The business side of photography
Two days ago, the Victoria News, in British Columbia, published this:
The page was taken down the next day, just minutes after news radio station CKNW asked the newspaper for comment.
It’s bad enough to lay off news photographers, which many newspapers are doing these days. In fact, the Victoria News laid off its very experienced staff photographer last year. But it’s sheer stupidity when a large, international, for-profit company asks people to work for free.
Continue reading →
The 1969 American cult film Putney Swope, a satire about the advertising world, corporate corruption, politics and more, has horrible acting and lots of great quotes. It also has this scene which has been posted on many photography sites:
I can get anybody for nothing.
The running gag in the film is that the commercial photographer appears at inopportune times always showing his portfolio but not getting any work.
A satire is something that pokes fun at a vice, foolishness or human folly. Feel free to interpret what the photographer represents.
A corporate client in Toronto recently said that they’ve always used amateur photos taken by their employees and cheap stock pictures for their annual report. But this year, the company wanted something better so they hired a professional photographer (me).
I overheard the annual report designer telling the client that a professional photographer isn’t just about better quality equipment. It’s also about the fact that “a professional photographer knows what to shoot. They see things that you don’t even think about.”
The company’s 2014 annual report isn’t finished yet but the client is “extremely happy with the pictures” and “can’t wait to get them published.”
This post isn’t about me bragging about my photography. It’s about the proven fact that professional photos are more effective than amateur pictures when it comes to earning reader attention and communicating a message.
Continue reading →
Most corporate photographers and editorial photographers will, sooner or later, have to shoot in a factory or on a construction site. This means you have to wear safety gear.
Having photographed in factories and construction sites for many years, including two assignments today, (one at an aerospace manufacturer and the other at a hospital construction site), may I offer a few suggestions to photographers who will be shooting in a similar situation:
• Although they may look fashionable, do not buy safety shoes. Get 6″ or 8″ safety *boots*. The reason is that safety shoes may be allowed in factories and warehouses but they’re not permitted on construction sites.
Safety boots must have the CSA green triangle patch which confirms that the footwear has a Grade 1 protective toe and a puncture-proof sole. It helps to also have electrical shock resistance.
Continue reading →
The more you use Photoshop, the more you find little issues with the software. For example, Photoshop lets you set the default unit of measurement for almost everything:
Almost everything.
Continue reading →
It’s important for every professional photographer to have a written set of guidelines to help define how they run their business. The American Society of Media Photographers (ASMP) has a blog post with a suggested list of policies.
Policies should be guidelines for your business and not carved-in-stone rules. We’ve all run into companies that hide behind policies that don’t always reflect the situation at hand. Your policies should help customers into your photography business and not push them away.
A company’s policies should also be reasonable and legal.
Some policies may be legally required (e.g. privacy policy) and some may be strongly encouraged (e.g. PCI compliance if you accept credit cards; a refund policy).
Your business policies can be part of, or supplemental to, your Terms and Conditions. Either way, having a clear set of written policies is an absolute must for every photographer.
Was the federal “Department of Canadian Heritage” named ironically?
The National Post this week pointed out that the cheap stock pictures used by Canadian Heritage are from a foreign-owned picture agency and were shot by foreign photographers.
Why does this federal agency use foreign photos to promote Canadian culture? It suggested that Canadian photographers are too expensive.
Unfortunately, the National Post article is many years behind the times. The federal government’s practice of using cheap stock pictures from foreign photographers has been going on for a long time. That’s correct: the Canadian government avoids Canadian photographers and buys cheaper work from abroad.
Continue reading →
