[biz-engineer]

Being a brand ambassador often means the following;- You get ZERO income from it

You sound like you are not aware, or write as if you are not aware, about content marketing as a business [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_marketing ] . My friend edits product reviews as articles and videos, she makes $1000 per article/video, without running a vlog channel. Just to be clear, nowadays we don't see much advertising style from the 70s. Content marketing (writing interesting content to catch and retain attention, introducing products indirectly, sustaining share of mind, all without the reader noticing) took a lot of ground in the advertising industry, content marketing is now the dominant form of advertising. This new reality is such that complete businesses are built around content marketing on the internet. For camera equipments we have marketing companies such as Tony & Chelsea N., Matt Irwin, Matt Granger(https://www.zoominfo.com/c/matt-granger/347626371), Jared Polin, and many others, who generate enough revenues out of their youtube channel by talking about camera equipment, it's a full time job & business. In 2021 alone, Alphabet generated USD 257.6 billion mostly out of selling internet services, essentially market research and advertising services via content marketing, as well as direct advertising services. It's a huge market, "photography" content being a tiny part of it. Sony and Fuji in particular have juicy marketing program. So where I live, Fuji sponsors photography workshops, Fuji pays the local "photographer" for setting up the workshops and attracting attendees, and obviously Fuji provides the cameras, lenses and flashes to be show cased at the workshop, and the instructor of the workshop is trained by Fuji, what he must say about Fuji benefits (the famous Jpeg film emulation is one of the said benefits, "you don't need full frame" is another one, etc..). There are two sides of the camera business: one side is the professional side (the equipment manufacturer, the marketing agency, the youtube channel, the side that produce content and makes money) and the other side (the receiving side) is the consumer side (the side that spends money and use the products). Obviously, the key ingredient that makes marketing content works is to have the professional money making side play the role of the camera customer side by using customer rhetoric such as "I have chosen Fuji because Fuji is really good for my photography, I really like the fujifilm film simulation jpegs, they are fantastic for my wedding photography".

---

Last edited by biz-engineer; 06-26-2022 at 11:35 PM.

[StiffLegged]

Haha, you've not upset anyone (or me), I just find it odd is all, to weigh in on a thread but not even take the 10mins to watch the content to which the thread pertains. Would you skip the OP on every thread? Or if the thread has an external link to an article you wouldn't take the 5-10mins to click and read up on that before giving your 2 cents? I just don't get that kind of mentality is all, I don't think I could easily contribute to a conversation if I didn't at least educate myself to what it is we're all talking about. And I really don't think the video is at all containing a click bait title, do you?

We’re not going to agree on this, I’m out of this thread.

[BruceBanner]

You sound like you are not aware, or write as if you are not aware, about content marketing as a business [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_marketing ] . My friend edits product reviews as articles and videos, she makes $1000 per article/video, without running a vlog channel. Just to be clear, nowadays we don't see much advertising style from the 70s. Content marketing (writing interesting content to catch and retain attention, introducing products indirectly, sustaining share of mind, all without the reader noticing) took a lot of ground in the advertising industry, content marketing is now the dominant form of advertising. This new reality is such that complete businesses are built around content marketing on the internet. For camera equipments we have marketing companies such as Tony & Chelsea N., Matt Irwin, Matt Granger(https://www.zoominfo.com/c/matt-granger/347626371), Jared Polin, and many others, who generate enough revenues out of their youtube channel by talking about camera equipment, it's a full time job & business. In 2021 alone, Alphabet generated USD 257.6 billion mostly out of selling internet services, essentially market research and advertising services via content marketing, as well as direct advertising services. It's a huge market, "photography" content being a tiny part of it. Sony and Fuji in particular have juicy marketing program. So where I live, Fuji sponsors photography workshops, Fuji pays the local "photographer" for setting up the workshops and attracting attendees, and obviously Fuji provides the cameras, lenses and flashes to be show cased at the workshop, and the instructor of the workshop is trained by Fuji, what he must say about Fuji benefits (the famous Jpeg film emulation is one of the said benefits, "you don't need full frame" is another one, etc..). There are two sides of the camera business: one side is the professional side (the equipment manufacturer, the marketing agency, the youtube channel, the side that produce content and makes money) and the other side (the receiving side) is the consumer side (the side that spends money and use the products). Obviously, the key ingredient that makes marketing content works is to have the professional money making side play the role of the camera customer side by using customer rhetoric such as "I have chosen Fuji because Fuji is really good for my photography, I really like the fujifilm film simulation jpegs, they are fantastic for my wedding photography".

I'm aware, I have friends that do content marketing for a living. You can believe what you like. Kevin was an ambassador and no longer is, he is said to continue shooting Fuji. Robin Wong was an Olympus ambassador, he quit but is still using Olympus. FJH was a Sony ambassador, quit but still uses Sony. If ambassadors were in so many pockets then they'd be swapping brands every second year, but they don't. Typically the ambassador status perks are no longer that useful to the tog, the ambassador status served their needs and no longer really helps and in fact can become a drain on their time commitments and resources. This is the cycle of brand ambassadors (at least for the very successful ones).

When Pentax Australia loaned me their K3III to review, I did so and they did not give me any input at all, I was free to say what I liked, they saw the review the same time the general public do. I have agreed to represent Pentax/Ricoh in August at an event and it goes without saying I am going to be positive about the brand, speak to their strengths but Pentax Australia know I'm not going to outright lie and deceive the public about this or that. Integrity is important too and as soon as you start to sound like a fanboi you lose credibility. Plenty of other ambassadors like Andy Mumford have also been outright critical and positive of Fuji and mention time and time again gear does not matter, you can shoot Sony or whatever you like, he just likes to shoot Fuji. I'll say it again, the pattern tends to be;

Photographer chooses the camera>shoots the camera well>gets noticed or applies for ambassador (because their work is of high quality and there is a mutual benefit working relationship)>becomes ambassador>promotes brand (based on a lot of the things they liked and what first pulled them towards that system)>gets perks (but is not told what to say, how to say it, censored or whatever).

If some get out of line, they get fired. If some don't promote enough (too much work), they get fired. But usually a nice balance is struck whereby the ambassador is positive but also critical, it gives some credibility to the brand overall. I just think this notion that Kevin and Andy are on Fuji payrol, censored what they can and cannot say, pushing fuji even though they don't themselves actually stand by their claims is... way off. When I speak about Pentax positively I mean everything I say. When I speak negatively about Pentax I mean it too, but there's a forum and a time and a place to talk about such things, at a Pentax or Fuji event at their stall is possibly not the coolest place to be forthcoming and dwelling on the negs, and I think everyone realises that and takes it as a given. It's frankly rude to do so otherwise.

We’re not going to agree on this, I’m out of this thread.

Bye.

[house]

The little adjustments to what you say are enough for it to be useful marketing. I'm not saying don't do it but the fact is that getting money or access changes how people behave and they become useful marketing tools. Fanboi or not.

[BigMackCam]

I have agreed to represent Pentax/Ricoh in August at an event and it goes without saying I am going to be positive about the brand, speak to their strengths but Pentax Australia know I'm not going to outright lie and deceive the public about this or that. Integrity is important too and as soon as you start to sound like a fanboi you lose credibility.

The little adjustments to what you say are enough for it to be useful marketing. I'm not saying don't do it but the fact is that getting money or access changes how people behave and they become useful marketing tools. Fanboi or not.

Congrats on the gig, Eddy. A relationship like that will hopefully be beneficial to both parties

Re house's comment... it raises an interesting aspect of such relationships, and I have an conundrum for you on that... one that doesn't necessarily demand an answer, more just something to consider (you may already have done so?):

When talking to folks at the event, if someone asks you about the K-3III, the HD DA*16-50 lens, etc., would you lean towards talking about the camera and lens' good points, or - especially if someone brings it up - would you feel comfortable talking about the apparent issues some users are having - for months now - with off-centre AF inaccuracy? Or, colour profiles released in firmware that are only enabled for specific lenses, despite the fact that they'd work perfectly well with any lens? Or... the aperture block issue in earlier cameras, but also - to some extent - in the current K-70? Quality and availability of warranty and servicing facilities outside of Japan? Etc.

Sorry, I guess this is OT and deserves a separate discussion thread... and, as I say, I'm not necessarily asking for an answer to the above. I find it interesting, though, because if I was in your position - building a YouTube presence and subscriber base - I'd find navigating that situation quite a challenge. Do you lean towards representing the brand, towards existing and/or potential Pentax users, or both - and if the latter, how? Tricky...

Anyway, best of luck with it. I'm sure it will be enjoyable, and hope you manage to get some value from it. I'm sure Ricoh will - you've plenty to offer, there's no doubt about that

[BruceBanner]

Congrats on the gig, Eddy. A relationship like that will hopefully be beneficial to both parties

Re house's comment... it raises an interesting aspect of such relationships, and I have an conundrum for you on that... one that doesn't necessarily demand an answer, more just something to consider (you may already have done so?):

When talking to folks at the event, if someone asks you about the K-3III, the HD DA*16-50 lens, etc., would you lean towards talking about the camera and lens' good points, or - especially if someone brings it up - would you feel comfortable talking about the apparent issues some users are having - for months now - with off-centre AF inaccuracy? Or, colour profiles released in firmware that are only enabled for specific lenses, despite the fact that they'd work perfectly well with any lens? Or... the aperture block issue in earlier cameras, but also - to some extent - in the current K-70? Quality and availability of warranty and servicing facilities outside of Japan? Etc.

Sorry, I guess this is OT and deserves a separate discussion thread... and, as I say, I'm not necessarily asking for an answer to the above. I find it interesting, though, because if I was in your position - building a YouTube presence and subscriber base - I'd find navigating that situation quite a challenge. Do you lean towards representing the brand, towards existing and/or potential Pentax users, or both - and if the latter, how? Tricky...

Anyway, best of luck with it. I'm sure it will be enjoyable, and hope you manage to get some value from it. I'm sure Ricoh will - you've plenty to offer, there's no doubt about that

Try and be fair and balanced is my approach. If you want to know more I have a huge backlog of Pentax reviews and related content that demonstrate how I try and manage that stuff;

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

If you can be bothered or are entertained enough to watch any of this you'll see I tend to find pros and cons on both brands, justifications for case usage and so on so forth.

Ya know Pentax are a pretty cool brand, even one of their official YT channels awhile back had some Japanese hotshot being interviewed and talking about his love for Pentax but at the same time freely admitting he uses MILC cameras from other brands for work (and the cameras even featured in the video along side him). This I think is a great mature move by Pentax, by not trying to directly compete with the other brands (that horse has bolted lol), but instead recognise their necessity in todays faster paced world but that it doesn't become the be all and end all. What other brand would be so cool to show other non 'their brand' cameras and give them kudos at the same time.

[morenjavi]

When Pentax Australia loaned me their K3III to review, I did so and they did not give me any input at all, I was free to say what I liked, they saw the review the same time the general public do. I have agreed to represent Pentax/Ricoh in August at an event and it goes without saying I am going to be positive about the brand, speak to their strengths but Pentax Australia know I'm not going to outright lie and deceive the public about this or that. Integrity is important too and as soon as you start to sound like a fanboi you lose credibility. Plenty of other ambassadors like Andy Mumford have also been outright critical and positive of Fuji and mention time and time again gear does not matter, you can shoot Sony or whatever you like, he just likes to shoot Fuji. I'll say it again, the pattern tends to be;

Hi Eddy,

Congrats. I'm happy to know you're a Pentax ambassador now. I read the forums from time to time and I've seen some nice videos you're producing, so I suppose it's related to your new 'status' .
You exposed an interesting point about JPEG/RAW use and their relationship with the concept of amateur/expert user (If I have understood the video correctly, I'm afraid that my English is not very good).
I've been mostly a RAW shooter guy (until this year). I can't find a good reason for that, maybe the fear of losing important details, not getting the WB right, thinking that it was just "the right and professional way to get pics"... or maybe it's just that I always preferred results coming from RAW format. Maybe I was just a little lazy?
But lately I find myself comfortable preparing my settings for familiar/candid photos and shooting in JPEG. I still reserve RAW when I have a job and want the highest quality. Sometimes I use a neutral profile setting for the JPEGs and then I add some styles on post, and I like the results.

I think that many modern cameras have very good JPEGs, so the use of RAW is perhaps not so necessary except when you really want to extract everything from the sensor. Everything has its place, I guess.

Regards.

[BruceBanner]

Hi Eddy,

Congrats. I'm happy to know you're a Pentax ambassador now. I read the forums from time to time and I've seen some nice videos you're producing, so I suppose it's related to your new 'status' .
You exposed an interesting point about JPEG/RAW use and their relationship with the concept of amateur/expert user (If I have understood the video correctly, I'm afraid that my English is not very good).
I've been mostly a RAW shooter guy (until this year). I can't find a good reason for that, maybe the fear of losing important details, not getting the WB right, thinking that it was just "the right and professional way to get pics"... or maybe it's just that I always preferred results coming from RAW format. Maybe I was just a little lazy?
But lately I find myself comfortable preparing my settings for familiar/candid photos and shooting in JPEG. I still reserve RAW when I have a job and want the highest quality. Sometimes I use a neutral profile setting for the JPEGs and then I add some styles on post, and I like the results.

I think that many modern cameras have very good JPEGs, so the use of RAW is perhaps not so necessary except when you really want to extract everything from the sensor. Everything has its place, I guess.

Regards.

Thank you, I should be clear... I am not a Pentax Ambassador (not officially), I just have a good working relationship with Pentax Australia and doing 'like Ambassador' type things (like camera reviews, attending stalls etc). This relationship suits me fine, I think we already have a society gone mad with labels and such. I've asked for a pin badge saying 'Ambassador' for the event in August (as a joke ).

But yeh, again the video was not really about Auto vs Manual, or Jpg vs RAW. It was more about my own position that I would make strong assumptions if meeting a photographer who claimed to shoot Jpg and use Auto mode. I would essentially place myself 'above' them in terms of skill and craft know-how... now... now I can't hold that assumption as I am having my eyes opened to extremely talented photographers using both Auto mode and Jpgs as part of their workflow.

[morenjavi]

But yeh, again the video was not really about Auto vs Manual, or Jpg vs RAW. It was more about my own position that I would make strong assumptions if meeting a photographer who claimed to shoot Jpg and use Auto mode. I would essentially place myself 'above' them in terms of skill and craft know-how... now... now I can't hold that assumption as I am having my eyes opened to extremely talented photographers using both Auto mode and Jpgs as part of their workflow.

Thanks, I undertood that part. I'm afraid I don't belong to the group of talented photographers, but I'm trying .

[reh321]

Thanks, I undertood that part. I'm afraid I don't belong to the group of talented photographers, but I'm trying .

‘Talent’ is not necessarily the question.
The question is what you want to control, and what you are willing to have the camera control.
I just recently learned that - depending on the camera - ‘green’ mode controls ISO and/or rendition in converting to JPEG.
I sometimes allow the camera {depending on which camera - I trust my KP more than my K-30 or my Q-S1}, to control ISO
as long as it tells me what ISO value is being used, but I insist on my selecting parameters used to
convert from ‘raw’ to JPEG. I pick one set of parameters, and may use exactly the same parameters
for several years without changing anything. That is how I do things.

[Mikesul]

This has been, and continues to be, a fun and interesting thread. Thanks to Eddy for starting it. Of course, it suffers, as do many other threads, from the occasional poster who comments on the topic without bothering to view the video.

[abraswell]

I rarely leave Program mode these days, Hyper-Program is just way too good. Auto, Av and Tv all rolled up into one. I don't do a lot of street, but when I do I find it invaluable. I like to shoot in auto but if I need to increase DoF or want to drag the shutter for some motion blur, I can do it by just turning the appropriate dial, then hit the green button to go back to auto. I'm not very good at it anyway, and I'd rather spend my time trying to find a good shot. And not getting ran over, because people around here drive like idiots.


As for JPG, I use it in sports. I just don't see the need for RAW there. Any edits I would make, the camera can do it itself. And the K3II buffer isn't great and the write speeds aren't either. And with a lot of these MILC's, you have to make tradeoffs in order to hit their maximum frame rate. My A7RIV can hit 10FPS, but that requires compressed (lossy) RAW and it drops to a 12-bit readout. And compressed RAWs out of that camera are still ~60MB. I'd rather shoot JPG.

[reh321]

I rarely leave Program mode these days, Hyper-Program is just way too good. Auto, Av and Tv all rolled up into one. I don't do a lot of street, but when I do I find it invaluable. I like to shoot in auto but if I need to increase DoF or want to drag the shutter for some motion blur, I can do it by just turning the appropriate dial, then hit the green button to go back to auto. I'm not very good at it anyway, and I'd rather spend my time trying to find a good shot. And not getting ran over, because people around here drive like idiots.

I see ‘Tv’ and ‘Av’, but ‘auto’????

‘P’ does allow aperture and shutter speed to “float”, but ISO? ….. and processing?
I want control over those things, or at least to be aware of what the camera is doing,
and I apparently cede all of that decision-making to the camera only under ‘auto’.