Advertisement Critique...

Hello all, I am putting together a half page B&W ad for a bridal magazine, and was wondering if anyone

had any helpful advice or comments about what I have so far.

 

Thanks so much in advance.

 

Todd<div></div>

Oh, I know the type looks pretty junky because I had to recude the ad a lot to meet the

maximum posting limitations of photo.net.

I love that. I would totally go to your website if I saw that ad. It's clean and gorgeous. I

wouldn't change a thing.

There are 4 factors that affect the performance of an advertisement:<p>

 

* The headline<p>

 

* The graphics/layout (including text)<p>

 

* The offer, and <p>

 

* The call to action<p>

 

This advertisement:<p>

 

* Doesn't have a headline<p>

 

* Has only "Flag-waiving graphics"<p>

 

* No offer, and <p>

 

* No call to action<p>

 

In terms of performance, if someone happens to see it when they're looking for a photographer - then it's possible (but unlikely) that they'd give you a call. If your advertisement appears amongst a group of similar advertisements then it becomes a lottery.<p>

 

A good (business) advertisement by definition must return you more in profits than it costs you in advertising expenses. If this kind of advertisement is cheap then you may care to take a gamble (as one does perhaps with a "lucky dip" lottery ticket), but if it's costing you serious money I'd say it's odds on that it'll be money down the drain.<p>

 

Sorry to be so brutal!<p>

 

Hope this helps,<p>

 

Cheers,<p>

 

Colin

I will disagree slightly from what Colin stated, in that, the content of effective advertising has to also take into account the target market. I wholeheartedly agree that if you are in the plumbing or pizza business then a traditional ad with an "offer" and/or "call to action" may be required to grab attention. But with the art field, many times a simple and elegant approach is just as effective. Most if not all of the photographer print ads in the local wedding magazine are crafted just as Todd's is -- an elegant image with minimal text -- and most are highly effective. Just my take.

He's making those duck lips- that's the only thing I don't like about it :)

The headline: None really needed. The ad is self explanatory. It's for wedding

photography, not wedding copy.

 

The graphics: these work fairly well. The strong diagonal is interrupted by the couple who

lead your eye back into the page and hold the viewer. It's not the expected wedding image

so it'll get noticed in a "sea of the usual".

 

The offer: also self explanatory. It's soliciting a specific type of wedding photography in a

targeted media, a Bridal publication.

 

The call to action: a web site URL is a noncommittal call to action. The public knows this.

 

 

The only cavate I'd put forth is that it'll further target people looking for work of this

type ... which after looking at your web site Todd, I'd say is exactly what you should be

doing. (BTW, the pic of the young couple looking at the P&S digital camera is great ! )

I like it. Even though you show a bride and groom, you don't lock yourself strictly for weddings. People pick up bridal magazines even when they're not getting married. At the beauty salon, waiting rooms, etc. You never know where your ad will come across, even if it is in a bridal magazine. You said it's a half page, can you specify getting the right hand page and on top? If so, I would do that, because that's where we tend to look first when we turn the page.

 

I will say this, I just zipped to your website, which I like, but for consistency I would have this ad's photo pop up first, and you have it in color, I prefer it in B&W. I didn't realize your logo was two linked rings until I saw it larger. But I like that too.

Hi Todd:

 

I like it as well. It appears simple and classy, plus it has a little twist on the traditional (angle shot, strong background). If you go into any high end store (terrible analogy but hang in there with me) you will see a lot of space and not to much "going on". Take that same store and go to the clearance part of the store and everything is shoved into one space, racks are very close together and you don't get that feeling of high class anymore. That is what the photographer is now trying to do with a more simple add. You want to create a feeling of simple perfection. High end and not cluttered. Perfect example here the only thing I worry about is sometimes bridal magazines don't reproduce really dark black and whites well. Their contract levels never seem to be right on so I tend to choose something with less contrast because it may loose something (or may not). Look at the same image with less contrast and make sure you still love it! Good luck, print ads can be tricky now a days!

I like the shot - sure the kiss is a little forced but the composition is strong - I might bring the vignette down a little, her dress looks a little shadowy. The middel stack whatever you call it could be toned down (the brightness) using curvers or some slight burning. Sky looks so nice I wonder what in would look like in color too. No problem with the text.

Photograph is excellently executed...but I found it cold as far as an advertisement...IMO

Marc Williams wrote:

 

<i>"The headline: None really needed. The ad is self explanatory. It's for wedding photography, not wedding copy."</i>

<p>

The headline is what stops a reader dead in their tracks - and invites & entices them to learn more. It affects the performance of an ad by up to 10,000%. If they don't read the headline, they're not going to read the rest of the ad - which in this case is somewhat of a problem - as it doesn't have a headline, but then again, it doesn't have anything else to read either. Remember that good advertising is "salesmanship in print" and "salesmanship multiplied by the media". If you had a prospect in front of you - and you had the opportunity to give them all the reasons why they should buy from you, would your total response be "www.abcxyz.com"?

<p>

<i>The graphics: these work fairly well. The strong diagonal is interrupted by the couple who lead your eye back into the page and hold the viewer. It's not the expected wedding image so it'll get noticed in a "sea of the usual". </i> <p>

 

You're referring to graphics in a photographic sense - I'm referring to them in an advertising sense (typeface, layout, images, response mechanism etc).

<p>

<i>The offer: also self explanatory. It's soliciting a specific type of wedding photography in a targeted media, a Bridal publication.

</i><p>

No - it's not "self explanatory" - put purely and simply it's non-existant.<p>

 

<i>The call to action: a web site URL is a noncommittal call to action. The public knows this.</i>

<p>

Again, no - it's not a "non-commital call to action" - there is no call to action. There's nothing here that will stop the reader dead in their tracks - put the magazine down - and go to the website. If they turn to the next page, your toast.

<p>

With 1/2 a page at the OP's disposal there's ample space to create a headline to flag them down - and sufficient body text to give them compelling reasons as to why they should call - and a strong motivator to do it now.

<p>

I'd suggest that the OP invests in some of the better advertising material out there - I'd recommend the likes of "Scientific Advertising by Claude Hopkins (the grandfather of modern advertising)" and "Ogilvy on Advertising by David Ogilvy (the father of modern advertising)" and "Tested Advertising Methods by John Caper (living advertising legend)".

<p>

Unfortunately, it's my opinion that this type of advertisement (to be honest, it's not really even an advertisement - it's merely a photo with contact information, not powerfull salesmanship) often this kind of thing gives the creator the "warm fuzzies", but it won't be anywhere near the powerful sales tool that it could be. About the best the OP could hope for would be to not loose too much money on it.

<p>

So sorry to sound so negative. I used to do this professionally in a previous life and the harsh reality is that most ads written by the end users and sales people just don't work - but the real kicker is that most business owners don't even notice because they never test the results in the first place - that's why many business have a budget for advertising - they see it as an expense. If you have an ad that costs you $1000 to run - and every time you run it you know (through testing) that it's absolutely, catagorically, going to earn you $5000 - what's your budget for it? (how often would you run that ad?).

<p>

Most ads just don't work - unfortunately, this will be one of them.

<i> If you had a prospect in front of you - and you had the opportunity to give them all the reasons why they should buy from you, would your total response be "www.abcxyz.com"?</i><P>

That might be a valid criticism if the ad consisted of blank page with nothing but "lafflerphotography.com" printed on it. You're treating the image as nothing more than a place to put text, but here, the image <b>is</b> the message.<P>

<i>"The offer: also self explanatory. It's soliciting a specific type of wedding photography in a targeted media, a Bridal publication."<P>

No - it's not "self explanatory" - put purely and simply it's non-existant. </i><P>

I think you're grossly underestimating the intelligence of his target audience if you think they won't understand what this ad is offering.<P>

<i>Unfortunately, it's my opinion that this type of advertisement (to be honest, it's not really even an advertisement - it's merely a photo with contact information, not powerfull salesmanship) often this kind of thing gives the creator the "warm fuzzies", but it won't be anywhere near the powerful sales tool that it could be. </i><P>

Look through any fashion magazine to see big-budget examples of this kind of non-advertisement. Selling style is different than selling plumbing services.

Love the ad. Completely disagree with Colin (sorry Colin!) I think it's simple, clean and perfect

just the way it is. Good stuff Todd!

This is a good exercise to discuss different ways and principles of advertising.

 

Colin, you are not wrong in some of the principles you bring forward. But they were never

meant to be applied wholesale to all advertising ... and the environment has change

considerably since some of the "legends" you mention wrote their books (not that much of

it isn't still valid in many circumstances). That said, the authors mentioned are excellent

reading for those embarking on marketing efforts.

 

In this case, if Todd's image doesn't attract the prospects attention, then no amount of

text will convince them otherwise. It is not often that the communication element is also

the product being sold ... photography. The consumer is, as Mike implies, visually savvy

these days.

 

The image he chose is one that Todd feels represents his "style" of shooting. To use

advertising language, it "positions" him in his market. Mike is right in that style is the

thing being sold here.

 

In today's marketplace, vertical media (specialized magazines like Bridal/Wedding) has

further narrowed the audience to those that are there for a very specific reason. With a 1/2

page ad you have to select a key communication point to deliver in seconds.

Positioning is without a doubt the single most important thing Todd has to get across in

his ad. It is important that prospects know this so they will be self-selecting.

 

If a headline were added, I would suggest one that further solidified the "positioning"

message. For example, I use the line "Romantic Photojournalism" © with a wedding

image that is exactly that, "romantic and journalistic" in style. It leaves little doubt what

type of wedding photography I do. My clients come looking for that style, and I get zero

prospects looking for more traditional approaches.

 

Not long ago, wedding photography ads had to carry a more complete story, but in this

day of instantaneous access to deeper content via the web, fitting yourself to the client's

needs in terms of "photographic style" is the gateway to further contact.

 

BTW Colin, not only have I read the legends, I've met some of them or worked with them,

including some not mentioned (like Bill Bernbach and Lester Wunderman).

Now what I personally haven't done is what Todd asked ... offer an opinion of the ad itself.

 

Todd, with the concept of "style" being your positioning focus, I question the choice of the

image you used.

 

After visiting your site, I was deeply impressed with some of your work. Many shots had as

much stopping power as the one chosen, but had a deeper emotional connection. Were I

you, I'd study the choice harder and try a few other shots prior to spending the media

dollars.

 

Nice work.

Time will tell I guess. I'd be interested in knowing 3 things:

<p>

1. Cost of running the ad,

<p>

2. Marginal net worth of a new customer (or at least an allowable cost of advertising per new customer), and

<p>

3. The yeild of the ad

<p>

Perhaps the OP would be good enough to keep us informed?

<p>

[speaking generally here] The problem I have with many peoples comments to advertising is that they forget what the purpose is. The great Claude Hopkins once said (paraphrasing to the best of my ability at 11pm!) "I don't want you to tell me that the advertisement was funny - I don't want you to tell me that the advertisement was entertaining. I want you to tell me that the advertisement was so compelling that you went out and bought the product". If - <b>and only if</b> - the advertisement does this can it be classed a success. And again I apologise, but I don't think that this ad is going to do that.

<p>

It's going to appear in a magazine where people are going to be casually turning pages to a rhythm - and I don't think it has the ability to stop people dead in their tracks thinking: "WOAH" - browser please - probably at best "nice shot ... next page". If they turn over to the next page, you're history. If they go to the website and don't buy, you're history. In a business where I suspect that far more weight is given to recommendations from friends, I can't see it being profitable.

<p>

It's been mentioned that we now live in a different environment to those of our marketing ancestors - true of course, but having said that human nature remains the same. People respond to compelling reasons - the respond to points of differentiation - and they respond to risk reversal and/or cast iron, self-punative, guarantees.

<p>

If it were me I'd structure something like (keeping in mind, 11pm plus here - not the time for my best copy-writing)

<p>

<center><h3>In need of a wedding photographer?</h3></center><p>

 

<center><h3> ... Here's 3 darn good reasons why you should use Todd Laffler Photography:</h3></center><p>

 

1. Weddings are a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity - failure of the photographer to capture all of the right moments just isn't an option. But unfortunately it happens all too often with many inexperianced photographers. Here at Todd Laffler photography we stand behind all that we do. If we shoot your wedding - and you're not happy - then we will dryclean the brides dress & the grooms suit, re-create the flowers, re-book the church, re-invite the guests, and do it all again for free.

<p>

2. We take tremendous pride in what we do - all images are captured with state-of-the-art equipment and then individually processed to ensure that each and every one is nothing less than "pure perfection"

<p>

3. We print our images only on the finest quality materials that are guaranteed to last over 120 years. Should one of our images ever fail to live up to your expectations (or even get damaged accidentally) then it will be our pleasure to replace it for you at no cost.

<p>

For more information, please visit our wesite - if you book our services on or before 4pm on August 4th it will be our pleasure to gift to you an additional "parents edition" wedding album (valued at $475) with our compliments (please enter the magic code "B&WAD1" on the website to qualify).

<p>

[include several well-chosen smaller photos with the ad]

<p>

1. It's got a headline<p>

2. Graphics need not be anything complicated<p>

3. Has an offer<p>

4. Has a call to action<p>

5. Targets fears of bride and failures of other photographers<p>

6. Employs risk reversal<p>

7. Has ad tracking/response mechanism<p>

8. Provides a point of diferentiation, allowing higher price point.<p>

<p>

Risk reversals (as sketched out above) often freak people out, but if you work to a system pre-qualify carefully - act in good faith - and charge more bacause of it, then you'll find that dis-satisfaction seldom occurs - and if by change it does once in a while then you're still streets ahead financially becuase you can charge more in the first place. (remember price for services rendered only ranks #4 on peoples list of what's important, but that's another series of posts!).

<p>

Hope this helps,

<p>

Cheers,

<p>

Colin

 

Colin, I apologize if this sounds overly harsh, but that ad copy sounds just like the sort of thing I used to hear on late-night TV ads for the Ronco Vegematic and other similar products. "If you order by midnight tonight, we'll include, ABSOLUTELY FREE, this 20-piece, resealable vegetable storage system!" To generations of Americans, that kind of ad is just a cheesy shtick that they associate with cheap, and largely useless, products. Again, I think you're grossly underestimating the level of sophistication of Todd's target audience.

One other point: promising to assume many of the costs for re-staging a wedding simply because the couple says they're unhappy is foolish. It invites people to extort a huge refund.

<p>I've watched this thread with some interest. While it's a great discussion, I have to say

that I agree firmly with the analysis offered by Marc.</p>

 

<p>Colin, IMHO your approach to advertising seems rather dated (reminds me of Vance

Packard, advertising guru of the '50s) and doesn't take any account of brand building or

positioning. There is a huge difference between positioning a service and selling a

product. And, although useful for selling commoditised products, Claude Hopkin's advice

is not relevant for premium products or brand positioning. If you look at major advertising

campaigns (e.g. Nokia, BMW, Nike), there is often more revenue spent in positioning a

concept than in selling the product - for the simple reason that brand awareness is an

asset in its own right.</p>

 

<p>I'd walk away from any advertisement styled in the model you suggest. If Todd

presented a special offer, tagline and date by which it had to be redeemed I'd have no

interest at all. In fact, his service would be devalued to me because I'd immediately

associate it with low value products and their accompanying sales processes.</p>

 

<p>Today's high-budget wedding customer expects sophisticated photography with

sophisticated marketing. Todd's advert is pretty close to this.</p>

 

<p>Colin, if you're in any doubt about this, take a look at some high end publications in

the fashion or lifestyle sectors and check out the advertisement style. You won't find

anything at all in the vein that you're suggesting.</p>

Agree with Mike - that ad copy sounds cheesy and cheap. If I saw ALL THAT TEXT on a half

page ad for a photographer, I'd skip right over it. It's a sales pitch and looks a little

desperate. Like "Please! Listen to me! I can convince you I'm good!" I think Todd's image(s)

speak for themselves ... a photography ad should sell with images!

 

It all comes down to simplicity vs. hype : WATCH THIS VIDEO!!

 

 

..

Sorry Colin, that's old school advertising. The world has moved on, the consuming public

has moved on and so has advertising.

 

These techniques are still employed to sell impulse items that have a low financial risk, by

some screaming huckster at 3AM, or on fringe channels ... but not for what is called

"considered" purchases of a higher cost and prestige.

 

NEED A NEW PURSE?

HERE ARE THREE GOOD REASONS YOU SHOULD BE CARRYING A LOUIS VUITTON !!!

 

JIMMY CHOO. HE'S GOT THE SHOE FOR YOU !!!!

 

Stuff like that would be the expressway to ruin for those brands : -)

 

Wedding photography is a high ticket considered service, not a 2 for 1 Oxyclean ad ...

 

BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE ...

 

If Todd's ad doesn't bring in business, it'll be because Brides aren't interested in his style.

"If we shoot and you are unhappy ..." YIKES - they (customer) just may be unhappy people, I can see the potential for doing a lot of free weddings with that type of wording.

 

Todd,

I think it is most likely an ad that will at least get the bride to index by turning a page corner as she is flipping through the magazine.

Sent too early. I'm no marketing genius, but this ad features the groom in my opinion. Perhaps a shot where the bride is the focal point, I think it would be great if the bride was in the position of the groom. I think, IMHO, that would have more captivating appeal to your real target audience, the bride. Just a thought.

Sorry not a wedding guy (or pro) but reading this thread, I would stop and stare at that

photo if i were flipping through magazine for the simple reason it is compelling and

different. I'd venture to guess grain silos have been used exactly 0 times in wedding

advertisements in the past and it takes someone w/ a sense of style, knack and creativity well

beyond the norm to pull something like that off. That says to me, this is someone who

woulddo something that stands out. That is what would be intriguing to me and make me

stop and think.