A question for all the futurologists.

[OurManInTangier]

Having turned forty back in October and racked up eighteen years as a professional photographer I've been thinking recently more and more about the future of photography. Primarily as a viable commercial business but also a little more generally as my thoughts have wandered.

Where do you see the next twenty years taking us? What will technology have in store for us, will it be good for business or the end of many businesses? Is there a business model for photography that can potentially weather pretty much any storm, akin to the (half) joke about lawyers and funeral directors never being out of work.

As a freelance commercial photographer I fill every roll from Director to teaboy via marketing manager and sales rep. What other roles may I/we need to accept to continue our trade?

In terms of photography as a hobby and purely for enjoyment will the two split perhaps? Hobbyists having everything they could wish for ( the future of film stocks aside, many a thread on that one already) whilst paid commercial uses becoming rarer and heading towards a slow death?

What may the future hold for us, both good and bad...and maybe anything thats a bit "meh" too🙂

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Simon,

Read Jaron Lanier's "Who Owns the Future?"

http://www.amazon.com/Who-Owns-Future-Jaron-Lanier/dp/1451654960

Cheers,

R.

 

[fdarnell]

If you are playing all the roles in the marketing arena, consider that if photography is taken to the LCD (lowest common denominator) by the internet, then to have a viable business model, it has to be the means, not the end. Your experience will give you a vision that can be applied to clients for their overall marketing of their business, and the photography will be just a means to deliver that message. I believe there will always be money in creative marketing, it's just that then venues will change considerably in the coming years due to technology.

That way, you can cut out all the middlemen and work direct with the client. Establishing those relationships long term will keep it going.

This is what I have found, I'm no pro, but I have a lot of work published as it was part of an overall effort, and I could get the shots needed to convey the message, create the media and deliver it.

This model works if you are trying to market an existing business or you are trying to market a new business to potential investors. This kind of sales will also have long term viability.

Just my 2.5 cents!

 

[fdarnell]

Just to clarify "LCD" for discussion: it really is the concept that all photography will be free for the taking off the internet and/or there will always be someone who is willing to shoot for nothing to get their work published.

I am in NO WAY advocating this, and think it's raping intellectual property, but I am merely pointing out what most will agree is happening. If you can get your mind around that concept of photography, then you will be able to find a path forward out of the current mess.

People may have a love/hate with Eric Kim, but I believe his current strategy is a result of photography LCD and is perhaps is path forward business model.

By the way, OurManInTangier, there are a few images that stay in my mind when I think of RFF, and yours are among them!

 

[OurManInTangier]

Dear Simon,

Read Jaron Lanier's "Who Owns the Future?"

http://www.amazon.com/Who-Owns-Future-Jaron-Lanier/dp/1451654960

Cheers,

R.

Roger, thank you for the link. I'll have to look into Jaron's book - the blurb on Amazon suggests he has a talent for explaining sophisticated concepts with clarity...which I will no doubt need.

I've been thinking along these lines since having a discussion with Richard Watson and Richard Scrase (both well known Futurologists I believe) both of whom I met on a job recently. Always an interesting topic but I have a long way to go before I feel comfortable discussing such things in depth with any one here let alone two guys who understand all the concepts and help form others.

Hopefully Jaron's book may help.

 

[OurManInTangier]

Just to clarify "LCD" for discussion: it really is the concept that all photography will be free for the taking off the internet and/or there will always be someone who is willing to shoot for nothing to get their work published.

I am in NO WAY advocating this, and think it's raping intellectual property, but I am merely pointing out what most will agree is happening. If you can get your mind around that concept of photography, then you will be able to find a path forward out of the current mess.

People may have a love/hate with Eric Kim, but I believe his current strategy is a result of photography LCD and is perhaps is path forward business model.

By the way, OurManInTangier, there are a few images that stay in my mind when I think of RFF, and yours are among them!

The role the internet, or perhaps more succinctly, the role that 'policing' within the internet will play over the next few years has been something on my mind. The Eric Kim example is a good one. Perhaps by giving up trying to receive revenue directly from your images and using them as just a part of your overall marketing strategy to build your brand e.g. you, essentially.

I agree the idea is uncomfortable, but navigating our way to the future has never been a comfortable process, unless you're happy to miss out.

...and thank you very much for your compliment, that one of my pictures may have stuck in someone's mind is enough for me.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

First, I've never been a professional photographer, so I'm sure my opinion here is seriously half-baked at best.

Call me 'old school', but I believe that in any business involving sale of expertise to clients, its "who you know" that paves the way for success. Building relationships with clients is how you generate business opportunities. Yes, it'll be useful to have a 'web presence' as a reference tool for your potential clients. But those are a dime-a-dozen these days. Face-to-face relationships and word-of-mouth reputation are, in my opinion, the mainstays of business success.

If you haven't already done so, you might want to browse around Kirk Tuck's website (visualsciencelab.blogspot.com). He's a professional portrait photographer that often writes about his 'adventures' in maintaining a strong client base.

 

[OurManInTangier]

There's nothing half baked about the idea of building client relationships and the power of reputation Jamie. In my time so far it has been pretty much the constant in terms of building a business and I doubt that aspect will ever change, though perhaps the ways in which we can build these relationships will increase. As they already have via social media, Facebook has become a business tool so much that many of the original users, lets call them young people 🙂 have begun to look elsewhere for their social media interaction.

I'm not simply thinking in terms of my own business here but in more general terms. For instance the changes in photographic devices and their popularity. Not so long ago most people had a compact camera or SLR regardless of their level of interest in photography, these have been supplanted, to some degree, by camera phones and then tablets. What does the future hold for the everyday user when they want to record something they see and then display it. The idea of taking a picture and instantly uploading it to a platform that allows global viewing without any form of intermediate action (e.g. PS or even uploading to a computer) would have seemed like something from Star Trek fifteen years ago.

 

[BlackXList]

Just to clarify "LCD" for discussion: it really is the concept that all photography will be free for the taking off the internet and/or there will always be someone who is willing to shoot for nothing to get their work published.

I am in NO WAY advocating this, and think it's raping intellectual property, but I am merely pointing out what most will agree is happening. If you can get your mind around that concept of photography, then you will be able to find a path forward out of the current mess.

People may have a love/hate with Eric Kim, but I believe his current strategy is a result of photography LCD and is perhaps is path forward business model.

By the way, OurManInTangier, there are a few images that stay in my mind when I think of RFF, and yours are among them!

A friend of mine has recently set up his photography "business", and is heavily advertising that he will take on any job for FREE.
He's had a couple of shots used in a national newspaper (one I feel immense distaste for), and didn't receive even a credit for them.

I'm currently too annoyed with the whole thing to find a nice way to say "Stop it!, you're f**king it all up for the rest of us", so I'm just steaming to myself about it occasionally, until I can approach it in an appropriate way.

The one future prediction I think probably has the most weight is that photographers are expected to provide video as well.

Personally, I find myself resistant to this, I know videographers, and people who work in post production, and I think it does their skills a great injustice, to suggest it's something that we as photographers could just pick up and churn out. (I suppose, we're their equivalent of the phone camera).

I work with a lot of musicians, and one night I was chatting to a guy with an incredible musical CV, we were talking about playing musical instruments.

He asked if I played, I replied that I play bass and guitar, and he said "Pick one, I've only ever played with one person who can switch between instruments fluidly, and that's Prince."
The inference being if you divide your efforts between multiples, then you'll be "ok" at both instead of being good at one.

This is kind of the approach I take to the Photo/Video question.

Whilst I will have a play with video. I've picked one, I'm a photographer.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

I'm not simply thinking in terms of my own business here but in more general terms. For instance the changes in photographic devices and their popularity. Not so long ago most people had a compact camera or SLR regardless of their level of interest in photography, these have been supplanted, to some degree, by camera phones and then tablets. What does the future hold for the everyday user when they want to record something they see and then display it. The idea of taking a picture and instantly uploading it to a platform that allows global viewing without any form of intermediate action (e.g. PS or even uploading to a computer) would have seemed like something from Star Trek fifteen years ago.

And not long from now, these 'instant' images will be 4x5 quality!! 😱

 

[btgc]

80% of people are ready to accept any cr@p just give it them free or almost free. Remaining 17% will pay for something made to standards above floor. And those remaining 3% will pay lot of money for anything they really want.

Now choose where do you see your customer. First group are easiest to get and last are hardest because their opinion makers have too many choices.

 

[sevo]

And not long from now, these 'instant' images will be 4x5 quality!! 😱

They might be 4x5 resolution, sharpness and colour depth. But there is a constant decline in published pictures that have the compositional quality once considered the minimum for a professional image shot on 35mm. I consider that the main issue professional photography is facing nowadays - when it becomes acceptable to print the kind of photographs anybody could do, anybody can be a photographer...

 

[gilgsn]

In the furure I believe everything we see will be recorded. Photography will then be the selection of images from what we see daily. It will be about remembering that decisive moment as a photograph and finding it in our daily movie file... Lenses will be embedded in glasses or clothing, even in our eyes in a more distant future. There will be no "cameras" as their own objects. Also, lenses will be everywhere and accessible by anyone on the Net. Any street corner would be "seen" by potentially hundreds of lenses connected to the net, put there by private individuals, businesses or government. Photography will essentially become data mining.

I think there will still be professional photographers, for portraits, studio photography and the likes. Not for news or documentary photography however, because anyone and everything will be under constant photography. Owners of the lenses/cameras will get automatic credit or renumeration if their images are used commercially. Imagine Google street view times a thousand...

The future will be stranger than we can imagine. With the miniaturization of cameras and their connection to the Net, everything will change. Aren't new cameras already getting Wifi capabilities? We will see new apps soon that will change the way we deal with images.

Rangefinders, SLRs, DSLRs, etc. will soon be a thing of the past, except for a bunch of photography enthusiasts. I would watch things like Google Glass for what the future might soon look like..

The future of commercial photography might not be so much about "taking" photographs but being in the right place at the right time or creating scenes to be seen and recorded, as well as mining millions of images to find "the one."

Gil.

 

[OurManInTangier]

In the furure I believe everything we see will be recorded. Photography will then be the selection of images from what we see daily. It will be about remembering that decisive moment as a photograph and finding it in our daily movie file...

Gil.

That doesn't only sound like a perfectly credible view of the near future but something thats around the proverbial corner.

I'd been thinking along the lines of Street View, though I'd forgotten about Google's glasses, and the open access to image making in terms of miniaturization and the ability to fit a camera to anything, anywhere. The idea that photographers may become the image/data miners searching for moments; news, crime, specific people (imagine the type of shots mags like Heat, Hello etc could have submitted from their readers as/when they see 'slebs.' Every waiter, barman, cab driver and nightclub bouncer will be filming A listers through to D listers wherever they go😱:bang🙂 is a very interesting, if a little depressing, one. Although it is one with a background of truth already, I don't remember the name but last year there was someone finding 'decisive moments' by trawling Street View which made some waves.

I'd also agree with the notion that cameras as objects in themselves may well become a redundant concept and that the image recording device will simply be an integral part of a a much more powerful and networked 'device.' The Google glasses concept is one thats pretty hard to overlook as an incredibly powerful future device that also works, in principal at least, in terms of allowing the user full access without physical hindrance i.e. freedom to use both hands. Unless humans prove to be incapable of dealing with information from both the world around us and from the wifi world at the same time through the same sense I really can't see why it may fail.

Interesting that you believe there will always be photographers taking portraits/studio shots. I'd been wondering about the role of future software with regard to this aspect of photography. With programs like Studio Professional able to turn a turd into a, well a polished turd perhaps, how long before we have the ability to turn the old fashioned passport photo booth into a miniature pro studio. Select the lighting mode, mood mode, desired age mode and all you've got to do is smile...or look brooding and edgy depending on 'your thing.'
I could certainly see the older craft of film photography and wet printing for studio portraiture remaining as a luxury 'oddity' item but the chain style studio portrait franchises such as Venture here in the UK and, if I remember correctly, PictureMe in the U.S. could pretty much be replaced by some clever software if the client is less interested in individuality and more interested in affordable vogue - IKEA is a world leader in showing this isn't a market to overlook or sneer at.

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . IKEA is a world leader in showing this isn't a market to overlook or sneer at.

Dear Simon,

Be fair! We may not be able to overlook it but surely we should retain the right to sneer at it!

More generally, very few people seem to have hoist on board the truth that economics in an affluent society, where "wants" and "needs" are often indistinguishable, is a very different subject from traditional economics. This was of course Galbraith's point in The Affluent Society, 1958.

Cheers,

R.

 

[OurManInTangier]

They might be 4x5 resolution, sharpness and colour depth. But there is a constant decline in published pictures that have the compositional quality once considered the minimum for a professional image shot on 35mm. I consider that the main issue professional photography is facing nowadays - when it becomes acceptable to print the kind of photographs anybody could do, anybody can be a photographer...

I'd suggest news and weddings are two of the top arenas for the photographic 'have-a-go hero.'

News outlets started having to shed staff photographers, tighten budgets and be creative in image sourcing around the same time as 'quality' camera phones were starting to be produced in pretty much every handset and now we have good quality video from phones too - citizen journalism has not only allowed news images to become either free or extremely cheap it also has the benefits (from a media viewpoint) of providing on the spot image capture anywhere at anytime with little to no cost and at the same time lowering the expectation of image sophistication; meaning more people can think, "I can do that too if I see something newsworthy."

Weddings, as most of us know, changed hugely with digital. Snap, chimp and re-take or move on. Throw a romantic PP filter over them, Unsharp Mask the crap out of the pics and if all else fails offer the couple all 8000 pics shot that day.

I would imagine it would be one hell of a powerful algorithm to make some software capable of producing interesting, powerful and pleasing compositions. So a good photographer still has the upper hand there even if their expertise isn't proving to be as sought after in some areas as it once was. However, how long before the process can be automated completely with results that aren't utterly ridiculous? From face detection to smile detection to good compo detection?

 

[OurManInTangier]

Dear Simon,

Be fair! We may not be able to overlook it but surely we should retain the right to sneer at it!

More generally, very few people seem to have hoist on board the truth that economics in an affluent society, where "wants" and "needs" are often indistinguishable, is a very different subject from traditional economics. This was of course Galbraith's point in The Affluent Society, 1958.

Cheers,

R.

😀

Quite right Roger, the two are not entwined. One must always reserve the right to sneer or look down ones nose. Isn't that the point of Celebrity Big Brother for instance?

Now I must admit that whilst I follow your point regarding 'wants' and 'needs' becoming indistinguishable in an affluent society, my knowledge of traditional economics is where my footing starts to give - this could become a thread for you to share recommended reading with me🙂

With regard to affluent societies and the confusion over needs and wants, I wonder whether and how much this may change, if at all, during and after this recession. Perhaps its just in my eyes that I see the same expectations at the same level, as if there has grown some form of 'Expectation of Right.' "They're my benefits I'll spend them on what I like, an iPad to match my iPhone." Not that I wish to bash benefits particularly, its just an easy example to give.