When it comes to deciding which photos to show on websites and on social media I often see two different philosophies employed by photographers. One type of photographer decides to only show a limited selection of what they deem to be their best work. These photographers typically have a low output but of consistent quality; limited to a few themes. Another type of photographer goes with what I call the “stock photographer” photo editing method. The output is much higher though quality varies greatly as they are less selective about what they post.
Though I have traditionally fallen into the latter category, I can see the validity to both sides of the argument. I personally find myself struggling to strike a balance between the two. Having a more tightly-edited collection is often more visually impressive and memorable. On the other hand, I shoot a lot of photos and I enjoy sharing them. Here are some questions I keep asking myself:
- Am I being true to myself if I am too restrictive in what I show or am I just employing quality control?
- Am I doing this out of self-expression or am I a visual entertainer and post based on web metrics?
- Is there a point in maintain a website and social media presence if I’m not trying to monetize my efforts, hence make decisions based on financial considerations?
- Will sharing a lot less but with consistently higher quality stimulate more demand?
I have no idea what the answer is but with this new site redesign I’m trying to strike a balance by having curated galleries while putting the archive part of my site more in the background. On social media sites however I’m less picky about what I post because I don’t make money from social media. My social media usage is more for networking and inspiration.