Neil Danton

…the Caption –

is not a Press Release!!!

No no no no no, and NO. Did I mention “No”?

It may vary with small-circulation publications, where one man, a small dog and a packet of fruit pastilles are putting the whole publication together, but any publication which is large enough to have a picture editor do not want to see “PR speak” in an image caption.

Any of the following, which may have been included in the press release, do not need to be detailed in a caption:

“Exciting”, “Wonderful”, “Fantastic”, “Not to be missed”, “Sensational”, “Brilliant”.

A journalist or sub-editor can take the facts from a breathlessly-excited press release and translate them into copy that fits with the publication’s style, but the image editors don’t want to read through the BS.

To quote from Sgt Joe Friday in the classic old American TV series Dragnet: “All we want are the facts ma’am”.

That can be summed up as Who What When Where and Why.

Before I go through those, just a brief rewind to explain exactly what a caption is, because not everyone knows. I’ll try not to get too “techie” here, but the basics need to be understood.

Prior to the invention of digital cameras, photographers used to shoot film (imagine that!). The process of getting an image onto the page of a publication included making a print, which was used to make up the page of said publication. The caption (or detail) regarding the content of the image, was literally written out onto a label, and stuck to the back of the image. That way, anyone who came across the print could just flip it over and read whatever the image was about.

Then technology moved on and via a very unwieldy and painful process (before the interwebthingy and broadband) images started to be transmitted via telephone lines for faster delivery to publications (newspapers being the prime example of the need-for-speed). Trouble was, you couldn’t transmit a label through a phone line, so having the information regarding the content of the image somehow had to be transmitted along with the digital version.

Along came a bunch of brainy people including newspapers, agencies and software gurus, and created the IPTC. While that sounds like the abbreviation for a Trade Union, in fact it stands for International Press Telecommunications Council. This led to the standard method of including a caption, EMBEDDED INTO a digital image, known as the IPTC or Metadata information. With the appropriate software, anyone could now read the information relating to an image, including photographer details, copyright, and the “facts ma’am”, as detailed above.

This leads to an important point regarding PR images. In larger publications a press release and an image may go in different directions but will need to be tied back together at some time, so need to refer to each other. More on that in pt06 – The Distribution.

So what does the IPTC information look like? I’m glad you asked, because I’m going to show you. It depends on the software you are using to view, but basically all the information will be available, just in different formats.

The version I’ll show you is from the software I use to sort, select and caption my images – Photo Mechanic by Camera Bits. For me, and many pro’s worldwide, this is the bees-knees of photo software for fast editing. There are of course other types of editing software, and I’ve used quite a few, but for me Photo Mechanic is the daddy of them all.

This is a view of the application open on my desktop computer:

If we zoom in a little and highlight one image we are going to look at:

We can then click on an icon to see the IPTC info. This is the lower half that contains nothing of interest at the moment:

and this is the top half that contains the caption:

So back to the point of Who What Where When & Why. If we zoom in further to just the Caption field…

The “Who”:

The “What”:

The “When”:

The “Where”:

The “Why”:

On occasion, where an image might not be accompanied by a press release it is acceptable to include further information than the basics. Personally I add this after the main caption and my own details, and clearly label it as “EXTENDED CAPTION:”.

Remember that at the end of the day, the caption is the information that should be displayed underneath or at the side of an image in a publication. A novel is not necessary. In most publications there is generally only sufficient room for a couple of sentences – at most.

Previously: PR Photography 101 pt 04 The Shoot
Next up: PR Photography 101 pt 06 The Distribution

TTFN

…the Photographer.

You are on your own on this one. Of course I could make it easy for you and just suggest you use me, but I only work on recommendation. By that I don’t mean I need to be recommended to you, I mean you need to be recommended to me.

Only kidding! .

Mostly…

OK, so apart from recommendation, there’s always the interwebthingy where you can do a search, bear in mind that that it’s worth going down at least a couple of pages, instead of the top 2/3 entries. The top few results may not be the best photographers, they might just be good at SEO. This always assumes they have a web-site or blog. They might not have a web-site or blog? Oh come on, it’s 2010, it’s pretty much essential to have one, unless… they are sooo good, or sooo famous they don’t need to advertise themselves at all, or unless the quality of the images is just a tad embarrassing?

So you’ve found their web-site/blog, what’s the quality like? That’s a question on 2 levels:

What’s the quality of the web-site like? Does it look like something that’s been knocked up from a €10 template, or is it something that looks professional, so the photographer probably is.

What’s the quality of the images like? Are they in focus and correctly exposed? (Oh, you’d be surprised). Are they creative, innovative and any other ‘ive you can think of? Does it look like what you are looking for them to do might just be a step-beyond what they exhibit at the moment? It’s easier for a competent photographer to adjust from creative images to something more simple, than it is to go the other way. Is there variety, or is it all the same tired ideas over and over.

Is there a good range of recent images. It’s easy to blab about hypothetical commissions and how great one is. Where’s the “proof of the pudding”? Are the images you can view from paid commissions, where a client has trusted the photographer and paid a fee, or is it all images shot for personal projects or their portfolio?

What you are mostly going to need is someone who can work fast, be professional, and produce great results time after time, even when there’s not much to create images from. One of the main differences between wannabees & amateurs, and a professional, is the ability to think-up something fast, under time-pressure. To work quickly and accurately.

While we are on the subject of using a professional, are you sure the person you are thinking of using is one? Anyone can promote themselves as a professional, but only the real professionals will have bothered with the cost of Public Liability and Professional Indemnity insurance. Easy to check of course, just try and book them for a commission that takes place between 9-5, Mon-Fri. Use an amateur that got a nice camera for Christmas, and it might be amateur results that you get. It could be very difficult to explain the results to your boss and even more difficult to re-arrange that one-chance photo-shoot.

When you’ve found a professional, do they really know how it all works with regard to getting images “placed” in publications? Do they know all the picture editors, and some of the journalists as well? Sometimes it’s not what you know…..

Lastly, what’s their personality like? Actually let’s not run before we can walk. Do they have a personality? Not something you can detect from a web-site, it’s going to need at least a phone call and maybe even a face-to-face. Remember that you might be putting this person in front of your CEO, or they will be your representative when the VIP/Dignitary arrives, so someone that can conduct themselves in a professional manner might enable you to keep your job a little longer!

Lastly, yes I know I’ve already said lastly, so this is lastly lastly. It’s like p.s. and then p.p.s. It’s my rules and I make them up as I go along.

Lastly lastly, can they provide references? Be a little cautious if the referee and the photographer have the same surname! Quality references. Blue-chip companies or institutions, not just the local grocer (sorry local grocer).

Finally (look I can’t go through that Lastly thing again), the fee. Does it include everything you need from the shoot, or is a low-price to get the commission, and then you are going to get stung for “extras”, which are actually “essentials”. I despair sometimes when a phone call starts with “How much…?” It usually means “If you’re the cheapest…”

Does cheapest get you best, or even adequate? Do you drive the cheapest car on the market, or drive the one that’s appropriate for your requirements?

Previously: PR Photography 101 pt 02 The love-hate relationship
Next up: PR Photography 101 pt 04 The Shoot

TTFN

…metaphorically and literally.

When on a commission I normally try and get the “safe” shots first, and then go for something more interesting. In this instance though, because of the timing being rapidly approaching dusk, I went the other way around.

This commission was to create some images for the launch of the Ashbourne & Purcell cup-finals week-end. These are competitions for 3rd level institutions (University age) in the sport of Camogie. Camogie is the ladies form of the men’s game of hurling with a few subtle rule changes. It looks a bit vicious with lumps of wood being flailed around, but has less injuries caused than Gaelic Football.

As always I was trying to think up something that would be a little bit different and when they sky started turning nice I knew I had the shot in mind.

So in reverse order of timing, the standard shot:

Two-light, no modifiers.

The slightly more interesting shot:

One light, white shoot through.

The nice sky (and the “oops missed shot”):

and the, well you decide:

Two-light, no modifiers.

TTFN

…the Love-Hate Relationship.

So in pt01 we went over what the definition is, now I want to cover how Commercial Photography for Public Relations useage can be used as a lower cost alternative to Advertising photography, and why that brings about the sub-title of the post – The Love-Hate Relationship.

Newspapers and magazines make their revenue from one source and one source only, advertising revenue. Forget the cover price of the publication, that hardly covers the cost of distribution, let alone office overheads, staff, printing, long lunches down the pub and other costs.

While not totally irrelevant at the moment, I’m going to ignore the declining revenues as a result of declining circulation where newspapers are concerned. This is a whole other subject that revolves around whether they should provide their content on the interwebthingy for free, put it behind a pay-wall, or create an app for the iPhone or the new Apple gizmo (the iPod Touch on steroids). For the purposes of this post it’s irrelevant, the same principles apply whether advertising revenue is 50% of what it was, or 150%.

The same premise applies. They would much prefer you pay to place an advertisement or advertorial that they can charge you a healthy sum for.

An advertorial is an advertisement that is designed to look like an editorial article, but isn’t. Somewhere, in very very small typeface on the advertorial will be a statement along the lines of “This is an Advertisement”. This is because newspapers are supposed to provide “objective commentary” and adverts clearly aren’t. Therefore the publication is required to point out that the space the advert is taking up has been paid for, just in case it’s readers can’t distinguish between real editorial articles and what is basically a press-release.

So they want you to pay, but you don’t want to, or can’t afford to, pay their rates. Rates obviously vary across different publications, but are loosely based on circulation, and also for magazines whether you choose Monochrome (black & white), spot colour (one colour) or 4-colour (colour to you and I).

Compared to the rate you would pay for an advertisement though, on a size versus size basis, instead of the advert the publication would really like there, for the same space your PR image occupies the fee you will pay for a good PR photographer will be a fraction of the cost.

It can work out to be a bargain then.

Only thing is, remember in pt01 the bit about “speculatively sent to a publication”. That’s the downside. Unlike an advertisement, there is no guarantee a PR image will be used. Even with a positive indication from a publication (in the case of a newspaper) that an image will be used, it’s still possible to get “bumped” in the event of a late-breaking dramatic news story – fire, flood, politician making a sensible statement, z-list starlet falling out of a taxi…. All the important things we need to know about.

So on the one-hand publications really want you to pay for advertising. On the other-hand, and here’s the love-hate relationship bit, sometimes they may not have enough content to fill all their pages, and rather than pay to use non-commissioned images, they might be inclined to use a PR image if it’s of sufficient quality, and it relates to a story of sufficient interest. Other times they have more than enough content, in fact sometimes so over-subscribed they can’t even fit in images they’ve commissioned and paid for.

More2f in a later post on getting “bumped”, settings your sights realistically on your target publications, and the sheer volume of imagery you are competing with.

So as the old saying goes, you pay your money and you take your chance. Pay heavily for advertising and guarantee placement, or pay a lower fee for publicity images and understand that there is no guarantee of usage. It’s going to take a bit of effort, timing, creativity and sometimes yes, just luck, for everything to fall into place just right.

That’s where it’s important that you choose the right photographer. Not only do you need one that can create great images, can be creative (even sometimes create something out of nothing), you also need one that knows the system, the way it all works in order for you to have the best chance of those images being used.

Spookily, that’s the subject we are moving onto in the next episode.

Tune in next week. Same time, same channel.

Previously: PR Photography 101 pt 01 The Definition
Next up: PR Photography 101 pt 03 The Photographer

TTFN

…the Definition.

So here we go, the start of a short series for a few weeks on the Monday post regarding Commercial Photography for Public Relations use.

The intention is to give some guidance to those who are not PR professionals, don’t have or intend to use the services of a PR consultant or agency, and intend to go-it-alone in getting their message out. Well, some help with the photography side of it anyway. This whole idea comes about as a result of repeatedly explaining the process in phone calls and emails, so I thought I’d do it once, and then point people to the blog. So it’s just me being lazy really!

So what is PR photography? Well as far as publications are concerned they consider it to be advertising photography for cheapskates. Ouch! That’s a bit harsh isn’t it? Well, yes and no. Stick with it, all will become clear in the fullness of time, when I explain a little further about the love-hate relationship publications have with PR images.

So let’s get going by defining the types of (professional) photography.

In essence there are only three:

Retail
Editorial
Commercial

That’s it.

So where is the PR photography then? Well, even though it sometimes appear to have morphed into it’s own category, in fact it’s commercial photography, but the images are used in an editorial context. Before we get too far ahead of ourselves, here’s a brief summation of the 3 types, which are defined by the USAGE of the images:

Retail. Anything where the photography is aimed at the general public (consumer) to purchase. The easiest one to relate to is Wedding Photography, but would also include family portraiture, school photos, prints (landscapes, seascapes) and “fine art” (no further comment on the last one).

Editorial. What you see in newspapers & magazines – sort of. Mostly what you see, without all the PR stuff!!

Publications either:
a) Commission the photography, via their own staff, freelances or agencies, or
b) Use images that are sent to them speculatively by freelances or agencies

a) Means they pay the commissioned photographer whether they eventually use the images or not.
b) Means they only pay if they use the images… or only pay if you catch them… or don’t pay very much.

Commercial. Everything else from A-Z. Advertising through to… OK I can’t think of a z at the moment. A vast range of image uses though.. Billboards, brochures, POS, marketing aids, blah blah. In Commercial Photography it is generally the USAGE of the images that determines the fee. As far as PR photography goes, the USAGE is distribution to the media (newspapers & magazines) for publication, nothing else (well almost nothing else).

The definition I use for Public Relations Photography usage is this:

“Images that are speculatively sent to a publication for editorial use, without payment to the publication”

The “without payment” bit means that the client isn’t paying the publication to guarantee usage (that’s advertising), but supplying the images to the publication on the off-chance they will be used.

It also means that the PR client commissions and pays the photographer to create the images, and the publication may use them without payment to either the PR client or the photographer, which just might encourage them enough to use them.

A small note of caution: Reference should be made that any images sent to a publication may only be used in relation to the caption* or Client’s press release. It could transpire that those images of the CEO that were taken for a business article might otherwise be used when if the CEO turns into a mad axe-wielding murderer one day and a publication wants an image to highlight the court appearance. Bang goes the client-photographer relationship if that happens. Of course it won’t stop them doing it…

Caption* – more on that at a later date.

Next up: PR Photography 101 pt 02 The love-hate relationship

TTFN