Digital photography has given those who are, for the most, part technically inept, a tool which requires a minimum amount of thought to get a reasonably good image which they can be pleased with in an instant. And for those who still take marginal photos, they have created actions to "dress up" a bad shot. A double edged sword for those of us who make their living behind a camera these days. A bad cake is still a bad cake no matter how nice the icing might look.
"There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept." Ansel Adams
Sent from a friend via e-mail:
Hello everyone,
Last year, I was asked to bid a half-day, outdoor, product-in-action, multiple location shoot and did not hear back from the agency. That's not particularly new but I knew they liked my work and had a suspicion that it had gone to a much lower bid. I wanted a better sense of the "new landscape" out there so I decided to just be up front and ask the question straight out. I just ran into this again and thought that maybe, in the new year, it would be appropriate to revisit some of the discussion points in this e-mail. This is what I got back.
Hi Jerry,
You are right, the project was assigned to another photographer whose quote was appx. 80% less than yours, is someone I’ve worked with before so I know they can deliver the required service and quality. I did like your overall approach, and rarely if ever take the this time to try and give some constructive feedback, from an “small agency” perspective. You may not like what you read, but here it goes, and please understand it would be easier for me to just say thanks but no thanks.... I take valuable time to write this as feedback you may consider so that we can possibly work together in the future.. I do think we need another photog or two as new resources at this time for future projects.
Being in the business 20 years is both a plus and a minus. Photographic experience is a value, for sure. So is staying current with the new economy and ways of doing business, especially in your industry. You are being challenged on one front by inexpensive stock images that once were your bread and butter. We rely a lot on stock photos for time, efficiency, ease of client approval and less time in photo art direction makes us more price competitive. We are solicited weekly by hungry new photogs that are ready and able to do what we need, without being tied down to the old ways of doing things, when the photographer ( and your quasi union ) could collaborate on setting terms and prices.
Here’s the hard love- your quote conveys the concepts of the old way of doing biz- not the new economy. As a company who’s most important revenue channel is web development, we’ve had to face a similar challenge. It’s a relatively small thing, but you list $75 for rental equipment. Rent what?? This is an on-location 4-image run and go shoot. What could you possibly have to rent that you shouldn’t already own as a 20 yr. veteran. It’s a line item that is a turn off. Same thing with the assistant fee- if you need an assistant to help you with a location shoot ( no lighting set up, no food prep, etc.) then that’s on you. Usage fees are the next item, I got unlimited, exclusive usage without issue. That’s old thinking, before stock photos took over the world of photography. I’m sure there are clients and agencies still drinking that Kool-Aid, but that pool is shrinking rapidly, leaving younger, hungrier, more customer-centric photographers to enter the game.
Let me ask you this intellectual question: the featured product and branding belongs to the client; the image shoot creative concept , photo art direction and graphic design belong to us. So why should you claim ownership to the images? Yes I know about how the copyright laws are written and the lobbying behind it, but in the REAL world, your contribution is no more or less than collaborative to us, yet we are buying “usage rights” from you for images we conceive and art direct? Like I said, you’re probably not going to like reading this, but it how agencies like ours are viewing the new economy.
Maybe I just needed to get this off my chest, and decided to share it with you now because I have a sense that you might get it, and we could work together in the future. I don’t mean to offend, only offer insight that might help. Like I said ,even as a “small agency” we get solicited by photogs looking for new business more times than I can count. This is the first time – don’t ask me why cuz I don’t know – I’ve share this insight from the customer perspective with one of those potential new vendors;
I took much longer than I anticipated writing this little dissertation, so going to close now. I hope you read it in the spirit it has been written. I wish you well, and I like your work.
(name not important)
This is being offered only as a constructive framework for a discussion. I really don't think there is anything to be gained my ranting at this particular AD. I have several art directors that go to bat for me on a regular basis so this was a little unusual. I've never had anyone spell it all out for me quite like this before. Clearly this one and I had different ideas about how the shoot should be executed. I actually appreciate that someone would take the time to respond to my request about the project. Obviously, this agency and I are not meant for each other and I've moved on but I hear these arguments more and more. I just wondered how some of the rest of you are dealing with them.
Any thoughts...
CL
