I have been considering switching from film to digital but have been reluctant based on my current and past experiences marketing my film-based images. Everyone I have dealt with over the past several years (stock agency, calendar companies, magazines, etc) are still accepting film, many prefer it, and some (e.g. Sierra Club) require it. No company has yet said they will only accept digital.
For those of you who market your work and have switched from film to digital what has been your experience in regards to the acceptance of this medium by your editors? Are you being told that it's preferred to film, are you being told they could care less if you submit film or digital, or are you being told to go back to film?
Not correct.---Many buyers take digital images, and they will even accept e-mail samples sent for review.
(A few at a time that is. Not whole portfolios)
They will also take whole portfolios on CDs. Many want a printed contact sheet with those though. They vary all over the place.
If you want to find out who takes what, buy the Writer's Digest, Photographer's Market book. Almost every listed market/buyer shows what they will accept.
Thanks, Paul, but that was not my question. I realize that many are accepting digital submissions but what I was wondering is how has the experience been for those that had been submitting film but are now submitting digital? Is your acceptance rate about the same; are you encountering any kind of problems that you weren't before?
My stock agency accepts both film and digital provided the digital is from a camera of at least ten meg. Most of what I submit is now digital.
Locally, most of the few publishers are reluctant to take digital. Here most graphic artists have no concept of advances in digital photography, nor the software to use it. One house is running Photoshop 7. Sharpening is unknown to them.
What I find surprising is that it is the younger generation that seems reluctant to move over to digital.
Due to the nature of our business, we almost never make "blind" or speculative submissions, rather we are responding to direct requests for images. In that setting, we have had no trouble with digital, and in fact most distant clients prefer digital- due both to our remote location and the ease of corresponding and tracking digital, and the hassles of caring for and returning original chromes. We do find that clients don't want mixed submissions containing both digital and film, and hence we still have to scan older images in our files, even though we are shooting digital almost exclusively.
Since our clients are asking us for specific images for specific projects, they actually like email "contact sheets" beforehand, then a smaller set of thumbnails on submission discs along with the larger files. I haven't prepared a printed contact sheet in almost two years.
We had one interesting experience with clients over the weekend, which I'm still trying to digest. A couple came to our studio to review stock images for the brochures and web site for their lodge. They weren't experienced or sophisticated about photos, so sitting and reviewing at a computer was a little "scary" for them I think. At the same time reviewing comparatively small thumbnails of images (for speed in loading etc) almost cost us a fairly large sale. They didn't stand up well to the large display prints (mostly 20x24 and larger) hanging in the studio, and we had to spend way too much time reassuring them that they were only looking at thumbnails and that the full files were like the prints they could see. Almost cost us the sale because the stuff on screen didn't look "as good as" the big prints, and it wasn't till my wife showed them the process of reducing a large file to thumbnail that she finally bridged the information gap. I would have called it a generation gap, but these folks were younger than we are!
MARK - No I have seen little difference between my film or digital buyers.
I work with both with no problems.
It's all a matter of first finding out what the buyer wants and then giving them that. When I do that I never have a problem, and when I don't, then I have them.
Any company that is set up to receive digital files, already knows what they need and how to use them.
The companies who can't, do not request nor accept digital files, which is why I said about the market book to see just who does what. It's just common sense, if a company is going to take digital then they know what to do with them and visa-versa. Any company that doesn't even know how Photoshop works, and I have come across large ones, are not going to take digital files. All I do is go by what they accept, and one form is not much different than the other. In fact many are changing to digital as fast as they can because it is a lot easier and faster, saves money, and eliminates all of the hassles of waiting for the image delivery and then copying them for print.
Discussion
5 repliesFor those of you who market your work and have switched from film to digital what has been your experience in regards to the acceptance of this medium by your editors? Are you being told that it's preferred to film, are you being told they could care less if you submit film or digital, or are you being told to go back to film?
Thanks for any input/insight you can provide.
(A few at a time that is. Not whole portfolios)
They will also take whole portfolios on CDs. Many want a printed contact sheet with those though. They vary all over the place.
If you want to find out who takes what, buy the Writer's Digest, Photographer's Market book. Almost every listed market/buyer shows what they will accept.
My stock agency accepts both film and digital provided the digital is from a camera of at least ten meg. Most of what I submit is now digital.
Locally, most of the few publishers are reluctant to take digital. Here most graphic artists have no concept of advances in digital photography, nor the software to use it. One house is running Photoshop 7. Sharpening is unknown to them.
What I find surprising is that it is the younger generation that seems reluctant to move over to digital.
Dave
Since our clients are asking us for specific images for specific projects, they actually like email "contact sheets" beforehand, then a smaller set of thumbnails on submission discs along with the larger files. I haven't prepared a printed contact sheet in almost two years.
We had one interesting experience with clients over the weekend, which I'm still trying to digest. A couple came to our studio to review stock images for the brochures and web site for their lodge. They weren't experienced or sophisticated about photos, so sitting and reviewing at a computer was a little "scary" for them I think. At the same time reviewing comparatively small thumbnails of images (for speed in loading etc) almost cost us a fairly large sale. They didn't stand up well to the large display prints (mostly 20x24 and larger) hanging in the studio, and we had to spend way too much time reassuring them that they were only looking at thumbnails and that the full files were like the prints they could see. Almost cost us the sale because the stuff on screen didn't look "as good as" the big prints, and it wasn't till my wife showed them the process of reducing a large file to thumbnail that she finally bridged the information gap. I would have called it a generation gap, but these folks were younger than we are!
I work with both with no problems.
It's all a matter of first finding out what the buyer wants and then giving them that. When I do that I never have a problem, and when I don't, then I have them.
Any company that is set up to receive digital files, already knows what they need and how to use them.
The companies who can't, do not request nor accept digital files, which is why I said about the market book to see just who does what. It's just common sense, if a company is going to take digital then they know what to do with them and visa-versa. Any company that doesn't even know how Photoshop works, and I have come across large ones, are not going to take digital files. All I do is go by what they accept, and one form is not much different than the other. In fact many are changing to digital as fast as they can because it is a lot easier and faster, saves money, and eliminates all of the hassles of waiting for the image delivery and then copying them for print.