White Backgrounds & Exposure.

[EdinburghGary]

Sooooooooo......

I am almost at the 4 month mark since opening the shop. I think I have shot over 200 individuals on white backdrops, and have learned to love it, and learned to REALLY hate it too.

Rather than rant, rave and pick holes, I'm just going to come out with it. Is the white background really a black hole for creativity? Does it suck the imagination out of your photography, and does it lead you to be lazy and shoot to formula?

Lastly, and this is really my biggest & most important question...one which I am asking myself as well. Have you given up on getting a perfect light setup, and accepted second rate results? I expect NO ONE will admit this.

However
I have been watching lots of web sites, lots of images on flickr, looking in magazines, looking at competitors work, and in my opinion, there is an absolute and wide disregard for correct lighting, based on what I have learned since opening. I see lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and of shots with what I can only describe as bland middle exposed skin tones on blinding bright backdrops, with no real shape to the faces, no shadows to speak of, and a catch light the size of a pin prick.

Maybe I am completely deluded, and what I am witnessing IS good studio work, but if that's the case, then I dunno what I have been doing the last 4 months with my constant tweaking and playing with lights.

Now, my big fat ugly disclaimer.
- I DON'T have ANY formal studio training.
- What I like may be 100% wrong, and technically poor
- I am not going to enter into a "Let's judge one anothers work" argument, and if one starts, I will ask the mods to kindly intervene and close the thread

It's an open ended ambiguous thread, with no real targets other than the general standard of white BG studio work.

And can I just take this oppertunity to give a shout out to Carl Davis. Of all the peoples work I have been following both here and elsewhere, his always delivers for me, and he has become a major source of inspiration - although I doubt he knows it . Serious talent IMO.

Gary.

 

[Diego Garcia]

Simple answer for me, but the customers/non photographers love it?

 

[EdinburghGary]

Simple answer for me, but the customers/non photographers love it?

But that's taking the question one step too far. The customers probably can't see a bad one from a good one. SO taking it up a level into our playing field, is there a general laziness and technical incompetence?

Gary.

 

[Diego Garcia]

But that's taking the question one step too far. The customers probably can't see a bad one from a good one. SO taking it up a level into our playing field, is there a general laziness and technical incompetence?

Gary.

Maybe, but would say, you cant reinvent the wheel, just add your slant to it. The white backdrop has been in effect since what, 1950's, perhaps before. For me, John French started it all off. I really don't know the answer, but perhaps in portrait terms, the stark clean feel of the said backdrop allows the subject to pop.

Is it lazy? Maybe, but if it sells than I can see why people would be loath to change it....

 

[EdinburghGary]

Maybe, but would say, you cant reinvent the wheel, just add your slant to it. The white backdrop has been in effect since what, 1950's, perhaps before. For me, John French started it all off. I really don't know the answer, but perhaps in portrait terms, the stark clean feel of the said backdrop allows the subject to pop.

Is it lazy? Maybe, but if it sells than I can see why people would be loath to change it....

I'm not dissing the background, more the light on the subject. I love what I perceive to be a good white BG portrait. It's the middle exposed, no catchlight, almost "Invisible Key Light" I'm describing...imagine shooting with no keylight and letting the backdrop over expose to a level which adds enough to EXPOSE your subject...the trouble is, ugly flat light.

G.

 

[Marcus Geezer]

I like this concept of this thread Gary as I feel it will make people stop and think about what they are doing (hopefully).

I've only owned multiple speedlights since this January and have only had a white/black reversible background for about 4 weeks and already I feel that the black side allows more creativity than the white. Why? You seem to spend more time thinkng about isolating the subject from the background and you end up invariably 'sculpting' the subject with the lights.

I've challenged myself to do more with the white following a very polite C&C and PM from yourself, but gona try and think about that one!

 

[EdinburghGary]

I like this concept of this thread Gary as I feel it will make people stop and think about what they are doing (hopefully).

I've only owned multiple speedlights since this January and have only had a white/black reversible background for about 4 weeks and already I feel that the black side allows more creativity than the white. Why? You seem to spend more time thinkng about isolating the subject from the background and you end up invariably 'sculpting' the subject with the lights.

I've challenged myself to do more with the white following a very polite C&C and PM from yourself, but gona try and think about that one!

I'm with you mate. I been turning my backdrop lights off loads recently, opting for gray, and I shoot side on for black too. Definitely preferable.

 

[EdinburghGary]

I like this concept of this thread Gary as I feel it will make people stop and think about what they are doing (hopefully).

I've only owned multiple speedlights since this January and have only had a white/black reversible background for about 4 weeks and already I feel that the black side allows more creativity than the white. Why? You seem to spend more time thinkng about isolating the subject from the background and you end up invariably 'sculpting' the subject with the lights.

I've challenged myself to do more with the white following a very polite C&C and PM from yourself, but gona try and think about that one!

.

 

[ShawWellPete]

I feel for you mate. I have a little speedlight home studio setup at home and even taking the odd pictures of my kids and their friends I have got a bored of white backgrounds. I much prefer taking the lights into the garden and having a nice sunset sky as the background. That, however, would be a bit limiting commercially.

For what it's worth, the parents of my kids' friends all love white background stuff but they are far more impressed by something more unusual.

I would try to push your creativity, get some safe white background stuff in the bag and then get the gels or different backgrounds out and break away!

 

[Tyke Tiler]

Sooooooooo......

Is the white background really a black hole for creativity? Does it suck the imagination out of your photography, and does it lead you to be lazy and shoot to formula?

Good question mate and one that I have pondered a fair few times too.
My answer, after many chewings and musings, is no. It doesn't suck all the creativity or the imagination out of the photography element for me but it is kind of a last resort rather than a first choice. As a lighting/location approach, it is on the more simplistic side and I suppose that's the point. There's definitely an art to it, or rather, an art to making it look complimentary to the model/subject.

There is still imagination and creativity needed when shooting a plain BG, playing with shadow placement and the direction of the key light is still amongst the primary challenges.

If plain BG's, whether white or otherwise, are a requirement from the client or if nothing better suits the concept or theme of the portrait, that's the only time I'll shoot them.

The kind of shoots I love the most are on location portraits, shooting environmental portraits is precisely my calling but the principles of lighting the subject creatively are arguably identical with plain BG's, with the exception of lighting individual elements of the environment perhaps.

Lastly, and this is really my biggest & most important question...one which I am asking myself as well. Have you given up on getting a perfect light setup, and accepted second rate results? I expect NO ONE will admit this.

I always try to get the best lighting for a shot, or at least manifest what's in my noggin but I don't always land smack dab on the bullseye. It could be me being a big flop (lack of experience, hang over, vegging out) or a limitation (time, budget, subject experience etc).

Even if the client is over the moon, I'll walk away from a shoot disappointed and unhappy if I failed to achieve what I envisaged. The 'clients happy so I'm happy' isn't good enough for me, fair play to those who differ though.

I see lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and of shots with what I can only describe as bland middle exposed skin tones on blinding bright backdrops, with no real shape to the faces, no shadows to speak of, and a catch light the size of a pin prick.

The really dazzling white BG's, bland tones and 'peachy' tint white balance errors are exactly the thing that put me off and still fuels my dislike for white BG's. But they still hold a very firm place in the world of portraiture, just look at it as an optional conveyance rather than a formula

I have grown to like plain BG's on varying levels though but it's always a last choice if I have 100% control.
If I 100% need to shoot a plain BG, it will never be a blown out one unless it's product.
I'll add gradation in the light on the BG, maybe add a slice of a pastel colour gel or off white as opposed to a close encounter of the third kind and use extremely soft fill, sometimes barely notable fill at all.
I'll spend more time on shadow placement or rather shadow placement is much more obvious so it spends more time on me.
Rims and kickers can add much more punch and dynamics depending on the desired mood of course.

There's plenty o stuff to shake it up and break away from the grind. Just stay away from the tied dye stuff... :razz: and definitely make the time to shoot more of the stuff you were doing with yer pal (the unhappy customer), those kinda things really help add spice to the bread and butter stuff that we can't do without

 

[Wobbler]

I love a good white bg shot - good meaning decent skin tones, nice composition, a bit of 'pop' to the image, not loads of white just for the sake of having it in there...and the good thing about the white is that it doesn't interfere with the image, doesn't define the image...that's when it's done nicely. It also sells, which is reason enough to shoot it.

However, like any nice style, it gets copied, so it's been done to death...and some people do it really really badly, a bad white bg shot is cringeworthy.

I like to vary my bg's in a shoot - I'll turn off the bg lights on a white bg and get a lovely rich gray, looks amazing on individuals. I'll always do some dark bg shots too, to give a completely different feel. I also have a crumbling old brick wall in the studio, which is a simply fantastic backdrop (it was a key thing when I was picking this location - a backdrop is a backdrop, can can be put up just about anywhere...but you want more sets to to choose from, open up some possibilities for shooting something a little different from every other tog out there...)

As a result, when a client views, the shots are varied...I think it does alot for my order value.

 

[alpina]

The News of the World supplement was full of high key stuff yesterday and to an extent last week. I cut out the images for my reference scrapbook and I did think some of the images were poorly done and was surprised they made it into the mag.

I am inspired by the high key work of Rankin and Perou at the moment and I guess like anything else in life I will move on onto something else eventually.

From my limited technical experience I find it quite challenging and interesting and very creative.

 

[awp]

I've never been a big fan of white backgrounds - and I don't do the volume of portraits Gary does - but recently I've much preferred using the vast outdoors - nice soft blurry backgrounds in muted tones to compliment the subject. I like that much better.

 

[Wobbler]

I've never been a big fan of white backgrounds - and I don't do the volume of portraits Gary does - but recently I've much preferred using the vast outdoors - nice soft blurry backgrounds in muted tones to compliment the subject. I like that much better.

...but it's so cold....and you can't make a cuppa when you want...or go to the loo...

 

[Denyerec]

Which lens do you use against the white BG Gary?

 

[DiddyDave]

I think you're getting confused EG

Lighting of the subject MATTERS MOST on any shot, White, Black, Colour, mottled etc backgrounds are irrelevant to lighting the subject and should be treated as a separate issue. If you can't do that right then any overall shot is at best a compromise

Venture et al use an incredibly flat lighting then PP it to death to create Art, nothing wrong with that, but it's not the same as Portraiture in the more traditional sense

So yes, get the key & any fill/hair lighting right and then you can offer your clients a White, Grey, Black, any colour, gradient, whatever background too

And soz mate - but there's no way to shoot tens, hundreds and eventually thousands of people and not be shooting to a 'formula' - which eventually makes it boring (as your boredom threshold is measured in minutes it's probably already boring to you )

You're in the business of churning images for profit, not the highest of fine art portraits, you simply need to find your formulas and sell them in huge amounts - if that kills your love & artistic temperament for it, then hire someone who's good with people and doesn't give a toss about the techie side or the artistic zenith. Venture do NOT hire talented photographers as they will get bored and leave, you need nice peeps that work without thought - day-in, day-out

And this is one of the factors that lead me to close my studio this year

DD

 

[mrtoad]

muted side lighting causing shading could be a way of 'breaking it up' and i think was used in portraiture of film and stage people

or a muted grey...

 

[photon]

http://www.chimeralighting.com/dspProduct.asp?productid=33

 

[Flash In The Pan]

But that's taking the question one step too far. The customers probably can't see a bad one from a good one. SO taking it up a level into our playing field, is there a general laziness and technical incompetence?

Gary.

It ultimately doesn't matter what you want, it's the customers who pay the bills and 9 times out of 10 all they want is a "nice" pic of ma, pa and the weans, at a price that won't bankrupt them....

 

[Byker28i]

You say white backgrounds now, but we had all our old photo's out over the weekend to sort them out (and see which ones the mice have nibbled).

We have about ten years of our childhood school photo's all taken against blue cloudy backgrounds, myself and my wife.

The kids school photo's all seem to be taken against similar backgrounds, never mind about some Olan Mills ones we had done.

Some things look good against white, other stuff against black. Quite like it though because it's clean, makes the items/people stand out...

 

[Dman]

Lastly, and this is really my biggest & most important question...one which I am asking myself as well. Have you given up on getting a perfect light setup, and accepted second rate results? I expect NO ONE will admit this.
Gary.

I have the white/black reversible background from Photodeals and just three flash heads. I've pretty much given up on getting it perfect, it's a lot harder when lighting the white from the front as opposed to the inside such as a Hilite.

However, I don't just accept second rate results, I just accept that I'm not going to get the perfect white background but still can get good results from a bit more PP. I understand that isn't easy for someone like you who does this on a full time basis, but so far it works for me.

Oh, and for what it's worth, I absolutely hate it. Shooting on a white background bores the life out of me, but it sells and it sells well. I prefer the black but give me outdoors shoots any day of the week.

 

[EdinburghGary]

I feel for you mate. I have a little speedlight home studio setup at home and even taking the odd pictures of my kids and their friends I have got a bored of white backgrounds. I much prefer taking the lights into the garden and having a nice sunset sky as the background. That, however, would be a bit limiting commercially.

For what it's worth, the parents of my kids' friends all love white background stuff but they are far more impressed by something more unusual.

I would try to push your creativity, get some safe white background stuff in the bag and then get the gels or different backgrounds out and break away!

I'd say I am now shooting 70% white BG, 15% gray, 15% black. All in the same shoot too, I make sure I vary it. I tend to use the gray and black for head shots more.

and some people do it really really badly, a bad white bg shot is cringeworthy.

I like to vary my bg's in a shoot - I'll turn off the bg lights on a white bg and get a lovely rich gray, looks amazing on individuals. I'll always do some dark bg shots too, to give a completely different feel. I also have a crumbling old brick wall in the studio, which is a simply fantastic backdrop (it was a key thing when I was picking this location - a backdrop is a backdrop, can can be put up just about anywhere...but you want more sets to to choose from, open up some possibilities for shooting something a little different from every other tog out there...)

As a result, when a client views, the shots are varied...I think it does alot for my order value.

The brick wall sounds awesome. Any examples of it mate?

The News of the World supplement was full of high key stuff yesterday and to an extent last week. I cut out the images for my reference scrapbook and I did think some of the images were poorly done and was surprised they made it into the mag.

I am inspired by the high key work of Rankin and Perou at the moment and I guess like anything else in life I will move on onto something else eventually.

From my limited technical experience I find it quite challenging and interesting and very creative.

Rankin has some amazingly inspirational headshots. Lovely work.

I've never been a big fan of white backgrounds - and I don't do the volume of portraits Gary does - but recently I've much preferred using the vast outdoors - nice soft blurry backgrounds in muted tones to compliment the subject. I like that much better.

I like location stuff, looks good. No one asks for it.....

Which lens do you use against the white BG Gary?

I'm shooting using my 70 to 200 f2.8 to force me to stop throwing white pixels away...if I loose the white BG, I switch to the 85mm f1.4.

I think you're getting confused EG

Lighting of the subject MATTERS MOST on any shot, White, Black, Colour, mottled etc backgrounds are irrelevant to lighting the subject and should be treated as a separate issue. If you can't do that right then any overall shot is at best a compromise

Venture et al use an incredibly flat lighting then PP it to death to create Art, nothing wrong with that, but it's not the same as Portraiture in the more traditional sense

So yes, get the key & any fill/hair lighting right and then you can offer your clients a White, Grey, Black, any colour, gradient, whatever background too

And soz mate - but there's no way to shoot tens, hundreds and eventually thousands of people and not be shooting to a 'formula' - which eventually makes it boring (as your boredom threshold is measured in minutes it's probably already boring to you )

You're in the business of churning images for profit, not the highest of fine art portraits, you simply need to find your formulas and sell them in huge amounts - if that kills your love & artistic temperament for it, then hire someone who's good with people and doesn't give a toss about the techie side or the artistic zenith. Venture do NOT hire talented photographers as they will get bored and leave, you need nice peeps that work without thought - day-in, day-out

And this is one of the factors that lead me to close my studio this year

DD

That's my point, no confusion. Your say "Lighting of the subject MATTERS MOST on any shot", and I 100% agree with you. In my opening post, I was asking how many people appreciate this, and how many ignore it to ensure that white BG....A lot of the examples you see often seem to have the BG lights doing two jobs....lighting that back wall up, and then flatly exposing the subject. It's gross.

muted side lighting causing shading could be a way of 'breaking it up' and i think was used in portraiture of film and stage people

or a muted grey...

Two key lights let's you do the shadows on one side, I installed a second last week and ramp it down now for white BG work - it's a cool mix.

http://www.chimeralighting.com/dspProduct.asp?productid=33

It ultimately doesn't matter what you want, it's the customers who pay the bills and 9 times out of 10 all they want is a "nice" pic of ma, pa and the weans, at a price that won't bankrupt them....

Deffo. I find though you can gently persuade or influence a little before the shoot. None have asked for on black yet, I always do a few headshots though, and on gray and they go down very well.

You say white backgrounds now, but we had all our old photo's out over the weekend to sort them out (and see which ones the mice have nibbled).

We have about ten years of our childhood school photo's all taken against blue cloudy backgrounds, myself and my wife.

The kids school photo's all seem to be taken against similar backgrounds, never mind about some Olan Mills ones we had done.

Some things look good against white, other stuff against black. Quite like it though because it's clean, makes the items/people stand out...

Cloudy blue I have the backdrop in the shop, a client wanted a photo replicated - with his wee boy!! It's almost a copy of his own nursery photo from 30 years ago, It's a terrible backdrop.

I have the white/black reversible background from Photodeals and just three flash heads. I've pretty much given up on getting it perfect, it's a lot harder when lighting the white from the front as opposed to the inside such as a Hilite.

However, I don't just accept second rate results, I just accept that I'm not going to get the perfect white background but still can get good results from a bit more PP. I understand that isn't easy for someone like you who does this on a full time basis, but so far it works for me.

Oh, and for what it's worth, I absolutely hate it. Shooting on a white background bores the life out of me, but it sells and it sells well. I prefer the black but give me outdoors shoots any day of the week.

I think you have probably hinted at the problem. It's VERY hard. Now, if other full time studios don't get it working, can you see them processing for hours and hours on end? I can't - and when you check various sites, you can see that problem.

Gary.

 

[EdinburghGary]

Good question mate and one that I have pondered a fair few times too.
My answer, after many chewings and musings, is no. It doesn't suck all the creativity or the imagination out of the photography element for me but it is kind of a last resort rather than a first choice. As a lighting/location approach, it is on the more simplistic side and I suppose that's the point. There's definitely an art to it, or rather, an art to making it look complimentary to the model/subject.

There is still imagination and creativity needed when shooting a plain BG, playing with shadow placement and the direction of the key light is still amongst the primary challenges.

If plain BG's, whether white or otherwise, are a requirement from the client or if nothing better suits the concept or theme of the portrait, that's the only time I'll shoot them.

The kind of shoots I love the most are on location portraits, shooting environmental portraits is precisely my calling but the principles of lighting the subject creatively are arguably identical with plain BG's, with the exception of lighting individual elements of the environment perhaps.



I always try to get the best lighting for a shot, or at least manifest what's in my noggin but I don't always land smack dab on the bullseye. It could be me being a big flop (lack of experience, hang over, vegging out) or a limitation (time, budget, subject experience etc).

Even if the client is over the moon, I'll walk away from a shoot disappointed and unhappy if I failed to achieve what I envisaged. The 'clients happy so I'm happy' isn't good enough for me, fair play to those who differ though.



The really dazzling white BG's, bland tones and 'peachy' tint white balance errors are exactly the thing that put me off and still fuels my dislike for white BG's. But they still hold a very firm place in the world of portraiture, just look at it as an optional conveyance rather than a formula

I have grown to like plain BG's on varying levels though but it's always a last choice if I have 100% control.
If I 100% need to shoot a plain BG, it will never be a blown out one unless it's product.
I'll add gradation in the light on the BG, maybe add a slice of a pastel colour gel or off white as opposed to a close encounter of the third kind and use extremely soft fill, sometimes barely notable fill at all.
I'll spend more time on shadow placement or rather shadow placement is much more obvious so it spends more time on me.
Rims and kickers can add much more punch and dynamics depending on the desired mood of course.

There's plenty o stuff to shake it up and break away from the grind. Just stay away from the tied dye stuff... :razz: and definitely make the time to shoot more of the stuff you were doing with yer pal (the unhappy customer), those kinda things really help add spice to the bread and butter stuff that we can't do without

Dude your advice is always top notch. When are you going to come to Edinburgh for a nice long tutorial session, I mean holiday?

 

[EdinburghGary]

And this is one of the factors that lead me to close my studio this year

Shut? Jesus! Sorry to hear that / or are you cool with it?

G.

 

[Dman]

I think you have probably hinted at the problem. It's VERY hard. Now, if other full time studios don't get it working, can you see them processing for hours and hours on end? I can't - and when you check various sites, you can see that problem.

Gary.

Indeed, but people still love it even when it's evident. It's amazing how differently the general public look at these things compared to those of us doing it. People are sucked in and become blind when it comes to pictures of their kids, they'll accept pretty much anything as long as the child looks good, even on an uneven background. As mine is part time I have the extra time to put in getting things right, but I don't spend any more than five minutes max cleaning it up. For you though, five minutes x the amount of shots you do = many hours not doing what you should be doing.

 

[DiddyDave]

Shut? Jesus! Sorry to hear that / or are you cool with it?

G.

All planned - and very happy with it

In fact, I should have done so a year ago at least. Income level is the same, I'm enjoying myself again every time I pick up the camera and I have more time to pursue other interests - including of course improving the Wedding business

Good times

If you don't sort your formulas out and get someone else in to shoot for you, you too will become bored to death with it and look for the next thing to shoot; but there's nothing wrong with formulas - it's how everyone works that shoots a LOT of the same sort of thing

DD

 

[Wobbler]

The brick wall sounds awesome. Any examples of it mate?

I'll post some shots tomorrow when I'm in the studio

 

[desantnik]

This has been an interesting thread - very similar to the one also running about someone's dissapointment with a sitting their wife had.

Just the same, its about putting your heart into individual works vs mass churned out relatively inexpensive bulk commercial shoots.

Crushing to an artiste? Almost certainly. Paying the bills? Maybe

Several of my very creative (in other forms of art) friends have suffered the same - the money making angle is rather stifling and the wonderful creative bit leaves you starving

 

[Rudesing]

Really interesting thread.

The loft is finally finished and I'm up there taking test shots today (will post some later). Having just spent out on a Hilite (maybe a year ago) and now a new set of 500w to replace my portaflash, I'd say that I haven't given up on the perfect lighting set up.... yet!

The Portaflash set was given me exactly the problems mentioned, no catchlights from most angles and bland lighting.

My problem with shooting kids is that I don't think I can get nice shadows unless I stick them on a stool and have no way to show their personality - which comes out better when they are given a bit of space to play. Then to catch the perfect expression facing the light is near impossible, with 'bland' lighting, it doesn't matter which way they are pointing.

But I'm new at this so what do I know!

Right back off to find GrantWestfield suppliers, reflective flooring here I come !

 

[..MD..]

Very intersting thread EG. I think i know what your saying and I am shooting alot more darker style shots myself at the moment as white studio style shots have made me try less harder imho. But as everyone says its still what people want and I know why this is.!!

Keep at it but try more of the coloured / mottled shots with snoots and grids for controled lighting to get more creative shots and keep your intrerest..


MD

 

[Jaffster]

Hi Gary,

Being 23 and having lots of Facebook friends around my age, I get to see plenty of the girls who've been for the "studio days" at local shops. It's always great to see huge copyright logo's printed over their profile pictures.

What I find interesting is that they don't seem to care on the quality of the work, how it's exposed or how the lighting looks. They just seem to care that they've been treated like a glamour icon for an hour and have 'professional' pictures to show for it. None of them are models.

For example, one particular friend had a shoot done (I won't bring names into it) and the first thing I noticed was the dust spots, there was many of them. They moved with the camera from landscape to portrait, I couldn't believe it. Then, on closer inspection I started to spot corners of lights in the top right/left corner, on one half of the backdrop is missing and they didn't bother to crop! Regardless, she was a happy customer.

I don't have a clue were to begin when it comes to Lighting, but I know what pleases my eye and I must say that looking through some of your images in your Facebook group, you're definately up there. Especially while we're driving 250 miles for a weekend away and an hour in your studio

 

[HoppyUK]

"Familiarity breeds contempt." It wouldn't matter what you were shooting or lighting, if you do it every day then you'll get fed up with it. And every professional has a working formula; put another way, you could call it efficiency - it gets the work done, churns money.

I would also say that portraiture is not supposed to be about lighting. It's about the subject. And since you don't know your subject's personality, you have to take their word for it when they say they like a particular image, shot in a certain style. It might well be on a white background, which they see as contemporary and fashionable. It's a novelty to them.

So many professions are littered with talented amateurs who turned their hobby into a living, and then quickly got bored to death with their work, and lost a personal passion in the process. It's sad and very difficult to work around.

Variety is the spice of life. How about you set aside some private time each week, to shoot some interesting local people of your choosing, to shoot in your style. I think I mentioned this a few months ago, with a view to a feature in the local paper, an exhibition or whatever. Call it marketing. Could be real fun.

And maybe get someone else in to do some of the churning. If you've got a formula, it should be easy enough to replicate, while you busy yourself building the empire Keep all the plum jobs of course - maybe like that 90th birthday was it? With three generations of children.

That kind of cool stuff will help to keep you sane. But don't go blaming the white background. That really is mad.

 

[artona]

Don't over complicate things Gary. 95% of your customers will buy what you decide they want. I don't bother with proofs or slide shows, I pre print and they sell, 100% of the time.

I use a black background when I want and a white one when I want, I am the pro not the customer (well some are but thats a different story)

As for lighting, although I have 6 monogold heads, 2 Bowens esprits and 2 elincroms I use one light, thats just one light. After all how many suns did you have when you were shooting landscapes. Try it for a month and see how you get on. I mean try it with customers not mampy-panzy test shoots

stew

 

[Flash In The Pan]

Being 23 and having lots of Facebook friends around my age, I get to see plenty of the girls who've been for the "studio days" at local shops. It's always great to see huge copyright logo's printed over their profile pictures.

Which would suggest there might be an opening for someone doing quick "n" nasty £15 Facebook profile pics...

 

[Wobbler]

EG - a few wall shots...















I've put a little album up with a couple more...

 

[EdinburghGary]

Very gritty - awesome to have that available!!

 

[awp]

Fantastic - loads of character and obviously very versatile.

 

[POAH]

The studio I use has a brick wall which I quite like


NSFW http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3441/3393041385_51abb5db2a.jpg

 

[who?]

You're in the business of churning images for profit, not the highest of fine art portraits, you simply need to find your formulas and sell them in huge amounts - if that kills your love & artistic temperament for it, then hire someone who's good with people and doesn't give a toss about the techie side or the artistic zenith.

Venture do NOT hire talented photographers as they will get bored and leave, you need nice peeps that work without thought - day-in, day-out

And this is one of the factors that lead me to close my studio this year

DD

I think that DD has given the answer (excuse my emphasis). Hoppy also makes some good points, as usual.

The vast majority of businesses in any field are there first and foremost to earn money. When you find a business which actually has a 'passion for excellence' (almost certainly TM / (c) some management guru) or even just a passion for the business area then you are lucky. For most it becomes the minimum effort for the maximum return.

I may be being unfair but I suspect that many of the franchise places are there not because they are passionate about photography or art but because of the returns. It isn't so much the choice between venture or inspire or whatever, but between venture and MacD and snap-on. A ready made business and possible return.

It is the case that most customers don't care either (I do wonder if the style is to some extent validated by the price). In all too many cases this results in :

The mediocre selling to the uninterested.



//tetchy whinging egg-sucking lesson mode off*





* well, maybe turned down a smidge

 

[desantnik]

The mediocre selling to the uninterested.

Isn't that true about nearly all business these days?

I mean think about the level of expertise in the sale of, quite frankly, technical items. Of course thats because the retailers have learnt that by and large the customer doesn't care (they just want it cheap), so why should they hire an expensive expert to do the job when any old person off the street will do.

Electrical retailers, DIY retailers, CAMERA GEAR retailers etc etc are all the same - unless you find the (still) enthusiastic new/saturday boy or girl who the numbing tediom hasn't yet crushed the spark out of.