Comments on: Building a Better Online Portfolio (Video)

By: Chad Adelhardt

Chad Adelhardt — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 05:55:25 +0000

Thank you Stella. Interesting… being in graphic design and imaging for so long I stopped thinking of watermarks as a protection against theft. Its SO easy to remove them anymore. Like Martin BeeBee, said previously (Cool name bty), I think of it in terms of marketing. I mean lets face it, if you put your pics on the web someone is bound to snag them once in a while. In a scene its a complement and part of us probably should hope that they do. Look at it this way, if you size your images correctly the only place they can really be used is on the web. Aside from designers using it as fpo (for position only) or maybe somebody cubicle wall, worst case it could end up in some small newsletter or something. Wherever it ends up, it would be pretty obvious that it was stolen. Basically the folks who are going to pay for it will, the others wont (AP not withstanding). For those that won’t, even if they take it off it gets you a little exposure (yes, a little pun intended). From a technical standpoint, for print the image needs to be at least 300ppi, 360 ideally, a web image should only be 72, then drop your quality just above losing detail and you have pretty much limited its use. I don’t think I can go along with removing it all together. Small and unobtrusive for sure, it is a very good marketing tool if done well.

It was a bit over stated but I don’t fault her for getting hung up on the water mark and back ground color too much. As an instructor, I can say its easy to get stuck on a point and there is a lot of pretty bad water marks out there. Then again, I have heard this complaint a lot from designers, art directors, and editors alike. If they are your main buyers its probably best to consider her advice.

As for black, well I like black back grounds. On the other hand black and revers type is very 90s.

By: Ed Silva

Ed Silva — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 05:13:34 +0000

Very informative webseminar. I disagree with the watermark. All major agencies watermark their galleries (AP, EFE, Getty, iStock) , because photo theft is rampant. I browsed her website and her photos are too small to see and you must click on each image ( no prev/next arrow).

By: shell4art

shell4art — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 15:02:03 +0000

This was fantastic. “Back in the day” I was a consultant in the music business (25yrs) and it always made me shake my head and giggle when others balked at tried and true advice. “Let them learn…” Well, I am heeding to this great advice from Stella, even though it is going to be a lot of work! I really enjoy a black background because it creates a frame with no distractions. I believe that white would draw the eye away. This very blog is on a black background! Things to change: Get rid of clutter Make separate info page Less categories Less photos I will be creating a stock category I will tighten it up! I sign all of my photos ;) It was a watermark years ago, then it changed to just being my signature. I have offered to remove it for the serious buyer but they have asked that I keep it and include it in sizing for matting. I like that she mentions that we take others on a journey. I have been told that my images do that and it pleases me greatly. shell

By: Philip Campbell

Philip Campbell — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 10:34:00 +0000

Worth listening to. I’m curious about the dislike for the black background, it seems it is coming from a long winter in NYC. White backgrounds are counter-intuitive, esp for artists and photogs. Why? We know that the eye is drawn first to the brightest object in a frame. A white bg says, don’t look at my photos, look around them, it pulls the eye away from the photo. Black emphasizes the image. Very interesting coming from Stella.

By: linka

linka — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 10:35:44 +0000

Wow is right Mr. photoGene. Silly silly comments from you. Stella has some great advice. Free advice is good, take it or leave it. One subject I have further comment. I have read that it is not suggested to create general categories on a photo website, as thousands of people will have the same cateogory lists. Such as landscapes, portraits, etc. Therefore when you search this, say on google, thousands of photographer’s will come up. Opposed to having project names, which are unique to you. If your project then becomes well known, people can google the project name and find your website. Take for instance Alec Soth. His projects are easily googled and you can find him listed at the top of a search engine by searching ‘Sleeping by the Mississippi’. Perhaps this depends on what kind of photographer you are. I am interested to hear anyone elses thoughts on this, as I am currently creating a website. I am primarily a documentary & landscape photographer. Best, Linka

By: John Winnie

John Winnie — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 17:18:19 +0000

Wow, photoGene, you’re wonderful! I bet you are a globe-trotting, highly sought after photographer that editors and photo buyers just love working with! After all, you know everything they know and “at least” a couple hundred % (sic) more. How dare those editors express their personal opinions when we should be listening to you instead. Especially since your awards stack up so impressively against a Pulitzer. And remember everyone, those editors and photo buyers are “NOTHING without Photographers.” Hmm, kind of like professional photographers are nothing without photo buyers and editors? A few words to the wise folks: I know a heck of a lot of self-important, egotistical photographers, but have rarely encountered the same in an editor or photo buyer. Most photo buyers are professionals looking to get through the work day just like you and me, and the last thing they need to be dealing with is someone trying to establish a “hierarchy” as opposed to a healthy working relationship. You want to get jobs? Be professional, be good at your craft, and be a nice guy (or gal). And maybe most important: no matter how high your opinion of yourself, remember, it’s “merely” your opinion and it may not be shared by others (i.e. Get over yourelf).

By: photoGENE

photoGENE — Sun, 20 Feb 2011 15:08:35 +0000

She does WHAT for a living? Photography career coaching? Anyone who’s stupid enough to think he should actually hire a career coach to tell him what to do shouldn’t be getting into photography in the first place. If you think that you really need to pay someone to hear stuff like: “You have to decide what kind of work you wanna do and focus on THAT”… Come on, dude… go do something else.. Preferably something you’re good at. As per the rest of stuff she said.. I knew.. well.. about… 100% of that.. and I know a couple hundred more.. at least.. Much of the advice she gave regarding the actual web site layout is merely her personal preference. One last thing to say is: Photo editors, Photo buyers and ‘Photography career consultants’, for that matter, are NOTHING without the PHOTGRAPHERS. Remember the hierarchy, boys…

By: Stefania Errore

Stefania Errore — Sat, 19 Feb 2011 17:53:45 +0000

Great webinar and interesting questions and suggestions. A lot to meditate and work on… Thank you !!

By: Ellen Jones

Ellen Jones — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:25:51 +0000

Perhaps all clothing stores should stop putting those pesky security tags on their clothes on the racks…and quit having security guards standing around! Makes us customers feel like they don’t trust us. I really feel like my bank doesn’t trust me either, locking the vault and stuff. We all know that most people are honest (LAUGH!)

By: Chris Hellier

Chris Hellier — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 03:06:32 +0000

Excellent presentation. Stella is certainly a good communicator. But I wonder how many photo editors share her aversion to black backgrounds. Many leading players in the industry, including Corbis, use black backgrounds on their websites. I’m also in no hurry to delete watermarks from my images. Do watermarks really put off many serious buyers? I doubt it. Chris Hellier http://www.chrishellier.com