Just a few weeks after Olan Mills threatened to shut their doors, both Sears Portrait Studio, and Walmart brand PictureMe Portrait have announced that they're closing their doors permanently. Both stating that because of the digital age and smartphone photography, they're no longer able to maintain profits in the industry.
Reports from the St Louis Dispatch show that CPI Corp., which operates both the Sears and Walmart studios is shutting down after defaulting on its lenders. Sears Portrait Studio and the PictureMe Portrait Studio have posted the following statements on their website --
“After many years of providing family portrait photography, we are sad to announce our Sears Portrait Studios [PictureMe Portrait Studios] are now closed. We appreciate your patronage and allowing us to capture your precious memories. If you currently have an album or have had a recent portrait session, you can order products at searsphotos.com [myonlineportraits.com] thru April 18, 2013.”
So does this bode concern for the typical professional photographer, or is it just another case of competition failing for not adjusting to modern technologies?
[via wcpo.com]
If you can't adapt to the current trends or create your own trends, you probably won't be in business long.
Adapt or die. That was the war cry since 2001! Kodak learned that the hard way also. . .
Yes, but adapt to what? We are in the age of Corporate Imperialism, where corporations call the shots and decide what you're worth, what your work is worth, and what they're going to pay you. If you don't like it, there's plenty of people in places like India, Vietnam, China, and the Eastern block countries that will do it for pennies a month.
Somewhere in not too distant future, every professional photographer will be "teaching" photography howtos, workshops, how-to-become-a-pro-photographer classes, selling ebooks, and running affiliate sites disguised as photography sites. :)
The closings have nothing to do with failure to adapt. These studios didn't exist to make a profit, they were simply a way to get people to come into the store and think, "Since I'm here I might as well look around." The last time I looked at a PictureMe store display, they were barely selling portraits above cost. It was something like 10 sheets for $5.00 with no sitting fee. Nobody can do the kind of volume necessary to turn a profit at that price.
While that may be the reason the store allowed the studios to operate out of them, CPI is a separate company who is (was) out to make a profit. Yes they advertise $5.00 packages, but they expected their employees to up sell that to something closer to $100. Obviously this is ridiculous and happens rarely, thus they are closing their doors.
It doesn't happen rarely... I work for a Wal-Mart portrait studio and it can happened at every session if I do my job the way I should be... the company is closing their American stores... Canadian stores remain profitable and will continue to serve customers
I managed a Canadian location for almost 10 years, and yes, $100 is more than possible at each and every session. I think many factors contributed to the failure of this specific company, too many to list. My heart goes out to all the staff that are now left without employment :(
SCREW THE STAFF! If you collectively do bad business (which includes dropping your prices and under-performing) you deserve to be gone!
How about having a little respect for the thousands of people now out of work? The staff don't set the prices or the business practices of the company. I'll admit that there were a lot of bad staff, but there were a lot of good ones too. And good or bad, they all had to work for a company that didn't support them, didn't provide adequate training, paid poorly, constantly changed things, had unrealistic expectations, had poor hours, and constantly treated the staff like they were a necessary evil. Even the best staff member with the best work ethic is unable to perform to their utmost ability under those circumstances.
How about having self respect and not working for a person or company that treats you like garbage? How about being a photographer if you're applying for a photography job and then you won't need training? How about getting another job instead of putting up with all that you said for years? Finally, how about survival of the fittest?
I'm going to be the devil's advocate and say that most people getting a job at one of these 'studios' aren't actually trying to become a professional photographer but rather just looking for gainful employment. Does every person flipping burgers at McDonalds have aspiration of owning their own restaurant or becoming a chef at a real restaurant? I don't think so...
I'm guessing you've had a poor portrait studio experience. That's a shame, some of them were really great!
I think my previous comment may have been a little harsh in retrospect. My thoughts were that these companies established a policy of under-whelming performance by advertising CHEAP, CHEAP, CHEAP. Then they hired and poorly trained their staff and treated them poorly. So I see your point that it was the companies that established the poor policy and the employees were simply following their lead. Sadly, none of it is helpful as these people weren't really in it for a career, just a fast buck! Me personally, I know many truly great artists and even non-artisan photographers that have a true passion for their work and hopefully, now, they will get the business increase and recognition they deserve.
The only way it can be done "every" time is by being borderline dishonest with customers. I found that when I did get customers to make that leap, they often didn't come back, because they realized that the advertised prices weren't honest or because they didn't like being pushed and pressured. If they did come back, they usually under bought, because they felt they had to make up for spending so much that first time.
When I did my job "the way I should" (aka, with the photography and sales techniques that the big wigs, who probably haven't set foot in a studio in 20 years if at all, said I should do it) my sales and customer service scores were mediocre at best. When I threw out the rule book and did things my way (photographed more creatively and didn't pressure customers into breaking their bank) my sales and customer service scores did soared.
I also think location has a lot to do with it. My studio was notorious for having a picky clientele. Which is another reason CPI failed. It refused to break the cookie cutter mold and customize to different markets.
Valid point Matthew. Lowering your cost will put you out of business! This has been studied and found to be a proven fact. If you discount your service too much, people won't see it as a value but something that is WORTH-LESS (worthless). It's killed many industries and until people learn that you simply can't have all the business and you have to accept that there will always be competition, the madness will continue. RAISE your prices if you want clients!
A majority of the people hired in their portrait studios don't even know how to use a camera. At least now people will have to look for local businesses! :)
Of course it's worriesome for professional photographers. If they can no longer operate in today's environment at the low ball prices they're charging then everyone should be concerned. While they may be able to justify low pricing as a "loss-leader," obviously their volume is so low that they can't even break even. The question is that if all of these new, so-called photographers are taking their work, what kinds of prices are they charging. I suspect that many people are taking their own photos. What I know for sure is that it's extremely difficult for anyone to make a living as a photographer. Even if your work is superb, people don't recognize a great photograph when they see one - especially all of the "so-called" professional photographers.
This is not worrisome for professional photographers, it had nothing to do with price. Look at the quality of the shots done in these studious, why bother going in to spend 20-40$ when you can get a great photographer mini session shot on location, not in a studio with their crappy lighting and get 5-10 amazing photos for around 100$? This is what my family does, portrait studios just have horrible quality and charge too much for it. We used to use them until we found out that we could pay a little more to get MUCH better pictures.
Self-fulfilling prophecy here. With that kind of attitude you'll definitely fail. The reason these 'studios' failed is because they didn't provide anything people couldn't do for themselves with a decent point and shoot. They provided a bad customer experience that didn't entice people to come in and have pictures taken. They went from offering occasional loss leaders to being the loss leader. Epic fail.
It amazes me what the iPhone and other smart phones have done to professional photographers. Sadly, few people want prints anymore, they just want the 'quick-clik then post' that can be achieved on most phones. Do smartphones take great pictures, no, but they do give people (at their fingertips) the ability to capture moments that otherwise would be left to a pro at a staged shooting event. I think there is a middle ground but it will take some time for the general public to establish what that is. Business professionals (realtors, executives, corporations, architects, property owners...) will all still need professional photographers but sadly the days of the 4x5 film camera in the studio, taking the family portrait are long gone. My family had a family portrait taken years ago under a big oak tree, all wearing suits and dresses, done by a pro using a 4x5. That photograph is remarkable! Not because we looked so good but because it shows true detail and was done by a pro. Today's portraits, even the best you can find, are done with 35mm DSLR equivalents, by people with far less passion for the craft and far less technical knowledge and sadly, it shows!
Failing to adapt? Adapt to what? Where they still using Polaroids or something?
A lot of these studios were still shooting film aged equipment.
No they were not. They have been digital for many many years.
Perhaps not these particular branches....but I can speak for personal experience...
A few months ago, a local studio went out of business, and I checked it out to possibly purchase the building and open a store front. The company had been in business for over 30 years, and was still shooting in film and developing it in store. Not to mention, this was a very popular photography studio locally...even though they were doing the cookie cutter images, with backdrops and props that were straight out of the eighties.
So perhaps they weren't shooting film per say, but they were certainly not current with a lot of their shooting styles....which shows their failure to adapt.
I love shooting film
But do you love shooting in film in a single indoor environment that never changes, or would your rather go digital for that use and lower your margins so you can go take awesome film shots anywhere else?
Do you have any idea the cost associated with having an entire market (U.S. & Can) of chains 'adapting'?? Our studio (in Can) had a Canon 40D DLSR. Pretty good I'd say.
Erinn, the 40D is crap! The only people that think it's not don't understand the level of detail you can get from a field or studio style 4x5 film camera. There's NO comparison on ANY level! My Pentax K-5 IIs is LIGHTYEARS ahead of the 40D in terms of dynamic range, noise control and image quality and even it cannot compete with a Wista 45SP or Sinar camera and good Schneider lens.
I find it remarkable that my eye has become accustomed to recognizing detail in 4x5 film that is not there in 35mm or FF DSLR formats; not even in MF film. Sure most people don't care about blowing up their images (portraits) more than 8x10 these days but believe me, when you go up as much as 16x20 the difference is NIGHT and DAY! Leafs in trees POP on 4x5 film. Details in clothing, hair, skin, eyes, all POP when produced on large format film. 35mm doesn't pop, even with good Zeiss lenses and on the few occasions it does, the background will be completely blurred, creating bokeh. 15 years ago, bokeh was considered the product of amateur photographers. Today, the majority of people think Bokeh is something to be heralded as genius. Ansel Adams said it best, "If the entire frame isn't in focus, you're lying!" Which is another way of saying, you're just an amateur and you don't have a true passion for your work.
True that! FILM has been out of the cheap studios and even good ones for more than 10 years now!
I can assure that no CPI Corp run studio was using film, they all adapted to digital about a decade ago.
Oh no, not a decade ago. But closing in on 5 years yes.
This is of no surprise to me at all. These studios were not producing quality experiences anymore. They used to be the go-to places for a lot of people because it is reliable and predictable (think McDonalds) but now that predictability hurt them. People say PictureMe photos and then looked at their neighbors photos that were taken on location and by a professional and gravitated to that because it is a better product. The photographer would provide quality customer service and products. These studios were ran by inexperienced photographers who followed an operational manual for the most part. And there is no pressure to provide a quality experience so they didn't. Price did not matter here. You don't go have photos taken because its cheap. People have photos taken because they want to capture a moment in their lives and want to remember what they looked like and they want to look good. Now there are definitely cheap people out there, but there are also cheap photographers too.
This is by no means a reason to worry for professional photographers that know how to run their business. It is a worry for big studios who lost touch with their customers and focused on scaling a system vs. an experience.
Here is my extended response to this http://www.jason-kirby.com/why-cookie-cutter-studios-are-failing-why-its...
You are exactly right, after a couple studio portraits my family started using local photographers going on location, and PAYING MORE because the QUALITY was so much higher!
As a former employee of Sears Portrait (I worked there for two years) I have to say I don't think their closing has to do with the "digital age" or smartphones. They treated their employees poorly, which meant a high turn over and that isn't good for business. Especially a business where you have to build relationships with your clients. They also used loss leaders too frequently and with too high of expectations for what the end sale should look like. You can't tell someone, "come to my studio and I'll give you a bunch of photos for $8" and actually expect clients to spend over $100. In the long run, it was treated their employees like dirt and their customers like idiots that put them out of business.
Thank you Katie, I could not agree with you more. This is by no means a threat to professional photographers who care about their clients and their work
Sure it does, why would anyone want to seek out professional photography for anything but the most precious of our memories? I don't want to pay <$100 when I can pay $8. Go further and print your own photos at Walmart for cheaper.
Money talks, and in this case it told Sears and Walmart to fuck off.
the 7.99 coupon was a marketing tool to bring clients into the studio. The client can pick out their favorite 1 pose in a 10x13, 8x10, 5x7, 3x5 & wallets. A proper photographic session should be able to get 12 great poses in which the client cannot live without. Then the client is shown packages that include all of the poses on different scales which can include fine art, enhanced prints, or cd's of the entire session. Please understand that this coupon is only used as a marketing tool... I, as you, should believe that our photography is worth more than 8 bucks! The hardest part of being self-employed is 1) knowing what you are worth 2) charging what you are worth.
In other words, it's bad business practices that put them out of business?
Exactly.
I partially disagree, CPI started in 1959 & became the only portrait company in Sears in 1986. CPI was the largest portrait company in North America. You can look at Kodak and blame bad business practices also. But the fact is the portrait industry is changing. No one is making prints anymore.I have seen many clients, in my waiting room, taking pics after a portrait session with there iphone and posting online. The funny part is that it took longer to download my CF card, then it took the clients to share and text to their friends
HERE HERE! AMEN! EVERYONE SHOULD READ HER RESPONSE!
I knew someone who used to work at Lifetouch, another horrible studio. This person was a manager and worked there for 5 years, and only made $13/hr. They had to stay late and clean their own store and were forced to cram people into TEN MINUTE sessions when they actually booked for 30, to get more people in. They were kept in the dark about camera settings and it was set up so they would only push a single button. They were also not allowed to use any images for their portfolio. The purpose of these places is/was to make sure the employees are kept down, and receive NO training, so they don't become an outside threat to the shitty chain store. Luckily people who really wanted to be photographers learned on their own and are bringing these places down. Lifetouch goes under different names, but they also seek out college grads who were in a photography course, who may be desperate for work. They offer them a training course to learn photography... what? If you ever look at their applications, they only ask you about SALES, not photography. They never even ask if you've taken a picture before, or if you enjoy it. I hope all these places go under and the executives rot.
The writing is on the wall. The commercial photography industry, both portrait/wedding and advertising, is in it's death throes. Everybody that reads Fstoppers should be familiar with the limitless amounts of DIY photography tutorials and BTS videos available for free online. Don't think for a split second that those things exist because new technology is miraculously giving a new generation of amateurs a chance at a career in commercial photography. Quite the contrary, those easily accessible resources are indications of the death of the industry. The last thing that happens to an industry (just before it dies) is that it becomes mainstream and accessible to everyone.
So much for the bad news....now, for the not-so-bad news.
Commercial photography is being replaced by something new. People will still be able to make a living with a camera but they will have to be involved in speculation or reproduction. The digital era has created an environment that has made photography "autonomous." Autonomy is the new game...so what is autonomy?
During the film era, the photography industry was dependent on clients. Film photographers provided a service for an audience that already existed. The audience might be a family desiring portraits, a couple soon-to-be married, a newspaper in need of photos for story illustration, or a corporation looking to advertise a product etc. The one factor that all of these various audiences had in common was that they provided a client base for photographers to depend upon. Unfortunately, dependence is the opposite of autonomy. So any business model for the modern digital era that is still based on the old model of film era client dependence is doomed to failure.
Photographers can no longer depend on a ready-made audience of clients. Now, they have to create their own audiences based on speculation. Today's photographer must produce content without a client for an audience that doesn't yet exist. In other words, digital era photographers must become their own clients and create their own audience. The way to do this is through what is often called "content production." The days of humping a portfolio around town looking for clients is over.
The second way to make a living with a camera in the era of autonomy is through reproduction. Reproduction is another word for education. We've all heard the cliche "those who can't do...teach." Teaching photography is a booming career field and there's no need to be cynical about it. It takes talent to be a good teacher. And the plethora of easily accessible digital technology guarantees a large future market of hungry amateurs salivating at the thought of learning how to take their own landscape, portrait and still-life photos etc.
Bottom line: the key to understanding the future of the photography industry is that digital technology created a switch from client dependence to photographer autonomy. The two new major branches of the industry will be based on speculation (content production) and reproduction (teaching.) Any folks that want to make a living with a camera in the coming era must start thinking in these new terms and put the film era business model of client dependence into the dustbin of history.
I think your reading the tea leaves a little too far into the future. Yes there is a lot of "teaching the industry" by people for people, but learning a few tricks does not make a good photographer. You still have to have passion, and you still have to have some talent. This just opens the door for people with those things to actually be able to put them to use.
Nor do I believe that the industry is in it's death throes. Its far from it. People are still going to pay more for a great photographer because they like their style, hence how much we paid for one at my wedding just a few short years ago. This age just means we can have more options.
There is never going to be an end to Moms who want newborn pictures, families who want family shots, and weddings that need a great photographer, and there will always be more of those things than there are of good quality photographers to give them. Like i said before QUALITY is everything, that is the reason these studios died.
Hi Rob, I totally agree with everything that you posted (especially the importance of quality) in regards to the industry as it existed in the film era. However, that's exactly what has changed. Clients shopping for a quality photographer with a particular "style" etc presupposes the existence of a client base and it is precisely the client base that is disappearing.
Cultural shifts and changes in the market environment never occur at a specific period in time. Instead, they happen slowly as a process over several years or decades. Since the process is slow, business people often don't realize that a change has really happened until it is too late. I'm afraid that this slow process of change is exactly what is confusing photographers right now about the business of photography. EVERYBODY is aware that digital has changed the market. But they tend to think of the changes in film era terms where a client base still exists. Digital is currently in the process of eliminating that very client base.
Relevant or Irrelevant?
Profitable or unprofitable?
The entire "In-store" photo studio product service simply failed be relevant to consumers and became unprofitable for businesses.
The self empowerment of consumers who have developed the ability to take their own photographs - or have a friend take photos of them, and then print the photos themselves - or more often simply view them on their computer, Ipad or Phone has simply made the "In-store" photo service irrelevant.
There was a time when "In-store" photography was the highest sq. footage profit area for Sears (yes.. the highest!)
Over the past 3 decades it became the lowest.
Consumers no longer need the service - ergo the need for the same services disappeared and the "In-store" experience has ended.
The broader question to professional photographers posed by the self empowerment of consumers is how to stay relevant.
The answer is simple.
The professional photographer must provide a product or service that the consumer cannot do easily or well themselves (or have a friend or relative do for them).
Whether its doing portraits using props and front projection systems (google Henry Oles "The Perfect Storm")
Or shooting weddings with a creative style and production values that consumers do not have the skill to attempt (participating in continuous skill and technique upgrades like attending the Wedding & Portrait Photography Expo Conference running this in Las Vegas)
Professional photographers need to stay relevant for consumers - and the only way to do that is to do something they cannot.
Anyone can take a photograph.
A professional is someone who can do it better.
Terry Debono