| Author |
Messages |
|
Director Fox
Posts:48
 |
| 10/18/2007 8:21 AM |
|
There has been some conversation regarding the possibility of a new feature that Hector Arroyo has dubbed "Jamuse Approved" - basically, some kind of certification for jamusers that would give potential clients a measure of confidence that they are looking at the profile of a real professional, displaying his own work. The idea is to keep the level of quality on the site high, and to promote customer satisfaction by not making potential clients wade through page after page of hack work, looking for decent talent.
In the last Advisory Board meeting, David F. mentioned that, as the site opens up to greater numbers of users, he and his team will be looking to us to "self-police" the site to a certain extent. So, questions that are up for discussion include:
1) How would self-policing work? And would it be enough to keep Jamuse relevant to potential clients? (i.e. keep the portfolio feature from being clogged up by amateurs.)
2) If some formal approval process is adopted, who would vet the members, what criteria would be used, and how would that time-consuming process be paid for?
3) Would multiple tiers of user "status" create an artificial hierarchy that would be potentially unfair and needlessly complex? |
|
|
|
|
_sobule design
Posts:41
|
| 10/18/2007 9:48 AM |
|
While in a utopic and perfect world there'd be no need for any kind of certification or review process I think we should all appreciate that there does need to be a baseline or bar established. I guess the question is when where and how, right?
As simple as possible is becoming the mantra (and a good one), so maybe a simple review-by-peers could be a way to go? I'm just brainstorming so bear with me but it could work something like this: Applicant submits portfolio of relevant work. X number of the Jamuse community must review and/or approve, allowing the user's portfolio to go live.
It's a bit of a slippery slope but I'm fully on-board with the need for a baseline. Ideally the peer-review would consist of both designer/artist-types and client/end-user-types. While the there is a propensity for snobbery that's pretty much the way that any guild/association/organisation is set up. AIGA, RGD, etc, etc. Either one believes in and trusts in the system or one doesn't.
Because there are so many disciplines represented here a largely community-based review may be the easiest to initiate and keep rolling.
Jamuse as an organ and as a community must just establish what the basis for being part of the jamuse community entails, I suppose. Can anybody with a sharp stick and a sandbox post a portfolio or is there a requisite amount of experience or demonstrated competence required? Again, could be a slippery slope! |
|
|
|
|
Aaron Lea
Posts:4
|
| 10/18/2007 11:50 AM |
|
Ok, before I begin, I swear I'm a nice guy, but I'm just being honest, not a snob.
Because of advances in technology (with the help of P2P, Bittorrent and warez in general), our industry has become dilluted even more with "ankle biters" who install a copy of Photoshop, learn how to make the "fake wood effect" or "water droplets" and then consider themselves a designer. This in turn also devalues our work as well as creates a pricing structure that we can't compete with when someone has a nephew that can do it for them on the cheap.
So yeah, I'm all for something that distinguishes one from the herd.
-A |
|
|
|
|
Director Fox
Posts:48
|
| 10/18/2007 1:05 PM |
|
Instead of having "jamuse approved" users and "regular" users, you guys are suggesting that only "jamuse approved" people could become users in the first place. Makes sense to me. It saves a step, and keeps the level of the portfolio section high.
If we require a reasonable number of "thumbs up" ratings (10? 20?) for each applicant, the snobs and the sandbaggers should average each other out. Maybe the idea is that each applicant has to get 10(?) thumbs up before they get 10(?) thumbs down. If they're rejected, they can reapply later, but ostensibly they would be encouraged to develop some different portfolio pieces first.
A community-wide review should be fairly straight-forward to implement: the home page could have a link to "Current Applicants," which would lead to a page featuring the portfolios of everybody in line for approval. Sort of a "Hot or Not" of portfolio review. Along the same lines, to maintain impartiality, I would suggest that only portfolios be visible (to avoid people giving "thumbs up" to the cute graphic design student with a sexy profile pic, who doesn't know kerning from leading). |
|
|
|
|
Allan Burch
Posts:61
|
| 10/18/2007 1:35 PM |
|
Definitely, there needs to be a baseline set. It's always a tough call trying to quantify a level of quality in creative work. I might suggest the very minimum criteria for a prospective Jamuser, before a community review, be that they are published in whatever form their field considers published--ie. have done commissioned work for a client. "Published" would need to be defined so I don't get to second base for doing an illustration assignment commissioned for my grandparents' 50th wedding anniversary.
This bare-minimum criteria might save some review time and effort. |
|
|
|
|
Agnès Dodart
Posts:4
|
| 10/18/2007 11:32 PM |
|
I am really anxious to have some feedback from the founders of Jamuse on this thread!...
I was contacted to participate in the evaluation of this website as an "advisory board member"... so, somehow I am part of the "cross section" that Jamuse is trying to reach ... yet I am an unknown, self-taught digital artist, who doesn't run a business and doesn't have many credentials. Which means that I am just an amateur that doesn't actually meet the standards for being part of this community?
Oh well... |
|
|
|
|
Art Wright
Posts:0
|
| 10/19/2007 2:39 AM |
|
| There are five or six wannabee photographers even in my small, college town. I'm sure the numbers nation wide must be staggering. Every fool with a digital Rebel, a kit lens and his trusty pop up flash thinks himself a photographer. I would think a peer review (drawn from the prospect's specialty) would be the best way to keep the community strong... |
|
|
|
|
n/er/g communications
Posts:24
|
| 10/19/2007 5:47 PM |
|
This is an interesting theory. And quite honestly, one that i have mixed emotions about. However, i think the real question lies with in Jamuses goals and aspirations.
From what i can see (based on the responses to my vision inquiries) Jamuses reasons for existence is to create the internets largest community of creative professionals. And, in the process of doing so, offering web-based tools that help enabe those professionals to simplify and streamline industry specific business processes.
One could probably argue (and probably to a certain degree of success) that in fact the latter is most likely the underlying reason for existence, while the community approach allows them to reach the masses in the shortest amount of time. Not to mention with the least amount marketing and promotional expense. If this weren't the case, then why not just develop a stand alone creative community and scrap costly features that require increased storage needs and levels of security?
Now, before my critics jump the gun on my statement, i want to be clear that i don't take issue with this approach what so ever, if in fact this is the case. Personally, i would say that it's a smart strategy.
While this probably not be the right time or thread to discuss the inside details of their underlying model, I do think having a general understanding of jamuses future priorities would help us decide if we should proceed with further brainstorming/discussion of these ideas, or backburner them in favor of more mission critical solutions.
My feeling is If jamuses bottom line goal is to simply attract as many users to the site in hopes of monetizing features such as museworx, than i would venture to say implementing a system that complicates, weeds out, or adds a level of bureaucracy will only stand to undermine that objective. Does this make sense to you guys?
Disclaimer: If there was something that i missed (either from last weeks conference call or here on the boards) that has driven jamuse to look at addressing this specific need, please let me know and i would gladly offer my 2 cents.
- Alex |
|
|
|
|
n/er/g communications
Posts:24
|
| 10/19/2007 8:02 PM |
|
Posted By Agnès Dodart on 10/18/2007 11:32 PM
I am really anxious to have some feedback from the founders of Jamuse on this thread!...
I was contacted to participate in the evaluation of this website as an "advisory board member"... so, somehow I am part of the "cross section" that Jamuse is trying to reach ... yet I am an unknown, self-taught digital artist, who doesn't run a business and doesn't have many credentials. Which means that I am just an amateur that doesn't actually meet the standards for being part of this community?
Oh well...
This is one of the areas i too would have an issue with an "approval" process.
Like Agnes, i am self taught in some respects. Chief would be in the area of layout and design. However i believe when it comes to creativity, you either have it, or you don't. And no, that pretty piece of paper you have from the most prestigious design institute will NOT make me think otherwise. You cannot teach somone to be gifted or talented in their craft.
Point is this:
Despite my lack of "institutional training" or other BS certifications, i think that in a head to head challenge against some of the worlds largest agency creative depts, 80-90% of the time my ideas, execution and creative deliverables would equal, if not exceed, their finished products.
This is not a slam on those creatives, yet the internal mind-sets of some agencies that hold them back from finding truly great talent. And in some respects, certain clients who are blind in thinking that just because they hire a Deutsch means that they will get a much better creative product than with a smaller, unknown.
I think it's important to remember that at one point in our lives we were ALL amatuers. Yet some how we had the passion, drive and focus to propel ourselves and our craft to the next level. Why not use what we have learned from our experiences to help others achieve what we have (or hopefully more), rather than shut them out of an opportunity to help them grow their craft?
Imagine how great it would have felt (not to mention the reservations you could have gotten) had an artistic great such as Beethoven, Picasso, Elvis, Wayne Gretzsky, or Michael Jordan reference you and your work as a source of inspiration? Or better yet, find yourself in a position to mentor that next great artist.
I can definitely agree that in some of our disciplines we are cluttered with inexperienced artists who undercut and de-value our services only to make a quick buck. But from my perspective, i see this as an opportunity for the more serious artist to eventually be hired to clean up the lessers mess. In an odd, bass-ackwards way, this can prove to be a sort of "benefit in disguise" to the more expensive provider since the client was just taught a painful lesson about "getting what you pay for".
Personally, i didn't and still don't see the benefit of trying to add "client centric" features & functionality to the list of goals for jamuse. Same holds true for implementing a system like this that aims to help them filter out talent. I think if we took a step a back and focused on building a superior creative community dedicated to simplification, collaboration, engaging discussions of ideas, advancing ourselves/others and insightful member blogs/articles, deciding whether or not to implement this structure would be moot.
Why?
Because the Jamuse brand WOULD BE the difference between the professionals an so called "hacks".
Knowing this, where else wold prospective clients turn to find the best talent?
Think about it.
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
harroyo
Posts:9
|
| 10/19/2007 9:00 PM |
|
I see from Alex that I got credit for starting this post, so I better chime in.
First of all, good, thoughtful ideas. I do not have the right answer, just maybe a slightly different perspective.
My original thought was not really for the sake of the professionals, but for the sake of the buyer. The difference to me is, I can quickly assess if the person has talent by the work they create in the discipline I need. What I have labor at assessing is their character - do they get their work done on time, are they reliable, references check out, etc...I admit it is HR stuff and boring, but if I hire and they fail, I lose.
Almost all jobs are received through referral...in most industries; however, this is changing and sites like this are intriguing. Without a direct referral, I worry a lot. So a site referal has some merit, at least at first pass.
Now, that said, I like Alex's other suggestion of using the rating system in some way to give me an idea of the work that is rated. I would probably look there first. Then see who is certified and call them to talk.
A couple ideas on the above discussions:
1. I do not think having an entry qualification to jamuse could work as it is too subjective and I have no idea who would want to enforce it... I suppose there is some basic level of competence needed so we do not have to see photos of my kids, but so far it is pretty good quality stuff that I see. I suppose we could use the Inappropriate Content link to email the site and they could remove the Junk as well.
2. Amatuers or professionals - more reading, but there are many, many articles about "User generated content", such as this year's superbowl commercials. Agencies are purusing sites like Ebaums world to find undiscovered talent. Might be some kid with a video camera and a lot of Coke and Mentos, but if its entertaining...they want it.
So I guess I did not help solve anything, but "work rating" is a good start and it's already there. First pass HR stuff, would be nice, and we'd pay and are paying anyway.
H. |
|
|
|
|
n/er/g communications
Posts:24
|
| 10/19/2007 9:37 PM |
|
Well then, if we are trying to find a solution to address a providers character, what about implementing a feature that allows other artists or clients, whom a user has worked with, to rate them on a "collaborationalability" scale? (sorry, i'm a little tired at this point).
Seems to me if you don't deliver on your promises, those that are affected can help make it public. Might take a little while to build up, but as Hector said, this comes with the job as it is. At least this way, a tool is in place and available so other members won't make our same mistakes. Unless they choose to ignore the rating, at which point, i'm not sure there is a way to implement a stupidity feature.
I do think that if this was the direction, there needs to be some kind of ability for the artist to defend themselves. Similiar to ebay and their feedback system where you can post a "rebuttal". I'm sure just as Hector has bad freelancer experiences, we have all had our own bad client experiences. Wouldn't make much sense to make it a one way street, especially in a community dedicated to the talent.
-A |
|
|
|
|
Mungo Studios
Posts:34
|
| 10/20/2007 12:14 AM |
|
Here is my opinion for what it is worth. At a minimum I think jamuse approved should be the minimum business requirements to be considered a professional. If I am on a site with pros I would expect they understand the same problems I have as a business owner. I pay property tax on my pencil holder, so I can’t give work away because I have overhead. The invention of digital has created a different problem of people doing pro-bono to a fault, to where it can even drive prices to where it is far to undervalued. So I believe there should be some policing, but not on a “quality of work” level, as some of the most famous artists in history have had their work ridiculed by critics, however are they a legal professional? I think the asking of a tax ID would be a good deterrent to start, then maybe in addition a member of a professional organization. A lot of the people playing pro do not have any of these things, they may have a membership but don’t have a tax id or insurance etc.
A simple form faxed to Jamuse that has the following, Fed Tax ID, a business phone bill, liability insurance, then you are Jamuse Approved
I mean at a minimum isn’t that a professional business, just a thought.
|
|
|
|
|
Director Fox
Posts:48
|
| 10/20/2007 8:40 AM |
|
Mungo,
Interesting idea, but a couple of issues spring to mind:
1) Jamuse has members from all over the world. Not all countries have U.S./Canada style Tax IDs.
2) How many freelance illustrators and designers around the world (or in the U.S./Canada) actually carry liability insurance?
3) How many freelancers of all disciplines use their cel phones as their business phones?
I guess my point is that being a "small" freelancer or an independent contractor doesn't mean that a person is unreliable or unprofessional.
Given that the issue is more one of establishing jamuser's reliability than appraising their work quality, I think n/er/g may have hit the nail on the head when he mentioned the eBay feedback system. There have been a scattering of requests in other boards for a feature that allows users to post their references and client testimonials, so maybe an eBay-style system, complete with checks and balances (an "appeal" feature) would be a near-perfect fit. The only change I would suggest is that it would be nice to invite our existing clients to give us public kudos, without having to wait until we have a jamuse.com "transaction" with them. |
|
|
|
|
Mungo Studios
Posts:34
|
| 10/20/2007 11:26 AM |
|
The problem with ebay style feedback on a free site, is you create many free email accounts and many jamuse accounts and give yourself good feedback.
The "legal" business verification is usually opposed by the people that are not. I mean really even if you are using a cell phone it should still be a business phone line. At least if you are a business that follows the law. Most of the people that go to the big box store buy a computer and call themselves a graphic artist, and use the cell phone, is that not what we are trying to stop? Even in other countries every country has ways to verify that they are a business and have some sort of liability, in fact if they do not, I would really want to know that they do not have it. As I would not want to do business with them.
|
|
|
|
|
n/er/g communications
Posts:24
|
| 10/20/2007 4:54 PM |
|
Just to clarify - i mentioned ebay as a reference point to the concept. I am not necessarily saying that the ebay platform is the way to go, as much as i am saying the theory (tailored by jamuse.com) should fit the need.
To address the authenticity piece, ther e are many ways to combat a user creating fake accounts for feedback purposes. If for some reason there were still skeptics in the the majority of the community, then i would say only show a users feedback when/if there were wrong doings reported.
That said, I think now would probably be the best time for David, or someone else at Jamuse, to jump in shed some light on the subject. It was my understanding that jamuse was here to serve as a creative community - not necessarily a creative BUSINESS community.
While i can certainly appreciate Mungo's POV about wanting to collaborate/discuss creative business solutions with other creative business owners (just like i assume an accountant wouldn't want to talk to a dentist about tax codes, right?), i think the "assumption" aspect is a little off.
What i mean by that is this.
Simply having a tax id or a business phone number doesn't necessarily qualify you as a "business person". Just like i would say because a person has children doesn't necessarily make them a parent. In my book, both require a certain level of skill, passion/love, dedication, knowledge and simple common sense. Furthermore, in the business example, the cost of obtaining these legal credentials is litrerally a fraction of what it costs to purchase that new computer from the big box store. And, just like there is nothing in place to stop the "wanna-be" designer from buying that computer and phone, there is nothing out there to stop them from christening their new web browser on legalzoom.com's business registration page.
The way i see it - there is no silver bullet when it comes to these challenges. Jamuse could implement hundreds of processes, checks and balances, etc. but at the end of the day it's either going to turn people away (and probably because of such a high level of red tape in supposed web 2.0 community, not because the user may not have the requested credentials), or prospective user will get what it is they need to join (and the latter assumes that jamuse is so great that they can't live with out it.)
Unfortunately people part of managing in the business world, or owning your own business, means that we will make bad hiring decisons, bad partner choices, and many other bad business calls. This is just the nature of the beast. And it's also probably the best way to learn and develop YOU as a business person.
|
|
|
|
|
tiangcoDesign
Posts:5
|
| 10/20/2007 6:28 PM |
|
This subject hits a very fine line. Though we as professionals in our respective fields can differentiate some of those who are truly in the field, sometimes the "wanna-be" can get by our keen senses by copying or imitating other creative works. I support the user certification/"jamuse approved" feature but what if those who are professionals get turned away as well? There has got to be a way to weed out the "extra useless baggage" and keep the legit creatives in tact. Also, as far as using tax numbers and stuff like that, some professionals do not have things like that because they do not do freelance work or don't find the need to. I don't really know how to get around something like this but maybe the way to get references? I know this may be a lot of work but we need to think about this issue further...
|
|
|
|
|
Allan Burch
Posts:61
|
| 10/20/2007 7:26 PM |
|
There's another portal to which I belong, where the membership is by invitation only. A bit snobbish perhaps, but the caliber of work is phenomenal. The founders search for and invite potential members based on their own eye for quality and what they want represented on their site. I think members can invite others, but I'm not certain how it is then approved. There are some recent graduates there, but work is on par with the professionals. The only qualification is the few running the site have to believe in your work. I'm very comfortable with that model on that particular site, since the work is so high-level and it's great to rub elbows and share space with others whose work inspires me. They pay the bills with select advertisers and by charging a fee for job postings from recruiters.
In the spirit of brainstorming about this issue, maybe it just needs to come down to a select respected group from the advisory board saying yea or nay, no matter what the prospective member's background or credentials. If their work speaks for itself, then that should be a good sign to a potential client. If he or she is obviously serious about their work, they are more than likely serious about their business or eager to learn. This may come down to the simplicity issue. If a client can come to Jamuse and see the work is great, it should go a long way towards making the Jamuse brand equate with top-level talent, as Alex stated. |
|
|
|
|
Director Fox
Posts:48
|
| 10/20/2007 10:31 PM |
|
As n/er/g points out, nobody likes hassles, and as Hector mentions, any review process would be highly subjective. I'm starting to suspect that creating barriers to membership is likely both to keep out desirable jamusers (who don't feel like wasting their time jumping through hoops), and to violate the all-important KISS principle.
But, let's step back for a moment ... Jamuse isn't really a portfolio site as such, it's a portal for working creatives, built around the Jam file technology. Since the only people who have a reason to use Jam files are active professionals, it logically follows that the majority of people interested in joining Jamuse would be exactly what we all seem to agree a member should be: an active, creative professional.
So, since there's no way to agree on what makes someone a creative professional, perhaps a more elegant solution to the problem of undesirable members would be to focus on the "active" part of the equation. Just automatically cancel any jamuser's membership after 90(?) days of inactivity. If you haven't used a Jam file or contributed to the community (i.e. posted something in the forums) in three months, you probably aren't an active professional ... Or at least not one that needs to be on Jamuse.
Whaddya think? |
|
|
|
|
Mungo Studios
Posts:34
|
| 10/21/2007 11:04 AM |
|
Posted By tiangcoDesign on 10/20/2007 6:28 PM
This subject hits a very fine line. Though we as professionals in our respective fields can differentiate some of those who are truly in the field, sometimes the "wanna-be" can get by our keen senses by copying or imitating other creative works. I support the user certification/"jamuse approved" feature but what if those who are professionals get turned away as well? There has got to be a way to weed out the "extra useless baggage" and keep the legit creatives in tact. Also, as far as using tax numbers and stuff like that, some professionals do not have things like that because they do not do freelance work or don't find the need to. I don't really know how to get around something like this but maybe the way to get references? I know this may be a lot of work but we need to think about this issue further...
Simply having a tax id or a business phone number doesn't necessarily qualify you as a "business person".
But NOT having, immediatly dismisses you, does it not?
Let's not try to overcomplicate it, is the site for pro's, what makes someone a pro, then can they prove it, easy enough regardless of the country they are in.
I am a member of several affiliations that only allow pros. Some are global, it is not that difficult to prove if you are a pro. Again resistance is from those that are not, which is what it should be. That is why I said, I see this all the time, organizations that require proof of being a pro, are considered snobish, but then they are more respected from the true professional. pretty common for a lot of Pro organizations, must be referred by two members, have tear sheets, have a business license. That is why I even said in my first suggestion, or affiliations. So say for example if someone is already a member of the PPA, then they would just submit their member number.
So back to the bottom line, is the site for pros, or just for people that use museworx. Once MRGI answers that then a good solution should be easy to determine. |
|
|
|
|
RobertGoguen Photography
Posts:12
|
| 10/21/2007 11:36 AM |
|
Seems like this will take a team to do all the approvals for the thousands of daily inquiries!
I am here for museworx and the ease of large file transfer to my client! My client could care less about the jamuse "Certification Program"
I have been looking all over the Net and can't find anything that combines all these "large file"/project, client tools in one place.
I LIKE THE CLIENT TOOLS... and would easily pay for them once they are enhanced and perfected.
BTW, it seems clients who collaborate on projects become "members". Once they have a password they can upload files and create there own projects! |
|
|
|
|
_sobule design
Posts:41
|
| 10/21/2007 1:49 PM |
|
Good points, all.
Just a rhetorical question; if Jamuse is built around museworx functionality is the portfolio / recruitment argument somewhat moot? I'd hazard to say that many could use this site as a recruitment tool if it turned out that the talent whose portfolios are posted is of good/reliable/etc quality. Given the many ways in which Jamuse can be used; for portfolio display, collaboration through museworx, recruitment, etc many users will be using the sites for many different reasons...
So back on the topic of screening and/or approval, wouldn't many people with portfolios here be without businesses of their own if they primarily work for other firms? Every country has pretty specific laws around business practice, taxation, and even licensing so basing only on the possession of a business license of some kind may not be the way to go. If Jamuse equals great talent then Allen and Alex' suggestions about some type of jury, which though subjective, may be a good solution. Finding the jury is a whole other thread, of course. ;)
Bob, you're right; many of our clients won't care about any kind of certification programme whilst using JamFiles, but using this site for finding freelancers or posting jobs would benefit at least some baseline... Or maybe it's up to all of us to do our own screening and wade through the portfolios that don't interest us until we find the ones that do? There's a creative for every level and every price-range so maybe people who design fifty-dollar logos will be found by clients with fifty-dollar budgets?
It seems like this isn't such an easy question! A bunch of us are ending our comments with the question: Is this for pros, or museworx-users? Both? In which case maybe ones type of membership (portfolio-poster or museworx-user for example) would determine any type of screening? If one' s here for the museworx service then portfolios are of no concern and vice versa.
Just a couple more thoughts... |
|
|
|
|
Dreamspeaker Graphics
Posts:38
|
| 10/25/2007 6:07 PM |
|
I like Agnes was recruited by Bruce to be on the advisory board. I am a very small fish in a very large pond. That doesn't mean that I don't have talent or am not creative. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder is it not. There are some very good "artists" on here whose work I can appreciate but don't necessarily like and would not purchase. That doesn't mean they aren't any good.
And, whereas, I would love to get constructive feedback on my work and learn from others I don't think it is there place to judge whether I should be here or not. I was invited......
And to that, I even emailed Bruce and asked why? I don't have a degree in graphic design or a masters in fine art.
I am pretty much self taught. I took several years of courses at a Technical Institute years ago for graphics programs. But do I have a degree or a certificate. To that I can answer NO. But I have worked in aspects of this industry–book publications as a production artist/compositor for the last 10 years full time–many times 70-90 hours a week. My forte is InDesign and QuarkXpress. I have led many major projects dealing with page layout for major publishers such as Harcourt, Glencoe, HRW, Houghton Mifflin, Prentice Hall etc.
I have developed my own small company of one that I call Dreamspeaker Graphics because I want to branch out and become more creative. I have a portfolio on portfolios.com and one on createmagazine.com (which is featuring one of my pieces in their next issue–or so they have requested) and neither has requested certification.
Many famous artists were not "recognized" till after their death. Perhaps that is my case or maybe I won't even be recognized then. After all, I am not striving to be famous but to do and continue to do what I like and what I constantly strive to be better at.
Is the question here whether the person has a reliable, responsible work ethic or are they good enough to be here and by whose standards.
Pete
|
|
|
|
|
Walczyk & Young Studios
Posts:13
|
| 10/25/2007 7:22 PM |
|
Well said, Pete. I am a self taught photographer -- also invited by Bruce to jump in based on our Studio's portfolio on portfolios.com. And while I am a member of Professional Photographers of America, so can anyone be who chooses to pay the yearly initiation fee. It is not incredibly expensive, but it's also not cheap but in my estimation at least demonstrates a willingness and even eagerness to continue learning on my own and from other professionals. Additionally, PPA has a certification process and the programs in place to also earn "degrees" from the association. I also belong to a great workshop site which is a continuing source of education and inspiration -- photoworkshop.com.
While I understand everyone's desire to make this a place for clients to find qualified, reliable and outstanding creatives, I also think that it is up to that client to do their homework. The idea that someone working "for less" brings the whole industry down is not a particularly logical one. I think that everyone needs to remember that not all markets are big ones and the value businesses place on creative work have a lot to do with the market one is in. Yes, with the internet and sites like these, it has become a global market. We don't publish our pricing at our Studio and we quote our jobs based on the market out of which the request comes. Is this fair? Who knows? But in all liklihood, a larger company from a larger market is going to have different standards and criteria by which they judge the work/portfolios they see. And if they contact the creative based on the work they see here, they must have some interest in what that artist has to offer. And why shouldn't I charge them less from Wrightsville, PA than someone from Manhattan might charge. Am I bringing the industry down? I don't think so! My overhead, by virtue of where I've chosen to operate my business, is a hell of a lot lower. And why shouldn't I charge them more than I might charge the small or medium sized manufacturer here in PA. I guess my point is that there are more pricing models out there than one can shake a stick at -- the artist/creative must determine what value he places on his work and his efforts which must take into account a myriad of factors.
In the end, when the site goes public and it costs hard earned $$$ to put up a portfolio, those that are not seeing a return on the marketing $$$ because they are not getting any work from the site, will in all liklihood find alternative ways to market their perhaps less than stellar skills. We all want to be noticed and we all want the work -- it is going to have to be our work that sells us. Remember Max Ehrmann's "Desiderada" --
"If you compare yourself with others,
you may become vain and bitter;
for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself."
My apologies for ranting on . . .
Peace,
Dan |
|
|
|
|
Dreamspeaker Graphics
Posts:38
|
| 10/25/2007 7:30 PM |
|
Thanks Dan,
I appreciate your reply. Your quote says it all.
Pete
|
|
|
|
|
|