How successful you look�

Yes � you need to dress for success.  If you show up to photograph a wedding in jeans with knees torn out and a t-shirt, then yes, it�s going to impact your success.  Dress appropriately for the occasion.

What you drive � no�what you drive makes no difference.

Your equipment � yes�it makes a difference.  If you�re shooting a wedding with a Canon G12 as opposed to a 5D MK II, yes, it�s going to influence your client. 

I went and looked at studio space last Saturday.  I was told $250/month for the space, plus a $500 equipment deposit for the use of a backdrop and three strobes.  The stands the strobes were on looked to be in worse condition that the $15 speedlight stands I�ve bought from eBay and the power cords were cracked.  Why would I pay a $500 deposit on equipment that costs less than $500?

Some additional points�

Insurance � yes.  If you don�t have insurance it conveys the message you don�t care about your clients, you aren�t cautious about what you do, and you are not professional.

Web site � yes (to a point).  If you are touting yourself as a �commercial photographer� and all you have on your website is pictures of landscapes and wildlife, your clients are going to keep looking.

How you act � ABSOLUTELY.  You aren�t professional unless you show professionalism in front of your client.

Not at all. What influences your 'level of success' is how hard you work, how well you satisfy your clients' needs, how well you understand and exploit the business opportunities, etc. The gear that you use and the car that you drive can only disguise inadequacies ... and then for only so long.

I recently read somewhere, maybe Fred Miranda - I remember it was a lady, sorry to quote someone I don't even recall - but she had a booking with a customer who had cheaped out on a session with a "mom with camera" type.  The pro photographer asked the client to point out the difference was between her style and the m-w-c.  The customer said something like "you showed up on time, you have flashes on stands and not a pop up flash, you took light measurements and held that colour thingy up, you told me to raise my chin and turn my shoulders a certain way - she (m-w-c) just fired away and the photos were terrible".

So - your actions go a long way as well!  But still, if you showed up in dirty jeans and and a slogan-tshirt you have already given the client a reason to hate you.

Oh Cory, you kill me!

Absolutely, most ppl are dumb snobs with no idea about aesthetics, and unless you can please them presenting something catchy in their favoured kitshcy style, they gonna very heavily judge you by your equipment. I know several wannabes making ok money -compared to their instantly visible severe lack of any talent- by constantly showing of their 'pro-gear'. Their business card, their opening homepage, etc, is showing them swningin' a big body with the biggest lens, and it works. It has been tested in flickr too, some guy posted shots with original exif, d40 I think, than posted the same shots (decent, but nothing showing real talent) with fake exif telling it was done with the biggest hassy + super-duper lens, got 5-10 times more likes and favourites. Conclusion is the same as always: people are stupid. : )

I like to show up in Spiderman pajamas and a pirate hat riding side saddle on a Shetland pony to all my meetings. It really impresses my clients.

 

Brilliant!  For that, I'd hire you!

Horses for courses, no doubt, but I can't stand working with people who make assumptions on the basis of appearance (having had my fill in the 80's).  I just prefer being around people with greater depth.

I kind of thought "photographer" was one of those professions where looking a little grungy was accepted, except for wedding pros of course.   Photojournalists typically seem to look a bit ragged, and "artists" of all types are given a lot of leeway on their appearance. 

Honestly, I don't think most clients or models can tell the difference between a Rebel and a 5DII, for example, nor between a Canon, Nikon, etc.   They do like to see those softboxes and umbrellas though, and a digicam with onboard flash would be a huge no-no. 

More than appearance, I think it is your attitude that conveys professionalism or lack of it.  If you are calm, confident, and give them good direction, they are going to be reassured, no matter how you are dressed nor what equipment you use (within reason).

   Most of my clients are more likely to notice if you don't have the latest version of photoshop than anything else. I think Lisa brings up a good point about confidence, because if you can't make the client feel that you are in control and know what you are doing, you are toast. I dress in jeans and t-shirt because 99% of the time I'm in the studio, on ladders or on the floor, or in some way getting messy. But on location at an office or the like, I make sure to dress well. It's a sign of respect for your client. The other stuff- cameras, lights, etc, are pretty much mystery objects to most people, so I wouldn't worry about the gear, as long as you have what you need to do the job properly. And little details make a big difference. A dirty ratty old extension cord is an advertisement that you're a slob, no matter what you drive. And to get back to the original question about brand, almost every client I've ever had has been a reference from another person, so the brand is key.

Quote from: jbarber873 on January 03, 2012, 21:43

   Most of my clients are more likely to notice if you don't have the latest version of photoshop than anything else.

How would they know this? My clients wouldn't have a clue, understand or care about which PS version I was using. All that matters to them is the results.

     My clients are for the most part ad agency art directors or graphic designers. I work in the studio, as I said, so they are naturally looking over my shoulder.

I must have dreamed about this thread in my sleep...  The first thought in my head when I woke up was David Bailey, and how he doesn't seem to care what anyone thinks.  I don't always agree with him, but I do enjoy his insistence on being himself. 

There are some comments in this interview that seem relevant to this thread. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1924630/David-Bailey-the-sixties-and-bloody-feminism.html

David can afford to look like a scruff, he has made his mark, in photography and commercial directing. Had you seen him in the 60s and 70s, he looked the part indeed. Although, this cockney lad, doesnt care what people say, at all.

Yes, true Lagereek.  But then the 60s were the first step away from conformity.  I think it might have just taken him a while to take the bigger stride.  

Fair enough though, of course when we feel at the mercy of someone else's judgement simply to be able to eat and develop, we have no choice but to make concessions and compromise ourselves (you'd think Dickens' attempts to illustrate that miserable fact two centuries ago would have had more impact).   At the earliest opportunity though, I do encourage people to help break the mindset that 'you are what you wear' or what you drive or any of that other tosh - by not feeding it.  As producers of an end-product, we are actually in a position to be able to change that, one little ripple at a time, by producing better and more desirable work than the competitor who 'blings' loudest, but offers  poor results.

I suppose I've always wanted the world to be more meritocratic.  

I agree!  have you seen Baileys commercial for Greenpeace? you know the one with the blood and furcoats, splashing all over the place. The slogan is: " it takes a thousand dumb animals to make a fur-coat but only ONE, to wear it"
powerful stuff!

I like Bailey a lot, even met him a few times in London, etc, and he is actually one of few, who is prepared to stand for what he is doing, no hokus pokus there.

best.