Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I have always thought of "editorial" photography as press related photography.  The stuff of magazines, newspapers, etc.


Lately, I have seen various photographer websites of non-newsworthy or non-documentary related photography that had labels of "editorial" photography.  The images were more conducive to what I would call "advertising" photography.


Should editorial newsworthy/documentary photographers label themselves as "photojournalists"?


Should advertising photographers label themselves as "editorial" photographers?


What say you?  What would you use for SEO purposes on your website?  How do you make the distinction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always thought of "editorial" as "stuff that goes in magazines* but not to sell anything other than the magazine". 


So the portrait of Lady Gaga above the piece about her latest album in Rolling Stone, even if she is wearing the latest Manolo Blahniks, is an editorial shot.


If exactly the same shot was used in an ad for Manolo Blahnik's Spring Collection, it would be an advertising shot.


The same shot used in the brochure publicising Lady Gaga's not-for-profit homeless polar bear orphan charity? Commercial photography.


I think it's the end use rather than photographic style that determines what "type" of shot it is.



*or webzines or newspapers or colour supplements...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.