I believe that in general, when competing on a high level in the advertising arena, production values are critical. Excellence in creativity and photographic technique is a given but I think most “A” level ad photographers would agree with me if I maintained that to be a player you have to come to the table with enough chips to anti up. I.E. if I want to shoot for American Express I’d better show that I can pull a team together that will match the quality that is worthy of a million plus dollar ad placement.

I think we all have responded to price at some point but I do agree that you have to prove your value and stay true to your vision – this includes not compromising on production values, your value, and the value your client expects. In short, it’s a balance – the better you balance the scale the more success you’ll see.

Just my humble opinion based on my experience.

I said I disagreed to the responding to price part. There will always be people who will do “it” for less–whatever “it” may be. Chasing price is not a way to build your business.

However, working for trade can be a good idea when the VALUE of the trade is equal to the value of the images’ use. For example, a mag that offers a free ad to a photographer if s/he does a shoot is NOT a good trade…unless that mag is something targeted directly to the photographers clients. The trade you describe above can be a good one.

Btw, there is no reason a new portfolio should cost that much money. I don’t believe in shooting for a new portfolio. A portfolio should be a representation of your vision–if you’re not constantly making your own work, then I guess you could end up spending a ton on portfolio shoots, but you should be making your own work consistently.
-L

But then, let’s say a city magazine approaches the photographer and says: “we love your people work and we want to give you a 12 page 24 image spread plus cover. We’ll pay all production expenses to your specifications if you shoot it. If it goes well we’ll give you 2 more this year.

If I take the deal, I get a portfolio of images to show and publicity without dropping a time out of pocket. So what I am understanding you to say, Leslie, is that you would advise the photographer to turn it down and spend the thousands to get the same images? Why? On principle? Because it’s good for the industry long term?

I’m sorry to disagree back at ya – but I’ve been in business over 20 years and I would recommend the photographer take the deal. Trade for services has been around for a long time – it still works great under the right circumstances.

Leslie

http://www.gocomics.com/tedrall/

Since I entered the business in 1980, photographers (including me until I wised up) have been under the impression that they should control the market rather than taking advantage of changes in market conditions. Wise up folks, you can’t control the market. In my most controversial opinion, get ahead any way you can but be sure your business and marketing plans includes financial success rather than emotional and egotistical self actualization to which most photographers cling.

While we should fight for every structural gain we can get on copyright issues and follow industry best practices, if you find it to your career advantage to shoot an editorial project or commercial job for reduced compensation or in trade, please do so because you can bet your bottom dollar that your fellow photographer will in a heart beat.

I will be offering some of my images for free to my wife’s Google Knol (“a new Wikipedia-like collection written by experts) that is focused on Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes. I hope that the photos make her Knol more popular and she becomes even known in the diabetes world. There is a family benefit here.

Will it be worthwhile to my healthcare photo career as well? It will be an interesting experiment. Would I have been wise to offer the images to a doctor that wasn’t my wife? I don’t think so.

The greater question is where is the benefit?

The fact that photographers are still trying to respond to threat of infringement because of perceived dangers (the internet) and their lost income is telling. Why are photographers so slow here?

The future is much, much faster than this and if photographers are at all interested in catching that wave then by all means let’s move on. I, personally, want to hear from you about new innovations and success stories.

Look, for example, at new ways to distribute, syndicate, and advertise work. Look, for example, at how social networking can be a leverage for audience and eyeballs.

Examine the ways these new mediums offer incredible possibilities and opportunities. And let’s find out how those who are successful tapping these possibilities and opportunities are doing it.

What impresses me — now more than ever — is that photographers are perfectly positioned to take advantage of this content ‘gold rush.’ Most of them, though, are wearing blinders.

From my point of view, AB’s and their budgets are at the best – a secondary placement for pictures. And at the worst – a wast of our precious time.

The future of this business (as has been suggested, and to which I agree very much) is about growing an audience, a following, a fan base. I look forward to reading and learning from you about the tremendous opportunities we are presented with today.