When I was out birding today I didn't see much of anything exciting by the way of feathered or furred critters.. but I ventured out a little further than I usually do, and happened upon this tree at just the right moment of light. I shot this with my 500mm + 1.4x tc, full frame, converted to B&W with a light blue toning to enhance the 'ghostly' feeling I got from it.
Now.. in addition to hearing whether this works for you, I'd love to hear your thoughts on what you choose to display in your online portfolio. Right now I have way too much stuff on my website, and once my new site is done this coming fall, I'm going to want to have things paired down to no more than 20 images per 'category'... how do you choose? Some of my less favorite images are really popular with folks on NPN, others with potential buyers, others with art directors, and still others with editors... but no one wants to rifle through 50 shots (that's what google analytics says anyways).. so it seems more reasonable to give a limited but high caliber selection, and have people contact you for more choices if that's what they want. But choosing that limited selection is so hard when you want to both please potential clients, gain 'respect' in the photo community (lets face it.. we all like that.. and it probably helps if eventually one wants to offer services like workshops), but also remain true to your personal vision. Also, I've had potential buyers just get overwhelmed with choice, and then take forever (ie. indefinite amounts of time) to actually go and order a print.. I'd rather make the choice easier for them
So, again, how do you choose? Or do you have other brilliant ideas?
And.. one more question.. what categories do you choose? Most people have things separated by say mountains, deserts, coast, waterfalls, etc.. my trouble is I like to shoot so many different things that it gets rather complicated to list them all that way. I'm thinking it might be interesting to sort things ecologically in a way - ie. have streams mixed with mountains if they were taken in a mountain environment, or shore birds mixed in with the coast. I think this would make browsing more interesting, rather than getting hit with the same thing one after another. Of course, if you're after a particular bird or waterfall, then it might be hard to find... I could go on, but I'd love to hear your thoughts.
I'll probably post these questions on NP discussion at some point, but wanted to post them here as a warm up first
Floris, as I do not work or convert to B&W I can only say I like this very much. For me, it is the very stark white tree trunks and branches against the completely black BG providing the etching on glass look or something along that line.
As far as your questions for portfolio decisions that could be a real challenge for thoughts. I think you have answered part of the question with input you either received or surmised from someone. That being the statement, "rifle through 50 shots". No doubt we learn that quantity is not the answer with regards to portfolio viewing. It is entirely based upon quality.
With that stated, it also is obvious that in most cases it will take a good quantity of shots in the field to support a strong portfolio. I doubt there were any photographers that set out and went out to take 100 images and call that their portfolio. It takes a lot of field and processing work to get a good strong 100-image portfolio IMO.
With the new world of Digital there is little doubt the image total count goes up with each field outing, but I'm sure any experienced photographer can still tell keepers from just fill-in shots. So far as by category, I would think maybe a very strong 25 to 35 shots per category would make a good portfolio. Again, Digital opens the door for diversity in that arena over MF or LF using film. The lens selections alone are unending for those cross category uses. What I mean by this is you will not normally find MF or LF shooters using that gear for wildlife images.
Not sure I have helped or muddied the water for you Floris. But, it really does once again get into a personal choice overall, I was just kind of thinking out loud here.
Great lighting here, and it looks great in b&w. I like this image a lot!
As for the portfolio, definitely a tough question and I don't think you can ever please everyone. It makes it tougher when you have a diverse portfolio. For what its worth, I wrestled a bit with how to organize my website a few years ago...mainly because I had things I thought were portfolio worthy, and things that weren't but I still wanted to share (more of a documentary side rather than the artsy side). So ultimately what I did was create them both - a gallery for my portofolio worthy images, and an 'archives' side where everything else went. I'm not saying its the best way to organize a site, but it is kind of the best of both worlds in a way, because my 'archives' serve as great landing pages. I'm always toying with my gallery/portfolio - layout and how much to put in there - and look at the effects it has. If you really have the patience and the inclination, then I'd set up some marketing tools on your site (even google analytics can accomplish this), and change it up every so often and see what the response is marketing-wise with regards to conversion, bounce rate, etc...Just some thoughts.
With regard to your website, no offense to the community here, but to heck with the togs. Your website is for marketing. It should play to both your buyers and your vision. If you are true to those audiences, I think the potential workshop folks will see plenty to encourage them to sign up.
Hi Floris, if someone could access the population of NPN photographers like yourself who sell via websites, there should be a wealth of data to mine. Web performance data could be collected and analyzed. Total number of clicks, number of clicks-per photo category and gross revenue as a per-click rate. How's that for a quality measure? Ouch!! No doubt the big photo stock sites could write the book on this stuff. Seems like there ought to be low-hanging fruit for some multiple regression analysis and resulting marketing tips. Jeez...sounds like work! I started this hobby to escape work!
Discussion
4 repliesNow.. in addition to hearing whether this works for you, I'd love to hear your thoughts on what you choose to display in your online portfolio. Right now I have way too much stuff on my website, and once my new site is done this coming fall, I'm going to want to have things paired down to no more than 20 images per 'category'... how do you choose? Some of my less favorite images are really popular with folks on NPN, others with potential buyers, others with art directors, and still others with editors... but no one wants to rifle through 50 shots (that's what google analytics says anyways).. so it seems more reasonable to give a limited but high caliber selection, and have people contact you for more choices if that's what they want. But choosing that limited selection is so hard when you want to both please potential clients, gain 'respect' in the photo community (lets face it.. we all like that.. and it probably helps if eventually one wants to offer services like workshops), but also remain true to your personal vision. Also, I've had potential buyers just get overwhelmed with choice, and then take forever (ie. indefinite amounts of time) to actually go and order a print.. I'd rather make the choice easier for them
So, again, how do you choose? Or do you have other brilliant ideas?
And.. one more question.. what categories do you choose? Most people have things separated by say mountains, deserts, coast, waterfalls, etc.. my trouble is I like to shoot so many different things that it gets rather complicated to list them all that way. I'm thinking it might be interesting to sort things ecologically in a way - ie. have streams mixed with mountains if they were taken in a mountain environment, or shore birds mixed in with the coast. I think this would make browsing more interesting, rather than getting hit with the same thing one after another. Of course, if you're after a particular bird or waterfall, then it might be hard to find... I could go on, but I'd love to hear your thoughts.
I'll probably post these questions on NP discussion at some point, but wanted to post them here as a warm up first
Thanks!!
As far as your questions for portfolio decisions that could be a real challenge for thoughts. I think you have answered part of the question with input you either received or surmised from someone. That being the statement, "rifle through 50 shots". No doubt we learn that quantity is not the answer with regards to portfolio viewing. It is entirely based upon quality.
With that stated, it also is obvious that in most cases it will take a good quantity of shots in the field to support a strong portfolio. I doubt there were any photographers that set out and went out to take 100 images and call that their portfolio. It takes a lot of field and processing work to get a good strong 100-image portfolio IMO.
With the new world of Digital there is little doubt the image total count goes up with each field outing, but I'm sure any experienced photographer can still tell keepers from just fill-in shots. So far as by category, I would think maybe a very strong 25 to 35 shots per category would make a good portfolio. Again, Digital opens the door for diversity in that arena over MF or LF using film. The lens selections alone are unending for those cross category uses. What I mean by this is you will not normally find MF or LF shooters using that gear for wildlife images.
Not sure I have helped or muddied the water for you Floris. But, it really does once again get into a personal choice overall, I was just kind of thinking out loud here.
As for the portfolio, definitely a tough question and I don't think you can ever please everyone. It makes it tougher when you have a diverse portfolio. For what its worth, I wrestled a bit with how to organize my website a few years ago...mainly because I had things I thought were portfolio worthy, and things that weren't but I still wanted to share (more of a documentary side rather than the artsy side). So ultimately what I did was create them both - a gallery for my portofolio worthy images, and an 'archives' side where everything else went. I'm not saying its the best way to organize a site, but it is kind of the best of both worlds in a way, because my 'archives' serve as great landing pages. I'm always toying with my gallery/portfolio - layout and how much to put in there - and look at the effects it has. If you really have the patience and the inclination, then I'd set up some marketing tools on your site (even google analytics can accomplish this), and change it up every so often and see what the response is marketing-wise with regards to conversion, bounce rate, etc...Just some thoughts.
With regard to your website, no offense to the community here, but to heck with the togs. Your website is for marketing. It should play to both your buyers and your vision. If you are true to those audiences, I think the potential workshop folks will see plenty to encourage them to sign up.