Making sense of in-store imaging

Take a look around any store and, with very few exceptions, you’ll see photography - it’s so commonplace that you wonder why it still finds favour. Surely the ubiquity of the medium must be such that it is the visual equivalent of white noise: seen, but not seen, and even ignored.

The facts, however, speak for themselves. It is everywhere and at a time when spend on in-store design, graphics and photography is likely to come under greater scrutiny than ever, the days of lavish photo shoots - other than at the top, top end - are probably over. Couple this with the fact that owing to the expansion of etailing, retail photography has found a new route for growth and there seems little chance that we are about to witness the death of the product or mood image.

Digital love

Things are changing though and the advent of digital imaging should in theory have meant that quick, almost disposable, in-store pictures would have become the norm. Sadly, they have not and the inexorable rise of the stylist - whose job it is to create the setting for pictures that will help to shift merchandise off the shelves - has meant that in many instances photo shoot prices seem to have risen, rather than dropped.

Given the fact that the average medium-to-large retail enterprise now has to create images that range from product shots for a website to, say, a holiday mood creation scene, as well as the occasional bevy of press shots, this may not be entirely surprising. The point perhaps is that the cost of producing an image may have dropped, but the number of shots required to deal with a Balkanised retail sector, offering more goods from more platforms, has increased overall.

The Holy Grail for a retailer therefore is to commission a photographer or a studio to produce images that can be employed generally, irrespective of platform, with a consequent cost saving. Zoe Davidson, senior brand manager, home and lifestyle at Sainsbury’s, says: “It’s about photography that ticks the inspiration boxes but can be used across the channels. We are doing more photography, in more formats, than ever before and, of course, we’re having to sweat the budgets. It’s vital that we produce photography that will work for all purposes, and our list of formats sometimes appears never ending. But it’s worth investing in [photography], as no one medium is any more or less important than any other.”

Easier said than done, as the level of product detail required for a website is entirely different from that likely to be encountered when the shopper heads for the stores and needs to be put in purchase mode. Andy Rosson, managing director at the Manchester office of image production agency Hangar Seven, says: “In a multichannel world, producing photography that works across all media can be quite a challenge for the retailer and this is perhaps why we’re seeing much more synergy between in-store displays, brochure photography and digital visuals. No one consumer touch point can afford not to portray a product’s design credentials and desirability.”

Which means in practice that ‘synergy’ there may be, but multi-purpose images are probably a pipe dream.

Davidson comments: “Obviously for us, the supermarket environment is not necessarily conducive to selling a lifestyle off-the-shelf.”

Sainsbury’s, however, in common with other food retailers that have moved into clothing retailing, has to try and create environments that will encourage multi-item purchases.

Davidson continues: “Lifestyle photography not only helps us soften the environment and make it more appealing for the customer to browse, but well-styled photography provides additional cross-selling support - showing how people can create an entire look with co-ordinating products across our different product categories that aren’t sat together on shelves.”

This may sound like a blinding glimpse of the obvious, but it’s worth bearing in mind that faced with an aisle filled with socks and underwear, it takes a fair leap of the imagination to build an outfit in the same way as can be done in a standalone clothing store. And Rosson says that there is more to in-store photography than providing a pretty picture. “A trend we are seeing at the moment is that more ‘people’ photography and life-size cutouts are being used around stores because it gives the impression of an enhanced customer service and that there’s a permanent friendly face wherever you turn,” he says.

This can even translate to the web where there is an increasing use of roomset photography and imaging that allows shoppers to create bespoke wardrobes by choosing from a set of photo options.

Lucy Kenna, brand manager at tiles and kitchen retailer Fired Earth, says that when photography is used as part of a roomset in one of the company’s showrooms, the products pictured have a tendency to become an almost immediate best-seller. “People can be shy about using colour and are often unsure of how tiles will look once on the wall, so showing items such as these in context can make decision-making easier.”

Shoot from the hip

All of which means, broadly speaking, that there are two options open to retailers seeking a variety of different image types to suit diverse media: location shots - in-store or otherwise - or heading off to a studio. There are clear advantages to the location route in that, very often, what you see is what you get and it can be very difficult to create an image that includes perhaps Table Mountain in South Africa without it appearing false.

The negative, naturally, is that all locations carry a hefty price tag. The studio alternative can give, particularly for roomset creation, greater control over costs and the time involved. And there is also the matter of post-production and image manipulation, meaning that irrespective of the method used to produce an image for use by a retailer, a certain amount of smoke and mirrors can still be usefully involved.

In uncertain times, it seems reasonable to assume that, given the primacy of photography as a means of customer communication, we are set to see more in-store and web images, rather than less. But there is the matter of customer boredom. Rosson says that shoppers expect more - even at the value level - when they walk into a store, and this translates to more than seeing ranges change on a relatively frequent basis. There is an expectation that the way a store looks and feels will alter almost every time you enter it.

It’s probably worth noting that in mass-market environments there is more pressure to get stock out on the floor and therefore mid-shop displays can begin to disappear. At this point, enter the large-format digital image - which is, within limits, capable of doing exactly the same job.

The best photography therefore is about understanding what the consumer wants, not producing what can be, in effect, attractive wallpaper. And perhaps it is reasonable that shoppers should expect more visual information as the number of available platforms continues to increase. Amanda Jones, marketing director at Silentnight Brands, responsible for many of the more familiar names in the bed and mattress world, comments on photography costs over the last three years: “I would say that budgets are about the same - we just work them harder to get the results that we want.”

However, for in-store purposes a sense of balance has to be maintained. Karl McKeever, creative director at visual merchandising consultancy Visual Thinking, puts the point: “If photography is used in preference to using mannequins and displays, the result can end up looking a bit flat. There’s been a trend in recent years, to creating décor walls using large-format photography on the walls behind shelves and this can be good, but it’s a matter of balance.”

The opportunity exists to use more photography more creatively therefore and for budgets to emerge largely unscathed. But as ever it’s a part of the marketing cost that needs to be monitored, subject to constant examination and ruthlessly controlled. A truism perhaps, but important for all that.