p.1 #1 · Difference between commercial and retail photography
Was watching a Daniel Norton video, and he made a great comment about his thoughts on the definition of commercial photography.
Really it boils down to who is asking, who is paying, and what it's being used for. Generally commercial photography is defined as:
1) Photos used to advertise a business or brand
2) Usually used to sell a product or service
3) Generally not paid by the individual subject of the photo
Generally retail photography is:
1) Paid by the subject or indirectly by their guardian/friend/relative etc
2) Not directly intended to use to sell a product or service
a bit of a twist, but would suggest commercial/adverstising is paid by the subject while retail/editorial is not paid by the subject.
Retail photography isn't the same thing as editorial photography though.
Editorial photography generally doesn't pay the subjects for their likeness.
To be honest, the photographer blog you linked sounds more like they're just trying to justify why they got rejected from Bon Appetit, as he wraps up his opinion with kind of a self-defensive opinion about editorial vs commercial/advertising photography. "So, in a nutshell, I believe that advertising food photographers are more interested in detail of the food and showing it off in it’s best possible light. Editorial food photographers are more interested in making pretty pictures of food, where sometimes the food looks as though it is a prop in the photo instead of the reason for the photo."
p.1 #4 · Difference between commercial and retail photography
The way I was taught in photo school, by mostly professional commercial photographers was that anything that was paid for before you took the image was commercial photography and everything else is ART!
I guess you can sub-categorize commercial into whatever categories make you feel better about what you do, or make someone else feel worse!!!
John
p.1 #5 · Difference between commercial and retail photography
I simply look at the who the customer is. Anything photographer to business is usually commercial. Anything photographer to consumer/individual is normally retail. The contracts and terms in commercial are more varied. There's no one-size-fits-all contract.
I look at these as guidelines because there are some grey areas such as real estate where it could either be retail or commercial. If I occasionally worked with an individual realtor on a 1-1 basis, I would consider that retail. If I worked with a real estate group or developer, under contract, to exclusively do all their real estate photography, I would consider that commercial because there is an exclusive contract in place.
p.1 #6 · Difference between commercial and retail photography
story_teller wrote:
I simply look at the who the customer is. Anything photographer to business is usually commercial. Anything photographer to consumer/individual is normally retail. The contracts and terms in commercial are more varied. There's no one-size-fits-all contract.
I look at these as guidelines because there are some grey areas such as real estate where it could either be retail or commercial. If I occasionally worked with an individual realtor on a 1-1 basis, I would consider that retail. If I worked with a real estate group or developer, under contract, to exclusively do all their real estate photography, I would consider that commercial because there is an exclusive contract in place.
I suppose one other important aspect of commercial photography that often differs from retail and editorial photography is usage/talent rights.
Generally if you do a headshot as part of a corporate or retail arrangement, you're not charging for example a 2 year digital only usage fee if they are just being used in the "about us" section of a website or business cards. However, if you then used these images in an advertisement for the business, then you might think about charging usage fees, in which case is the job still retail? Or is it now commercial?
I suppose though there's going to be jobs that are clearly commercial, there's going to be exceptions or "hybrid" arrangements.
p.1 #7 · Difference between commercial and retail photography
It is very subjective.
The gray area is something like a business portrait for the subject. It is a commercial photo in the sense it is being used for commercial purposes. However, the sitter is usually the client and as such the vagaries of retail photography apply.
For me, the commercial aspect is when the client is a business and they are hiring me to make them look good. Whether it is product or architecture it is commercial.
The retail photo world is comprised of people inexperienced in buying photography and are in the category of wedding and family portrait work. They are anxious and cost conscious and unaware of contracts and only faintly aware of copyright issues. Not a sin, but takes a lot more time to close a sale. In addition, marketing is constant.
In commercial work the client is spending their bosses' money (most of the time) and have some experience in licensing, shooting schedules, permits etc. They also call more frequently and will refer you thus relieving you of marketing chores to a large degree once you have become established.
p.1 #8 · Difference between commercial and retail photography
There are no grey areas for me (imho).
Please go to asmp.org to learn more.
Photography when practiced for consideration is business. As a long time practitioner I suggest that you learn from what the professional organizations are teaching. American Society of Media Photographers is the way forward, https://www.asmp.org/newyork/ you can actually speak to or write to working people about your projects before you bid for them.
p.1 #9 · Difference between commercial and retail photography
I read Daniel Norton's article, but it seemed to me not complete and many details were missed that should have been present in the article. Don't you think so? Some photos were taken not only for commercial activities, each photo has a certain hidden meaning that not everyone can understand. Sometimes it is very difficult to understand the main idea conveyed in the photo, and people create a wrong opinion. I read a lot of information about photography on https://graydonschwartz.com and thanks to this I can draw the following conclusions. Sometimes even amateur photos can be attracted to commercial photos, but this is not true. Think about it!
p.1 #10 · Difference between commercial and retail photography
Retail photography is Portrait Studios and Wedding Photographers. Think of photography as a bottle of aspirin—a retail consumer buys one or two bottles from a store. A store buys hundreds of bottles of aspirin for resale because they are a retail business.
Portrait Studios and Wedding Photographers make most of their money by selling expensive framed prints and overpriced photo albums. Their ability to make money is based on salesmanship, just like any other retail business.
There are also non-retail portraits that come as part of an event package. The promoter hires a photographer, who does no sales, just a lot of button pushing. Often a commercial photographer will get the job. They have a crew who can set-up, photograph a couple of hindered people, and be gone in several hours ...and each portrait will be of the same high quality.
p.1 #11 · Difference between commercial and retail photography
Ambassaduss wrote:
I read Daniel Norton's article, but it seemed to me not complete and many details were missed that should have been present in the article. Don't you think so? Some photos were taken not only for commercial activities, each photo has a certain hidden meaning that not everyone can understand. Sometimes it is very difficult to understand the main idea conveyed in the photo, and people create a wrong opinion. I read a lot of information about photography on https://graydonschwartz.com and thanks to this I can draw the following conclusions. Sometimes even amateur photos can be attracted to commercial photos, but this is not true. Think about it!...Show more →
Commercial photos are commissioned by a client to promote a commercial venture. Some images may have more artistic pretensions than others (think fashion) but in the end all are made in the service of generating revenue for the client. That was the primary impetus for their creation.
In some cases a client may license an image created by an artist for use in a commercial effort but the intention is the same. Sell more stuff.
The issue of "hidden meaning" is an artistic conceit designed to signal to the "insiders in the know" that they are a clever lot.
That has marketing value if your target audience is a snobby crowd. If it isn't then your cleverness is wasted.
Businesses will spend money to make money. Preferably in the short term. In some cases culturally fashionable images are part of brand building and market positioning with an eye to long term benefit.
In the end it is money calling the tune. Artists are the dancing monkey for commerce.
p.1 #12 · Difference between commercial and retail photography
Is the distinction between retail and commercial important? Maybe, but I would say only in terms of the value of the images produced to the photographer. I called myself a commercial photographer when I did product photography and advertisement for a brand that hired me directly as a staff photographer. The photos I shot were used to sell their products , they weren’t the product itself. In the case of my event photography, headshots, portraits, weddings, engagements etc. my photos were the product. That is my own distinction. The photos I shot for clients have merit and use beyond just the specific event - I used them to attract new clients. The product photos I shot were largely useless to me, I did not back them up and do not have them anymore.
