Despite the rise of social media, having a website is still imperative in order to showcase your best – and not just latest – work as a photographer. Here, five professionals, including editors from the Guardian and the British Journal of Photography, offer an insight into what makes a photographer’s portfolio stand out.
With so many variables before we even judge the quality of the work, the presentation of your website can be tricky to perfect. Layout, colors, navigation – everything has to be right. Your portfolio introduces you before your clients meet you – and first impressions are important. In an attempt to unearth what industry professionals look for, the British Journal of Photography spoke to the following experts:
- Diane Smyth, Digital Editor, British Journal of Photography
- Ken Flaherty, Founder, Doomed Gallery
- Matt Martin, Co-Curator, Doomed Gallery
- John Wyatt-Clarke, Founder, Wyatt Clarke & Jones Photo Agency
- Fiona Shields, Head of Photography, The Guardian
The first question was quite simply: What do you look for? The answers offered a variety of advice, the most straightforward being that a website should be clear and easy to navigate. As Smyth puts it, “Design comes second.” Given the short timespan we tend to stay on a web page, it’s also crucial that although images are large enough in size to clearly be viewed, the file size should be kept to a minimum to ensure short loading times. There was a general consensus that a clear identity and aesthetic should be present; select only your best images, and try to avoid a wider range that includes weaker shots. Smyth also expressed a dislike for watermarks.
Next: how much can be said for the first impression? And which shapes that impression the most: the work or the layout? With the exception of Wyatt-Clarke, who admits he spends more time examining a portfolio because of his experience as a photo agent looking to work with photographers for several years, there was quite a bit of emphasis on the layout. Websites shouldn’t take ages to load, a lead image should grab attention, and further pages of your website should be at the forefront rather than requiring several clicks in order to access them.
How important is aesthetic? Is it important, or should a website simply be plain in order to let the work do the talking? Good news for those of us useless in graphic design: the verdict was that the photos are the most important aspect. A plain, simplistic layout is certainly not frowned upon. A creative website can definitely complement great photos, but as Wyatt-Clarke puts it, “No site will ever be good enough to disguise poor work.” Shields makes the interesting point that it’s “worth paying attention to the visual sense” of the publications you are hoping to work with or submit to and to ensure you’re on their level in terms of presentation.
You can read further questions in addition to the experts’ answers in full over at the British Journal of Photography.
[via BJP]
" The answers offered a variety of advice, the most straightforward being that a website should be clear and easy to navigate. As Smyth puts it, “Design comes second.",
Thats the saying of someone who doesnt know that design means to prioritize function over form or aestethic, so the design of a photography website must be made to prioritize showing the photo in a clean and unbostructed way.
his quote must have been, "aesthetic comes second"
So the landing page should have 1 key/main image and not a selection. I have a fullscreen website but for my latest site (http://abstractabstract.com/) I went with a gallery of 10 images on landing page, thought it gives a nice, quick overview of work.
Well that sure escalated quickly. Good post though.