Opinions on Photography Websites - Categories for Photos

Mensch Maschine

Hi,

I'm having a website built for me at the moment. I've gone for a minimalist style with the gallery just being a horizontal scroll wit white background. No flash or fancy ****e, just a simple (what I'd consider timeless) site.

However, as a view (maybe not so much as a photographer or you can include that) do you think it's relevant to categorise photos or just but in a portfolio of the best you've done?

I know people will want to see what your even/gig photography is like and will go to that category. Is there anything to be said to just have a mixed bunch?

One recurring theme in my photos or one consistent thing is that all my photos are of people. Would something like that be enough or should I categorise them.

And if you categorise your photos, would you do it broadly? Like instead of Fashion, Portraits - you just put 'People?'

Any advice here? I'd love to know your opinions.

Thanks

humberklog

Hey MM what do you want to do with the web-site or the web-site to do for you?

Good event photographers do events well.

Good wedding photographers do weddings well.

Good artistic photographers do artistic photography well.

And so on with gigs, family portraits, fashoin, commercial, etc.

What I think makes most peoples sites look weak is when they spread themselves too thin and try to advertise all of the above (and more) on the one site.

Concentrate on your strong points to advertise that product. If your gig, event etc. work is not up to scratch then leave them out of the site. If you want to get work in the areas you're weak at then practice until you have the pictures to prove you have the skill sets.

More often than not a lot of Irish photography web-sites are advertising the fact the the photographer has a camera and not much else. And that's a real pity as they're flushing their strengths down the pan in a mishmash of weaknesses.

If your web-site's not intended to corner the market immediately in every possible field of photography then I would advise you to start off slowly and properly and display the work that is good and don't advertise yourself in areas where you have asperations but not yet the experience nor ability.

Mensch Maschine

Good Question and sound advice

Essentially I would like to do more fashion photography or portrait photography. I think I've been thinking about narrowing it down but not enough. You're right. I wont succeed as a jack of all trades. I suppose I need to build my portfolio up in the areas I want to work in. I think I wont be able to launch my site until longer than expected.

humberklog

Mensch Maschine wrote: »

Sound advice and nice imput.
Essentially I would like to do more fashion photography or portrait photography. I think I've been thinking about narrowing it down but not enough. You're right. I wont succeed as a jack of all trades. I suppose I need to build my portfolio up in the areas I want to work in. I think I wont be able to launch my site until longer than expected.

There was a thread recently focusing on a particular photographer's site (I won't link as the thread was, rightfully, locked. The site in question was advertising a home portrait service. A good idea and a very good price but the product as advertised by the sample pics was poor at best.
The real shame was that the photographer in question is a really good photographer. But the site in no way showed off her talents.

In your OP you say you're liking the simple sleek display so far. Well if you're enjoying that why not start from there? Have a simple site you like and let it build around your strengths.

No reason to hold back on putting the site live because you think you need more when what you're looking at, you like.

Mensch Maschine

Interesting.

Yes, about the design, the minimalism, I think it's popular in design but the idea is basically inspired by the idea of Led Zeppelin's manager never letting Zeppelin, release a single, if you want to hear the track you by the album - the first 3 albums didn't have titles and the fourth didn't even have Led Zeppelin written on it. It was just a photograph. So you couldn't really judge the band on anything else but the music.. Or Kraftwerks minimalist approach to music and art. They remain anonymous, letting the music speak. I wanted the photos to speak for themselves. Not Flash or anything else.

I appreciate your thoughts. I've been thinking about it for so long now. I want to get it right. I just hope I have a enough work, presentable enough for a live site. I think I'll use this summers light as the last run for shoots in prep for the site.

humberklog

One bit of advice on selecting pics is: Pick one shot, if you have 2 or three pics that are essentially the same subject but you're having trouble selecting the one you prefer then have a cup of tea and take more time.

Get it down to one and show it in either B+W or colour but don't do both.

Don't give people your unsureness. You're the artist and you know best.

Mensch Maschine

Thank you. This is great advice.

So that was another thing. Should I only put one photo from the one shoot or is it tacky (for want of a better word) to have more than one of the same shoot?

Basically, if you have more than one shot from the same shoot, is that moving in to 'it's own category territory?'

I appreciate you taking the time to reply.

humberklog

Mensch Maschine wrote: »

Thank you. This is great advice.

So that was another thing. Should I only put one photo from the one shoot or is it tacky (for want of a better word) to have more than one of the same shoot?

Basically, if you have more than one shot from the same shoot, is that moving in to 'it's own category territory?'

I appreciate you taking the time to reply.

If the photos are different (and are good) then show them for sure. I used the words "same subject" in last post incorrectly. The same subect can of course be in a different photo.

It's just that you can see repeats often. Same subject in essentially the same photo. Might be a slight different angle, lighting, B+W-Colour conversion etc.