Represent

The reactions have been just about what I expected to the not-so-dramatic news of my leaving the agency. Mostly there has been support and well wishes, with a couple of the "you just made the best move of your career!" and "oh, wow, are you ok?!" thrown in for good measure. The handful of my clients, probably the most important category of individuals to measure against, who I've had the "Redux conversation" with over the last two weeks have uniformly not really cared at all. I'm sure there are a couple of others who will, but its ultimately business as usual at JLPFL, for which I'm thankful.

So it's late, I have a glass of bourbon at my side (I'm in training for this weekend's road trip to Bardstown), and though I'm not wearing sunglasses, smoking cigarettes, or driving to Chicago, I think I'm ready to try and dig into a little bit of discussion on agencies, being repped, and all of that mythical stuff. As follows are a few bullet points from a certain non-expert. Use them wisely.

* Becoming a fully represented photographer will not begin, end, save, or otherwise critically explode your career as a freelance editorial photographer. I know, it's very sad to hear, but is nonetheless true. There are no agencies out there that will be able to absolutely guarantee you work, and the top groups, to their credit, are extremely 100% up front about this fact.

* There are several other agencies out there who will use you and take advantage of your passion and hope for the future until you finally wake up and realize that it must stop. Do not work with people who do not respect photography. It will not lead you anywhere, especially when you don't own any of the work you've been making for peanuts.

* Technology and that Internet thing with the tubes, plus the shrinking budget of most major magazines, have changed the editorial game, which has changed the representation game. Agencies used to be much more important for the simple reason that it was more difficult for a New York picture editor to stay in touch with a Dallas-based photographer.

* Despite its philosophical possibilities, the Internet is still not a dire threat to agencies because a lot of photo editors are understandably dependent on hearing from someone they trust that a photographer is good enough to be given an assignment. And because the budgets are smaller, there is more pressure to ensure that jobs do not need to be completely reshot. And even if reshoots weren't a problem, there is just so much information to sort through and so many friggin' photographers out there that its hard to see through all of the shit and find good people to work with.

* Love or hate a giant agency like Getty, you have got to understand that using them can be an incredibly efficient way for an art director or picture editor to get a job assigned to a decent photographer in some location outside of the major media markets. Tight deadlines and massive marketing from the largest agencies make this all the more tantalizing for an editor.

* Great photographers are not enough to make an agency successful, especially in a declining editorial market. To compete with giants Getty and Corbis, an agency must make money on its archive. Even the small, cooperatives have got to make money somehow, which is to say that a photographer must understand that agencies are above-all businesses.

* Agencies with good reps are very good at getting your foot in the door with new clients which is one of the most important pros to being repped. Real, in-person relationships are what everything is about.

* Whether you are repped or not, you are still basically on your own to guide and promote your career. An agency can help and give you support, but you have got to understand that if you really want to grow then you have got to have a plan and stay focused.

* Just because you are lazy and hate to do your own promoting and invoicing is not really a good enough reason to give away 30-50% of your income to an agency.

* Agencies with large rosters of clients can not possibly support and promote all of them with the same enthusiasm and reliability. If you are thinking about joining an agency you want to know what the rep to photographer ratio is. Even the best reps can not handle dozens of semi-busy photographers at one time, and if you are in a large agency then you might want to think about trying to promote yourself within that firm to try and get better response from your reps. "Promote myself to my own agency? Are you crazy?" Yes, I am, and some of your colleagues are doing just that, staying in close touch with the reps.

* Photographers with a large and active existing roster of editorial clients have the most to lose when choosing to become fully repped. And you definitely do not need to be repped to have someone agree to add your images to their archive to boost resale potential.

I'm sure that I'll continue to have relationships, full or in part, in the future with agencies and my time with Redux has certainly taught me a lot. This small list is just the tip of the iceberg, but the night has finally caught up to me and I've said enough.

« Go to previous entry | Home | Go to next entry »

Comments (5)

What do you mean by "It will not lead you anywhere, especially when you don't own any of the work you've been making for peanuts." Is that WFH you speak of? Is the WFH with your agency or the magazine? You sign WFHs?

Jeff

Hey Jeff -

Yeah, I'm talking about WFH and buyouts, which are specifically aimed at younger photographers sometimes, who might be interested because they feel they must jump on any and every opportunity and think crappy deals its all a part of paying their dues. But on the other end, those photographers not only were paid less than what they deserved but they also can't resell any of the work because they don't own anything. Its just counterintuitive if you are trying to build a business.

I don't sign WFHs and rarely work under a buyout, except when the client has paid (a lot) for those rights. Most WFHs I've been offered are from publications, but there are several big wire services which match bad pay with a horrible contract that are lose-lose.

I have never understood the point of having an agent for editorial work. Financially it makes no sense to give 30% of $500 to a rep. If you include your overhead and cost of financing jobs for magazines you are probably better off moneywise to be an asistant.

Wow, John! Great insights. I think we're all evolving with the times...becoming both better businesspeaple and better photographers.

I would add one thing to what you said. I wish I was sharing your bourbon...

No, that's not it exactly. What I want to say is that it's incumbent on any photographer to be a self-starter. Agency or not, a photographer must have a vision and the motivation to execute that vision. Otherwise your ARE subject to the whims of the marketplace.

When it all comes together experience has taught me that the vision and its execution result in the discovery of markets otherwise unknown, assignment work out the wazoo and an increase in sales of existing pictures with or without an agency.

And once accomplished, you're no longer a freelance editorial photographer, but a photographer who pursues editorial work under their own direction and at their leisure...

John, Thanks for all of your sharing and participation in "our" community. It's crazy refreshing to watch those in our field invest with information back into our community. You insights on the rep deal is from my observation right on the money.

© 2006-2008 John Loomis. All Rights Reserved.