So if you would like a print of any of the images you have seen on this blog or of many more that are on my web site, they are now available. If you use coupon code GINGER, you will get 25% off (but that is only for a limited time).

Another real blog post coming to you soon. Enjoy!

Full Page Photo in People by Brad Rickerby

Can Social Media Marketing help you, the photographer, increase your revenue? Is SMM a waste of time, or is the promise of a gold mine true? I and know photographers who have praised SMM as the wave of the future, and others who have damned it as an enormous – I mean really huge – waste of time. Buried within that range, I suspect are a big range of computer and photographic expertise.

From my own experience, I find it helpful.  Social Media Marketing is one tool is the collection of tools that a professional photographer has to put his name and work out to their target market. Remember that, it is just one tool. It is a tool, that if used properly, can deliver impressive results. But it is a complex tool that will take time to learn. It is also a tool that doesn’t necessarily deliver quick results. And again, based on my own experience, you are going to spend a lot of time using Social Media Marketing, so you had better figure out your goals and the best pieces of the entire SMM scene to get you to those goals.

One of the problems with Social Media Marketing success is an understanding, at a purely conceptual level, of exactly what it is and therefore, how it can best be used.

Many years ago, one of my first jobs out of college was as an insurance salesman for Met Life. My sales manager sat me down one day and drew me a picture on a yellow legal pad (the iPad of the day). Basically it was two half circles facing each other. In the lower part of the half circle he put a dot. It looked sort like this:

Sydney Australia Harbor

Money from Stock Photography. One of my favorite subjects. With my next post I will begin a series on the business side of stock photography. All that time I spent working on Wall Street and the top tier MBA give me a unique perspective for this task.  I will start slowly with a brief review that answers the question, What is Stock Photography?  This and subsequent posts will be geared for the beginning and intermediate stock photography, but will also contain nuggets of insight and information valuable too to the advanced professional.

For now, I want to tell you what stock agencies I have my images with. These are, Getty, Alamy, agefotostock, iStock, Dreamstime, Veer, 123RF and Fotolia. As part of my series on the business of stock photography I will provide a review of each of these companies. Most importantly for the moment however, the only companies listed that provide regular, reliable income are Getty (of course), iStock and Dreamstime. agefotostock comes through with sales every once in a while. The others are a waste of my time. You may have, of course, more success with them than I did. I guess it all depends on your particular situation.

For beginners, I always suggest starting with Dreamstime. I will tell you why in another post. If you are just starting out, have a look at what they offer and what they require.

The image above was created in Sydney, Australia. It is a night scene of their iconic harbor and bridge.  This image was created back in the stone age days when we all used film and were forced either to have the correct exposure or to throw the image away.

I used Fuji Velvia 50 for this image.  I always slightly over-exposed my dusk and night shots on film. It gave them a more dramatic look. The photo was created with a 200 mm lens on a tri-pod with a remote release. Right at dusk, I’m going to guess that I was at f11 to f16, for about ten seconds (ISO 50).

Australia was really good to me and I long to return. I have stayed in both Sydney, where I explored the great city with wonderful people, and Cairns. In Cairns I got to scuba dive on the great barrier reef. The diving itself was a tremendous experience. To top of the experience, I created some great under-water images, such as the “Confused Fish” (I will give you technical details on this image in another post).

Confused Fish, Great Barrier Reef, Cairns Australia

Jumping for Joy

Many things go into the making of a great stock photo.  The photograph needs to be simple and deliver many concepts. It also needs to feature attractive people, but no so attractive that they cannot be identified with. That last is important. No supermodels. And don’t overdress (or undress) your models. Use clothing that would be worn by regular people. No huge diamonds, for images of regular people living their lives.

Along the same lines, while we are talking about dressing your models, logos of all varieties are huge no no’s! Further, I never liked shooting outfits that are all black. All black is harder to light properly and more difficult for the end user to reproduce correctly.

This image has been licensed any number of times because it follows these simple rules. It is conceptually diverse, representing the concepts of joy, victory, achievement and the like. Blaire is a cutie. Made up differently, she could be stunning, but with minimal make up, her hair down and an ordinary dress, she is easy to identify with. The dress is a good color and has no logos.

This image was created digitally at an ISO of 250. It was shot at f 5.6 at 1/250th of a second with a 28 mm lens. A hand held flash using a wireless remote was used to balance against the back light.

Red Tulips

I love being outside for my photography, wandering around city streets and looking for that perfect confluence of circumstances, or sitting behind a tri-pod waiting for the light of dusk to bring its magnificent colors. For years I have done my best work that way. But I don’t know if anyone who lives near to me in Connecticut has noticed, but its freaking cold outside.

Granted, I’m not as young as I used to be, but winters seem to be getting unbearably cold. Not only that, but winter light seems to me at least, to be bluer than it ever has been. So who wants to wander around freezing to take blue pictures?  I considered brief taking black and white images, but then realized my market for them (essentially zero) and moved on.

But then I read a book titled Photographing Flowers: Exploring Macro Worlds with Harold Davis (yes, I get a (very) small commission if you buy the book through me – but still, it is a book worth reading). Unlike most of the photo and how-to books that I pore through, this one had some images I really liked and enough detail on making them that I could start creating some images myself.

Now I spend hours in the basement and I’ve created not a few images that I really like. Some, like the above, have gone on to find homes at Getty and other stock agencies.

So long as the winter lasts, you will find me nights, warm in my basement, working to expand my knowledge of photographing flowers.

This image was created with a Canon 50 mm, f2.5 Macro lens. I got this lens ages ago to shoot a piece of John Lennon memorabilia on assignment.  This was maybe 15 years ago. I spent as little money as I possibly could on a new lens as I didn’t plan on ever doing another shoot that would use a macro lens. Obviously the lens has stood up well.

The lens itself was set at f32 with a shutter speed of 1.6 seconds, ISO 100. I used a remote release and a tripod.

I will provide the lighting details for this image in a later post.

Vancouver Skyline, dusk

Both the buyers of stock photography and the suppliers of those very same image are complaining about the very same thing. That is, the lack of selection and creativity in the stock photograph marketplace. Both sides, so the argument goes, are seeing the same images over and over and over again. They all look the same, with only slight variations on the theme.

Yet buyers keep buying what is essentially boring and suppliers keep supplying boring.  Photographers (I include myself here) are not without guilt. They too perpetuate boring because that is what agencies accept and what buyers buy.

The stock photo agencies keep taking boring from photographers because they perceive that that is what buyers want and it is what photographers supply. And buyers can only get what agencies offer which is what photographers supply. Which, as noted, is all boring.

They could all change this pattern of circular boredom if buyers stopped buying boring and/or agencies stop supplying boring and/or photographers stopped shooting boring. If any one group shifted its pattern, than boredom would be broken. But no one is willing to be the first to stop be boring!

Ultimately I think the buyers perception of what the public wants to see is at the heart of the boredom cycle. Everyone else just dances to that tune. But it is true. What the general public wants is boring. They have boring tastes driven by their boring lives. And please note here, first, I am not talking about you or I. We who create are generally, not boring. Our revenues are just driven by those who are boring. Second, I am not talking about some assignment work. I have seen some high-end fashion assignment work that is quite creative, quite interesting.

But for the most part we in the world of stock are boring. And like it or not, we will continue to produce, deliver and display boredom so long as that is what the public wants. Images that challenge, excite or that require thought are just not what is in demand. This is not to say that the creation of stock imagery is easy. As anyone knows who has done it, it requires seemly endless hard work.  Indeed, you could argue that being as boring as the stock photography industry requires, demands an extraordinary amount of creativity.

If you want to take creative images, and to see creative images, really, you should be looking at photo gallery shows and art openings.

Sadly, the stock photography industry and particularly the microstock side of the industry (you can still place and sell an image less boring at Getty) is stuck at boring.  Blame humanity. If you want to take a royalty check home at the end of the day, you too are stuck at boring!

There are other troubles with the Stock Photo industry. I will blog about some of those soon.

The photograph above is of the Vancouver, British Columbia skyline at dusk.  It is a beautiful image, one that makes my point completely.  While beautiful, it is utterly boring. Perfect for stock then. It looks like every other city skyline image that has ever been taken and that will ever be taken. Perhaps the colorful foreground adds a bit of interest, but still, the image is routine, formulaic and cookie cutter. I love it though.

For the record, this is a digital image, created with a 28 to 70 mm f 2.8 lens, set at 36 mm. The ISO was 100 and the image was created at f 9 at 13 seconds. A tripod was used.

Out of clutter, find Simplicity. From discord, find Harmony. In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity. ~ Einstein

Representing the concept GO

Should you take the leap? Jump into the world of professional freelance photography?  An old Chinese proverb, and a favorite among my quotes to live by, provides direction:  ”The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best is now”.

Just saying …………………………………..

By the way, the photo is of a green light, focused a little softly (focus is such an over rated concept, don’t you think?) in Times Square. The image has been in my Getty portfolio for almost a decade and has sold really well during the time. It has sold well because it represents the illustration of a concept in very simple, graphic form.  In this case the concept the photo represents is go or Go For It!

Close up of Calla Lily

Calla Lily – Very tightly focused – Going off to Getty tonight – thinking of taking my blog and my Facebook Page, https://www.facebook.com/bradrickerby in a more business direction – The Business of Photography – tips on general business, marketing, social media marketing for photogs and artists. Any thoughts?

Seattle Skyline at dusk

For those of you who thought I created my fine art photographs with nothing but streaks and blurs and being out of focus, I give you this urban skyline of Seattle.

Sometimes I just play it straight. I put the camera on a tripod and use a remote shutter release so that I can have the sharpest image possible with no trace of blur. I do this particularly when I am shooting the image for stock. When I first started shooting stock with Tony Stone (that went on to become Stone and is now just Getty) they loved the creativity of my images.  That creativity was what Tony Stone wanted and what separated my images from every one else’s. A lovely blur to suggest motion and speed, the use of a brilliant red  to fill the frame with heat and excitement, that was what Tony Stone wanted and what I was happy to supply.

The landscape has changed. Today, images have to be straight forward and 100% readable. I don’t know whether the change came about because of what buyers were demanding or if it was a result of what stock houses were offering. But today, to be acceptable as stock, your night exposure must be on a tripod with virtually everything in focus.  This is especially true when it comes to cityscapes and skylines.

This is not such a bad thing.  It is possible still to create and sell beautiful city images for stock.  Just look at this image of the Seattle skyline.  It was created as a commercial image and is beautiful and tells a wonderful story about Seattle.

This image was created digitally at ISO 100 with a 200 mm lens set at f10 for 13 seconds. I used a -1 exposure compensation value to help darken the image slightly and create more detail in the lighter areas of the image. A tripod was used.

I shot this image from a small park in the north of Seattle. The park is just about at the level of the Space Needle which creates the effect of looking directly into the windows of the buildings.  I found the park through the National Geographic Traveller Seattle guidebook.  I often use this type guidebook to scout locations when I am short on time. I will provide more travel photography tips like this in a future blog post.