Why no business?

A number of you have mentioned removing the Wildlife and Nature link. I'm not sure I really want to do that altogether. What if I changed it from Wildlife and Nature to Other Interests and separated the link from the other by placing it further below the Contact link?

huntersdad wrote in post #15959358
A number of you have mentioned removing the Wildlife and Nature link. I'm not sure I really want to do that altogether. What if I changed it from Wildlife and Nature to Other Interests and separated the link from the other by placing it further below the Contact link?

I think having two websites would be better. Potential clients are interested in what you can do for them. Your site for getting business should stick to that topic. The only way to let in the wildlife photos would be to put a very few of them in an About Me section, which would feature a short bio including your education, employment, and family.

As to the website. Never publish unfinished work. Never. You wouldn't send a customer a photo that you had only started editing.

Everything you put into the wild is part of your brand. This is a critical piece that others have mentioned as well.

You just recently had the YM send out an email trying to get work. Let's assume for grins that a parent went to your web page 10 minutes ago. You're not getting business from that parent or any parent they speak with.

Is it me or what that your website by Smugmug look really early 90's HTML design? I am using Firefox and IE8. Both display your site as pretty bare with small image thumbnails. If that is the case, you need to drastically improve that. First impression is critical.

You are competing with perhaps the most crowded sub-group in the photography industry right up with wedding photography. Portrait photography is about making the connection b/t you and potential clients. Your works have to be top draw.

If anything, you should ask yourself WHY do you want to take photos of strangers? WHY should the very same strangers pay you?

This is harsh but...

The whole website screams "GWAC."

whenever I see websites that are TRYING to get the portrait business but their portfolio is chock-full of landscapes, wildlife and, well, anything BUT portraiture, I immediately think GWAC. It says to me that you really like doing landscape and wildlife photography but you're only doing portraits because there is money in it. I can pretty much assume that your heart isn't in portraits, it's in wildlife and landscapes.

Anyone can buy an entry level DSLR from Costo and a cheap prime and get the portrait shots in your portfolio. If I'm going to pay to get portraits done, I want someone who knows how to use off-camera lighting outside, I want someone who knows how to pose people in a flattering way. I want creative, unique portraits, and I just don't see that here.

The watermark on the photos is a played-out font straight out of MS Office suite, slapped on in Photoshop or LR, and just screams GWAC. If you're going to watermark your photos, brand it! Because anyone on Windows can copy that watermark.

I see some shots on your site that miss the focus. And some shots I just don't understand at all -- one of the couples on the site is obviously photographed in their (or your?) backyard. That's fine for family snapshots, but I don't know - I'm sure there are more compelling places to shoot in your area, rather than a suburban neighborhood. This, to me, screams lack of creativity. This is a very competitive business!

I can't say if a client -- especially someone with no understanding of photography -- would think the same way, about all I wrote, though.

I know you said you updated the design of the site, but it still looks very '90s/Geocities-era to me. This is the kind of site I would've made back in 1998.

veritasimg wrote in post #15960081
Is it me or what that your website by Smugmug look really early 90's HTML design? I am using Firefox and IE8. Both display your site as pretty bare with small image thumbnails. If that is the case, you need to drastically improve that. First impression is critical.

You are competing with perhaps the most crowded sub-group in the photography industry right up with wedding photography. Portrait photography is about making the connection b/t you and potential clients. Your works have to be top draw.

If anything, you should ask yourself WHY do you want to take photos of strangers? WHY should the very same strangers pay you?

The concept of glass houses comes to mind.

Presently I am on a very fast connection and I don't have a data cap to think about. If I were at home where connection can be iffy and such, I would not stay on your site for any length due to the images being so heavy. Is it really necessary to have such large file sizes? Is page load time no concern in Vancouver?

Alright, the wildlife link is leaving. I have rewritten the About Me and Investment page with a more professional tone. Some of you may still not like it but I'm not a writer.

I have also added a couple pictures back to the portfolio tab until I can get find some willing subjects.

Several people have commented that the site feels old. That doesn't really tell me anything. If you are going to complain about the site, give me some examples of things to change.

Missy, you have a PM btw.

Brad, I wanted to commend you for opening yourself up for C&C. So many times we see someone ask for help and then defend themselves against any change. I think your attitude will really help you move forward.

Thanks Chris. I have learned a lot from this board and continue to participate here despite switching to Nikon. I have found almost everyone to a great help and no doubt a wealth of knowledge. As I am serious about making this work, I am not above receiving harsh yet honest and helpful criticism.

Hearing and applying are two different beasts. Luckily I am capable of both.

This is the most well thought out, straightforward, honest, blunt yet compassionate and helpful string of posts I've read in the business forum yet -both on the questioner and response side.

Just wanted to say thank you all.

Michael

huntersdad, I don't think your web site is killing you (as I look at it today). I doubt it will win you clients either. From my perspective it's tough for any web site to do that. It's all about the images and the personal connection. With the proliferation of cameras and photo-sharing I think you are left with two choices to succeed in portraiture: (1) Sell the heck out of yourself and be a good+ photographer; or (2) Be an amazing photographer and let your shots do most of the heavy lifting for you.

Can you explain why Wildlife & Nature still have a title on your homepage? Particularly when you want to do portraits, but don't have a Portraits heading.

My suggestion would be to remove the Wildlife & Nature title from the menu bar as it is now... and make the initial page of the Portfolio have various genre headings (e.g. portraits, wildlife, etc.)

I also agree with what was said above about the watermarking. It would look much better if you had just used your logo instead of that standard typeface for a watermark. Again, the branding...

CrackedLens wrote in post #15960358
This is the most well thought out, straightforward, honest, blunt yet compassionate and helpful string of posts I've read in the business forum yet -both on the questioner and response side.

Just wanted to say thank you all.

Michael

I agree. Things can get ugly sometimes but it's nice to see threads like this. Blunt criticism is the only way to improve. It's painful and nobody really likes getting it, but if you can resist the urge to get angry and actually use the info, it helps.

drvnbysound wrote in post #15960363
Can you explain why Wildlife & Nature still have a title on your homepage? Particularly when you want to do portraits, but don't have a Portraits heading.

My suggestion would be to remove the Wildlife & Nature title from the menu bar as it is now... and make the initial page of the Portfolio have various genre headings (e.g. portraits, wildlife, etc.)

I also agree with what was said above about the watermarking. It would look much better if you had just used your logo instead of that standard typeface for a watermark. Again, the branding...

Working on the W&N link. I have the logo as a vector file which means nothing to me, so I'll have to figure out (or have some help) getting it into a watermark.