Is Being a Camera Brand Ambassador Right for You?
There are so many myths and misunderstandings about the nature of photography brand ambassador roles. The general belief is that camera brands will indulge their ambassadors’ every photographic need or whim and will also pay those photographers to use and promote that equipment. With only a few exceptions I can think of, it isn’t like that at all. In today’s article I’m going to talk a little about my experiences across several years as a brand ambassador for Olympus UK. We parted company when I resigned at the end of 2016 and I confess to a sense of relief when I finally stepped away. Before getting down to the reasons why (and I was by no means the only one) it’s important to establish exactly what a brand representative is.
There are as many different camera brand ambassadors as there are photographers. If an ambassador is an employee of the brand then they’ll be salaried and that’s where their remuneration starts and ends. Then there are contracted brand ambassadors who agree to promote the brand’s equipment via educational seminars and material for an agreed rate and the provision of equipment for their needs. A third group, the independent ambassadors, perform a similar but less intensive function and aren’t tied to a contract (usually because they either use a range of equipment brands in their business, or they don’t want to be bound by a set of formalised conditions). When I represented Olympus I fell into the independent non-contracted category - I was a full-time photographer and had to balance my day to day work carefully.
In all of the above categories the photographer will be an already established user of that brand, which is important in order to gain the trust of his or her audience. I use the term ‘her’ with care. When I joined Olympus I was one of only two or three female ambassadors in the industry. Things have moved on a bit since then, but until fairly recently the industry was still in the dark ages.
There is another category – that of the well-known ‘influencers’ or photography bloggers who’ll be gifted some equipment by a brand on the understanding it will promptly be reviewed and promoted. This category is very different to the first examples I’ve mentioned. The influencer category is the least likely to be taken seriously because it can be argued they’ve been incentivised to write favourably.
As you can see, not all ambassadorial roles are equal. And not all are enduring, happy or productive. Brands often change over time as their marketing managers come and go whilst staff turnover rates may change as well. New management may bring with it a new culture which may impact the brand/ambassador relationship negatively. Cost cutting will normally result in a brand expecting maximum return from ambassadors whilst limiting the ambassador’s ability to fulfil his or her role. Brand marketing managers rarely seem to realise that when ill feeling creeps into an ambassador’s mindset, that ambassador is exponentially less likely to act for them.
Back in the day, being offered a role as a brand ambassador was arguably the ultimate mark of recognition and status. But does that sense of pride hold true today? I’ll answer that question further down.
Brand ambassador roles are often shrouded in mystique, so maybe it’s time to talk about the reality.
The Vital Role Photography Brand Ambassadors Play
At this point we need to ask a very important question. How do camera brands market their equipment? The answer is simple: via exquisite imagery and the endorsement of respected image makers. Without photographs, and a known name to back them up, any brand marketing campaign will fall flat. Without a credible seal of approval and the vital information shared by expert top tier users, no amount of technical data will do the job.
Between 2012 and the end of 2016 I acted for Olympus UK as a brand visionary and product ambassador. I was one of the first full-time professional photographers to adopt the Micro 4/3 format for all of my work. I had a lively blog and I was very active on photography forums, and my work was often in the media. I was also prominent on the industry awards circuit and I held the rare position of Fellow in the BIPP and SWPP. Given those credentials, it wasn’t long before I attracted the attention of the Olympus marketing department.
At the time Olympus was expanding its ambassador and visionary stable to cover several photographic genres. There was an ambassador for fashion photography, animal and wildlife photography (that was me), photojournalism, landscape photography etc. It felt like an exciting time, but the staff changes concurrent with this led to some instability and an overall poor understanding of how to manage the brand’s best assets. Marketing managers may well be photography enthusiasts but unless they’ve run a photography business they may be incapable of understanding how professional photographers work - and what it costs us to do what we do.
After all, the brand is profiting from that photographer’s name, their expertise, a great deal of their time and hard-earned credentials. This is often where the ambassadorial relationship can disintegrate. That very disintegration is something I’m seeing more and more now (Olympus isn’t the only offender). There is a tendency for a brand to fall back on the well worn line which usually revolves around ‘valuable publicity’. In reality, the photographer doesn’t benefit one jot from simply being aligned with a brand - no matter how many times that brand mentions the photographer’s name or publishes their photographs. The very suggestion that you’ll benefit passively from a brand association can be a sign of things to come.
A brand ambassador is (or should be) at the pinnacle of their career, so it’s implausible to suggest that absorbing a brand into an already established sphere of influence would contribute to the photographer’s ability to gain clients or increase their income. I have never had a client who has been remotely interested in whether or not I represent a camera maker. It’s also fair to say that at least some potential students or mentees have probably been turned off by it, fearing a seminar will be a selling exercise.
Given that the vanity aspect is unlikely to resonate with a well-established photographer, it may be the reason why some brands have started to target less well-known photographers who may be more susceptible to flattery. Very often these photographers may have very few industry credentials, but they may have a large social media following and therefore exposure to the brand’s target group. The lack of a well-known name however is likely to limit the amount of influence those photographers might have.
The “Something for Nothing” Photography Culture - the Death of the Brand Ambassador
Irrespective of where an ambassador lies on the industry prominence scale, the ’exposure’ offered by a brand will not include exposure to that photographer’s client group. The brand will be targeting camera buyers - both amateur and professional. They are not the people who’ll be looking to hire a photographer. Because of that, brand ambassadors need to be tangibly rewarded for the work they provide to a commercial entity – an organization where everybody in the chain of command from the boss to the cleaner will be remunerated.
Without our images, without the articles we write, without our published work, without our public appearances and the training seminars we run - a brand would have no hope of credibly establishing its name in the market. So why do so many brands increasingly expect their ambassadors and visionaries to work for little or nothing?
We now live in a culture where there are large numbers of competent amateur and hobbyist photographers who are more than happy to give their work away for free - even to a commercial entity who is quite literally exploiting them. Businesses are all too happy to take a photographer’s work (which has cost them time, money and overhead to produce be they amateur or professional) in exchange for a mention. And many amateur photographers are happy to hand their work over on that basis. To a professional, who understands costs, this practice is undoubtedly damaging to the industry and detrimental to those who depend on photography for their living. It creates a climate where professional photographers are treated in exactly the same way as the hobbyists who are so keen to see their name in print.
Marketers don’t always understand that lower quality visuals can be counter-productive if not damaging to brand perception. Yet that situation prevails as I write this. This is largely the method by which brands now populate their newsletters and social media streams, where this was once the province of a well supported ambassador corp.
Marketers also fail to understand that a review or endorsement from a largely unknown or unproven ambassador may not resonate enough with the target audience. I felt that Olympus fell into the ‘quantity vs quality’ trap that cost cutting often results in. The very premise of a known name acting for a brand is that of reputation - no established professional will risk the goodwill of their followers by endorsing products they don’t wholeheartedly believe in.
How has the dilution of the ambassador pool affected the brand/ambassador relationship? There is and should be an expectation that a brand will supply an ambassador with his or her equipment, but even that is becoming more unlikely. If a brand is taking on large numbers of visionaries then it becomes broadly uneconomic to provide them with much, or anything. The same can be said if the brand is struggling to hold its place in the market. Cost cutting comes into play and the brand’s most important assets are often the first to take a hit. It all too often results in ambassadors undertaking time intensive equipment reviews, endless social media posts promoting the brand, allowing the brand to piggyback their achievements, whilst receiving very little in return. An experienced business person (as any credible ambassador should be) is unlikely to view that as a relationship which can continue.
Photography Brand Ambassador Gripes - When Resentment Sets In
It’s important to differentiate between the normal ups and downs of accepting a public-facing role and poor treatment by a brand itself. With respect to the former, a role as a brand ambassador will bring you endless emails from amateur photographers wanting to talk about equipment. Your blog posts will be linked in photography fora around the globe, and your opinions picked apart often by amateurs with little understanding of their craft. Be prepared to be criticised, belittled, accused of being a brand shill, and occasionally that criticism will cross the line into insults and abuse. In other words, you’ll have to take rather a lot of you-know-what along the way. If you don’t have a particularly thick skin then being a brand ambassador is probably not for you. Of course all of that is no reflection on the brand you might represent (who may well treat you as a valued and respected colleague) but it does highlight the potential negatives you’ll encounter along the way.
My gripes with Olympus largely centred around the non-provision of equipment (and at times expenses). Repeated attempts and some arguments did result in the receipt of a used camera body, a battered flashgun requiring repair, and two used lenses. To be clear, I was grateful for those things and I did a very thorough job of reviewing and promoting them, but I wasn’t so happy about the battle I’d had to go through to get them. What became clear was a gradual blacklisting which arose when those concerns were viewed as complaints.
I wasn’t the only Olympus ambassador experiencing the same, some of whom had supported the brand even longer than I had. The blacklisting would extend to emails ignored and a general freezing out from communications. A notable occasion was when I won one of the most coveted titles in the photography industry - with an Olympus team in the audience at The Societies Photographer of the Year Awards in London. There was no acknowledgement and no mention of this achievement on the Olympus social media streams or blogs, when in fact the marketing value would arguably have been immense.
My decision to leave Olympus at the end of 2016 was burnished by the unreasonable contract I was presented with at our final meeting. The contract set out a raft of time and overhead intensive activities I would have to fulfil for the brand, with virtually nothing offered in exchange. There was no offer of equipment (beyond the possibility ‘where priorities allow’ of a 14 day loan for the purpose of review) and the possibility of some paid seminars. Sending equipment for two weeks to full-time review sites is normal - those sites gain high volumes of traffic and will draw their income from advertising, sponsorship and commission from affiliate links. But that isn’t how working photographers normally operate. To act for a brand whilst keeping our reputations intact, we have to be seen to use that equipment in our day to day work.
The contract also contained an exclusivity clause. To date I’d always been an independent non-contracted ambassador. That enabled me to choose the equipment which best suited my personal and professional needs. That was entirely Olympus for several areas of my work, but my backups and personal use equipment was drawn from several brands including Fuji. I was told that in signing the contract I could no longer recommend or review non-Olympus items. There’s nothing unusual in an exclusivity clause, but if the brand isn’t supplying your needs then it’s hardly something any given photographer will agree to.
I wasn’t the only Olympus ambassador to be handed a contract like it, and this led to what felt at the time like a mass exodus. Legal scrutiny derided the contracts as ‘unbelievable’. Some took to social media or their own blogs to offload visible anger and upset.
My withdrawal from Olympus brought with it a number of positive changes. I had time to reassess all aspects of my business. My website was pared back to reflect my customer work rather than my equipment. The emergence of new mirrorless contenders has meant that the last few years have been quite exciting and the advantages offered by Micro 4/3 equipment are now all but obviated. My portraiture camera bag has been reassigned to Sony. I now have only one Micro 4/3 camera, made by Panasonic.
I still occasionally chat on my blog about the cameras and lenses I use, but I’ve politely declined the brand alignment offers I’ve received since leaving Olympus. I’m not saying that I’ll never take on another ambassador role, it’s just that my approach will be much more considered.
This article is by no means a criticism of Olympus cameras and lenses - I used them for years and I loved my Micro 4/3 equipment back in the day. But for most photographic purposes there are better options now for a similar size and weight.
Things to Consider if You’re Offered a Brand Ambassador Role
If you’re presented with a contract, ensure you have the opportunity to take it away with you so you can fully assimilate its contents. If it’s handed to you at a meeting don’t be pressured into signing it there and then. What matters is that a contract, if tested in court, would be deemed as ‘fair and reasonable’. If you can answer yes to that, then you’re good to go
Make sure you have a clear understanding as to the breadth of your ambassadorial role. You’ll need to know how often the brand will expect you to mention, review, or blog about their equipment. In-person appearances are also a key part of being a brand ambassador or visionary. Make sure you have an understanding of where or when that’s likely to be. If you’re a full-time working photographer with an already overstretched schedule, is it feasible for you to take on anything which may impact your day-to-day work or your income? Whilst being a brand ambassador sounds glamorous, the reality can be stressful
There is (and should be) a broad assumption that your equipment needs will be met by the brand. This seems to be a privilege reserved for some ambassadors and not others, so make sure this is clearly set out before you agree to anything
Generally speaking a contracted brand ambassador exclusively uses one brand of cameras and lenses, or at least uses that equipment for the vast majority of their work. Some ambassadors use and promote equipment from a number of brands, aligned with their own needs and preferences. If that’s you, make sure that whichever brand approaches you understands that. If a contract is involved, then non-exclusive terms would need to be fixed
Image rights is another matter which demands close scrutiny. Ensure you’re clear about the terms whenever your images are used rather than allowing blanket use ad-infinitum of any photograph you pass onwards
It’s a reasonable expectation that any expenses you incur in promoting the brand will be covered
An ambassadorial role may include travel both within your own country and overseas. Whenever a photographer is away from his or her working base then clearly they cannot serve their clients and that income is lost. On top of that, we have our day-to-day business overheads which exist irrespective of how we spending our time, and that’s another loss. Overseas trips will always result in the requirement for articles, blogs, and social media updates when we return. Therefore a brand ambassador needs to weigh up very carefully how they can justify every moment before committing to something which may bring with it a large workload
In the last few years I’ve seen one photographer after another fire the equipment brand they’ve been representing, for the reasons I’ve outlined in this article. Brands are managed by marketing departments and in my experience marketers care only about profit, but in a surprisingly short sighted way. Most marketers seem to approach a brand association caring only about how little they can spend, whilst extracting maximum gain. It’s little wonder things start to fall apart if that equation becomes visibly one sided.