In the last post, I introduced my Photography Value Framework so that I can describe the value of various photos in the same standard. Let me document the detailed definition of the framework here.
Photography Value Framework assesses the value of one photo based on three parts - Company, Customer and Competitor, and each part has two elements. However, I need to define two major premises before explaining about the three parts.
The first is a "photo" itself. Everything starts with one photo in this framework. And of course, photographers basically need to take as visually finer a photo as possible.
The second is a "target group". In this framework, photo needs to tell a story, and the story must have a big impact to somebody. In order to maximize the impact by design, photographers need to select, or sometimes newly define the target group of the photo. This action of defining the target group is perhaps the most challenging part of this framework.
Based on these two major premises, I'm gonna see the three parts of this framework.
In this framework, Customer is an uncontrollable part for photographers, but they must consider it when setting up the major premises. In order to make the photo more valuable, the population of the target group must be large so that more people potentially have relation with the photo.
And their sense of belonging to the group must be strong so that they actually get interested and have relation with the photo. The more people have relation, the more valuable the photo becomes.
If you set up a target group with a larger population, its members' sense of belonging to the group tends to be weak. Photographers need to take the balance and think for whom their photos should be presented.
In this framework, Company is a controllable part for photographers. The value of the photo is ultimately determined by the impact of the story it tells. The story must move people, and in order to move people, the story should be based on the history of the target group so that they get absorbed in the story.
Photographers need to quote or originally define any convincing history as a basis of the story the photo tells. This process is pretty creative. If photographers manage to present a story with the impact big enough to change the presented history, we can say that the photo has offered a new great value.
Besides, the factor of being visually fine is of course needed, but is not the most important because there are floods of only-visually-fine photos in the internet. If people only need such fine photos without story, they can google pictures and find any suitable one from the floods. Most of them are free, and if priced, very cheap. If your photo doesn't have any story, "your" photo itself is not necessary for people.
In this framework, Competitor is a factor which finally substantiate the value of photo. The creation - the combination of photo, story and history - must be original so that people who want such creation only look at its creator now and forever.
The creation must also be un-duplicable so that the value of the photo continues or even be enhanced. Probably there are many possible ways. You can take a picture of extremely rare event. You can add any human beinig who grows and changes (or ages). You can mix chronological event to the story. You can re-interpret any history in a new way. And even, you can design a completely different target group in a new thinking frame.
This part, Competitor, tells me a very important essence of photography. Photographers need to look at others' creations to make their photos valuable.
Hmm... have I managed to document what I'm thinking about this framework?
Enjoy the posts of the same category!
Author of this Blog