When putting together my first websites I did quite a bit of research on the best way to have them designed. It seemed that the best way to do it was to have photos of spectators reacting on your site. The reason behind this is that you are selling the benefits behind your show. However, when I look at the websites of some of the more successful performers, the majority of them don't have this kind of site. The majority seem to have simple sites which mostly only have photos of the performer. Many do have video and testimonials on their site though.

I am making some changes to my performing style etc and will be shutting down old websites and starting up a new one. I am beginning to think that I don't need all those pictures of spectators reacting anymore! I can understand how you may want those types of photos for a site targeting kids shows but for someone who is targeting adults I get the feeling that all the reaction shots can sometimes look a bit cheezy.

Any thoughts or experiences with this?

Thanks
AM

It's a sales concept and psychology. If you see someone reacting well, you want to experience that same feeling. Technically you don't need them, but its a great thing to have. Look at some commercials you see on TV; I can guarantee they have someone smiling, who is probably good looking, and it makes people want to feel that same way. Personally, I don't have anyone looking like that, but the only reason is because since I've just started doing shows seriously I haven't had the opportunity to take them. However, I'm itching for the opportunity to do it because it is a good idea to do.

As for professionals who don't do it, its usually because they have the ability to book shows on a consistent basis without having to worry about selling shows through their website. One guy I know literally doesn't have a way to contact him because he is booked entirely through agents (and makes a good living).

Either that, or they've made up for the lacking of those pictures with other sales tactics (which is what I've attempted to do). Its a difference between an informative site, or a motivational site. One website might just inform about a person because they need a base for people to get information about them. Or, they need a website it motivates people to buy their service. David Copperfield doesn't need a motivating website because he is a big enough name to not have to sell through his website. His name and reputation alone sells tickets. However, almost everyone else needs to sell shows through their website because they aren't a household name.

What you think is cheesy is another person's motivation to hire you.

AM
IMHO You want pictures of audiences responding to you. Pictures of people laughing, or people with a surprised look on their face only takes on real meaning when you, or your face is in the center of those picture. That changes the message from pictures of people laughing to pictures of people that you are making laugh.

Just my thoughts

Video is a lot better than photos. Having video allows buyers to experience the reactions you receive and they become invested in you by spending time on your site to see your video. People can always just glance at your website and they're usually off within 1 minute. But if you have videos then they are glued to your site (and psychologically more invested in you).

Pictures have become useless nowadays because every entertainer has the same pictures of people laughing (it's not like a magician will post pictures of people with sad faces). The only way pictures become effective is if you have something of you performing in front of a crowd of 5,000 people. That type of picture makes the buyer think "wow, he must know what he is doing if he performs for such huge crowds."

So the only way a picture is effective nowadays is using them for indirect communication. It's not about showing how people are laughing (direct communication), it's about showing how 5,000 people are laughing (indirect). The best marketing is built into your services. You should never have to tell people what you're doing...you just allow them to guess it in your manner.

The same holds true for video testimonials. It is not about having a couple people saying "John the Magician was amazing." What you want is to have sooooooooo many testimonial videos that your buyer is now saying to himself, "well if he has this many videos of people raving about him then he MUST be good."

As Dave pointed out, the top performers don't have photos on their site because they already built up their business as a "word of mouth" only business. So the only people who go to their site are people who have already seen the performer and the website doesn't matter.

I believe that photos are extremely important in a person's marketing and positioning strategy.

I would argue that, while video are vitally important, photos play a different - not better or worse - role. Photos will communicate a ton of information with just a glance. A client can get a good idea if you are right for them with the first image they see.

Video requires more of an investment of time which may be put off until later especially for an office worker with no sound on their computer. Or, if the video even works for them at all!

I think there is more to consider than just whether to have an audience reaction shot. Think about the demographics and dress of those reacting as well as the venue the photo is taken within. The subtle elements of the photo communicate as well.

It is ideal to have you in the photo along with the reactions.

Your photo needs to appeal to and be attractive to your target market. It must also represent your positioning strategy.

The big question to ask yourself is: what do you want to communicate and how can a photo communicate that for you?

My favorite pictures are the ones where you can see all the various faces in the audience with expressions of amazement, laughter, and happiness, with me in the picture, but my image somewhat subdued. I have a couple of those kinds of pictures which I feel "speak a thousand words". The pictures are not staged, but the result of having many many pictures taken over the years. I believe that these kinds of pictures are more effective than pictures of me doing some type of illusion where the potential client's reaction might be "Oh, I've seen that trick before", or "card tricks are boring" or whatever. I would rather sell the benefits as aussiemagic said above, and the picture of my audience laughing is one of the benefits.

Thanks for all the replies.

Like I said in my original post I have gone the picture route up untill now and I still may go that route again but I want to rethink this carefully. Like I said, a lot of the websites I have seen from guys who are successful and market to a similar target market as I will be marketing to, do not have many photos of people reacting on their site. I would like to post some of those sites here but don't think that is appropriate.

I am kind of leaning towards Benji's way of thinking and can see the value of including a photo of a performer performing for a very large crowd but not the value so much in individual shots of people having a good time etc. like every other magician is doing. Everyone is always talking about how we should sell the "sizzle" and not the steak. But a good steak restaurant doesn't need to do this surely. Their product is their best sales tool. Like Benji said, "the best marketing is built into your services". The public knows this too.

When I think of how I would answer Scott's question: "What do you want to communicate and how can a photo communicate that for you?"

Just having a few photos of me on a simple site without any "oversell" seems to me to communicate that I am succesful and professional and don't need to go to extremities to prove that fact. I don't need to oversell myself because I am already successful and going overboard would only seem to cheapen my image and services.

A lot of discussion is on this forum is based around how to interact with our clients and often people will say that it is not good to act desperate. In fact, it is better to even act like you don't need the gig! If we are successful surely our sites shouldn't be screaming out in desperation for people to book us! I am not sure how well I am articulating my thoughts on this, part of the reason is I am still not sure how I feel about both approaches, but I am leaning towards a more simple and classy site with less USPs and all the rest of the stuff I was told to include. The car salesman approach is definitely not the image I want to portray.

I look forward to discussing this more with you all.

I'm absolutely with Scott - a combination of photos and videos are important. First of all, I think a good photograph or two makes your site far more visually pleasing. It doesn't need to be under the heading, "look how good I am!" Just a few placed here and there gives the site a bit more life, and also can subtly convey the message that you've done this before. I've just finished having some professional photographs taken at an event I was working, so that I can add them to my site and class it up a bit.

I would argue that photos are essential, as Scott says, for different purposes. I would personally find a site without any photographs at all to be rather dull to look at.

Simply put, pictures of you performing in front of an audience is validation that you actually perform shows. It puts to rest the question for the potiential buyer that you actually perform and present shows.

The next kind of photo that is good is you and a spectator together. This is good if you say your act uses audience participation.

Remember the old saying, "A picture is worth a Thousand Words".

Yes, I have seen those professional sites as well that do not show any audiences. So my 1st question in my mind, if this guy is so great, why dosen't he show himself in front of an audience.

I have seen sites with video that cut away to an audience, and if you look carefully, you will see the audience is only a 'stock' video clip. Not the audences of today in their Tshirt and shorts.

Wmhegbli gets it spot on. Reaction shots validate you do what you say you do!
It's like being a web designer and not having a website!
They are so important! Stock images are not a good idea as they crop up on multiple sites. I know a couple of magicians who did a few free gigs on the understanding they could take a photographer (with the guests permission of course)to these events purely to get shots.
Ade

While the topic is about photos on websites, I think a good deal of this applies also to photos on promotion pamphlets that are more extensive than just one side of a sheet of paper.

http://www.thehouseofenchantment.com/pag......ing.html