely layered, Teenage Paparazzo moves beyond personal documentary, charting a cultural revolution of celebrity obsession that may have been born in the United States but stretches across the globe.

Catfish

Nev, a 24-year-old New York–based photographer, has no idea what he’s in for when Abby, an eight-year-old girl from rural Michigan, contacts him on MySpace, seeking permission to paint one of his photographs. When he receives her remarkable painting, Nev begins a friendship and correspondence with Abby’s family. But things really get interesting when he develops a cyber-romance with Abby’s attractive older sister, Megan, a musician and model. Prompted by some startling revelations about Megan, Nev and his buddies embark on a road trip in search of the truth.

Catfish centers on a riveting mystery that is completely a product of our times, where social networking, mobile devices, and electronic communication so often replace face-to-face personal contact. Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman’s grounded documentary is a remarkable and powerful story of grace within a labyrinth of online intrigue.

More at Sundance (here).

Posted 01 February 2010 † A Photo Editor § Photographers ‡ Comments (3) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

Ask Anything With Amanda And Suzanne – How Not To Blow The Face To Face Meeting

Former Art Buyers and current photography consultants Amanda Sosa Stone and Suzanne Sease have agreed to take anonymous questions from photographers and not only give their expert advice but put it out to a wide range of photographers, reps and art buyers to gather a variety of opinions. The goal with this column is to explore more of the commercial side of photography (not my area of expertise) and to solicit honest questions and answers through anonymity.

Our Second Question:

I sent out mailers and emailers to agencies recently and received asurprising amount of positive replies.

I recently drove for 9 hours after an Art Buyer seemed really enthusiastic about my work on the website and replied to my mail saying sure make the trip, I’d love to see your book. We sat down with two of his colleagues and things were going well.

About a third of the way in to the book he started to lose interest and then wandered off like a grazing dairy cow, I was bewildered but continued with his colleagues. He reappeared when the we’d already finished the book. Shook hands, said thanks for coming in and left. I exchanged a few more pleasantries with his colleagues and was left to pack up and let myself out on my own. Humiliated. Ok so this is the industry, not for wimps, fine. Maybe if the book and all the answers were perfect you might still get a jerk or get the right person on the wrong day. But how do you avoided blowing that valuable opportunity?

Our Response combined with the help of a very sought after rep and art buyer:

Just from reading this question – we see many red flags.

Our first thought  when he said – “We were a third into the book and lost interest” and then follows up by saying “We had finished the book” – lets us know he was controlling the book viewing process and dialoging it the whole way through.

We think the first thing to remember is that every one can have a bad day and that may have been the cause.  You never know what someone is dealing with on a personal level.  Maybe the AB had bad news that morning, thought he could handle the meeting but just couldn’t.  Since you don’t know, the best thing to do immediately is to send an e-mail thanking him for his time as you could see how busy he was and that you truly appreciate the time given.  That you will send new work as you shoot it and would love to hopefully work together in the future.  Okay, that being said after the fact what should you do in the future?

  1. Make sure your website and portfolio compliment each other- the best of your work in the beginning of your website while the portfolio has to be consistent throughout.  Sometimes it is best to work with a neutral person like a consultant or a client you have a close relationship with for a non-emotional attachment to the images.  Rob has a huge list (here)- interview the ones you are interested in working with.
  2. Make sure your portfolio is professional and what the industry is expecting to see.  If you portfolio looked thrown together, then you have cheapened the images.  The presentation talks about your attention to details as you would on a shoot- the production value of the book transfers to the production value of a shoot.
  3. Let the viewer look at the images at their pace- don’t comment on every image- wait till they ask a question.  If they don’t ask anything then you need to ask them questions from your research (i.e. about an ad you loved that they did)
  4. Research- who you are talking to and the agency.  This is why a database is so crucial to your marketing.  A database is not only for sending out e-promos and mailers but used more efficiently for research.  We like Agency Access for several reasons- it’s clean, folders tally up total contacts, accounts and titles plus it has map quest to get you to your meeting.
  5. Research the agency by going to their website to see their accounts.  Then research the person you are meeting with.  Also, go to these websites to find award winning work:
    http://www.commarts.com/annuals/2009-Advertising/winners
    http://adsoftheworld.com
    http://www.graphis.com
    http://www.oneclub.org

Kat Dalager of Campbell Mithun  in Minneapolis has been especially kind to show you how to do this.  The first thing I do is go to my Agency Access account and look her up.  She is listed as the Print Production Manager, but over sees art buying and buys herself.  So when making your list make sure you include art buyer, creative buyer , print producer and print production manager since Agency Access uses their titles but makes sure they purchase photography.

mkt1

mkt2

From this page, you have a live link to the agency as well as the map:

Untitled-1

And you can see samples of their work:

Untitled-2

Untitled-3

Untitled-4

You can also look at their work at www.agencycompile.com This is a free service but used for new business and marketing managers so it will not give you the creative personnel, hence the reason for a database.

mkt4

mkt10

After you have researched the company, research the person:

mkt8

And you can find a video with her talking about the business:

mkt6

When we went through more Google pages , we find this:

mkt5

She is adorable and friendly. You can see that in the video as well. And this from Plaxo:

mkt3

Read this and find common ground to create a non-invasive conversation- you don’t want to get too personal. But it is good to see who you are talking to. Suzanne found this info on her own and found a lot. You may not find this much information on one person but you can find plenty about the company where they work. Kat reviewed this and she said:

“One thing to mention is cross-checking sources because they are only as current as the information provided to them. For example, we no longer have H&R Block.

Also, since they can see we don’t have any car accounts, it would not be the best use of my time or theirs to send me a car book.

1 technicality: I go by “art producer” rather than “art buyer”

To summarize, some meetings go bad and that’s just part of the process.  When I (Amanda) repped for a short period of time I experienced the same thing, so you are not alone.  I flew to NYC to meet someone and at the receptionist desk I was told she was too busy to meet with me.  I also had an AB look at the portfolio in the lobby.  So there are no prejudices against particular people for meetings – everyone will experience a bad meeting in their lifetime.  We say – good!  That means one important thing – you are doing meetings.  With every 5 bad meetings comes a great meeting.  A client once had a meeting and was told “Great work, but we have no clients that need your style to ever hire you”.  A week later – that same agency called to book him for a job with a new client.  Go figure.  Keep your chin up and just battle through it…it’s part of the game

If you want more insight from Amanda and Suzanne you can contact them directly (here and here) or tune in once a week or so for more of “Ask Anything.”

Posted 29 January 2010 † A Photo Editor § Ask Anything ‡ Comments (49) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

Building Trust With Your Potential Clients

I know I’m more of an optimist than most, but whenever I see something like this it makes me think that the free culture/attitude is less about “I want everything for free” and more about “I’m tired of being lied and tricked into buying something and I need a way to trust you before we do business.”

Video by Michael Hanson while shooting the story for the NYTimes (here).

Posted 28 January 2010 † A Photo Editor § The Future ‡ Comments (18) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

D-Day For Tablet Freaks

UPDATE: iPad

Picture 2

Everyone in the media industry will be waiting with baited breath as Apple unveils its tablet computer today (live here at 10am PST)

Will the Apple tablet save publishing? No.

It will force them to get off their collective duffs and start investing in defending their brand digitally, but just like the music industry the business model–where you’re forced to buy a bunch of crap to get at the one thing you want–is broken. I’ve long predicted a bright shiny future for people who deal in photography and the tablet is one more device where things shouting for our attention will require creative geniuses to give us arresting imagery.

Designer Joe Zeff has this to say (here):

Watch closely as newspaper and magazine publishers bet their last nickels — not an exaggeration, in some cases — on this new medium. It provides the 50-somethings who run these companies a chance to captivate subscribers and advertisers by returning to their roots — producing and selling the terrific newspapers and magazines that made these brands valuable in the first place. But even better than the original, with up-to-the-minute content that can be individualized for every reader — and advertiser. Happy days are here again, along with the ubiquity, relevance and brand loyalty that has been absent from the publishing world for the past 15 years.

Jason Kincaid over on TechCrunch (here) describes how a tablet will change the way we consume media and a big part of that consumption will be in rich media where text, graphics, audio, video and photography combine to immerse users in a story telling experience.

I for one am looking forward to getting rid of the piles of magazines, browsing an endless newsstand of titles and buying well written, well photographed and well designed stories to read.

Posted 27 January 2010 † A Photo Editor § Magazines § The Future ‡ Comments (54) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

Fat Wolves

I remember my first encounter with a fat wolf. I was researching stock images of wolves for a story we were running in Outside Magazine and I could find nothing I liked. All the wolves from the specific location in the story looked like mangy old flea-bitten dogs. It wasn’t until I widened my search to include any wolf photo available as stock did I discover healthy, strong, wolf looking wolves. Upon further inspection I learned that these were captive wolves (who apparently are well fed).

If you haven’t heard the recent uproar about Spanish wildlife photographer Jose Luis Rodriguez being awarded first place (here) in the Wildlife Photographer of the Year contest run by the British Natural History Museum and BBC Wildlife Magazine then being stripped of the award (here) after people called into question the authenticity of the wolf in his winning image (here).

I quickly lost all interest in the controversy when I read this (here):

“José Luis started by placing meat in the corral.”

Great wildlife photography for me is equal parts photography and sport. If baiting the animals is acceptable to the judges who cares if it was captive or wild?

I like what photographer Bob Keefer  has to say (here) about the whole kerfuffle:

But the weirdest thing is, the winning photograph is awful. Whether “real” or staged, it’s utterly cheesy, the kind of demented nature porn that has come to dominate the nature photography market around the world. Who cares if it’s a picture of Ossian? It’s boring, overwrought and melodramatic. The judges knew this when they picked it, referring to its “fairy tale” qualities.

The judges should be fired, both for choosing the photograph in the first place and then for their handling of the complaints about it.

Someone online obviously felt the same way. Why stop with one jumping wolf when you can have 3 and a full moon to boot (UPDATE: obviously an homage to the three wolf moon t-shirt phenomenon that went completely over my head – ape):
wolfmoon

Posted 26 January 2010 † A Photo Editor § Awards ‡ Comments (41) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

Photographer’s Stop Motion Video Nominated For A Grammy

Photographer Eyal Landseman created a stop motion music video for Oren Lavie’s song “Her Morning Elegance” and now it’s up for a Grammy Award (here). How cool is that?

The photographer is exhibiting and selling 22 prints from the 2,321 images that make up video in a nice little publicity stunt (here).

The video has 10 million views on YouTube.

Posted 25 January 2010 † A Photo Editor § Photographers ‡ Comments (17) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

Ask anything with Amanda and Suzanne – How Much Money Do Commercial Photographers Make?

I’m so excited about a great new column I’m kicking off today called “Ask Anything.” Former Art Buyers and current photography consultants Amanda Sosa Stone and Suzanne Sease have agreed to take anonymous questions from photographers and not only give their expert advice but put it out to a wide range of photographers, reps and art buyers to gather a variety of opinions. The goal with this column is to explore more of the commercial side of photography (not my area of expertise) and to solicit honest questions and answers through anonymity.

To submit a question you can email me or leave a comment in one of these posts.

The First Question comes from me:

One commercial photographer told me he was bringing in $250,000 in profits and another said he has several million in billings. So, what do successful commercial photographers make? I’ve always believed it was a lot. How has the economy effected the way people price? Are photographers starting to base their usage on their cost of doing business instead of the cost of the use?

Amanda and Suzanne: The responses have been amazing, from photographers with all levels of success to a very high level art producer. We really enjoyed the personal and honest insight we got as to how they bill and the thought process behind it. It reminds you that you are not alone in this negotiating process. Keep reading – we had 1 photographer bold enough to give the answer everyone has been waiting for.

Hot Emerging Photographer:

What is an average successful profit for a commercial photographer? My rep doesn’t price based on CODB, but on what the market bears. And it’s definitely going down from what it used to be (from the mouth of my rep). Times are changing, sadly enough it’s because the high earning commercial photographers with big overheads are struggling to stay alive and taking jobs for much lower fees in order to pay it. In turn, that makes the emerging photogs like us less competitive because we don’t have the experience and portfolio that they do. Then to think about hiring a staff, and having to pay for that. Now I understand why photographers get paid quite a bit. My rep basically bids on what the client’s budget is, we push the production as low as we can to do a good job then create the fee out of the gap. I think if everyone goes by CODB that will drive the market down even more because the smaller guys don’t have as high of a CODB. I vote to keep an industry standard of fees. Especially with this digital era.

Established Photographer 1:

250K in profits! I want to be him. In my best year, I grossed 225K and I was quite pleased. I can’t remember what I net’d but would have to guess around 1/3 of that.

I’m not sure I’m not a great one to compare as I keep it small, simple, and avoid big overhead. I’m happy with a couple of big jobs a year. I’d rather work fewer, better jobs than be cranking at 100% all the time (and burning out). It’s also difficult to compare me to most; I was away from business from 2005-2007 and have had a very challenging economy to grapple with upon my return so there’s no steady recent history for me to gather information with.

I have estimated jobs based on usage, and I haven’t won many of them :-(

Established Photographer 2:

I have always tried to avoid talking about this kind of stuff. Even though I bill well over a Million Dollars in gross billing annually. What you actually pay yourself is much, much less.

I am at the top of my game and probably make about what a halfway decent Attorney makes.

It is quite exaggerated what photographers make.

Keeping up with new equipment, software, insurance, salaries, and repair keep you from making any truly great money.

I assure you the owners of Advertising Agencies make much more money than us guys in the trenches.

Sure there are a few Super Star photographers but they even go broke. Take Annie Leibovitz for example.

Established Photographer 3:

Alas, I am south of 250K…. I think my rep told me once that most guys are around 20 – 25% of their gross, I was typically around that to maybe a bit more. I don’t know specifically what the numbers are, just in a general sense – as I remember that 08 taxable income was about the same as 07 but at less billings in 08.

I don’t do cost of business pricing per se, but can’t say I am a poster boy for usage fees either. I have found that it’s harder to get a premium for bigger usage on some projects (i.e. art buyers ask for a specific usage and then later want unlimited for a year or 2 for the same money or relatively modest increase in the fee). That’s big and small agencies, not across the board, but it’s not unusual. Maybe I am getting played, but it usually happens in competitive bids where they say the other guy will do this usage for this money, so to be competitive I need to come closer to that number – that kind of thing. I typically but not always cave into it, as my costs are relatively low now, I don’t have a staff or a rep, my equipment is paid for and my studio mortgage is relatively reasonable – less than what I was paying in rent a few years ago….. so in that sense my cost of business does figure into it, but I only consider it when pressed to meet another person’s price.

Established Photographer 4:

o.k. here is the poop in Vague terms.

Yes, many years the take home profit (the photographers net earnings after operations) is over 250K but that depends a lot on investments in equipment etc.

Last year for sure the usage is based on the size of the client and the size of the buy. For example a one year print license starts around $2,000 per shot. Big clients/ big media buy $5,000 per client. There are some exceptions for tiny clients and design firms.

Established Photographer 5:

Depending on what you shoot, it’s not necessary to bring in several million or even a million to generate 250k in profit (e.g. – Still life and product shooters don’t have the high production expenses compared to someone who shoots talent). In a good year, I can earn $200k personal salary on $800k in sales. (THIS AIN’T ONE OF THOSE YEARS….). I’m sure those billing 3 million can earn a profit of a million. What their personal salary comes to is another matter altogether.

It’s in our best interests to keep money in the corporation, as a corporation is taxed differently (lower) than an individual. Many buy company cars & new gear at the end of a good year to reduce taxes payable. There are creative accounting (and totally legal) ways to reduce one’s personal salary while maintaining a very nice lifestyle. The perks of running your own business.

Personally, I don’t believe in the CODB model. It’s far to limiting and does not represent what one’s competitors are charging. I don’t believe one’s fees should ever be based on one’s overhead. My overhead is my choice, and so is that of my competitors. But my fees need to be as high as possible while being as competitive as one can be. Low bids are generally not well received by art buyers.

Hi-end guys/gals don’t price themselves as commodities. They tend to price very high to maintain their perception as hi-end.

License model, combined with photographers fee (shown as one line item!!) is the way the top guys estimate.

An Established Photographer with Actual Salary Numbers:

We grossed in 2008, $218,000 in fees alone. In 2009, we grossed $253,000. In 2008, we paid $100,000 in salaries to assistant photographer and myself combined. In 2009, that figure was $125,000. That is most of the picture. There are other benefit issues, such as health insurance, meals and travel, that come out of the business and reduce the net of the company… If you look at our net between 15K-20K each year, after buying gear, bonuses and finding every write-off. We are also a C corp, which makes me a salaried employee.

A Very Established Art Buyer:

Believe it or not, top photographers do gross a million or more in fees. Of course, agent commissions come out of that, but it’s still a nice living. I don’t see top photographers any more willing to compromise on pricing than before the economic downturn. It still comes down to the project and what it’s worth to the photographer.

Usage pricing is all over the board and there seems to be no rhyme or reason to it. It’s simple survival: people are doing whatever it takes to survive. Sometimes the compensation is reasonable, but I’ve also heard horror stories of unreasonable compensation and even blatant disregard to copyright laws. Unfortunately, in those cases it comes down to who can hold out the longest with lawyer fees.

I wouldn’t say it’s the Wild West, but I certainly don’t see the solidarity in holding out on pricing that an “up” economy allows. There is definitely an air of desperation among many photographers, especially those just entering the market. I don’t know that it’s any different from any other business, though. It’s tough everywhere.

Stock imagery seems to be taking quite a bit of a hit this past year as well. Account reps are disappearing and even the Big Two (Corbis and Getty) are making drastic staffing cuts.

I hope the recovery heads our way soon!

Our 2 Cents:

From across the board – everyone has the same hope and desires – do good work and bill appropriately. Regardless of your status in this market – it all is interconnected. You have to know your worth creatively to bill appropriately. Of course – Joe Blow may gross $500k annually but his overhead could be $300k – which means he is not better off than the wedding photographer netting $250k with very little overhead other than equipment updates. So from a wide range of talents – you can still net 50k – 1MM in our BAD economy. But you have to do your part to get those jobs and keep those clients and ask for what you are worth – NOT WHAT IT COSTS TO PAY YOUR BILLS!

Call To Action:

If you are willing to share your actual annual earnings – what you grossed in fees and what you took home at the end of the day (net) – please email us your exact figure and how long you have been in business and the type of photography you do (editorial, commercial advertising, consumer, etc…). We will be thrilled to be able to share if with your peers – while keeping you anonymous! We respect everyone’s confidentiality. This information in the end is not for us – but for you the photographer!

If you want more insight from Amanda and Suzanne you can contact them directly (here and here) or tune in once a week or so for more of “Ask Anything.”

My jobs tend to be fees inclusive of usage, and however high I can negotiate given the client.

Posted 21 January 2010 † A Photo Editor § Ask Anything ‡ Comments (105) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

I.D.’s Executioners

“On each occasion, I was politely told that the typical buyer of advertising space lacked the time and intelligence to grasp complicated ideas such as I had just presented. Nor in six years was any notable investment made in a dedicated sales staff, reader research or web development for I.D.”

“Imagine going to a hospital and learning from the person holding the scalpel that he really doesn’t see a difference between your hand and your foot; after all, an appendage is an appendage, and a sock can be pulled over any of them.”

Read more (here) via, Magtastic Blogsplosion

Posted 20 January 2010 † A Photo Editor § Magazines ‡ Comments (4) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

Stanley Greene’s Black Passport

Book trailers seem like a great way to spread the word and sell books online. Here’s a good argument why:

“I think you can only keep positive for eight years. If you stay at it longer than that, you turn. And not into a beautiful butterfly.”

Black Passport Stanley Greene photographer Compiled by Teun van der Heijden

via, dvafoto

Posted 19 January 2010 † A Photo Editor § Book Publishing ‡ Comments (20) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

A Photographic Benefit for the Survivors of the Haiti Earthquake

I like this. From the press release:

Professional photographers are offering a special edition fundraising magazine through the Magcloud print-on-demand service to benefit victims of the recent earthquake in Haiti.

The magazine features work from preeminent photographers and all proceeds will go directly to the International Red Cross to assist the people of Haiti. The issue is titled Onè Respe, after a traditional Haitian greeting meaning honor and respect.

San Francisco photojournalist Lane Hartwell, is spearheading the project.

See the magazine on MagCloud (here).

Posted 18 January 2010 † A Photo Editor § Photographers ‡ Comments (10) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

The Beginning Of The End?

Jamie Kripke: Hey Rob – have you seen this:

Jamie: 98% CGI by a 30 year old dude in Spain with a single PC. It’s beautiful. We’ve all seen a lot of CGI over the years, but it’s usually just a bit off, or just too slick and most of it is really expensive, and requires a team of people to make it look right. But this is different — this is one guy and a PC. Low budget. And he’s not a photographer by training either. Photographers, especially ad shooters, are freaking out about this.

Rob: I’m not sure I get what all the fuss is about. I saw it a couple days ago and was blown away by how it looked, but overall it seemed underwhelming to me. Maybe I’m missing something?

Jamie: Most of this was made by one guy, without a camera, and without leaving his desk, for little or no money. Photographers and art directors aside (b/c they are not the ones cutting the checks), what client wouldn’t want to have complete control over a shoot for a fraction of the budget of going on location?

Rob: It costs dollars to make a photograph anymore and now we’re seeing CGI going from millions to thousands of dollars. The value is no longer in the creation of the product. It all lies in the creativity. The idea. Only an artist can give it meaning.

Jamie: I think most would agree — without the idea, you have nothing. This is also about the shifting role of the photographer. Here’s a guy who’s not a photographer (at least not in the traditional sense) that is creating beautiful images without a camera. He’s bringing both the vision and the execution at a very high level.

I think it’s pretty rare for one person to have both skills in spades, but if things continue in this direction, what does it mean for photographers? Will their role turn into one of simply relaying experiences or imagining images that are then recreated in CGI by a dude at a desk? Will location shoots become a thing of the past, with photographers spending their days racking their brains in windowless rooms? Who knows?

Obviously there is a random, candid human element that will always defy CGI, and portrait shooters should be ok, but when you think about landscapes, products, architecture, it starts to get iffy. Especially when you bring tight ad budgets and tight clients into the picture.

So in a CGI world, who’s going to bring the vision?

Rob: A photographer has two roles: make something beautiful and make something interesting/meaningful. Now this guy Alex made something beautiful but then he filled it with clichés: doves, cherry blossoms, dolly shots, crane shots and a bunch of focus pulls.

So, it seems that now photographers don’t need to work on making something beautiful. It can be done in post. The photographer is now an artist and a problem solver. They need to come up with the unexpected and original.

Hasn’t it always been this way with photography. The choices are endless, practically unlimited. Photography is about editing. Where you stand, what time of day and when you push the button. The CGI artist has all those endless choices too.

The big product guys already have photographers on staff to take pictures for them because it’s the idea that counts. We’ve been there for awhile with product photography.

Jamie: Yes, and photographers now have more tools to choose from than ever before. For those of us that enjoy hauling cases of camera gear to distant locations, the idea of creating images without getting on a plane or hearing the click of a shutter can seem scary, but it’s also incredibly exciting. I’d like to believe that we’re heading into a golden age of photography where literally anything will be possible.

Rob: For optimists, anything is possible.

Here’s the making of vid for the doubters: http://www.vimeo.com/8200251
and here is a bit more info on the creator Alex Roman: http://motionographer.com/2009/08/16/alex-roman-thethirdtheseventh/

Posted 15 January 2010 † A Photo Editor § The Future ‡ Comments (92) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

How To Help The People Of Haiti

Through an effort backed by the U.S. State Department you can text ‘Haiti’ to 90999 and a $10 dontation will go to support American Red Cross relief efforts in Haiti (here).

According to reports, as many as three million people may have been affected by the quake, which collapsed government buildings and caused major damage to hospitals in the area.

There’s also http://doctorswithoutborders.org

Posted 14 January 2010 † A Photo Editor § Uncategorized ‡ Comments (7) ° → Email This Post Email This Post

Good News In Photography

The outlook for photographers is not all bad. In fact, I run into photographers (online) all the time who are doing well and their business is growing. One photographer I spoke with recently said his business was up 20% this year and has been up 30% on average each of the last 5 years. How is that possible? I asked him to explain why he thinks he has been so successful in a dour economy. Here’s what he said:

For years I have been doing all of the expected marking: advertise in sourcebooks, online, emails, using social media and blogging. You’ve got to have a little bit of everything going because eventually you will hit on something and you may not know what it was that stuck. I think of it more as brand building for the long run than any one job. I love working on my marketing and advertising, because for me it is a way to help drive the direction of my career and getting the work I want. Ten years ago I had a very specific vision of where I wanted to be and I really think that has been the key to it all. That and persistence every single day, if I am not shooting I am marketing.

Here are other key points to why my business is growing:

Easy To Work With
This means not only helping to solve problems, but also being passionate about the entire job and not just the creative side. It’s also, having a good time on the shoot or at dinner or even having a good time traveling.


Flexible
Sure we’d all love higher fees but the reality is they’re not always there. It’s like dining in a restaurant, if you want Salmon and they’re out of Salmon, don’t you want the waiter to recommend something else or offer another solution? Clients are the same way. Photographers need to be problem solvers, they need to propose solutions to a roadblock, not complain about it.

I know this one is touchy because most people think lowering the price means lowering the fees. You don’t have to approach it that way, you can solve production issues in ways that are cost effective. Simply choosing a different location to shoot can reduce costs or going through the estimate with clients, because one shot out of 5 is really through the roof on the budget. Explain that and maybe that shot is the least important so they drop it. Give the ideas and alternative solutions based on the brand and what they want to communicate. That is why they hired you.

Other solutions include: reducing your crew, doing without the motorhome, using real talent, shooting close to home, finding more local crew. If you have to travel with a big crew, costs really add up so you can negotiate group rates, stay in less expensive hotels to reduce them. Also, watch extras like overtime, shoot an extra shot or 2 a day or shoot gorilla style. Clients appreciate when you are looking out for the budget and it’s possible to reduce the budget without lowering your fees.

Many times things change once you get to the location and start shooting and I completely understand when clients come up with new ideas and want to change things at the last minute because I was an art director for 5 years before I started my photo business. If you do your pre-production before and everything is set you can adapt and make it happen. Sometimes this effects the cost of the shoot and sometimes I do not bill additional for it but not every decision I make is financial.

Honesty
When clients ask me what I think or if I think something is headed the wrong direction on a project I tell them and give them my reasoning. They appreciate it as long is it is coming from an honest place and you are be constructive and not just complaining.

If you work with a staff and or a rep make sure they have the same integrity and honesty as you. This was the biggest decision for me in getting a rep and I have an awesome rep.

Being a true part of the creative process
Be a part of the creative process from the first phone call to the last, not just during the shoot. I have many clients now that involve me in initial concepting even if they do not know who the photographer will be yet. I get those jobs 95% of the time. I also have many clients that ask for feedback on the layouts after the shoot. I give my honest opinion.

I do not just shoot what clients ask me to shoot, I shoot it with my vision and my creativity. But, this is not about creating fine art, I am taking all the info I know about the brand and what they are trying to accomplish and then I apply my vision. At the end of they day the client appreciates it and understand my value as more than just a technical person that understand how to work all the fancy lights and equipment.

Be Polite
for those times when you just can’t make the budget work no matter what, or you don’t get the job, be gracious. I turned down several jobs last year for budget and schedule reasons. I always leave the door open for future work.

People are really responding to my vision
I think the slower economy has made clients re-evaluate all the excess over the last several years and want to get back to the basics. My style is more honest, direct and real feeling. That is just a suspicion of mine and not really justified by specific examples.

Personal projects
If you have nothing new to promote that you’ve shot for a client, promote yourself. Clients like to see what else you’re made of and chances are if you pour your heart into it you’ll ignite a new passion. Creative Directors, Art Directors and Art Buyers love talking about personal projects. I find these to be great conversation topics with clients I am working with or have worked with because they can feel your passion.

Marketing
I have actually increased my marketing and advertising this year. I am religious about doing marketing and do it every work day I am not shooting.

If you have a rep remember it’s a partnership. They need you to participate in the process, they need new work to show. My rep also supports and understands my creative goals beyond the pure business side and I think that is invaluable for any creative.

Surround Yourself With Good People
I have a great producer/assistant on staff and it has really freed me up to focus on the bigger picture aspects of my business. She also has honesty and integrity in abundance. I never have to give a single thought to how she will interact and work with clients.

Posted 13 January 2010 † A Photo Editor § Photographers ‡ Comments (54) ° → Email This Post Email This Post