Clients reacting to Camera VS Smartphone for pro photo session (NOT the usual discussion)

Hi, there are lots of forum discussions and articles on the web about professional cameras VS smartphone cameras, this thread is not about comparisons or the pros and cons of each one as your working device for pictures. Smartphone cameras are getting more and more powerful every year but its not secret there are physical limitations when it comes to how the optical system is built, not to mention the algorithms behind the smartphone cameras trying to figure out how the picture should look like (this is more aggressive on smartphone cameras than on common photographic cameras).

 

My intention and curiosity is: about the client.

 

Straight to the point: I have seen some youngsters working their way up in photography using expensive smartphones. Yes the pictures are amazing, yes they use a lot of filters, yes... they have limitations both technical and physical due to a camera being very diff than a smartphone camera. Yet... the clients seem to bee ok with that because many of those photographers are actually selling their photos and specially their services.

 

What do you think about this? at this point I wouldn't consider that a professional practice, and I don't know how many clients would accept this to take place during a photo session (specially about food photography), I'm seeing people accepting this but I'm not sure how much. What do you think? While I have some powerful gear I'm still sure a photo camera will always do a better job, specially the impact on the client.

 

So yes I'm seeing more and more youngsters selling photographic services using their smartphones,

 

• What do you think about this as photographers?
  
• What do you think the clients think about this?
  

 

 

- - - - -

 

Some context about the topic:

 

Yes, the photographer makes the photo. In the past when I started you could arrive with your manual film camera and do your magic, people would rarely interfere or complain because a camera was a camera (weird big device) and so the photographer was usually respected just for having a camera with several moving parts. LATER over the years it was more common to see photographers being asked about their camera model or their features because people were starting to learn or to get involved, and so, some photographers would be judged for not having powerful modern equipment.

 

What I mean there is, for some people in the industry (as clients) your camera matters, and if your camera is not impressive enough they won't like it and will tell you about it. Yes... it's their problem but it's also yours (and mine) because we can't exactly always choose the client, we might find out about this too late.

 

Today: clients might even have more powerful cameras than the photographer (my sister husband has an amazing one but he can't even operate the microwave oven). The thing is client perception about the cameras and photographers has changed immensely.

Different clients, different levels of knowledge and experience. Also, different ages. IMO, knowledge of or about more sophisticated cameras is on the wane. A new generation of clients might be perfectly OK with phone cameras. FWIW, even though we now have focus stacking, I've taken some shots with very small sensor cameras that achieved DOF not easily had in a single shot (with larger sensors) otherwise. I could make a case that a phone camera might be the preferable tool in some cases. OTOH, I'm older and want a great whacking camera with fast lenses for reduced DOF, or maybe a 4x5 and all the stuff that goes with it. :D If I were a client, I'd reject phone cameras and could probably pick apart the images technically, but I'm not and technical criteria isn't usually the deciding factor as to what's a good image, as much as most serious photographers might think it should be.

If I had hired a photographer, for whatever reason, I would specifically state I required the use of good quality camera and lens combinations, not some character in tatty jeans nipping around with a smartphone, yet charging the same price. If some people are willing to accept this, that is up to them, but to me it does not indicate that the 'professional' is prepared to act in an appropriate manner. As the client, I would expect (and obviously pay for) a 100% professional approach to the booking. If I visit a lawyer, I expect them to show the respect and professional approach their calling demands. If I visit a doctor, the same applies. Surely those who do not put themselves out to make a good impression on their clients are cheapening and demeaning the business of professional photography ? I understand it is becoming more and more difficult to make a good living in this these days, and I do not feel that any service that does not provide the best possible results is doing anyone any favours, the clients or the photographers. Whether the clients understand the subtle nuances between images produced using different equipment is of no matter - there is such a thing as professional pride.

I have seen some youngsters working their way up in photography using expensive smartphones. Yes the pictures are amazing, yes they use a lot of filters, yes... they have limitations both technical and physical due to a camera being very diff than a smartphone camera. Yet... the clients seem to bee ok with that because many of those photographers are actually selling their photos and specially their services.

 

What do you think about this?

I think it's fine. If I think someone is getting ripped off, I wouldn't feel comfortable. But if I think someone is getting a decent product, given their expectations and the context, I don't have an issue with any of this.

What do you think the clients think about this?

You answered this in what I quoted just above. Clients seem fine with it. That's not always the end of it because I've seen clients ripped off who only discover later they're not getting a good product, to their disappointment. But I think it's a demographic matter and many older folks think about photos differently than many younger folks (with some healthy exceptions). Electric pianos have replaced "analogue" pianos and a lot of buildings aren't as well-built as they used to be. Some balance between complaint and acceptance of time marching on will always have to be reached.

What I mean there is, for some people in the industry (as clients) your camera matters, and if your camera is not impressive enough they won't like it and will tell you about it. Yes... it's their problem but it's also yours (and mine) because we can't exactly always choose the client, we might find out about this too late.

That's why it makes sense to choose the camera to work with that best works for you. If you're losing clients because of the equipment you use, you'll either seek out different clients or different equipment. If you're not losing clients, you'll likely keep doing what you're doing successfully.

 

As a client, if I were just wanting screen images for a website presentation of my wedding, I might not care as much about what kind of camera was used as if I were planning a quality traditional photo album with some enlargements for wall display.

some character in tatty jeans nipping around with a smartphone

Yikes, quick move from smartphone use to other assumed traits.

there is such a thing as professional pride.

Having been a professional, I did take pride in my work and equipment and I know my clients appreciated that and were pretty loyal to me over the years. I agree with you on that.

 

I've also tried to remember that pride can get out of hand ...

A proud man is always looking down on things and people; and, of course, as long as you are looking down, you cannot see something that is above you.”

―C.S. Lewis

@samstevens quoted me :

 

some character in tatty jeans nipping around with a smartphone

 

Yikes, quick move from smartphone use to other assumed traits.

 

OK, litotes for dramatic effect, I agree, but I think you see my point, especially in view of your own professional experience - and indeed expertise - (much greater than mine). And your own gentle jibe about the expectations of different generations accepted and understood. Time indeed marches on - I have to accept it, but I don't have to like it.

I think it is interesting. Depending on the ultimate use of the photos, one may certainly demand a certain level of sophistication in the equipment. A lot of young people aren't interested in fine art prints at substantial enlargements...they want something to share with their friends and families and maybe small prints. Phones are fine for that...but they fall far short in 20x30 enlargements, which is where I often aim my works. So, IMHO, it falls back to the types of works you do and the client demands. But are phones OK, sure, respecting their limitations. I'm sure the same was said back in the day when Leica went for the 35mm format, when the standard was much larger.

I have to accept it, but I don't have to like it.

Words to live by!

 

I just find that the further apart the two are, the more I don't like what I have to accept, the less rosy my outlook on life is and I much prefer a cup half full than half empty. So I tend to find things I can like about what the younger generation does, as I wanted my parents' generation to do when I was young, I usually can, if I keep an open mind, and just emphasize those positives that are usually there and not dwell on the negatives which are as likely to be there as well. The more years I have behind me and the fewer years I have in front of me, the more willing I am to fondly remember but also let go of the past and embrace a future that others can enjoy even after [sarcasm]the center of the universe, me[/sarcasm], is gone.

 

:)

Thanks for all the comments.

 

Different clients, different levels of knowledge and experience. Also, different ages.

Yes, absolutely. Sometimes that brings new challenges that have absolutely nothing related to the photographic skills.

 

In my region it's said salesmen are judged by their car because it's a sign of their success. Makes no sense to me, people can arrive in someone else's car, borrowed, the car might end up taken away by the company because they didn't pay on time, etc, but still to many people this is the real deal (along with their watches), makes no sense to me but it's how some people actually measure others. That way of thinking also manifests on the photographic field sometimes, leading to the following:

 

Time indeed marches on - I have to accept it, but I don't have to like it.

True. The thing is, sometimes we might have to accept it, we are free not to like it BUT... we are left to choose what to do about it, meaning it's not just a personal choice but also a work decision.

 

I think it is interesting. Depending on the ultimate use of the photos

True. There were lots of situations where I worked amazingly well with a high quality smartphone camera: the resolution of the image (preview) was great, not to mention the freedom and versatility of sharing or sending the content to the computer. Many big cameras don't allow this. The results were great, fast, practical but yes not as easy in terms of image enlargement, and sure while it was fast and practical, the session did't look "cool", felt like going to war with a laser pointer instead of a gun, this matters to some people.

 

I have enjoyed the benefits of smartphones with high quality cameras but still holding on to a camera. As a photographer, taking the camera out of the bag feels like "ok now we are getting serious about this".

LOL. A chance to take a bit of my own medicine. I don't like being ignored but am willing to accept it! ;)

I remember some time ago seasoned professional photojournalists complained that a new generation was showing up in war zones with cell phone cameras. The pros were wearing flack jackets and helmets while the young guys were wearing sneakers and shorts.

LOL. A chance to take a bit of my own medicine. I don't like being ignored but am willing to accept it! ;)

Ha ha ha, all the comments were read, I agree with what you posted, absolutely.

the young guys were wearing sneakers and shorts.

Speaking of acceptance, we old guys have to accept that young guys look better in shorts.

FWIW, I don't think I even know anybody that has bought or owned a 20"x30" scale print. An 8"x10" is about it for most people.

 

If you hired an artist for a portrait, would you inspect his materials for the quality of the paint and brushes? Would you expect the artist to be well dressed and behave in a professional manner? The opposite might be the rule as artists don't usually fit into the mainstream.

Would you expect the artist to be well dressed

No, but I prefer my artists to smoke a pipe!

 

ARTIST SMOKING PIPE

• What do you think the clients think about this?
  

It is up to the clients to decide what they want and how much they can spend. On photographers side, from pure technical and financial standpoint entry barrier to business never been lower, everybody has "free" cellphone and Instagram does all dodging, burning and advertising, all one need to make acceptable for some clients technical quality of pictures.

But one thing didn't change at all, photographer still have to learn about posing, lighting, composition and how to make supermodel from mother in law:)

In general terms . . . there are two buckets of Clients. One bucket will assess the outcome only by the results at hand; the other bucket will be influenced by the procedure.

 

It's the same for any business.

 

Some folk want a Dentist/Doctor with a good chair side conversation and they value glitz and glamour of the surgery; others will only judge on the skills of a technician of the highest order. Judgement by some of a meal's quality is considering the decor of the restaurant; others are engrossed only in the smell and taste of the food.

 

As a business owner, it is imperative to know exactly the business that one is in: to that end it is necessary to understand exactly what it is that the customer wants to buy.

 

In most cases it is good for a business to appear from the outset flexible in those provisions. For example, in the specific situation of using a Mobile Phone as the workplace “tool” – this could present to those clients who are engrossed in the procedure, as either a positive or a negative: I expect this will primarily depend upon how the business is marketed and if that marketing grabs the Prospect, then whether or not the Prospect is sold within the first minute of conversation that the procedure is worth them spending their money – that period is the sale’s negotiation.

 

I’d argue that if the offer is solely “online” and the subsequent purchase is “online” also, that type of offer and acceptance procedure severely restricts any good quality sale's negotiation.

 

WW

I’d take the same attitude I do in my professional life - when I hire a specialist, tools are their business. I’m paying for results.

"That's a nice camera. You must get terrific pictures with it."

 

Since so many people, especially older people, confuse tools with expertise, I think many of them would balk at a phone camera for a professional job.

 

Younger people might just say "kewl"

FWIW, I don't think I even know anybody that has bought or owned a 20"x30" scale print. An 8"x10" is about it for most people.

.

You should come to our annual "Art in the Barn" show, where many photographers exhibit & sell their prints which often well exceed 20x30 inches. I've even got a couple of 30x40 inch canvas prints hanging in my den, and just had one done in that size for my grandson's living room.

Younger people might just say "kewl"

LOL. Yes, especially ones still living in the 1990s. :cool:

As a parent, grandparent and since late last year a great grandparent I have noticed that especially mothers see the child not the photo. I have been made (for a quite life) to produce prints from what I consider poor files (my fault for letting folks see the near misses). What really grates is when they are other peoples files that are wanted.

I'm not saying I approve of the lowering of standards, I just see it as a sign of the times now that everyone and their mother (pun) carries a camera. As enthusiasts we may have higher standards and expectations, but if someone is posing as a professional photographer (never me) they needs to be equipped with the tools to meet all conditions.

especially ones still living in the 1990s

 

I, of course, am not the only one...although my decades of choice remain the 60s and 70s.:rolleyes:

In the film days every mom with small kids had an Instamatic in her purse and even more when the 110 format came out. The results were pretty bad but they were happy with them. It got the job done. I think the camera phone is simply the new Instamatic. Easy to carry and always close at hand. Now as then though big events mean hiring a professional or something close. People with serious photographic knowledge and skills. The phone camera is much more capable than a pocket Instamatic but still isn’t as versatile as my D810. My wife might disagree but but the last wedding we shot she was using a full frame DSLR, not the Iphone.

 

Rick H.

I ran a graphics business for many years. Many potential clients, most of whom were producing high quality print materials such as glossy brochures and magazine ads, asked what equipment I used and legitimately so, I thought. Having good and expensive equipment allowed me to take on all varieties of work, from highest quality to quick and dirty and produce the best product I could.

 

BUT ... I knew many decent, small graphics companies who didn’t have as good equipment, whose clients probably didn’t ask or care, and who did mostly the kind of work that didn’t require top-notch equipment, such as lower-end business cards, cheaper pamphlets, and even some newsprint work. (These were the days before anyone could do it themselves on a home computer ... aka the good ol’ days, lol.)

 

I would never have told someone doing that kind of work to spend the kind of money on equipment that I did, especially if they were satisfied with the current level and number of clients they had. And, for a lot of the kind of work they were doing, it would have been downright silly to have even thought about better or more expensive equipment unless they were thinking of changing their business model.

 

There are photographers who seem to put an emphasis and premium on gear regardless of its applicability to the situation. I prefer getting gear advice from photographers who have a good sense of what’s needed in different circumstances.

Great points have been made, I read all the comments. I'm also in favor of results and practicality, some devices have diff limits, and so and so.

 

Yet I'm curious on some (possibly absolute regional tendencies) as people (clients) trying to judge photographers based on their gear. Some people don't care, some do care, but as a service provider we not always have the chance to choose the client, the client select us instead and we just arrive there. I did experience some of this years ago where people at least in my region had some sort of expectation based on (at least in my area) Nikon vs Canon and Sony left behind at the end of the spectrum (that's the simplified list).

 

At present time I see some flexibility on the market towards expensive smartphones. It's not a healthy standpoint, it's not a healthy practice or way to look at the market, but it is the market and one has to learn how to deal with it. I'm seeing huge impact on clients when you set up your gear and somehow you add a monitor/screen to check the pictures in detail, "it looks pro" it sells... specially if your pictures are good.

 

Some setup like this one:

 

LINK

 

 

Anyway... it's funny when you get some respect from your clients and instead of allowing your setup to be judged, you setup your limits and they have to deal with it. There was this "pro" photographer always talking about lenses, cameras, expensive stuff, but you never get to see his camera except "this old useless camera I carry with me", he said. He was known for hotel photography and the trick is: when it was time to take pictures of the rooms, he would demand to be left alone, closed doors. You would never know what kind of setup he used for the pictures.

Edited January 20, 2020 by William Michael