5
Producing a Marketable Photo

Some Basic Questions Answered

Digital or Analog?

The reality of today’s technology is that digital photography is the most cost-effective way to produce stock photographs. There’s no film to contend with, no handling and storage concerns, the per-picture cost is less, the delivery is hassle-free, there’s no liability on the part of the photo buyer, and best of all, your originals don’t have to leave your premises.

Digital technology has advanced to a stage where editors at most publishing houses are ready to go completely digital. Their fellow editors at newspapers, and art directors at ad agencies, have migrated to all-digital. So why haven’t all your buyers?

The answer seems to lie in the nature of the publishing business. Photo buyers at book and magazine publishers depend on a wide variety of photographer talent and technology. They don’t have the luxury that newspapers or corporations enjoy: dictating standards to a staff of photographers. Freelancers will submit to publishing houses every degree of quality of digital work. Publishers must be capable of handling submissions in formats that photographers submit. As of now, that means 95 percent digital with a few small pockets of holdouts that are still accepting slides.

You’ll find that most buyers will request, in the end, digital submissions or a high-quality scan from the transparency.

With this reality in mind, this chapter emphasizes digital submissions.

When we used to shot with film we learned that the camera was of less importance. With digital, nothing could be further from the truth. The old acronym from the early days of computing, GIGO, Garbage In, Garbage Out, still very much holds true. You need to have a digital camera of at least 16 megapixels. While a digital SLR isn’t absolutely necessary it will certainly make your life a lot easier. Just like with film cameras you want to be able to use different lenses as your needs differ.

My basic digital camera kit for the editorial stock photographer consists of only five items.

One really good digital camera. I happen to prefer Canon, but go to a camera store and try out several different models and makes until you find one that feels right in your hands.

One really good wide-angle lens. Unless you’re opting for a full format camera, this will mean anywhere from 8 to 20mm or a touch more. For me this is my most used lens, so I buy the best I can justify within reason.

One good medium zoom in the 24 to 70 range.

Either a longer zoom like a 70–200 or a really good macro lens, whatever works best for your specific needs and what you most frequently photograph.

Finally, a good flash is hard to beat. I do a lot of photography at dusk or dawn and quite a bit during the small hours of the night, so I want the best and most powerful flash I can get for my particular system.

Unless you’re shooting something very specific your basic kit doesn’t have to be any more complicated than that. Add to that a good camera bag, a tripod, a few memory cards and you’re all set to go.

It is true that the initial cost is higher with digital than it was with film. But, and this is big, you will not have to constantly be buying film and paying for developing. Nor will you have the added time and cost of scanning, and all this adds up very quickly.

As in any other business, you’ll need to stay connected and be knowledgeable of new technology, and you’ll need to keep abreast of what the market prefers at any given time. Your photo buyers will certainly tell you what they prefer.

What ISO Should I Use?

This might be the question I get most often from editorial stock photographers. Great advances has been made in technology and ISO speeds we could only dream of a few years back are now available, with results that are surprisingly good. The same rules apply though. Use the lowest ISO that you can. Back when Fuji Velvia and Provia were the gold standard for film, you wanted to stay at or below 100, 50 with Velvia, if at all humanly possible.

It is technically possible to use ISO 64,000 and even higher with good results if everything else in your digital toolbox, including your know-how of post processing, is top notch. Unless dictated by horrific light or lack thereof, there’s simply no reason to go to ISO extremes. The one possible exception would be for creative reasons.

Look at the photo right here. This was actually made back in the day when film still ruled, Fuji Provia if memory serves. ISO 100 film shot at ISO 400 and cross processed, meaning slide film processed as film negative. I needed a cover photo for an article I was writing for a Swedish magazine about runaways in the U.S., specifically young, female runaways. My loving and always supportive wife came with me to our local city park at around 3:30 in the morning. We were in and out in less than fifteen minutes and the magazine obviously liked the image well enough that they used it for the cover.

Another huge advantage of digital over film is that once that initial investment has been made, you are free to experiment with techniques, subject matter, setups, etc. as much as you want to. Interestingly enough I don’t find that I shoot more now compared to when I was using film. I used to average sixty rolls of slide film for one week of normal shooting, and my first rough edit would bring that down to about half. Much of the shooting I do is very fast paced (when high-risk narcotics-related search warrants are executed, time is of the essence) so to have a high initial editing is normal. Compare that to when I shoot in the studio and my keepers’ rate is close to 100 percent.

BLACK AND WHITE—IS IT STILL VIABLE?

Very much so. Converting from color to black and white can be quite complex, and many photo buyers prefer to have a professional digital imaging company do conversions; others request that the photographer completes this task. If you have to convert from color to black and white, use good photo-editing software such as Adobe Photoshop or Adobe Lightroom.

There are plenty of tutorials available online. Before you do anything though, make sure you understand the requirements from the photo buyer. At the very least the photo buyer should be able to tell you which file format(s) they prefer, any specific requirements they have, and enough information so that you can produce what the photo buyer needs. Since it is easily done using software, I see absolutely no need for shooting in black and white (or grayscale) even if your digital camera has this feature.

Scanning: Should I Do It Myself?

Depending on your PS/A, you may want to invest some time in learning about scanning your images (digitizing them into pixels that can be manipulated, sharpened, color corrected and stored).

Many other photo buyers will say to you, “Just send me the picture; we’ll scan it here.” What they’re saying is because there are so many levels of proficiency and so much variety in equipment needed to transfer your film to pixels, they’ve found it more effective to work with their own service bureau.

Of course, if you are a commercial stock photographer, you’re more in a position to consider investing in a scanner and do the work yourself. This area is much like working in a darkroom. Some photographers don’t want to trust their finished products to other people. In the long run, if you’re just starting out in editorial stock photography, your best bet to convert your film to digital is to farm your scanning out to a competent service bureau. For the greatest control over the finished product, combine this with getting software such as Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Lightroom, SilverFast etc. so you can do your own sharpening, color correcting, manipulation, and so on. Sharpening is something you should stay away from in ninety-nine out of one hundred cases but more on that later.

Like anything else, learning to make good scans will take time and effort. There are a number of great books on the market for those interested in learning Photoshop, scanning, digital darkroom work and so on. Your local camera club or community college might offer workshops in digital imaging as well. It doesn’t really matter how you learn scanning and digital imaging as long as you do. We often hear photo buyers talk about how often they come across scans that are simply not good enough for use in print. Make sure your scans are good enough to be used in print.

If you are sitting on a large archive of slides it makes sense to invest the time and money it costs to get a film scanner and do the work yourself. Costs for a good-quality film scanner—I’d stay away from flatbeds here—run anywhere from three hundred to many thousands of dollars. It comes down to the size of slides and/or negatives you need to scan. If you have large slides and only occasionally need to scan you should be fine with a good-quality flatbed scanner. Check out reputable dealers such as B&H PhotoVideo and Adorama in New York to see availability, pricing and so on. Obviously your scanner needs to be able to work with your computer, and when we’re looking at large files you want to make sure your computer is up to par. Just like you’re buying into a system of lenses and flashes when you’re purchasing a new camera, you’re building a system when you buy a scanner. The players in the scanner system are software, scanner and computer.

If you don’t need to scan a lot or very often, consider farming it out to someone else. There are some editorial stock photographers who offer this service to the rest of us and there are professional service bureaus using the latest drum scanners—it’s all about what your needs really are.

Digital Previews and Submissions

Even though you might not be positioned yet to send out digital images for publication, you should utilize handy digital “previews” for the selection process. Digital previews—sending a small, low-resolution, digitized image via e-mail to photo buyers—are quickly becoming popular. With digital previews, the photo buyer can have a quick look at an image risk free. Without having to handle the original slide or a high-resolution image on CD and risk damage or loss, the photo buyer can decide whether she wants to use the image. She can then have the photographer send the original or a high-resolution scan.

Digital previews are typically scanned at 72 or 96 dpi (5" × 7" [13–18cm]) for viewing on-screen. The most common format for digital previews is JPEG (Joint Photographic Experts Group), a lossy compression algorithm that saves considerable disc space (and e-mail time) without much loss in image quality. Captioning information can be added to the files themselves to make that crucial information readily available to the photo buyer.

Should you send unsolicited digital previews to a photo buyer? Yes, if you’re positive that your image collection matches the specific interest area of the buyer. However, if you send a general-interest selection of images, you’ll probably get on the photo buyer’s list—i.e., the blacklist. It’s so easy to send off electronic pictures, but don’t fall for it. It can be a trap if misused.

Digital submissions, however, are handy in many ways. There are no original slides floating around, and the photographer can easily make five or two hundred dupes of a digital image. Moreover, if a CD with a digital image gets lost, while that’s not good, it’s not nearly the catastrophe the loss of an original slide would be.

Format, resolution and file size are perhaps the most important details to keep in mind when pondering digital submissions. If the photo buyer wants a digital image, the format can vary from photo buyer to photo buyer but most common are JPEGs and TIFFs (Tagged Image File Format). The resolution can vary with the usage of the image, but a good rule of thumb is to scan at a minimum of 2,800 dpi. This will give you an image roughly eight by twelve inches (20–30cm) at 300 dpi output. As with everything else, whatever the photo buyers say, goes. Listen, learn and submit only what they want, exactly how they want it.

Should I Shoot Vertical or Horizontal Format?

Photo editors continually lament that they do not have enough vertical shots to augment their layouts. “Printed matter is usually a vertical format,” one editor told me. “Yet photographers persist in sending me horizontal pictures. I could use many more verticals than what I get.”

One photographer friend told me that when she was starting out, she pasted a label on her camera that read, “Is it a vertical?”

Do Photo Editors Accept Color Prints?

Few photo editors accept color prints. Actually I can’t even remember when I last sent out a print as an actual submission. Certainly not since moving to the United States in 1998, so it has been a while for sure.

This doesn’t mean you shouldn’t own a great photo-quality printer. When I got my 13" × 19" (33cm × 48cm) printer, it came at a rather high price. So did the extra large paper and stiff mailers that could accommodate that size. It is an investment that has paid for itself several times over the years, not in sales but in continued access and for me that is huge. It takes a lot of work, time, and effort to me to be able to visit a new police department or prison system. When I do and when I return home I select one to three of the absolute best of the images and print them as 13" × 19" (33cm × 48cm) full color. These prints are then mailed to the chief of police, the prison warden, etc. along with a letter of thanks hoping that we can grow this to a mutually beneficial cooperation that will stand the test of time.

This simple thing has proven to be hugely popular. A 13" × 19" (33cm × 48cm) print is impressive at any rate, and if I look at my investment over time and by the goodwill it has generated for me with a variety of officials, it might be the best marketing dollars I have ever spent.

Q’s and A’s

Q: Should my low-res previews really be 5" × 7" (13cm × 18cm)? Isn’t that too large?

A: Yes they should and no it isn’t. You want a file that shows up large enough on the photo buyer’s computer monitor that they are having no issues in seeing what is in the photo.

Q: I found an 18 megapixel point-and-shoot digital camera, but photo buyers are telling me the file quality isn’t up to their standards. What gives? Megapixels are megapixels right?

A: Megapixels are indeed megapixels but sensor size is the much bigger issue here. Only in relation to the sensor size of your digital camera does the number of megapixels matter. Let’s look at a very common example. The Canon 5D Mark III is a 22.3 megapixel camera. The sensor size is the same as the old 35mm film used to be. B&H PhotoVideo (www.bhphotovideo.com) will charge $2,499 for the camera only. The Sony Cyber-shot DSC W-800 is a 20.1 megapixel point-and-shoot that will set you back an astounding $88. The sensor in the Sony is what is known as a ¹⁄₂.3" and is tiny compared to the Canon. Obviously there will be an enormous difference between a $88 camera compared to a full-frame professional camera. It is also easy to see where someone coming at digital from film can easily be confused by all the marketing terminology. With film it didn’t matter if you had an old Nikon with a motordrive or the newest and most expensive offering from Canon or Minolta. As long as the lenses were equivalent, 35mm film was just that and—brands and speed aside—it didn’t make much of a difference from one to the other.

Q: A photo buyer wants me to send a high-resolution file for publishing as a JPG. That can’t be correct can it since JPG is a “lossy” format meaning quality will be lost the more times the file is opened and saved? I know TIFF files are better quality, should I just send them a TIFF instead and tell them about how JPGs work, maybe they just don’t know?

A: No. The “customer is always right” applies to photo buyers too. They know what they want and there’s a reason they’re asking for a specific format—it’s what they’re set up to work with. It is never, ever a good idea to offer to “educate” potential clients. Remember, they cut you the checks, not the other way around.

Q: The photo buyer told me to “check our submission guidelines” and e-mailed me a document spelling out all sorts of details about digital submissions. Surely I don’t have to follow every single thing, right?

A: Submission guidelines are the golden tickets of editorial stock photography. They extremely helpful in that they take all the guesswork out of the equation for you. Well-written submission guidelines will tell you exactly how this particular photo buyer wants images sent. Follow the guidelines to the letter. Every single thing. Sending out submission guidelines is also a good way for a photo buyer to gauge new photographers whom they might want to send out on assignments. Simply by making sure you are following the submission guidelines you show them that you’re responsive enough to change for them, you’re responsible enough to make sure you do everything within your power to make the submission as close to perfect as possible, and you show them that you can follow directions, a very important thing when it comes to getting assignments.