In general, I’m a fan.

You asked about having two sites. I’ve answered that in the post above.

You also asked, “I’ve noticed that some well known photographers, such as Chase Jarvis market themselves as much as they do their body of work. Is it important to also market yourself and not just the images that you produce?”

I’m not a huge fan of the photog marketing themselves as celebrity. But market yourself, you must, assuming you are a freelancer of course.

But market your work rather than your own face, so to speak.It does depend on your niche and in fashion, it’s true that the photogs can become public figures, too, but it’s rare.

Remember that in the freelance world, much work comes from word of mouth and referrals from your professional peers. So, go lightly on what some might misinterpret as too much ego or creating a false impression that you may be hard to work with.

Having an “ABOUT” section is good on a site, and you do need to brand yourself, certainly. The book does have a marketing chapter and it is very important to constantly sell yourself with promotional materials.

You asked, “I’d like to know how you feel or would potential clients feel about a website with dual portals. One portal would show photojournalism and commercial work while the other showed wedding and fashion. Is it too much to have the two together??

You see it both ways these days yet I’m a proponent of two separate sites. The reason? Buyers and editors each have their unique challenges to solve. You want them to believe and know you are truly dedicated to what they do.

Now, as you know, pros very often have two specialties these days. Nothing wrong with linking between the two sites.

I would never show weddings with photojournalism. The bride is the client, and nervous about the big day. News images can shock the senses, not serve to relax.

Weddings and fashion do go very well together, though!

You asked, “If I’m applying for a staff job with a large daily, wouldn’t a package of 4 or 5 solid photos from a local event serve me better than an ultra-eclectic portfolio? I feel like an editor should be more interested in what i can produce on a daily basis. Can you correct my thinking on this issue?”

Competition has always been tight in every photographic specialty; in the past two years there has been a virtual implosion in the world of newspaper photojournalism. Thus, if an editor does have an opening, it’s likely to be at entry level salary. You can bet that TERRIFIC portfolios will grace his or her desk.

Thus, it’s no time to beat around the bush. Present your most dynamic and impressive portfolio. It needs to exude confidence, smooth as silk, so an editor would feel you’d naturally cruise with routine assignments, too.

Some will ask in job applications to see a week’s worth of clips, for example, but most will not.

For your idea, I’d suggest writing a sentence at the end of your cover letter that you would be happy to provide examples of you coverage from recent events.

I’m looking to break into Fashion and Commercial photography and was wondering if it is best to try to sell yourself as a photographer or to market yourself differently with 2 sites, one for fashion and another for commercial work. I currently have only one site which contains both: http://www.richhinton.com

I’ve noticed that some well known photographers, such as Chase Jarvis market themselves as much as they do their body of work. Is it important to also market yourself and not just the images that you produce?

Many thanks for giving us this opportunity to ask such open questions.

Nick Morris
The Image Group Photography
http://www.theimagegroupphotography.com

I’m struggling with keeping my portfolio relevant. I realize that (unfortunately) I don’t make portfolio quality photos every day. Does presenting a portfolio to an editor of my most spectacular and rare photographic catches really represent me accurately as a photojournalist? If I’m applying for a staff job with a large daily, wouldn’t a package of 4 or 5 solid photos from a local event serve me better than an ultra-eclectic portfolio? I feel like an editor should be more interested in what i can produce on a daily basis. Can you correct my thinking on this issue?

Thanks for your time!

-Luke S.
http://www.LukeSphoto.com

SoundSlides can be a good and easy to use tool for multimedia shows. Using a bit of instrumental music in the background is a possibility; with SoundSlides the length of the soundtrack becomes the length of the full presentation. Thus, if you have 20 images and a 60 second music clip, each picture would run for three seconds. This type of approach can work well for a “greatest hits” wedding portfolio show, for example.

Having said that, many editors and buyers can’t stand multimedia portfolios. It’s not multimedia itself that is the problem, it’s that the viewer is potentially losing navigational control. When I researched the book, so many people complained about viewing portfolios where they couldn’t control the pace, that I dubbed it, “The Flash Backlash.”

So, if you do choose a Flash based presentation, be sure you also have a manual click through method for the viewer to look at your portfolio at their chosen pace.

Also worth noting, if you are doing editorial work today, multimedia is becoming requisite with elements including stills, sound and video. So, having two or three tightly edited projects created in Flash or Final Cut Pro can keep you in the running with Web editors.

The moving image is also changing the advertising market in a big way, too.

Many thanks!