I think this conversation has moved and what isn’t being considered is the client’s viewpoint.
I know three people very well that are in the apparel business. One a CEO, the other the chairman of the board, the third a Couture.
I can tell you, talking to these three people, the only thing you hear is “retail is difficult” no matter what side your own, off the rack or bespoke.
And, it’s not just apparel, it’s all retail. I was in an apple store the other night, buying drives (I’m always buying drives) and the customer next to me was lining up portable ssd’s and looking online to see the best price he could get.
Once he did his research, he walked out, so I guess he found a better price online. Now Apple doesn’t need the money, but their sales have also taken a drop. People just won’t buy the newest I-phone because it’s out.
As Rob observed, fashion publications and high priced brand’s photography have also taken a big hit, more every year. I was having my hair done and while waiting I went through every single page of what I think was the latest US Elle magazine.
Thick book, full of ads but doing a count there was only two editorial’s that was shot on a location, 98% were shot on either colored backdrops or stripped into them. The two with locations were of the “free kind” like standing in a street or on a lobby construction site. Not the old Peter Lindberg in the south of Europe with Kate Blanchett and Bradley Cooper.
The advertising was all on simple backdrops, except one for shoes that was in some hotel room.
But from the designer’s/maker’s standpoint, they don’t have the budget and their newer creative’s that are the decision makers didn’t get into the industry until the recession. In other words they have never been on a shoot that requires props, locations, even medium sized crews. It’s the old form of catch 22. They don’t make the marketing enticing, so the sales suffer, which means they cut back on the marketing budget.
Rob mentioned websites and unlike Rob I have no problem reading or viewing a magazine electronically. It’s fine as long as the content is strong. Rob mentioned Chanel and they did spend some money but all on their fashion shows in major markets, hence most of the imagery was of the fashion shows, in still and motion, though the motion imagery is more visceral https://www.chanel.com/en_US/
It’s not that the sky is falling, it’s that you have to learn different skills and how to direct the whole process. Drag man, but this business has never been easy.
Now Rob, I know, you know if you really wanted that sweater campaign, it takes more than saying you want it. Get some sweaters, do a test, build a purposely designed web promo and go after it.
Yes, it takes investment and yes it’s no fun “testing/presenting” for free, but until they see what you can do, what you will do and who you are, the chances of them finding you on your roma site are almost impossible.
IMO
BC
James, Rob, I think you both make good points but each from different business and timeline perspectives.
Lindberg is a bit of a case apart because he's got a big name and a rare survivor of the giants who
made fashion photography, a bit like if we'd still have a Balenciaga or a Picasso alive and active nowdays.
So he does what he wants, regardless of what history requires because he is part of History.
This kind of freedom is so extremely hard to gain that very few in the world can enjoy.
So he is loath to fit in ADs and agencie business, imposes some conditions for the editos like an emperator, such as "no retouching whatsoever".
Not even Testino that I know has this power. But did Peter have to drop out certain amount of incomes as the price to
pay for insubordination? Not everybody is willing to exchange fame and wealth for freedom. Some paid hard price for having tried.
In a way Rob prones a glimpse of Lindberg's freedom and it may works if goals are setted accordingly.
Just make a decent living is doable. No hassles but not that much chance of glory either. And after all, who cares?
"It's my way" may easily become the way-out because "my way" implicitly means to be enpowered by some sort
of authority and prestige.
Then the client does not come-in to deal its requirements but because they match those of the artist. Big difference.
On the other hand, can someone reasonably obtain freedom without being rebel; but a subtle double game
between fawning on the industry -because cash is needed- and sending it to hell at the same time -because after all cash is not the only thing that matters-?
This is where the Sex Pistols or the Who excelled. They were products of their business industry, but this latest
could not control them either.
"being oneself" regardless of what's up out there.