I've been thinking about this a bit lately. With the rise of multiple platforms for photographers, I'm more and more convinced of the need for sites like NPN which focus on constructive critique rather than pleads to 'like me' and 'share my photos please'. Before I put pen to paper I was wondering about your thoughts on the various sites. It seems that it is becoming more important to be good at social networking than photography! Here are a few of my brief thoughts.
flickr - dated and dying
photo.net - still not bad for beginners and those interested in a wide range of styles.
google plus - what's with these ridiculous circles? Nice gallery layout but ultimately a popularity contest with little correlation to quality
facebook - a powerful tool potentially but lots of white noise to get through. Great for networking in fashion, portraits when you draw teams together for a project.
500px - no experience but looks OK in that there are editors in control.
My thoughts -
I have been on Flickr a while but rarely visit. Don't like it in general.
I am on Photo.net too but find it useless / lame / biased.
Not on Google+
Absolutely not on Facebook or Twitter for that matter. Absolutely refuse to join.
I am on 500PX but find it is also a popularity contest. The more you comment on others' work the more popular you are at least in my experience.
Been on Deviantart and Redbubble the longest though now more just to follow other photographers I like. Some are on NPN, others not. The few sales I have made where through DA but conversely I have found most stolen images occur through DA and Flickr too. Be sure to use the Tin Eye to see where your images have been lifted http://www.tineye.com/ (more useful than Digimarc IMO).
I am also on Whytake.com (run by Alister Benn and Rafael Rojas and company) and find it constructive.
I look at social networking through business eyes. What a joke! Lots of folks are having fun putting in lots of effort while earning zip.
There are much more fruitful ways to invest your time if sales are your goal. Have a good time on the social networks and play the popularity games as you like. But don't let it take away from your money making efforts if your goal is to make money.
Hey Eva, I thought for a quite a while about whether Whytake.net was counted as a social networking site but in the end considered it more of a showcase for top quality nature photography. There are some networking aspects to it though.
Facebook as I mentioned is tremendously useful for certain types of photography such as fashion and glamour. I am also finding it vital for organising shoots for Carnevale next year - if you're not on FB you will be left out of the loop as a lot of the schedule is organised through it. In fact when I run my Venice Carnevale workshop next year, shoots will be coordinated through Facebook.
Don't get me started on twitter however. It's a joke.
Anil and Hank, while it may not be important to everyone, I do believe that there are photographers out there who have become successful mainly due to their social networking skills rather than image making. This has always been the case. Hasn't the business of photography always been 90% marketing, 10% skill?
It depends on what you're after. If you are just posting for fun or critiques, then you really don't have to be that adept at social networking, just find a site you like, post there and have fun. If you are trying to run a business or get your name out there as a nature photographer, then you better be darn good at social networking, and seen at as many sites as time will allow you post. All sites have there own unique thing going on and it's nice that there are all these options. Every site will not appeal to everyone, and that's okay.
My whole business is based on marketing myself through these sites. If it wasn't for these sites, I couldn't go from one end of the country to the other filling up workshops if these photo sites didn't exist. So the time invested in marketing in the internet sites is in no way a waste of time, and yes your business is 90 percent time spent marketing and running the business and 10% shooting, unless you are lucky enough to have someone running the business end for you, then you can go out and shoot.
Posted by Larry Fischer on June 30, 2012 at 12:34 PM
I'm on flickr.com. It is simply a place for friends to view photos. For me it is inexpensive.
I've not yet thought to try to sell anything I've created.
On flickr.com I NEVER receive any constructive criticisms.
Whatever level of photography I've reached, most has been from self study and the honest input from the plethora of good photographers on NPN.
I'm sure there are other sites dedicated to improving one's ability.
I don't need more than NPN with one exception. I note that 'people' pictures get almost twice the hits as landscape, etc.
So, if when I do get into people, I will probably look outside NPN.
This seems to be the state of the American mind: feel good about yourself regardless of skill level or quality.
I hope this does not offend but I believe it stems from the John Dewey progressive educational mind set which began in the 1930's. We are now reaping the dubious benefit of those from his what I consider false belief--feelings rather than knowledge and ability. It is simply easier to control those who know little or nothing. That's a political statement of sorts.
For those engaged in selling photos it is probably frustrating to see this 'feeling' enter into a nice photo being picked because of cost rather than paying for something recognized as superb.
The issue with that statement is beauty in in the eye of the beholder. But I also assert that aside from the concept of beauty there should be, in a well educated and astute person, the ability to recognize technical aspects of processing differences and other aspects. Some would pick a photo that was not leveled because of the price difference. In sum, I think this subliminally represents a shallowing of the American, or perhaps the human, mind in general. Photographers who sell have a lot of things to overcome. NPN helps for the technical part; business acumen for marketing.
More than you wanted to know.... grins
the fisch
In my experience, each of the sites has something unique to offer, and most sites do depend on "social networking."
Like others, I post to various sites and for different reasons.
I sell images through zazzle and stock outfits but that's a laugh because the income is mostly minuscule.
The main plus, IMO, on 500px is that images get far more exposure than here on NPN. As one acquaintance explained, he used 500px to drive people to his blogs. I do something similar and that's to place links to other sites on my image commentary.
Another plus on 500px is access to the international community which is far greater than here at NPN.
My main objection to all of the sites including NPN, is that in many ways we are playing around the concept of popularity contests, which as Mike pointed out, is necessary if you are really marketing whatever it is that you sell--workshops, books, tutorials ...
I strongly agree that NPN does provide some solid feedback on posted images. I've learned so much over the years through my participation on NPN. Some of the folks have been kind enough to share their knowledge. But to that, I have to add that I've learned a great deal by critiquing other images, plus my own research (and practice) as I've pursued tutorials offered on the 'net through Lynda.com, NIK, as well as offerings posted by other individuals.
1X.com may hold out some hope since they do offer a "critique" experience. Just for giggles and grins, I've submitted an image and I suspect that it will be of less value than the feedback that I have received here on NPN. We'll see.
And yes, Anil, unfortunately in this era, the game played today is popularity--at all costs. Times have changed. Solid skills are out and networking is in and has been for years. You scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours. As a result, many aspiring photographers think they are "good," because they've achieved high numbers.
To sum it up, each site, IMO, has something to offer.
To me the big advantage of something like Facebook is that it actually forces folks to see what you're up to. I don't have a blog at the moment, but when I finally do get that established, folks will still only read it if they take the time to come back to my site. Something like Facebook or Google + helps you get the word out more effectively, since you don't have to wait for folks to be proactive and come back to find you. By posting news on the social network, I'm taking advantage of what's essentially a condensed news feed. Not everyone that has "subscribed" to (liked) my page will follow the links I post or read everything I have to say, but at least there's a better chance they'll initially see it. That, after all is the first step in getting the word out...
I frequent only two photography sites: NPN and the Large Format Photography forum. I don't have the time, nor the inclination to make various and sundry versions of my photographs so that I can post them elsewhere. In all honesty, I don't post many images on NPN any longer. It's just easier for me to print the ones I want people to see, and perhaps to purchase.
I also have no interest in Facebook, et al. First, I prefer to use my time doing other things. Second, I have serious concerns over privacy and the relentless activities of miscreants who want to steal my identity and/ or my money. Therefore, I have chosen to maintain a low profile.
The concepts of marketing have not changed; only the methods. Perhaps I am a ludite to an extent, but I prefer to stay away from social networking via the Web and use more truly personal methods; phone calls, personal referrals, and prints hanging on walls.
At this juncture, I am not convinced I need to keep my web site. I've had very few sales from my site, it's a pain in the arse to maintain, and it isn't inexpensive over the long haul.
I suppose that if I were doing workshops or tours, I would reconsider my stance. But, since I have no present desire to do these things, I will maintain my personal status quo.
Photography for me is a very deeply personal enterprise: I do it because I love it for the process and for the end result. This is something I will not compromise. If I am not popular, then that's OK with me.
What a great and varied set of perspectives so far. My current use of networking sites for making announcements about trips, blogs and workshops like what Max suggests. Some of the ways I judge them include : gallery layout and customization, how well the editorial and interaction. I personally prefer more emphasis on showing photos and less talking. Some sort of editorial control is a good thing so that the whole network doesn't become dependent on popularity. I find this whole concept of circles on google plus a bit of a joke.
Some very interesting thoughts Larry about the concept of false belief - I agree with every word.
Preston I'm like you rather dubious about the whole thing too but as Carol intimates the world has changed and I think each of these websites have something to offer. Unfortunately improving your photography is not one of them. NPN remains one of the only websites where it's not all about mutual back slapping.
We have recently stepped up activity on that page, including posting the Weekly Picks and announcing new monthly issues. We also now run a "Critique of the Week" feature where we post a photo and ask for critiques, the goal being to offer the best, most constructive review. I select what I believe is the best critique and give author a 1-year membership to NPN. We get on average only about 6 critiques per photo, but in a week's time a 1000+ views (sound familiar?).
Posting photos has become much easier - getting useful feedback has not. I have come to the consclusion that taking a good photo and getting it in front of a large audience is now much easier (and far more fun) than serving up useful comments.
Jim, IMO, your last sentence is such a sad commentary on the world in which we live, and I have no doubt you are correct. People appear to be far more interested in the number of views and in the beast named popularity than they are in gaining solid and useful feedback on their images.
Further to your last comment Carol and Jim's too is that unfortunately popularity is being equated with quality.
Posted by Anne K. Rusk on July 1, 2012 at 10:55 PM
It's interesting because this same line of thought has been bouncing around my household for the past few months. My activity on NPN has decreased (my lurking has not) for a few reasons: I can't/won't view it on my phone (commenting, especially anything worthwhile, is almost impossible), time, energy to comment back (I won't post if I can't reciprocate the critique). I have branched out on G+, Facebook, 500px, and Flickr. What all these sites have done is get me in touch with other photographers who have the same interests. It is social above all else and as long as I keep it in that box, it serves me well.
What is so awesome about NPN and what keeps me coming back is the absolute focus on quality and learning through critique. There really isn't any other site that invites nit-picky honest critique in the spirit of improvement. I have learned so much here! It is interesting to note that I have met more photographers here than on all the other sites combined, making NPN way more social than the others!
Social media sites will come and go, the core elements that drew me to NPN are timeless.
I've been working a lot on my latest music project (almost done, after 2 years) so ill give you a perspective from the music side of art.
The digital revolution basically hit the music industry 10-15 years before visual arts, so what you see in music could arguably foreshadow what will happen in photography. Up until a few years back, Myspace was the big music engine, but it basically self-imploded for same reasons that you refer to in FB, Google Plus etc. 1 million bands/artists were using every trick in the book to build a huge base of 'followers/fans' because the shear numbers gave them credibility, and a few acts got signed by major labels because of that popularity. But once everyone and their Uncle Louie caught on, it just became a big joke. And Myspace disintegrated. But the internet music explosion continues, to the point where all talent has become watered down. There's no gatekeeper or way to separate the literally thousands of crappy artists from the 1 or 2 true talents. (incidentally, the publishing biz also parallels this--witness the explosion of self publishing!) So, there is some good stuff out there, but there's so much garbage that often the good just gets lost in the popularity mix. I came to the conclusion a couple years ago that the internet music game was pointless--I think there's going to be (already is to some extent) a backlash where people will start returning to live performances rather than immersing themselves in the sea of virtual sounds. The analogue in photography is what Preston referred to: personal referrals, prints on the wall. You can't fake those. So, that's why those various sites are doomed to failure as marketing tools in the long run. That's why ill stick with sites like NPN so long as they remain true to the original vision.
I like that Hank, "Geezerhood"
I agree with Stan, most new formats or sites come on the scene and hit it big, and then either something changes in the dynamics or people just get tired of the site and move on to the next new site. There will always be a next new site that everyone will flock to, and it will be the greatest until someone develops another new idea, and then everyone will be off and running again. As long as people are out there with their thinking caps on, you will have a replacement in some manner or another. That is where Hank's Geezerhood comes in, as you are not able to adapt to the next new thing, and just want to stay in the old ways. Same with making a living in the photography business or any business, you are constantly adapting to the changes. Look how the stock business has changed, which made lots of pro photogs having to reevaluate there business model. Change or die. There are some products or services that will stand the test of time, but those are much fewer then the ones that die off.
There's also the principle of "return on investment."
Anyone looking for meaty critiques gets only thin soup at best on social media for all their time and effort, compared to NPN. As in Stan's example, you also have to wade neck deep in a lot of crap to find the occasional diamond. In our case, the financial return on invested time is so low as to be meaningless- We get a much higher return from other marketing investments.
Social media is great for those in need of back pats and entertainment, but it's yet to prove itself to me in any meaty way. I'm taking a pass on it while continuing to invest in media that's proven for us, depositing checks in the bank rather than back pats and feather strokes.
I get the feeling that social media as we know it today has not and can not live up to its claimed benefits, and that it's only a step in the evolution toward some meaningful next generation that will indeed put meat on the table. I'm content to wait and see.
Posted by Tom Nevesely on July 9, 2012 at 11:40 AM
Personally I’m having a hard time figuring out how social media can be beneficial to me from a business point of view. I can see how something like Facebook can be useful for wedding and portrait photographers to attract clients but how is it useful for us nature/landscape photographers? It looks to me that most of the “friends” we as photographers have on the social networks are other photographers and I can only see two main positives from this:
One, you can interact/socialize with your peers (totally personal and not at all business related, but a perfectly valid reason and for me, the one main reason I’m even on social media)
And two, to attract other photographers to your workshops or photography tours.
Since I don’t run any workshops or tours I struggle to find way for social media to help me sell prints or stock images to clients, the two things my business revolves around.
I’d really love to hear how I can take advantage of social media to help me sell more because I’ve been thinking about it for a long time and I still can’t figure out anything useful.
Kah Kit, you asked about my thoughts on the various sites so here goes:
Flickr – Used to use it, not so much anymore. It’s ugly and mostly useless. The only thing I see it being useful for is if a bunch of photographers want to quickly and easily share photos from photo walk or something like it.
photo.net – I occasionally have a look at the forums there but I never post anything.
Google+ - I have an account there but don’t use it. Honestly I don’t how Google+ could be useful for me.
Facebook – Again, I have an account but I don’t update it very often. I mostly use it to see what my friends are up to.
Twitter – I wouldn’t know what to do with it.
500px – It looks nice and I go there to look at photos from other genres but I don’t like how the ranking system works. If you’re lucky enough to get a few likes in the first hour of posting your image the chances are it will shoot up to the top, but if you post at a different time and you don’t get any like in the first hour, the same image might not get any exposure.
Posted by Kah Kit Yoong on July 10, 2012 at 11:50 AM
Thanks for all your thoughts. I'm going to think it over a post a blog about all this.
There are many who doubt the power and effectiveness of social media (we are not one of them). So, I did a small experiment with Darwin's website. I referenced one of his articles on my G+ account. The traffic to his site that day was 3 times higher than normal. Now consider what would happen if you consistently put your content on social media.
One more thing...Have done a search through Google lately? For those of you who have account on G+ the results of your "Friends or connections" come up along with rest of the crap on the internet. So what you ask? The implications are far reaching...Google indexes social media interaction. So, the more connections you have with others on social media the more your content will be visible to the others. Combine this with fact that there are authorship tools tied to social media...so any article I write for NPN or any other blogs (or my own blog) will also be visible to my connections through social media if indexed correctly.This combination of social media and visibility has more impact on my photography business then Flickr, 500px or NPN.
So what has 1 years participation on Google+ done for us? In last year, we have sponsorship/partnerships from SMUGMUG, LensRental, Joby, F-Stop, OnOne SW, NIK...just to name a few. JUST THIS WEEK, I have interviews with Trey Ratcliff (Flatbooks), iPad Magazine. Here are some concrete statistic - in our last workshop over 95% of participants found us via social media.
Posted by Kah Kit Yoong on July 22, 2012 at 10:02 AM
Discussion
23 repliesflickr - dated and dying
photo.net - still not bad for beginners and those interested in a wide range of styles.
google plus - what's with these ridiculous circles? Nice gallery layout but ultimately a popularity contest with little correlation to quality
facebook - a powerful tool potentially but lots of white noise to get through. Great for networking in fashion, portraits when you draw teams together for a project.
500px - no experience but looks OK in that there are editors in control.
Why?
I have been on Flickr a while but rarely visit. Don't like it in general.
I am on Photo.net too but find it useless / lame / biased.
Not on Google+
Absolutely not on Facebook or Twitter for that matter. Absolutely refuse to join.
I am on 500PX but find it is also a popularity contest. The more you comment on others' work the more popular you are at least in my experience.
Been on Deviantart and Redbubble the longest though now more just to follow other photographers I like. Some are on NPN, others not. The few sales I have made where through DA but conversely I have found most stolen images occur through DA and Flickr too. Be sure to use the Tin Eye to see where your images have been lifted http://www.tineye.com/ (more useful than Digimarc IMO).
I am also on Whytake.com (run by Alister Benn and Rafael Rojas and company) and find it constructive.
Just my 2 cents.
There are much more fruitful ways to invest your time if sales are your goal. Have a good time on the social networks and play the popularity games as you like. But don't let it take away from your money making efforts if your goal is to make money.
Facebook as I mentioned is tremendously useful for certain types of photography such as fashion and glamour. I am also finding it vital for organising shoots for Carnevale next year - if you're not on FB you will be left out of the loop as a lot of the schedule is organised through it. In fact when I run my Venice Carnevale workshop next year, shoots will be coordinated through Facebook.
Don't get me started on twitter however. It's a joke.
My whole business is based on marketing myself through these sites. If it wasn't for these sites, I couldn't go from one end of the country to the other filling up workshops if these photo sites didn't exist. So the time invested in marketing in the internet sites is in no way a waste of time, and yes your business is 90 percent time spent marketing and running the business and 10% shooting, unless you are lucky enough to have someone running the business end for you, then you can go out and shoot.
I've not yet thought to try to sell anything I've created.
On flickr.com I NEVER receive any constructive criticisms.
Whatever level of photography I've reached, most has been from self study and the honest input from the plethora of good photographers on NPN.
I'm sure there are other sites dedicated to improving one's ability.
I don't need more than NPN with one exception. I note that 'people' pictures get almost twice the hits as landscape, etc.
So, if when I do get into people, I will probably look outside NPN.
This seems to be the state of the American mind: feel good about yourself regardless of skill level or quality.
I hope this does not offend but I believe it stems from the John Dewey progressive educational mind set which began in the 1930's. We are now reaping the dubious benefit of those from his what I consider false belief--feelings rather than knowledge and ability. It is simply easier to control those who know little or nothing. That's a political statement of sorts.
For those engaged in selling photos it is probably frustrating to see this 'feeling' enter into a nice photo being picked because of cost rather than paying for something recognized as superb.
The issue with that statement is beauty in in the eye of the beholder. But I also assert that aside from the concept of beauty there should be, in a well educated and astute person, the ability to recognize technical aspects of processing differences and other aspects. Some would pick a photo that was not leveled because of the price difference. In sum, I think this subliminally represents a shallowing of the American, or perhaps the human, mind in general. Photographers who sell have a lot of things to overcome. NPN helps for the technical part; business acumen for marketing.
More than you wanted to know.... grins
the fisch
In my experience, each of the sites has something unique to offer, and most sites do depend on "social networking."
Like others, I post to various sites and for different reasons.
I sell images through zazzle and stock outfits but that's a laugh because the income is mostly minuscule.
The main plus, IMO, on 500px is that images get far more exposure than here on NPN. As one acquaintance explained, he used 500px to drive people to his blogs. I do something similar and that's to place links to other sites on my image commentary.
Another plus on 500px is access to the international community which is far greater than here at NPN.
My main objection to all of the sites including NPN, is that in many ways we are playing around the concept of popularity contests, which as Mike pointed out, is necessary if you are really marketing whatever it is that you sell--workshops, books, tutorials ...
I strongly agree that NPN does provide some solid feedback on posted images. I've learned so much over the years through my participation on NPN. Some of the folks have been kind enough to share their knowledge. But to that, I have to add that I've learned a great deal by critiquing other images, plus my own research (and practice) as I've pursued tutorials offered on the 'net through Lynda.com, NIK, as well as offerings posted by other individuals.
1X.com may hold out some hope since they do offer a "critique" experience. Just for giggles and grins, I've submitted an image and I suspect that it will be of less value than the feedback that I have received here on NPN. We'll see.
And yes, Anil, unfortunately in this era, the game played today is popularity--at all costs. Times have changed. Solid skills are out and networking is in and has been for years. You scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours. As a result, many aspiring photographers think they are "good," because they've achieved high numbers.
To sum it up, each site, IMO, has something to offer.
That's for the opportunity to spout off.
Carol
Max
I also have no interest in Facebook, et al. First, I prefer to use my time doing other things. Second, I have serious concerns over privacy and the relentless activities of miscreants who want to steal my identity and/ or my money. Therefore, I have chosen to maintain a low profile.
The concepts of marketing have not changed; only the methods. Perhaps I am a ludite to an extent, but I prefer to stay away from social networking via the Web and use more truly personal methods; phone calls, personal referrals, and prints hanging on walls.
At this juncture, I am not convinced I need to keep my web site. I've had very few sales from my site, it's a pain in the arse to maintain, and it isn't inexpensive over the long haul.
I suppose that if I were doing workshops or tours, I would reconsider my stance. But, since I have no present desire to do these things, I will maintain my personal status quo.
Photography for me is a very deeply personal enterprise: I do it because I love it for the process and for the end result. This is something I will not compromise. If I am not popular, then that's OK with me.
--P
Some very interesting thoughts Larry about the concept of false belief - I agree with every word.
Preston I'm like you rather dubious about the whole thing too but as Carol intimates the world has changed and I think each of these websites have something to offer. Unfortunately improving your photography is not one of them. NPN remains one of the only websites where it's not all about mutual back slapping.
We have recently stepped up activity on that page, including posting the Weekly Picks and announcing new monthly issues. We also now run a "Critique of the Week" feature where we post a photo and ask for critiques, the goal being to offer the best, most constructive review. I select what I believe is the best critique and give author a 1-year membership to NPN. We get on average only about 6 critiques per photo, but in a week's time a 1000+ views (sound familiar?).
Posting photos has become much easier - getting useful feedback has not. I have come to the consclusion that taking a good photo and getting it in front of a large audience is now much easier (and far more fun) than serving up useful comments.
Sincerely,
Carol
What is so awesome about NPN and what keeps me coming back is the absolute focus on quality and learning through critique. There really isn't any other site that invites nit-picky honest critique in the spirit of improvement. I have learned so much here! It is interesting to note that I have met more photographers here than on all the other sites combined, making NPN way more social than the others!
I've been working a lot on my latest music project (almost done, after 2 years) so ill give you a perspective from the music side of art.
The digital revolution basically hit the music industry 10-15 years before visual arts, so what you see in music could arguably foreshadow what will happen in photography. Up until a few years back, Myspace was the big music engine, but it basically self-imploded for same reasons that you refer to in FB, Google Plus etc. 1 million bands/artists were using every trick in the book to build a huge base of 'followers/fans' because the shear numbers gave them credibility, and a few acts got signed by major labels because of that popularity. But once everyone and their Uncle Louie caught on, it just became a big joke. And Myspace disintegrated. But the internet music explosion continues, to the point where all talent has become watered down. There's no gatekeeper or way to separate the literally thousands of crappy artists from the 1 or 2 true talents. (incidentally, the publishing biz also parallels this--witness the explosion of self publishing!) So, there is some good stuff out there, but there's so much garbage that often the good just gets lost in the popularity mix. I came to the conclusion a couple years ago that the internet music game was pointless--I think there's going to be (already is to some extent) a backlash where people will start returning to live performances rather than immersing themselves in the sea of virtual sounds. The analogue in photography is what Preston referred to: personal referrals, prints on the wall. You can't fake those. So, that's why those various sites are doomed to failure as marketing tools in the long run. That's why ill stick with sites like NPN so long as they remain true to the original vision.
Welcome, welcome, welcome!!!!!!!
I agree with Stan, most new formats or sites come on the scene and hit it big, and then either something changes in the dynamics or people just get tired of the site and move on to the next new site. There will always be a next new site that everyone will flock to, and it will be the greatest until someone develops another new idea, and then everyone will be off and running again. As long as people are out there with their thinking caps on, you will have a replacement in some manner or another. That is where Hank's Geezerhood comes in, as you are not able to adapt to the next new thing, and just want to stay in the old ways. Same with making a living in the photography business or any business, you are constantly adapting to the changes. Look how the stock business has changed, which made lots of pro photogs having to reevaluate there business model. Change or die. There are some products or services that will stand the test of time, but those are much fewer then the ones that die off.
Anyone looking for meaty critiques gets only thin soup at best on social media for all their time and effort, compared to NPN. As in Stan's example, you also have to wade neck deep in a lot of crap to find the occasional diamond. In our case, the financial return on invested time is so low as to be meaningless- We get a much higher return from other marketing investments.
Social media is great for those in need of back pats and entertainment, but it's yet to prove itself to me in any meaty way. I'm taking a pass on it while continuing to invest in media that's proven for us, depositing checks in the bank rather than back pats and feather strokes.
I get the feeling that social media as we know it today has not and can not live up to its claimed benefits, and that it's only a step in the evolution toward some meaningful next generation that will indeed put meat on the table. I'm content to wait and see.
One, you can interact/socialize with your peers (totally personal and not at all business related, but a perfectly valid reason and for me, the one main reason I’m even on social media)
And two, to attract other photographers to your workshops or photography tours.
Since I don’t run any workshops or tours I struggle to find way for social media to help me sell prints or stock images to clients, the two things my business revolves around.
I’d really love to hear how I can take advantage of social media to help me sell more because I’ve been thinking about it for a long time and I still can’t figure out anything useful.
Kah Kit, you asked about my thoughts on the various sites so here goes:
Flickr – Used to use it, not so much anymore. It’s ugly and mostly useless. The only thing I see it being useful for is if a bunch of photographers want to quickly and easily share photos from photo walk or something like it.
photo.net – I occasionally have a look at the forums there but I never post anything.
Google+ - I have an account there but don’t use it. Honestly I don’t how Google+ could be useful for me.
Facebook – Again, I have an account but I don’t update it very often. I mostly use it to see what my friends are up to.
Twitter – I wouldn’t know what to do with it.
500px – It looks nice and I go there to look at photos from other genres but I don’t like how the ranking system works. If you’re lucky enough to get a few likes in the first hour of posting your image the chances are it will shoot up to the top, but if you post at a different time and you don’t get any like in the first hour, the same image might not get any exposure.
There are many who doubt the power and effectiveness of social media (we are not one of them). So, I did a small experiment with Darwin's website. I referenced one of his articles on my G+ account. The traffic to his site that day was 3 times higher than normal. Now consider what would happen if you consistently put your content on social media.
One more thing...Have done a search through Google lately? For those of you who have account on G+ the results of your "Friends or connections" come up along with rest of the crap on the internet. So what you ask? The implications are far reaching...Google indexes social media interaction. So, the more connections you have with others on social media the more your content will be visible to the others. Combine this with fact that there are authorship tools tied to social media...so any article I write for NPN or any other blogs (or my own blog) will also be visible to my connections through social media if indexed correctly.This combination of social media and visibility has more impact on my photography business then Flickr, 500px or NPN.
So what has 1 years participation on Google+ done for us? In last year, we have sponsorship/partnerships from SMUGMUG, LensRental, Joby, F-Stop, OnOne SW, NIK...just to name a few. JUST THIS WEEK, I have interviews with Trey Ratcliff (Flatbooks), iPad Magazine. Here are some concrete statistic - in our last workshop over 95% of participants found us via social media.