Every so often I hear some photographer complain about how an Art Buyer got a project shot for half what s/he estimated it at. The usual comment is something like “that AB is anti-photographer” and there is lots of spite and malice in the tone.
Thing is, if a buyer gets a project shot, at the quality level they need, at half the price, that is not the fault of the buyer–it’s the fault of the photographer(s).
There is often a lot of hypocrisy in these complaining photographers. At the same time as they complain about the ABs going with the lower price, they are telling their colleagues how they can get a website for less here or, worse in my book, getting scans or retouching done off-shore for next to nothing.
Why is it okay for you to save money and not the advertising agencies (via the buyers)? Any business needs to try and save money where they can. In an agency, it is the buyer’s job to get the right creative work at the best price s/he can. So why do we get so angry at them when they do their job? If the half-price photographer didn’t offer at such a low pricepoint, the buyer wouldn’t be forcing the more costly photographers to lower their prices–they are simply buying the less costly equivalent.
Now, the really interesting thing about this situation is that there must be equivalent product and services for this situation even to present itself. That is, there must be multiple photographers of equal “vision” for a given project for the buyer to be able to choose a cheaper alternative (usually). So, if you differentiate, if you make unique images, then buyers who want to work with you won’t be able to find cheaper alternatives. A unique vision, by definition, precludes competition.
So, rather than get pissed the next time you lose a project to a cheaper alternative, take a good long look at what you are bringing to the table. Are you offering your best work? A unique vision? Or do you know, in your heart, that there are a bunch of other photographers who could do it just as good as you could?
Finally, keep this in mind when you get frustrated with an Art Buyer–they want more than anything to get the best photographers they can and, much more often than not, they are in there fighting for you. Sometimes the budget is written in stone and they know that they are going to have to compromise the quality of the work to hit a certain budget. But they hate that. Often, they will push back in their agencies to try and find some place where they can sneak more money into the photo budget. But they are not miracle workers and they do not have the power to dictate “we will use this photographer, no matter the cost.” They are your allies and if you can keep that in mind, you may be able to find ways to work together that will work for both of you.
At the very least, it will help you avoid being frustrated when they go with someone cheap.
good food-for-thought!
Rocksteady,
Danno~
I’ve read a lot about art buyers, photo editors, art directors, creative directors, and even photographer consultants, being staunch supporters of photographers – and there’s no question in my mind that this is true.
However, I wonder if there is a disconnect between art buying and the client. That is to say, do the account reps and agency executives have the same knowledge & appreciation of the value of photography that the art buyer does?
Because photographers deal with art buyers and AD’s every day, for me at least, there is big unknown when it comes to the mysterious dealings happening between the agency and the client – and that has the potential for the value of photography to get lost. A massive black whole, where the seller and the buyer rarely, if ever, communicate directly.
Now I could be way off here, but it seems to me that there is a role for agencies to not just fight a little harder for photo budgets, but also to educate clients. I wonder if, over the last 10-20 years, agencies have become fearful to lose an account and have lost their backbone. I’m not blaming art buyers (see above – I know how hard the fight) but there are many other corporate levels and interactions going on between agencies and clients that I am questioning.
Because I’ve noticed a trend – art buyers and agencies in general have become ‘yes men’ to the clients. While art buyers (and to a certain degree account reps) may be fighting, I believe that these battles are no longer being fought with the same passion or commitment as in the past. Is it just me, or do art buyers and account reps no longer have quite the same clout or agency support they once had?
While I genuinely appreciate the efforts of art buyers and art directors – who obviously would love to have larger budgets approved to execute their vision – it seems to me there isn’t the same incentive to do so as there once was.
Is it simply fear of the client, have AB’s lost the support of their bosses, are agencies rewarded by clients (like some cost consultants) for chopping budgets, or is it something else?
Perhaps this is the new norm – the fear of an agency pissing off a client.
It’s a shame.
Bacon:
I think that rolling over for the client is more a function of Accounts Services and the powers-that-be than the ABs. But, at the end of the day, if your job depended on you working within the budget provided and not making too big of a stink about it, I think most people would hold their noses and do what what necessary.
Like you wrote, too many are losing the support of their bosses. What choices to they really have in that situation then?
-Leslie
Agreed – AB’s may not have much choice here. That’s what concerns me. And why I’m asking why the agencies don’t take a stand – if for no other reason than to ensure their work (the creative, the ad) turns out as best as it can. I hear AD’s complain abut lousy budgets, yet the agency does noting abut it.
But who decides the budget? I’d like to believe that it’s a function of AB’s to be involved with this, not simply the client dictating, or worse the client pulling a figure out of a hat. Has the collaboration process gone missing? I’d like to believe the AB’s would provide insight into what it costs to produce an ad, and with the support of their agency, fight for an appropriate budget to work with the an appropriate photographer for the job (as decided collectively) and to create a great ad.
And if as you say the AB’s are loosing the support of their bosses, I wonder why the agencies senior people don’t stand up for the sake of executing the best they can. Surely it’s in the best interests of the agency to also push for appropriate budgets so their ads turn out as best they can. Isn’t the agencies reputation on the line? Don’t they want to produce great work more often?
Because I’m afraid what you’re saying is that money has trumped everything…. including the outcome of the creative.
Still hoping someone can provide additional insights into the inner circle of agency/client dealings. I think there’s an opportunity to make some positive improvements, not just for the photographers but the agencies and clients too.