Ok, I’ve said it before so it’s only right that Jackanory (AKA Andrew Hetherington) calls me out (here) on the FREE promotion. Perception is everything, so acting like you’re too busy to submit a couple photos to the free online promo or pretending like you have too many clients so it’s not really worth the effort could oddly be considered a good strategy.
I’ll counter that by saying this is where all your existing clients can see some new work. Along with all the other photographers who are too busy to update their websites. There. It’s a chance to show new work because you’re too busy working to show it yourself. Extra points for camera phone photos of polaroids that will eventually make it into your book if you ever get the time.
11 Comments
If you’re too busy, you’re not charging enough.
I wouldn’t know, but maybe some people might be too busy to put stuff up at a site like Flickr (which is known for many things, but not necessarily for what you are trying to do): Isn’t the business all about perception (OK, I’m simplifying what little I know, but it’s not much of a simplification)?
@2 – yes
won’t be caught dead on flickr
I will add my voice and say thanks a lot to Rob!
However, I too am concerned about having to open an account and post on flickr. I feel that the venue for something like this should feel a little more professional. Flickr makes it feel more like the KMart photo booth than a place for pros to hang out.
Just my 2 cents.
Best,
I’m not against the idea of Flickr. I’m all for people, including professional photographers, sharing their work.
But…I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again…Flickr is one of those sites I rank high on the uuuugly list.
I’m not presenting (and that’s how I like to think of it) images on something that looks like a cell phone interface.
It’s one thing for a client to slap and image on a hang tag but to put work I care about on Flickr gives me the heebee geebees (sp?).
Can’t someone out there pleeease design a public domain/networking site with some style?
Totally off subject…but see you at the APA event in SF next week Rob!
Cheers,
Michelle
I wish there was something better. The slideshow feed that comes out of there looks really, really good and there’s no logo on it so that’s worth a lot in my mind. Also, I think I can make it private after the final group is selected. I’ll check on that.
Hi Rob,
GREAT idea, bad venue.
Flickr strips metadata on all but the largest image.
The thumbnail images on my page and anyone’s account page are stripped of metadata.
That’s why I keep them small and watermark everything.
How do we submit un-watermarked images without making at least the small version of them totally public?
Chuck
Flickr is a great promotional tool. I’m looking at the best money making year of my life, largely thanks to Flickr. If you don’t have an account, you’re missing the cluetrain.
@8: Can you recommend anywhere to learn about using Flickr as a promotional tool? As I wrote on another post, my experiences with it make it seem far more time consuming than it’s worth.
@Eric Schmiedl: All I can tell you is a little bit about how it’s helped me. Flickr isn’t just cool because you can upload your photos and send clients to look — that’s not what Flickr is about. What makes it cool is that you can participate in communities, add Flickr friends (like MySpace or Facebook) who watch your photo stream and a few of your recent photos on their friends stream when you upload shots.
I have about 60,000 photo views/month on Flickr. When there’s an audience that big for your work, that can only be a good thing — and it certainly has been a good thing for me.
Participate in groups and earn a reputation, and people start to pay attention when you post things. That’s what happened to me. I posted an article about shooting better portraits, and somebody found it on a flickr forum and posted my blog URL to Digg. Pretty soon it had over 600 Diggs and hit the homepage — then other people started linking to it, and before I knew it, I had a million pageviews virtually overnight.
I’ve had editorial opportunities handed to me on Flickr — chances to write about photography, and photograph local nightlife events. I have friends who have had photos published in national mags because the photo editor found their shot on Flickr.
I would certainly NOT make it your primary marketing effort. You need to be working steadily to be taken seriously, but I wouldn’t be so quick to write it off, either.
To anybody who says, “won’t be caught dead on flickr”: your loss. Being on Flickr certainly hasn’t hurt my bank account any. For every photo editor who snubs me because I’m on Flickr, I’ve got two regular house clients handing me money for the same reason.
Oh, and as Rob already mentioned — it’s easy to use. It gives me a neat little flash slideshow to put on my own website, and it’s a breeze to arrange custom sets for clients to browse without too much work. I also use it to keep track of stock, because it finds keyword matches faster than Lightroom.
I had a Photoshelter account and canceled it in favor of Flickr and SmugMug, and I have no regrets, though I might re-open a Photoshelter account if they start to do well at attracting stock photo buyers. I’d be interested to see what photo editors have to say about that…
– Eric
Only photographers and movie stars worry about all of these silly perceptions.
“If I put something on Rob’s free site, do I look needy, greedy, slow, cheap, man the list goes on”.
When I walk through Tokyo I just laugh that a movie star is holding a soft drink can plastered on 20 million vending machines, but the same “star” probably wouldn’t do a Lexus commercial in the U.S. for four million bucks.
And then for some reason photographers think they have a persona to protect, as if they are a household name and somebody from GQ, or Flaunt might think the less of them if they see their work scattered on flicker.
This is silly. You get work, by getting your name out, showing your work and hopefully telling your story. Nothing more, nothing less.
You continue to work by giving a client (every client) more than they anticipated, without stress and no 200% over charges.
A few years ago a client showed me a binder of correspondence from photographers that bid on the project I was shooting.
Some of their e-mails started with they wanted huge production fees, a percentage of sales from the product (I’m not joking here) to usage fees that were movie star rates.
Then as the weeks went by the e-mails changed from those “demands” to cutting their rates and fees to almost nothing.
So from movie star to furniture mover, all in two weeks. What kind of message does that send?
This business is sideways in it’s thinking and always has been.
I like Rob’s idea and think there is a big hole in this industry for a qualified, simplified, central point where buyers can view photographer’s work, especially one that has more validty than just writing a check.
JR
Comments are closed for this article!