I'm interested to hear how different photographers determine when a photo should be removed from their portfolio. I'm not talking about deleting it from your files but rather removing it from public viewing. I've heard it said that a photographer's portfolio is only as good as its weakest photo but how do we make that distinction? I know people on here use the comments and views of a critique in different ways but how do we use these tools to determine whether a photo is good enough to stand on its own? Let's say for example you have a technically sound photo with good lighting and composition. It doesn't have that WOW factor but it is a good photo that certain people would like and enjoy. Because this photo would then have a limited audience does that make the photo eligible for the chopping block? I'm reading a book that says to leave this photo in a portfolio would only bring the overall perception of your portfolio down rather than the good ones bringing it up. Any thoughts?
PS - I didn't see any older threads on this topic as I wasn't sure how to search for it but if there is one please let me know.
Posted by Bill Brennan on February 13, 2011 at 12:39 PM
Cristina, self critique is so difficult. As you try to refresh your portfolio, consider how you feel about the image. If you do not feel good about an image, that is your first cut. Consider the Wow factor for your second cut as others are attracted first by Wow. Then consider the technical elements for your final cut. From time to time, bring some back for a second try.
Bill Brennan
Posted by Brad Mangas on February 13, 2011 at 1:17 PM
I believe it's a matter of what you want out of the images you offer. If you are in the "fine art" business then maybe you only want to show a small selection of your very best work. There are many professional photographers who have online galleries (websites) that have thousands of images available, after all if you are in the business of selling to an array of customers why would you limit what they can see. I personally have never understood this. I have heard the saying that your portfolio is only as good as the weakest image and a customer can't purchase what the don't see either. I think worrying about this, contemplating what is the "weakest" and how many should a person have in a portfolio and what types of images should you be offering is a waste of time that is much better spent in creating work not debating over it.
If you plan to show matted prints to a gallery for consideration, the prints should be a representative sample of only your very best work. If you are marketing, say, through a website and have images that may find multiple uses, a larger number is acceptable, but you'll need to cull as your work improves.
As far as deciding which are the best of the best, I suggest you show your work to cross-section of folks who will evaluate your work objectively. Your mom would not be a good choice; she will love everything you do. Good choices would be other photographers, friends who you trust to be honest with you, other non-photographer artists with proven skills, etc.
If you make arrangments for a portfolio review, be sure to ask for their reactions to each photograph, just as you would when posting an image here for critique.
Just another thought, here: A photograph that may be 'weak' to one person, may not be 'weak' to another. Include images you feel are your best work and then see what the reactions are. Also, in terms of presentation, put those that you feel may be weaker, first, and so on, saving the 'wow' images for last. If you put the 'wow' shots first, and weaker images last, that may tend to bring down the overall impression of your body of work.
I cut images as soon as I have something better or more interesting to me, or when no interest has manifested in clients.
Posted by Stan Rose on February 13, 2011 at 2:57 PM
Excellent question, Cristina! I wish i had an answer for you, but ive been trying to figure out the answer myself, at least my web portfolio, so im interested in the responses here. Ive seen some pro photogs with huge numbers of photos on their websites, others with only a handful. Obviously it depends on your market, who you want seeing and/or buying your photos, but even that is a tricky question. When i came out with my new website a couple months ago, the first image that sold was one i probably would have cut (a standard comp, mid-day) if i was going on my subjective opinion. So its a tough call. I know a lot of the images im showing will probably never sell, i just like them and think theyre worth sharing. Thats pretty much where i draw the line right now--if im confident that the image has something to offer, ill keep it in, although at some point i might have to become more selective...
Posted by Buck Ward on February 13, 2011 at 4:41 PM
Christina - If you aren't proud of it, don't show it off.
I remove photos from my website from time to time. Sometimes it's just because it has lost favor in my own eyes, or maybe I have a newer similar photo that is better. My general attitude is that my galleries should grow in quality rather than quantity. If I become ambivalent about a picture, out it goes. If I am uncertain about a picture, I post it here at NPN. If it doesn't get rave reviews here, it generally doesn't make the cut. (Although, I will say that one of my favorites, an award winner and one of my best sellers, hardly received any notice when I posted it here several years ago.)
Imagine this: If someone wanted to choose a single picture from your portfolio that would be prominently displayed as being representative of you as a photographer, as an artist, are there any that you would prefer they not choose? If there are, get rid of them.
On the other hand, if it sells, why would you remove it from your inventory? I had a picture that was a little unusual that I posted on my website. After a short while, I decided that its uniqueness didn't overcome the fact that it wasn't a favorite of mine. Soon after that, it sold to a person who said that she loved it. She only saw it because I had forgotten to remove it from my New Work gallery. So - you never know.
Bottom line: A portfolio should contain about 20 to 50 of your very best. If you have more than that, it could probably stand some culling. Which reminds me - I haven't done a serious update of my NPN portfolio in a long time.
Posted by Greg Lessard on February 13, 2011 at 6:52 PM
Great question Christina! I agree with most of the thoughts already presented here. Yet, I still hang up on the quantity vs. quality debate. Obviuosly being able to have both quality and quantity is ideal. High quality photos should be your first priority regardless of who you market it too, which would lead you to cull the vast majority of your images. But if you don't show your work, how will it ever sell?
The only way I can come up with is to possibly have multiple websites. One may be for a stock type portfolio of many images and another for fine art of only your very best photos. With websites becoming increasingly cheaper these days, this is a viable option. I am curious to see what others might think of this idea. Is there a downside that I am not thinking of?
Posted by Jim Sabiston on February 13, 2011 at 10:47 PM
Cristina,
There are a number of ways to approach this, as others have noted with their good suggestions. Here is how I go about it.
I use three primary qualifiers:
1) Is the image worth committing to paper and ink in a mat for presentation in my sales bins at a show. If it fails on this first pass, well...
2) has the print sold within the last year? Sometimes what I think is a great image does not sell. Sometimes images that I think are mediocre sell like hotcakes. Prints that fail to sell end up in the clearance bin to recoup printing costs and are marked for the short list on my web site.
3) my work has improved over the years and my web galleries are limited to 50 image files. As new work gets uploaded, it is necessary to cull older images. 1 and 2 above are a large part of determining which images are removed. Time will tell which of the new images have staying power.
Posted by Jim Sabiston on February 13, 2011 at 10:48 PM
Cristina,
There are a number of ways to approach this, as others have noted with their good suggestions. Here is how I go about it.
I use three primary qualifiers:
1) Is the image worth committing to paper and ink in a mat for presentation in my sales bins at a show. If it fails on this first pass, well...
2) has the print sold within the last year? Sometimes what I think is a great image does not sell. Sometimes images that I think are mediocre sell like hotcakes. Prints that fail to sell end up in the clearance bin to recoup printing costs and are marked for the short list on my web site.
3) my work has improved over the years and my web galleries are limited to 50 image files. As new work gets uploaded, it is necessary to cull older images. 1 and 2 above are a large part of determining which images are removed. Time will tell which of the new images have staying power.
Thanks everyone for your helpful comments. It's nice to know that I'm not the only one struggling with this. Once I get the opportunity to expand my portfolio I'll definitely be drawing pointers from the comments here.
Discussion
10 repliesPS - I didn't see any older threads on this topic as I wasn't sure how to search for it but if there is one please let me know.
Bill Brennan
As far as deciding which are the best of the best, I suggest you show your work to cross-section of folks who will evaluate your work objectively. Your mom would not be a good choice; she will love everything you do.
If you make arrangments for a portfolio review, be sure to ask for their reactions to each photograph, just as you would when posting an image here for critique.
Just another thought, here: A photograph that may be 'weak' to one person, may not be 'weak' to another. Include images you feel are your best work and then see what the reactions are. Also, in terms of presentation, put those that you feel may be weaker, first, and so on, saving the 'wow' images for last. If you put the 'wow' shots first, and weaker images last, that may tend to bring down the overall impression of your body of work.
--P
I remove photos from my website from time to time. Sometimes it's just because it has lost favor in my own eyes, or maybe I have a newer similar photo that is better. My general attitude is that my galleries should grow in quality rather than quantity. If I become ambivalent about a picture, out it goes. If I am uncertain about a picture, I post it here at NPN. If it doesn't get rave reviews here, it generally doesn't make the cut. (Although, I will say that one of my favorites, an award winner and one of my best sellers, hardly received any notice when I posted it here several years ago.)
Imagine this: If someone wanted to choose a single picture from your portfolio that would be prominently displayed as being representative of you as a photographer, as an artist, are there any that you would prefer they not choose? If there are, get rid of them.
On the other hand, if it sells, why would you remove it from your inventory? I had a picture that was a little unusual that I posted on my website. After a short while, I decided that its uniqueness didn't overcome the fact that it wasn't a favorite of mine. Soon after that, it sold to a person who said that she loved it. She only saw it because I had forgotten to remove it from my New Work gallery. So - you never know.
Bottom line: A portfolio should contain about 20 to 50 of your very best. If you have more than that, it could probably stand some culling. Which reminds me - I haven't done a serious update of my NPN portfolio in a long time.
The only way I can come up with is to possibly have multiple websites. One may be for a stock type portfolio of many images and another for fine art of only your very best photos. With websites becoming increasingly cheaper these days, this is a viable option. I am curious to see what others might think of this idea. Is there a downside that I am not thinking of?
There are a number of ways to approach this, as others have noted with their good suggestions. Here is how I go about it.
I use three primary qualifiers:
1) Is the image worth committing to paper and ink in a mat for presentation in my sales bins at a show. If it fails on this first pass, well...
2) has the print sold within the last year? Sometimes what I think is a great image does not sell. Sometimes images that I think are mediocre sell like hotcakes. Prints that fail to sell end up in the clearance bin to recoup printing costs and are marked for the short list on my web site.
3) my work has improved over the years and my web galleries are limited to 50 image files. As new work gets uploaded, it is necessary to cull older images. 1 and 2 above are a large part of determining which images are removed. Time will tell which of the new images have staying power.
There are a number of ways to approach this, as others have noted with their good suggestions. Here is how I go about it.
I use three primary qualifiers:
1) Is the image worth committing to paper and ink in a mat for presentation in my sales bins at a show. If it fails on this first pass, well...
2) has the print sold within the last year? Sometimes what I think is a great image does not sell. Sometimes images that I think are mediocre sell like hotcakes. Prints that fail to sell end up in the clearance bin to recoup printing costs and are marked for the short list on my web site.
3) my work has improved over the years and my web galleries are limited to 50 image files. As new work gets uploaded, it is necessary to cull older images. 1 and 2 above are a large part of determining which images are removed. Time will tell which of the new images have staying power.