Category: Uncategorized

Sometimes we need to be reminded that, no matter how much we love what we do for our careers, it’s just work. I don’t mean that in a disparaging way at all–but I do mean that, while important, work needs to be kept in perspective.

There is a balance to be struck between career and other parts of life. While you will hear me say “If you really want it, you should be willing to do whatever it takes to follow your dream–including working second jobs, etc.” you also need to remember that your family and friends are incredibly important to your success as well. They need your time and attention.

Those two ideas aren’t in conflict but they can get convoluted at times. Usually, friends and family get sacrificed in pursuit of career. That can be just as dangerous to your success as ignoring your business.

Having support from friends and family is vital to being successful. We all need cheerleaders at times, and people who will sympathetically listen when we bitch about clients who are difficult, and people who won’t judge us on what we produce. It’s not our clients’ job to tell us it’s okay when we screw up, or to love us, or to be there for us when we are hurting or struggling. Our friends and family hold those “jobs.”

However, you need to give to them to keep the relationships healthy (for both of you). If you are choosing to work rather than spend time with your spouse (or kids), regularly, then you might need to re-think that decision. If, for example, you are indeed working an extra job to bring in money while you build your business, you need to deliberately schedule some time with your sweetie. S/He’ll understand you can’t spend hours every day, but if you make the effort to schedule a fun Saturday afternoon or something, that will go a long way towards feeding the relationship. Turn off the cell phone and email and spend that bit of time completely with them.

Take some time to give to the people you love, if for no other reason than so that they will continue to give to you (but hopefully just because you want to give to them, too). Call your parents, spend 30 minutes playing a game with the kids, take a walk with your lover. Feed your soul with these relationships and you’ll find that you will be better able to focus on work when working–making better creative, doing better marketing–generally being more productive (and happy) in your work.

Successful marketing in the creative industries today is not formulaic. I can’t tell you how often I hear from photographers (especially on forums) who say that they just want to know what to do–as in “give me the formula for success.” These people are looking for something like:

3 postcard mailers + 6 email promos + website = 25% increase in business

Trouble is, there is no formula. There are common tools which usually work at some level and some others that are usually less successful, but even within those categories the phrase “it depends” still is supreme.

For example, a print mailer is a good thing, generally speaking, but only if the image(s) on it are fantastic and it’s a part of a whole campaign, not a one-off shot in the dark. Oh, and if the design sucks, that’ll reduce its effectiveness. Same for printing. And if it’s a postcard it probably won’t be as effective as a folded mailer…except, of course, when it is, especially because of reasons like image choice and design.

Then there is targeting. If you aren’t targeting well, then you’re wasting a lot of your marketing budget. You *could* send out 6000 cards each mailing to a list of buyers who buy lifestyle photography and maybe you’ll get a hit here and there. Or, you could spend more money on each piece, making a higher-end-looking mailer (maybe a mini-book?), and send it out to only 1000 much more targeted targets–ones you know have used work like yours in some way and with whom you really want to work.

Instead of throwing it out there and seeing what sticks (old school marketing, imho), by building a highly targeted list you can then devote more money and energy to seeing the commonalities of your targets and making pieces that really speak to those targets. You don’t have to worry so much about “70% may like X but the other 30% will be offended” and the like, because, as you target, you’ll see that your best targets are more alike than not.

So no, there is no formula for marketing success other than doing the research, being consistent, and having the persistence to keep trying for the rest of your career.

Two, actually, for the ASMP Strictly Business 2 tuition!

After drawing quite literally out of a hat:

…the winners of the SB2 tuition scholarships are Cheri Homaee of Ohio and Jim Bryant of Washington! Congratulations to Cheri and Jim!

Everything you always wanted to know about getting a rep, especially for fashion/editorial work, in one blog post.

There have been many posts lately on ASMP’s Pro/Student forum about pricing issues, like standardizing usage prices. I’ve been trying to offer my opinions while staying out of the fray, but I’m getting frustrated with some of the debate. People get very emotional about these issues and then it gets difficult for them to look at ideas dispassionately before jumping to conclusions about their merit, etc.

As readers here know, I think the idea of standardizing usage licensing prices is at the least interesting and worthy of further investigation. One of the arguments against it is that it isn’t done that way; another is that no one should get to dictate prices. I think neither of these attitudes is helpful in looking at possibilities.

The WGA is looking at new methods and models for pricing usage for the creative products of its members. They seem to understand that just because something wasn’t done that way in the past (or was done, sort of, but didn’t work in the past) doesn’t mean it might not work now. Why can’t we in the photo industry get that?

Life and business and technology (etc.) are changing at incredible speeds and we have to be willing to look at ideas openly in order to find best possibilities for us all. What was may not be now; or what was, then wasn’t, may be again. Who knows? But if we dig in our heels and say “This is the way it is done. Period” we’re going to be left on the side of the road with our egos intact and our businesses in shambles.

The other side of this coin are those people who say things like “Creative Commons licensing is here to stay so we have to accept giving away usage.” They are only seeing that one issue in monetizing creativity and basing everything on it. Equally but differently blindered, so to speak.

Today there are a billion outlets for creative material usage and each set of those uses may require different methodologies for pricing. Today sure as hell ain’t yesterday and tomorrow will be completely different, so you better wear a cup, as they say. But during this fundamental transitional period, we owe it to our businesses (and to the value of our creativity) to look at all the monetizing ideas possible–no matter how crazy or against the previous grain they might be–before rejecting any out of hand.

Then, if (huge if) any new methods gain endorsement from any of the major photo groups, each business owner will still get to pick her/his own way. Even if prices are standardized, no one will dictate them and no one will be forced to use the suggested standardized prices, for example. As always, it will be a choice. Just like today where photographer A uses FotoQuote to price a gig while photographer B throws in all rights for a tiny sum–each makes his her own choice and lives with the consequences.

But as a group, we can and should look at what the changes in media and technology bring to the table. New methods for monetization are certainly possible if not probable. Let’s see what our best minds can come up with. After all, they said no one would ever pay $4 for a cup of coffee (Starbucks) or buy books online (Amazon), and Google has broken every “rule” about monetizing anything and made one hell of a business.

Grey NYC moved a department to the second floor…from offices with a view to a cubicle farm. A creative director there responds in this hilarious homage to Sinead O’Connor. (Thanks Åsk for the link!)

What a weekend! The ASMP SB2 core team (Judy Herrmann, Susan Carr, Richard Kelly, John Harrington, Blake Discher and me) got together in Los Angeles to practice and refine our presentations, workshops…pretty much everything about the upcoming events. We worked our butts off–we’re trying to fit in a hell of a lot of information into a 2-day event–but I think it’s really coming together and will be fantastic.

Everyone on the team is trying to get not only as much information as possible out there to the audience, but also taking the time to flesh out important things like copyright, paperwork, negotiations, and in my case, the steps to building a marketing plan. The Sunday morning negotiations practicum/roll-plays will be a great opportunity for photographers to practice without fear and the afternoon workshops will fill brains to capacity.

Add in the great keynotes by either Sean Kernan or Joyce Tenneson and all the time to talk and learn beyond the formal events (like the casual lunches together and evening receptions) and, well, I can’t tell you how excited I am about it! Totally geeking out….yup, that’s me. 🙂

People are already signing up from all over (I know of one photographer from Alaska who is coming to the LA event and a couple from North Carolina for the Atlanta one, for example) and the mini-consultations offered through ASMP are very popular add-ons. I’ve already booked several post-event meetings (I’m doing longer format Test Drives the Monday after each SB2 event in each city)…and all this is weeks before the first event and months before the others! (C’mon, you know how photographers often wait until the last second before signing up for things like this…)

If you haven’t signed up yet, get to it. And remember to book your hotel room too (to ensure getting a special rate and being on-site for the whole weekend–for that extra time together and networking).

This is going to be great…

I just got a link to this interesting article about compensation models for production partners. Note how the value of creative content is mentioned, how new technologies are changing perceived values and risks, and how shared ownership is being discussed (see Christopher Guest part).

Now, before you have a fit about shared ownership, take a breath and read the article and just think about it. Nothing has to be decided today–I’m certainly not taking a position yet myself–but with the change in business and technology and media, new models should be considered carefully and not rejected just because in the past something that sounded similar was the worst thing for creatives.

It may be that creatives could financially benefit in the long run from shared ownership–if you had designed it, wouldn’t you like to get a penny every time the Nike shwoosh appears? Or this may be a bad thing that will cause creatives to lose control and long-term income. It is just too early to tell.

But looking at new ideas and thinking about them is never a bad thing to do.

Remember, you can always say “no.” 🙂

EPUK has a wonderful piece about what photographers wish they had known when they were starting out. Great insight for old pros and newbies alike.

I think photography should have standardized usage licensing prices.

*gasp*

Yes, I really wrote that and I really mean it. And yes, it will tick off some photographers (and certain consultants) and they are entitled to their opinions. In fact, I welcome an open and respectful dialogue on this topic.

Here’s why I think this is a good idea and how it would work.

Very much like music licensing, standardized usage licensing prices would take the burden of one major aspect of pricing off the shoulders of creatives…on both sides of the equation. In smaller agencies and businesses, the buyers of photography often are creatives themselves and they aren’t really trained or qualified to negotiate fees the way professional art buyers are. Photographers hate the voodoo of usage pricing. So, standardizing the usage license prices would make that part of the business so much easier for everyone involved.

This is logical because the usage value of any image can be effectively quantified and is exactly the same regardless of the image. X usage = $Y; N usage = $Q.

Please note that I said the usage value, not the entire value of an image being used.

Think about it…a $2 million media buy will have exactly the same reach regardless of whether the image used in it is shot by Annie L. or me. The same number of magazines will run the same size ad, etc. The same potential eyeballs will be looking at the campaign.

Now, a client would be an idiot to hire me to shoot anything because I’m not a photographer and Annie L. can make an infinitely better and more effective image for their campaign. And that difference would be reflected in the Creative Fee we would each list on our estimates.

Creative Fees would remain completely up to the photographer. Each photographer would be free to set her/his own prices based on the complexity/creativity of the project, time required, and the name value of the photographer, etc. So my estimate for the hypothetical project listed above would list a low Creative Fee whereas Annie L. would surely have a very high one.

But the Usage Licensing Fee would be identical.

In most cases, a standardized Usage Licensing Fee will be higher than what the majority of photographers have been charging for that usage. It will raise the income for a large number of photographers and it will significantly reduce the effectiveness of lowballers. Here’s why.

The Creative Fee for most photographers will be a smaller part of the total set of fees on any estimate so when one photographer charges 50% of the creative fee of another photographer, in the whole estimate that difference will be reduced to a much smaller percentage difference. For example, let’s say Photographer A estimates $10K Creative Fee and Photographer B estimates $5K. The Usage Licensing Fee is a standardized percentage of the media buy (let say 3% for this example) and the media buy is $2 Million. That makes the Usage Licensing Fee $60K. So the fees for A are a total of $70K and for B they are $65K…a difference of less than 8%.

I think standardizing Usage Licensing Fees would not only help the lower and mid-level photographers, it would not in any way penalize the high-end photographers. They could still charge a high Creative Fee (as they should!) and they would still get projects based on their name value, etc.

Frankly, I can’t see a significant downside to such a system. The argument that clients will expect re-licensing to be a percentage of the original usage price does not hold up because usage is usage is usage. Of course the original Creative Fee would not get repeated for a re-licensing, but if the usage is the same as the original usage, then the Usage Licensing Fee will be 100% of that original Usage Licensing Fee.

And that, in my book, is fair.