Possibly a new way to make money on your existing photo shoots.

[astroNikon]

There is a kernel of a good idea here.
How about turning it around a little.....

1. I want a pic of a black rose sitting between a giant diamond and a unicorn with a cabbage as the background.
2. I go to your site and register the request for free.
3. The photographers registered to your site see the request and make submissions to the request.
4. I can then view all the submissions on a given date and make a selection, at which point money changes hands.
5. The photog gets his cut, the web site owner gets his cut and I get what I want.
6. I will obviously get a cut for coming up with the idea.

Basically an auction house for a product .. last one to zero wins.

I've been on websites like that for IT services. Normally quality is not part of the original equation. Though after the product is completed it becomes obvious quality should have been part of the equation.

 

[NickArt]

There is a kernel of a good idea here.
How about turning it around a little.....

1. I want a pic of a black rose sitting between a giant diamond and a unicorn with a cabbage as the background.
2. I go to your site and register the request for free.
3. The photographers registered to your site see the request and make submissions to the request.
4. I can then view all the submissions on a given date and make a selection, at which point money changes hands.
5. The photog gets his cut, the web site owner gets his cut and I get what I want.
6. I will obviously get a cut for coming up with the idea.

Basically an auction house for a product .. last one to zero wins.

I've been on websites like that for IT services. Normally quality is not part of the original equation. Though after the product is completed it becomes obvious quality should have been part of the equation.

You're right, That's exactly why I didn't build a platform like that. It already exists and I think that model doesn't treat photographers fairly. They have to compete. All do the work but only one gets paid.

That's why I built it so the client only works with the photographer that can deliver what they are looking for.

 

[407370]

There is a kernel of a good idea here.
How about turning it around a little.....

1. I want a pic of a black rose sitting between a giant diamond and a unicorn with a cabbage as the background.
2. I go to your site and register the request for free.
3. The photographers registered to your site see the request and make submissions to the request.
4. I can then view all the submissions on a given date and make a selection, at which point money changes hands.
5. The photog gets his cut, the web site owner gets his cut and I get what I want.
6. I will obviously get a cut for coming up with the idea.

Basically an auction house for a product .. last one to zero wins.

I've been on websites like that for IT services. Normally quality is not part of the original equation. Though after the product is completed it becomes obvious quality should have been part of the equation.

You're right, That's exactly why I didn't build a platform like that. It already exists and I think that model doesn't treat photographers fairly. They have to compete. All do the work but only one gets paid.

That's why I built it so the client only works with the photographer that can deliver what they are looking for.

Snapwire has already stolen my idea........
I dont know why this is a bad thing. If a pic is requested then if you dont want to take a chance on your version not being chosen then dont enter a pic. This has enthusiast rather than pro written all over it. I might just join as a hobby, if its free.

 

[astroNikon]

A global platform really limits your photog selection.
as in, low wage countries will win all the time in prices.

I saw it in IT .. I can't compete against someplace only charging $2.50 USD an hour.
I know there's so much more to it than price. But who's going to vet the photogs to the client?

Unless you make it like a dating website and create best matches. But then those are full of scammers too. you'll have to have a payment system like Paypal to hold the money until the product clears the completion hurdle.

 

[robbins.photo]

However, what if they are looking for a bowl of fruit that has a uncooked meat on it because they want to communicate awareness and healthy eating.

or even less specific, what if they are looking for a bowl of fruit that has a glass of green smoothy front it.
can they find it from stock sties? maybe couple between all the stock sites, but certainly will not have enough to find the one that works.

even less specific than that, what if they are looking for a bowl of fruit but they need the photo to be framed in a way so there is a lot of room on the bottom which they'll use for ad copy. I don't know how much options they'll have getting if from stock sites. Even if they find something close, they'll have to spend time and money photoshopping it for it to work. So at the end, it will still cost them more than the price of the stock so paying that extra amount to the photographer and get a more natural result would be a better choice for them.

Any of these scenarios are very similar to the real pain points that I've seen clients experience. But if a photographer is shooting a bowl of fruit, it would be relatively simple adjustment for their shoot to get the photo they need.

So as the pro I have to setup the shoot, do all the lighting, etc, etc.. I'm not "saving" myself any time at all because I'm setting up a shoot specifically for your client - which is not how this was presented at the start. The idea was this would be a minimal time investment for the photographer because they were already "there" and shooting anyway, right?

The downfall here is the statement, "if the photographer is already shooting a bowl of fruit"... meaning if they are already getting paid by someone else to shoot a bowl of fruit then yes, they could make some adjustments and take a few specialty shots.

However, "if the photographer is already shooting a bowl of fruit", well then he's doing that on someone else's dime. Which leads to the conflict of interest issues brought up earlier, upset clients and eventually loss of business and reputation for the photographer.

If you stipulate the photographer isn't going to be doing this on someone else's paid shoot, well then it's no longer a simple matter of making a few minor adjustments to something your already shooting. It suddenly becomes a full blown shoot of it's own that needs to be setup from scratch.

 

[astroNikon]

However, what if they are looking for a bowl of fruit that has a uncooked meat on it because they want to communicate awareness and healthy eating.

or even less specific, what if they are looking for a bowl of fruit that has a glass of green smoothy front it.
can they find it from stock sties? maybe couple between all the stock sites, but certainly will not have enough to find the one that works.

even less specific than that, what if they are looking for a bowl of fruit but they need the photo to be framed in a way so there is a lot of room on the bottom which they'll use for ad copy. I don't know how much options they'll have getting if from stock sites. Even if they find something close, they'll have to spend time and money photoshopping it for it to work. So at the end, it will still cost them more than the price of the stock so paying that extra amount to the photographer and get a more natural result would be a better choice for them.

Any of these scenarios are very similar to the real pain points that I've seen clients experience. But if a photographer is shooting a bowl of fruit, it would be relatively simple adjustment for their shoot to get the photo they need.

So as the pro I have to setup the shoot, do all the lighting, etc, etc.. I'm not "saving" myself any time at all because I'm setting up a shoot specifically for your client - which is not how this was presented at the start. The idea was this would be a minimal time investment for the photographer because they were already "there" and shooting anyway, right?

The downfall here is the statement, "if the photographer is already shooting a bowl of fruit"... meaning if they are already getting paid by someone else to shoot a bowl of fruit then yes, they could make some adjustments and take a few specialty shots.

However, "if the photographer is already shooting a bowl of fruit", well then he's doing that on someone else's dime. Which leads to the conflict of interest issues brought up earlier, upset clients and eventually loss of business and reputation for the photographer.

If you stipulate the photographer isn't going to be doing this on someone else's paid shoot, well then it's no longer a simple matter of making a few minor adjustments to something your already shooting. It suddenly becomes a full blown shoot of it's own that needs to be setup from scratch.

yeah but does the photog get to keep the bowl of fruit ?

 

[NickArt]

I wouldn't use it, or provide it. If a shoot is being funded by a client, they have my full attention. Anything else would be unprofessional and unethical of me. Even with full disclosure, it would create a bad impression of me as a professional, and my company as a brand.

I completely understand and respect that.

This was not made to satisfy the needs of every client or every photographer out there. In fact, I wouldn't even have the slightest idea what you clients would want when it comes to wedding photography. But I know exactly what the clients need when it comes to advertising and marketing. I spent years working with them and understanding what their pain points are. And, I see an opportunity for photographers to make money to relieve those pain points.

 

[astroNikon]

I'm sure they could facebook hunt too for a photographer specializing in a certain category. Not all photogs are experts at all categories.

 

[robbins.photo]

yeah but does the photog get to keep the bowl of fruit ?

Well considering that it will be up to the photographer to buy it in the first place.. I would think, yes...

Lol.

So for the OP, I'm not going out of my way trying to be a debbie downer here, I'm really not. I just see at least one very serious flaw in your business model, in that if a professional photographer isn't already shooting something for someone else, well then there is no cost savings to be had and as a result the photographer winds up working for peanuts. While you'll probably still get photographers that are willing to do that, lets face it, they probably are not going to provide the quality end product that an Art Director or someone of that caliber is going to be satisfied with, so the end result will most likely be a lot of very unhappy clients.

The only way I see around that would be for you to vet the incoming submissions prior to sending them on to the client, which would be an extremely time consuming process and eventually a pretty expensive one.

That I would imagine is probably why most stock photography sites don't already offer this as a service. With standard stock the client can look through the images first and decide which ones are high enough quality - if your doing a custom order like this though your relying on the service to provide you with a quality product before you can actually see the product itself.

Which of course for you means that you will need to ensure the product is of acceptable quality, and given the business model as presented I just don't think your going to attract the kind of photographers who will produce a quality product reliably.

Just my 2 cents worth of course. YMMV

 

[Vtec44]

This was not made to satisfy the needs of every client or every photographer out there. In fact, I wouldn't even have the slightest idea what you clients would want when it comes to wedding photography. But I know exactly what the clients need when it comes to advertising and marketing. I spent years working with them and understanding what their pain points are. And, I see an opportunity for photographers to make money to relieve those pain points.

I'm originally a commercial photographer for a very large nationwide retail chain prior to starting my own business. I still do commercial photography on the side on various advertising projects. I also worked for WPP (Advertising, Branding, Consumer Insight, Digital, Marketing, PR, Design, Media - WPP) for many years. I can tell you from experience that even well targeted, your plan has various critical flaws and many hurdles to work out.

 

[NickArt]

If you stipulate the photographer isn't going to be doing this on someone else's paid shoot, well then it's no longer a simple matter of making a few minor adjustments to something your already shooting. It suddenly becomes a full blown shoot of it's own that needs to be setup from scratch.

Look at it this way.

There are millions and millions of stock photos out there right? It's a $5Billion industry. Most of those photos, not all but most, were set up properly at one point by a photographer, on his own dime, and did a full shoot hoping that one day someone, somewhere will need this photo. So people are already doing this even with extremely bad returns.

If before their photo shoot, they let other know about it. They will have an opportunity to shoot the photos they already know that someone needs and will pay for it.

EDIT: would like to clarify that I'm not suggesting that this is only for stock photographer, I'm just pointing out that what you're thinking is impossible, already happens on a huge scale.

 

[robbins.photo]

Look at it this way.

There are millions and millions of stock photos out there right? It's a $5Billion industry. Most of those photos, not all but most, were set up properly at one point by a photographer, on his own dime, and did a full shoot hoping that one day someone, somewhere will need this photo. So people are already doing this even with extremely bad returns.

People yes. Pros, not so much. This is perhaps one of the biggest problems with your business model. Your target clients are Art Directors and people who expect a professional, high end product, right?

If before their photo shoot, they let other know about it. They will have an opportunity to shoot the photos they already know that someone needs and will pay for it.

So we are back to a pro shooting stuff for you when they are being paid by another client, and all the problems that entails.

So things to consider:

1. A pro most likely won't touch this with a 300 foot pole, those that do are likely killing his own business as a result. You just don't sell photos to someone else when your client is footing the bill for the shoot. Bad business all the way around.

2. You'll probably get plenty of interest from amateur's and fauxtaugs, but they won't produce quality results, at least not reliably. That means vetting every submission, or losing serious face with your clients when they request a picture of a bowl of fruit with some uncooked meat and what they get is something their own kid could have shot with an Iphone for them.

3. So far in this conversation we've gone from a pro doing this on a paid shoot to no a pro shouldn't be doing this on someone else's paid shoot back to a pro doing this on someone else's paid shoot as being part of your business model. That's going to make this whole thing pretty tough to market, don't you think? In all honesty I think it would really help for you to sit down and think about what your actual business model is going to be, and the sort of photographers you'll be able to attract as a result.

 

[NickArt]

Look at it this way.

There are millions and millions of stock photos out there right? It's a $5Billion industry. Most of those photos, not all but most, were set up properly at one point by a photographer, on his own dime, and did a full shoot hoping that one day someone, somewhere will need this photo. So people are already doing this even with extremely bad returns.

People yes. Pros, not so much. This is perhaps one of the biggest problems with your business model. Your target clients are Art Directors and people who expect a professional, high end product, right?

If before their photo shoot, they let other know about it. They will have an opportunity to shoot the photos they already know that someone needs and will pay for it.

So we are back to a pro shooting stuff for you when they are being paid by another client, and all the problems that entails.

So things to consider:

1. A pro most likely won't touch this with a 300 foot pole, those that do are likely killing his own business as a result. You just don't sell photos to someone else when your client is footing the bill for the shoot. Bad business all the way around.

2. You'll probably get plenty of interest from amateur's and fauxtaugs, but they won't produce quality results, at least not reliably. That means vetting every submission, or losing serious face with your clients when they request a picture of a bowl of fruit with some uncooked meat and what they get is something their own kid could have shot with an Iphone for them.

3. So far in this conversation we've gone from a pro doing this on a paid shoot to no a pro shouldn't be doing this on someone else's paid shoot back to a pro doing this on someone else's paid shoot as being part of your business model. That's going to make this whole thing pretty tough to market, don't you think? In all honesty I think it would really help for you to sit down and think about what your actual business model is going to be, and the sort of photographers you'll be able to attract as a result.

Hold on a second, Are you suggesting that stock photographers are not pros?

I know stock has a bad reputation, but trust me,there are a lot of high-end stock photography out there.

 

[robbins.photo]

Hold on a second, Are you suggesting that stock photographers are not pros?

I know stock has a bad reputation, but trust me,there are a lot of high-end stock photography out there.

Thought the idea here was to flesh out your business model, not distract from obvious issues with it, but ok sure, I'll play.

Stock photography websites don't pay squat. There are some guys who are really phenomenal with huge portfolios that do manage to make some money at it, but lets face it the vast majority of the folks that submit to stock photography websites would have made more money per hour if they'd gotten a job working for McDonalds.

Most stock photography sites rely on large numbers of submissions from people who are either not pro's or those who are first starting out, they usually submit for a while, realize they aren't making any money and move on only to be replaced by a fresh crop of similarly experienced folks.

Nothing unusual or shocking about it, that's how the vast majority of stock photos come to be - primarily because for most folks stock doesn't pay well at all. Just a fact of life. I never stated or implied anything else.

I will however point out that this is completely tangential and does nothing to address the problems with your business model as stated, which was then changed, which was then changed back.

Hey, I realize your probably kicking yourself now in asking for brutal honesty - but there it is, brutal and honest. If you would prefer I simply wish you luck in your endeavor I can still do that too and stop responding. Whatever floats your boat.

 

[NickArt]

Hey, I realize your probably kicking yourself now in asking for brutal honesty - but there it is, brutal and honest. If you would prefer I simply wish you luck in your endeavor I can still do that too and stop responding. Whatever floats your boat.

Sorry it took little long to respond but I don't regret asking because I really wanted to get a brutally honest and constructive feedback.