The best examples i'm always shown for branding seem to be cheap beer manufacturers, sugar water (soda) companies, junk food companies, US carmakers (currently on welfare), and computer companies with single digit marketshare, it also seems very effective for selling expensive things that people don't technically need (mcmansions in Nevada). In other words, it sells things with little content or actual value. Which seems to be the opposite of what a Wedding Photographer is doing.
Meanwhile Google is poised to take over multiple industries by delivering pure content with barely any branding, taking us back to the purity of the modern age.
Serious question:
Outside of making sure your photography is presented well, and obviously making sure people remember your name. How much should a photographer really be focused on branding?
More importantly, doesn't your photography technically brand itself
Just thinking out loud here... Your average art gallery is all white, and quiet, whereas a lot of blogs/websites come off more like supermarket tabloids...
I guess I'm kinda wondering about overbranding. So yeah... What's the deal with overbranding?
I went to an very interesting workshop that talked about this same topic. The premis behind the workshop is that YOU are your brand, as you are wanting your clients to trust, recognize and promote YOUR work. Over branding in this case was doing to many things and not keeping it simple. For example photogs who also say they can be the DJ, bake the cake lol. But real branding if you keep your focus on making your company, style and YOU immediately recognizable and memorable your probably along the right track... I would say your photos DO differentiate your work but each photo can be different, having your brand or you watermark present will help for someone to know it is yours EVERYTIME.
The other thing I found interesting is that certain colors, type fonts, photos with people facing the camera, photos with peoples backs to the camera, photos of objects etc... They all can effect the way a person FEELS about your work. So much psychology goes into all of that simple branding you mentioned... (coke, McD's etc...)
I think you are making a cardinal mistake in the way you think about branding. Regardless of what anyone tells you branding is NOT a logo or the visual trappings on a website or packaging. Those things will end up representing the brand over time, but they are not the brand itself by a
long shot.
A brand is a value statement about what buying, owning and using a given product means about a person's life.
Think about that hard for a few minutes. ANY photographer that is making more than market rate for what they do ( typically more than $1000-2500 depending on the area ) is using branding to get there. Your images do NOT ( NOT, NOT, NOT !!!!! ) brand themselves at all. Your images mean what you tell people they mean. And if they don't mean anything beyond the paper they are printed on they are a commodity and worth whatever the lowest bidder will offer.
Branding isn't just for beer, soda and cars. Google has a very strong brand whether you see it or not. Apple has a spectacular brand. Think about this - Apple does not sell computers - they sell a solution to my busy, hectic life that suits my aesthetic sensibilities. They have me convinced that my product won't get a virus, or an incompatibility that will slow me down. They have me convinced that my time is valuable and therefore I need my inofrmation fast and I need every little thing in my house to seemlessly work together. They have me convinced that my computer and phone represent me to the world and that they need to be stylish and desirable because of it.
Apple doesn't sell me products, they reaffirm something that I believe about myself. In doing that they make me happy to pay way more for a phone or laptop bcause it is the perfect and only phone or laptop that might suit me. Branding helps to tell the perfect client who they are so that they can find you. It is NOT just marketing. It is tying a fundamental belief system into the ownership of a product.
You can go ahead and dismiss the concept if you want. But to make a short story long and answer your fundamental question branding is th single most important factor in operating a profitable business. Again, you can ignore it if you like, and you can discount my thoughts if you wish. But (!) I would happily put my averages up there against anyone else's and I have been named to PPA's list of Top Performing Studios ( the only scientifically based gauge of financial performance this industry has to offer ) every year that I have been in business. In 2009's recession I posted my best year ever and my 2010 is already overbooked with weddings. Within 6 months of picking up a camera for the first time I have been making mine and my wife's full time living through photography. I'm only saying those things to drive home this point - without effective branding I wouldn't have accomplished any of it. The right people know who I am, where to find me, and are willing to pay my rates because I have built the brand that communicates my value. Those peopl are seeking me out ( because I don't spend a nickel on advertising ) becuase of th power of my brand.
But please, ignore branding. Assume that your images will magically sell themselves . Makes my job so much easier.
TRReichman wrote:
I think you are making a cardinal mistake in the way you think about branding. Regardless of what anyone tells you branding is NOT a logo or the visual trappings on a website or packaging. Those things will end up representing the brand over time, but they are not the brand itself by a
long shot.
A brand is a value statement about what buying, owning and using a given product means about a person's life.
Think about that hard for a few minutes. ANY photographer that is making more than market rate for what they do ( typically more than $1000-2500 depending on the area ) is using branding to get there. Your images do NOT ( NOT, NOT, NOT !!!!! ) brand themselves at all. Your images mean what you tell people they mean. And if they don't mean anything beyond the paper they are printed on they are a commodity and worth whatever the lowest bidder will offer.
Branding isn't just for beer, soda and cars. Google has a very strong brand whether you see it or not. Apple has a spectacular brand. Think about this - Apple does not sell computers - they sell a solution to my busy, hectic life that suits my aesthetic sensibilities. They have me convinced that my product won't get a virus, or an incompatibility that will slow me down. They have me convinced that my time is valuable and therefore I need my inofrmation fast and I need every little thing in my house to seemlessly work together. They have me convinced that my computer and phone represent me to the world and that they need to be stylish and desirable because of it.
Apple doesn't sell me products, they reaffirm something that I believe about myself. In doing that they make me happy to pay way more for a phone or laptop bcause it is the perfect and only phone or laptop that might suit me. Branding helps to tell the perfect client who they are so that they can find you. It is NOT just marketing. It is tying a fundamental belief system into the ownership of a product.
You can go ahead and dismiss the concept if you want. But to make a short story long and answer your fundamental question branding is th single most important factor in operating a profitable business. Again, you can ignore it if you like, and you can discount my thoughts if you wish. But (!) I would happily put my averages up there against anyone else's and I have been named to PPA's list of Top Performing Studios ( the only scientifically based gauge of financial performance this industry has to offer ) every year that I have been in business. In 2009's recession I posted my best year ever and my 2010 is already overbooked with weddings. Within 6 months of picking up a camera for the first time I have been making mine and my wife's full time living through photography. I'm only saying those things to drive home this point - without effective branding I wouldn't have accomplished any of it. The right people know who I am, where to find me, and are willing to pay my rates because I have built the brand that communicates my value. Those peopl are seeking me out ( because I don't spend a nickel on advertising ) becuase of th power of my brand.
But please, ignore branding. Assume that your images will magically sell themselves . Makes my job so much easier.
I dont understand how you can say all that, particularly with your thoughts on Google, and say that your images do not brand you at all. That makes ZERO sense, seems like a dated ideal and seems to contradict your OWN brand. Your picture are at least of the professional level, I actually like a lot of your work. But I know guys who make ridiculous amounts and their work is awful, people need to stop using these socially irresponsible examples as their models and instead use them as a reason to move on from that dark spot . I TRULY believe that in the new economy it's unsustainable.
I hate to say it, but that line literally cements my feelings. What sucks is that what you said applies to me as well... currently, the only difference is that I HATE IT. I want to just become a better photographer, I can make a healthy living in about 5 other industries, so I dont really give a crap about numbers, though I respect what you've done as a business.
I still love you though, and you're the go to guy for business advice.
i pretty much agree. there is a ton of talk about branding/sample albums/biz cards/consultation techniques, when in reality, that means very little to the customer. its something that they will associate with you, but not remember you by. i have booked every single couple ive met with for 2010. and it has nothing to do with my consultation skills. as my style has been more refined and my portfolio has become more impressive, i could be anybody nice and they would hire me.
I guess this is where I bow out. I could go on for pages about the very clear and strong brand that Google has constructed and how it has directly contributed to their market leadership. They have clearly publicized their roots (founded by 2 hipster tech guys made good). They have established one of the greatest workplaces in the world and publicized that too. It makes us view them in a favorable way because of who they are and where they came from. To say that the austerity of their website is an indication that they have no brand is crazy. They separated themselves from portals like yahoo and aol by having an austere webpage but they reinforce the fun, accessible nature of their brand withthe way that they alter their (incredibly well know) logo for different holidays - people know and look forward to that. Ultimately the biggest branding effort came from positioning themselves through articles and public outreach that searching=googling. They made the connection in the public mind that their brand represnts the entirety of the industry they operate in. To say that they have no branding is just ignorant of the way that business works.
The other thig I was thinking is that Sergio is one of the prime and classic examples of branding wihin the photographic community. He satsifies every tenet of branding from having an origin story to devloping a recognizable look and a predictable public persona. The way people feel about him is not just based on his images, but also on the stories that he tells about himslef, the attitude that he takes in responding to his work, the controversy that he knowingly creates through his posts and the people who come to his defense. You can like his work, but the way you feel about him (at least on this forum) is influenced by so much more thanthe images.
I'm going to make an assumption. If I'm wrong, then i truly apolgize right now. I'll gladly apologize again later. I wod imagine that the OP is not as successful as he wants to be. What I don't get is why you would want to be dismissive of a fundamental business element that empirically successful businesses have been leveraging for years? Why dismiss it? Why not embrace it and use it and maximize it before you abandon the concept altogether? I have to say in the most positive and encouraging way that I can that you haven't researched or explored this concept nearly enough to dismiss it.
I wouldn't say that images don't matter either, nor do I think I have advocated social irresponsibility at any stage. What I have said is that the images donetcet it done alone. Plus, while I admire and ruthlessly advocate that people improve their craft, this unfortunately isn't that best foru
for exploring that concept which I am very sorry to say. I have tried personally to act in non emotional way and constructivly critique and have gotten called on the carpet for it and written off for favor of far less insightful commentary and decries that whatever magic exists in our beautiful, unique snowflake hearts makes it art and right in th world of photography or whatever. Just know that I am totally on board with you wanting to be a better photographer. BUT, if you hav decided to be a professional you have the responsibility to tackle all the aspct that entails, including business/marketing/branding. As a full time working pro I can tell you that only 10-15% of my time is spent on photography. That's not necessarily a bad thing.
Oh, and the fact that you called me the go to guy for business advice is a direct result of me having branded myself that way. Cheers
Sergio Mottola wrote:
i pretty much agree. there is a ton of talk about branding/sample albums/biz cards/consultation techniques, when in reality, that means very little to the customer. its something that they will associate with you, but not remember you by. i have booked every single couple ive met with for 2010. and it has nothing to do with my consultation skills. as my style has been more refined and my portfolio has become more impressive, i could be anybody nice and they would hire me.
its all about the photos...
+1
I don't know Sally Mann's brand or logo, but I know a Sally Mann photograph when I see it.
TRReichman wrote:
I guess this is where I bow out. I could go on for pages about the very clear and strong brand that Google has constructed and how it has directly contributed to their market leadership. They have clearly publicized their roots (founded by 2 hipster tech guys made good). They have established one of the greatest workplaces in the world and publicized that too. It makes us view them in a favorable way because of who they are and where they came from. To say that the austerity of their website is an indication that they have no brand is crazy. They separated themselves from portals like yahoo and aol by having an austere webpage but they reinforce the fun, accessible nature of their brand withthe way that they alter their (incredibly well know) logo for different holidays - people know and look forward to that. Ultimately the biggest branding effort came from positioning themselves through articles and public outreach that searching=googling. They made the connection in the public mind that their brand represnts the entirety of the industry they operate in. To say that they have no branding is just ignorant of the way that business works.
The other thig I was thinking is that Sergio is one of the prime and classic examples of branding wihin the photographic community. He satsifies every tenet of branding from having an origin story to devloping a recognizable look and a predictable public persona. The way people feel about him is not just based on his images, but also on the stories that he tells about himslef, the attitude that he takes in responding to his work, the controversy that he knowingly creates through his posts and the people who come to his defense. You can like his work, but the way you feel about him (at least on this forum) is influenced by so much more thanthe images.
I'm going to make an assumption. If I'm wrong, then i truly apolgize right now. I'll gladly apologize again later. I wod imagine that the OP is not as successful as he wants to be. What I don't get is why you would want to be dismissive of a fundamental business element that empirically successful businesses have been leveraging for years? Why dismiss it? Why not embrace it and use it and maximize it before you abandon the concept altogether? I have to say in the most positive and encouraging way that I can that you haven't researched or explored this concept nearly enough to dismiss it.
I wouldn't say that images don't matter either, nor do I think I have advocated social irresponsibility at any stage. What I have said is that the images donetcet it done alone. Plus, while I admire and ruthlessly advocate that people improve their craft, this unfortunately isn't that best foru
for exploring that concept which I am very sorry to say. I have tried personally to act in non emotional way and constructivly critique and have gotten called on the carpet for it and written off for favor of far less insightful commentary and decries that whatever magic exists in our beautiful, unique snowflake hearts makes it art and right in th world of photography or whatever. Just know that I am totally on board with you wanting to be a better photographer. BUT, if you hav decided to be a professional you have the responsibility to tackle all the aspct that entails, including business/marketing/branding. As a full time working pro I can tell you that only 10-15% of my time is spent on photography. That's not necessarily a bad thing.
Oh, and the fact that you called me the go to guy for business advice is a direct result of me having branded myself that way. Cheers
pretty well said, although i think its wrong to apply the term branding unequivocally to a photography portfolio and a search engine. and what i also am trying to say, is google could have a totally different logo and it wouldnt matter. they got where they are from what they actually did, not what they tried to make themselves look like.
Hey, just wanted to apologize off topic for any typos or other errors. I'm writing from my iPhone and it's tough to edit. I'm writing on my iphone because I'm out of town shooting a destination engagement in Phoenix. There are probably a ton ofgreat photographers here in AZ - did they fly me out here because of my images or my brand?
I do agree it is about photos but I can tell you that the image you present with everything a couple comes into contact with is huge. We go big on our bridal show booths, print our contracts on premium linen paper, take extra time to make sure all of our packaging is custom and looks expensive! People leave after our meetings feeling not only a certain way about our work but also about us as a company.
Think about if Sam Hassas (whose photos are amazing and stand on their own for sure) marketed himself using a flickr page, a craigsist ad, a black and white copy paper flyer and wrote his contact info down on post it notes for clients, then told them his packages start at 3k.... might make people a little but uneasy.
google is seriously the best at what they do, which is help people find things, and help people sell things. they didnt do this for branding purposes, their algorithms were literally created to be the best way to search for things, in a simple and clear cut manner. it helped establish a very simple brand and they haven't swayed from it or introduce stupid gimmicks. they're service is delivering content on demand, our service is delivering good photos. if they sucked at what they did, we eventually wouldn't use it. (see: US automakers)
what youre saying seems contradictory.
establishing your brand through your products and services (which you're arguing doesnt happen since photos have NOTHING to do with brand) is only logical, if we're not referring to the branding you said not to refer to (logos and design aesthetics).
Trr, you're trivializing products and services by literally turning them ALL into marketing ploys.
Also i'm doing absolutely fine with my business, and have experienced tremendous growth by using my photos as the brand, maybe it won't work forever, but i encourage you to stop thinking there is an impure motive behind EVERYTHING. I could call you an empty money shooter based off this thread, but that would be stupid, im not a sheep who takes everything at face value and walks whichever way i'm not getting beat with a stick. So i would appreciate if you didn't "BRAND" me in some way. Having a strong opinion on something, whether it's the status quo or not, indicates strength and independence, not weakness or projection. (see: a history book)
And no, you didnt freaking market yourself as a good business man in this forum. YOU ARE A GOOD BUSINESS MAN IN THIS FORUM.
Sergio Mottola wrote:
pretty well said, although i think its wrong to apply the term branding unequivocally to a photography portfolio and a search engine. and what i also am trying to say, is google could have a totally different logo and it wouldnt matter. they got where they are from what they actually did, not what they tried to make themselves look like.
I feel it's necessary to point out that a brand is NOT a logo. A brand is what people believe about a company. It's too easy to decry branding becaus some people with crappy work make lots of money. What about the far more prevalent occurance of great photogrpahers not making a living. Why isn't there stupid awesome work makig them enough?
Ever look into how much money and how many people google employs to do brand management? I'm sure all those jobs and all those millions spent are just a joke, right?
I agree 100% with TRReichman and several others in this thread. Good branding is what takes photographers to the next level. I think what most people need to understand that branding is more than just a logo and is definitely not gimmicky at all! Google's simple design of their now very recognizable logo is very much a part of their branding and the image they present to clients.
Brands as a whole sets you apart from the many competitors. Sure we'd all like our images to set us apart BUT successful branding allows us to connect with our customers, build trust, and belief in superiority. There are many components to branding that are not just logo. Some have been touched upon in this thread but here are some more:
Ways to increase awareness and build customer loyalty (all part of branding):
- Blogs
- Social Media
- Advertising
- Websites
- Word of Mouth
- Telephone
- Networking
- Presentations
- Products
- Services
- Advertising
- etc..
As a photographer I have way more books on branding and marketing than on photography in general. It's just that much more important in what we do. I just wish I had more time to spend on branding and reading those books.
. Makes my job so much easier.