Product photography pitch on Dragons Den

L

lostsoulal2

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,336
Edit My Images
Yes
I caught the last few minutes of Dragons Den (Series 13: Episode 13 on Sunday 24/1/2016) and an unsuccessful pitch to get funding for a product photography business.
It's available to watch on BBC iplayer - it's the first presentation.

I was interested to see the business opportunity was based on using a StyleShoots Horizontal Table:

StyleShoots has developed a room-sized machine that takes still-life, hi-res, background-free product images in just 20 seconds.
it's an all-in-one system comprised of an illuminated glass tabletop, daylight simulation lamps and a Canon 5D Mark II DSLR camera. The system is powered by an embedded Mac mini computer and controlled by the user entirely via an iPad running a custom app.
You can read more about the system here

Appears the system has been around for a few years, but I was unaware until Sunday - could not find any pricing information, no doubt it will too expensive for most users / studios, but an interesting product.

I will continue using a white sheet of paper.......................... :)
 
I don't understand how such a machine could be a fits all solution for product photography. How does it know how to light a product in a way that gives it textures? What about different shape objects etc..?

Reading the link, seems it was invented to respond to the boom in fashion ecommerce. In that case, it must be more useful to photograph the goods on a person
 
Last edited:
its not hard to see why it was unsuccesful
 
it's almost as if there's a lot of companies offering very affordable catalogue packshot solutions and companies out there already.
 
•
Wow, what a great and brilliant idea!

I hope I will never have to consider buying that tool as it would mean
a great number of shootings for product catalogues to amortize it and
I would prefer to have far less catalogue shoots of that nature that this
investment would require.
 
These things (this one and various others) have been around for years. I happen to know that a well-known photographic lighting company has been developing one of these products for a long time.
Yes, they produce flat-lit, boring photos - but the produce them to a consistent standard and totally de-skill product photography to the point where literally anyone can produce "professional" results.And these machines can be used all day every day, or to photograph new products as they appear, with no delays - and today's marketeers have to carry an enormous range of different products.
The alternatives are to
1. Do the photography in-house, which involves training staff and a lot of staff time, and often get inconsistent results
2. Employ a professional photographer, at high cost.

IMO professional photographers have shot themselves in their collective foot by often producing crap work at prices that are far too high for the market to bear - top end manufacturers will always use top pro photographers for their product shots, but smaller ones will often go to the much cheaper "professionals" who are comfortable with photographing kids and weddings but who don't have a clue about product photography, which involves a lot of knowledge about lighting and marketing, but who will take on the product photography jobs because they delude themselves that they're capable.
 
Garry Edwards said:
These things (this one and various others) have been around for years. I happen to know that a well-known photographic lighting company has been developing one of these products for a long time.
Yes, they produce flat-lit, boring photos - but the produce them to a consistent standard and totally de-skill product photography to the point where literally anyone can produce "professional" results.And these machines can be used all day every day, or to photograph new products as they appear, with no delays - and today's marketeers have to carry an enormous range of different products.
The alternatives are to
1. Do the photography in-house, which involves training staff and a lot of staff time, and often get inconsistent results
2. Employ a professional photographer, at high cost.

IMO professional photographers have shot themselves in their collective foot by often producing crap work at prices that are far too high for the market to bear - top end manufacturers will always use top pro photographers for their product shots, but smaller ones will often go to the much cheaper "professionals" who are comfortable with photographing kids and weddings but who don't have a clue about product photography, which involves a lot of knowledge about lighting and marketing, but who will take on the product photography jobs because they delude themselves that they're capable.
Click to expand...
I think the Dragons actually disagreed with your point about the pros being overpriced.

Deborah actually said she prefers paying her local photographer at "very reasonable rates" than the type of 'solution' she was presented with.

I thought that was nice to hear.
 
good on deborah - though i suspect a lot of businesses would concur - why invest in a large expensive piece of capital equipment that you then have to maintain, run, and presumably pay someone to operate when you can just contract in a service and pay for it as a revenue expense...
 
odd jim said:
I think the Dragons actually disagreed with your point about the pros being overpriced.

Deborah actually said she prefers paying her local photographer at "very reasonable rates" than the type of 'solution' she was presented with.

I thought that was nice to hear.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but what does she know?

As someone who is very involved with lighting solutions, I hear the same thing from customers time and time again - they are sick of their local pro photographers producing poor work, which is why they opt to do it themselves in house - and their decision is nearly always right, because with the right equipment and with tuition, they very quickly become expert (or at least highly competent) in their own narrow field - this doesn't mean that they could photography everything superbly, what it does mean is that they can do better than the pros that they have tried, in their own specialised field.
 
Garry Edwards said:
Maybe, but what does she know?

As someone who is very involved with lighting solutions, I hear the same thing from customers time and time again - they are sick of their local pro photographers producing poor work, which is why they opt to do it themselves in house - and their decision is nearly always right, because with the right equipment and with tuition, they very quickly become expert (or at least highly competent) in their own narrow field - this doesn't mean that they could photography everything superbly, what it does mean is that they can do better than the pros that they have tried, in their own specialised field.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing she uses product photographers, so she probably knows quite a bit?
 
odd jim said:
I'm guessing she uses product photographers, so she probably knows quite a bit?
Click to expand...

I'd also guess she has the sense to hire pros who know what they are doing rather than bargain basement bob who does a s*** job cheap
 
Product photography is not always bland white sheet stuff.
In the past specialist needs were met by in house photography. Today inhouse studios are few and far between.

I spent a few years photographing components and shop fittings that used the "willpower" system. And shooting hundreds of shop interiors including many of the more famous london stores, even a few in Belgium. It was almost impossible to find local photographers who could understand the market place, or who could take a half reasonable interior. And even fewer who could shoot polished metal components suitable for catalogue work. I rather doubt such a market exists to day.
 
odd jim said:
I'm guessing she uses product photographers, so she probably knows quite a bit?
Click to expand...
We don't know that, and I don't know exactly what she said, but based on the report that she said "Deborah actually said she prefers paying her local photographer at "very reasonable rates" than the type of 'solution' she was presented with." I'm guessing -perhaps wrongly - that she's using a local photographer who charges "very reasonable rates". Obviously a specialist product photographer could be local, and it's also possible that she considers high-end rates to be reasonable - and if she does then I applaud that - but it may be more likely that it's just a local photographer who specialises in everything...
Terrywoodenpic said:
Product photography is not always bland white sheet stuff.
In the past specialist needs were met by in house photography. Today inhouse studios are few and far between.

Terrywoodenpic said:
Product photography is not always bland white sheet stuff.
In the past specialist needs were met by in house photography. Today inhouse studios are few and far between.
Click to expand...
In house studios are in fact now becoming extremely common
I


Terrywoodenpic said:
I spent a few years photographing components and shop fittings that used the "willpower" system. And shooting hundreds of shop interiors including many of the more famous london stores, even a few in Belgium. It was almost impossible to find local photographers who could understand the market place, or who could take a half reasonable interior.
Click to expand...
Very true. Photographing products (which includes specialities such as architecture and fashion) requires marketing, subject and even the market sector, there's a lot more to it than just photography
Terrywoodenpic said:
And even fewer who could shoot polished metal components suitable for catalogue work.
Click to expand...
Photographing shiny objects is easy, but only for people who have the necessary knowledge, skills and equipment. This seems to exclude far too many photographers.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Garry Edwards said:
We don't know that, and I don't know exactly what she said, but based on the report that she said "Deborah actually said she prefers paying her local photographer at "very reasonable rates" than the type of 'solution' she was presented with." I'm guessing -perhaps wrongly - that she's using a local photographer who charges "very reasonable rates". Obviously a specialist product photographer could be local, and it's also possible that she considers high-end rates to be reasonable - and if she does then I applaud that - but it may be more likely that it's just a local photographer who specialises in everything...
Click to expand...
We do know that, she said it. I saw it. She prefers using photographers. From her locality. She said that with her mouth. It's not a point for debate, that's just what she said.

Perhaps you should watch it, especially for its full context. It is what the thread is about after all :)
 
Last edited:
In house studios are in fact now becoming extremely common
Click to expand...

However how many are staffed by a full time fully trained and experienced professional Photographer?
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
However how many are staffed by a full time fully trained and experienced professional Photographer?
Click to expand...
Fair point, which reminds me...

A few years ago, a well-known supermarket chain was taken over by a larger one. They had their own in-house photography studio which, I'm guessing, was staffed by real photographers.

All their equipment was moved to the new owners and I was asked to train them to use it, they booked a whole day of training, which was just enough to sort out the equipment - which included high end Mac computers, medium format camera with digital back and everything needed in terms of lighting. They wouldn't pay for any additional training and ended up asking me to do their product photography, which I did for a while but as their 28 day payment terms actually meant over 200 days I left them to find another solution :)
 
Last edited:
Garry Edwards said:
Fair point, which reminds me...

A few years ago, a well-known supermarket chain was taken over by a larger one. They had their own in-house photography studio which, I'm guessing, was staffed by real photographers.

All their equipment was moved to the new owners and I was asked to train them to use it, they booked a whole day of training, which was just enough to sort out the equipment - which included high end Mac computers, medium format camera with digital back and everything needed in terms of lighting. They wouldn't pay for any additional training and ended up asking me to do their product photography, which I did for a while but as their 28 day payment terms actually meant over 200 days I left them to find another solution :)
Click to expand...
Surely not - a supermarket stalling on paying one of their suppliers? If any of them were up to that kind of business it would be reported in the news! [emoji1]
 
TheBigYin said:
well, they're all at it, but in this case I'd guess it was Safeway/Morrisons rather than Tesco ;)
Click to expand...
Yup, unless we're going old school and getting into Presto Gateway, William Lowe etc! But agreed, they're probably all at it. I know in my industry, companies we work for drag their heels about paying up for stuff or invoke contract small print to say we missed our chance to get paid for work :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top