FB Pixel

The Death of the BTS Marketing for Photographers?

Filming on set for marketing

I recently read a piece by my friend and wedding photographer Susan Stripling where she admitted she is completely done forcing behind-the-scenes (BTS) content on a wedding day. She’s tired of the pressure to perform for an algorithm while trying to create actual art for her clients.

Reading it felt like a massive breath of fresh air, because this exhaustion isn’t just a wedding photography problem. It’s an industry-wide epidemic. Whether you shoot commercial gigs, family portraits, or quiet street photography, the pressure to turn your workday into a reality TV show is real.

Somewhere along the line, we let the self-proclaimed social media gurus convince us that if we didn’t film the process, the final image didn’t happen.

I’m calling it. The era of manufactured backstage access needs to end.

The Divided Mind

The original concept of BTS content was great. It was an authentic look at how an artist works. But it has mutated into a full-time secondary production.

As an ambivert, it takes a massive amount of mental energy for me to step into a session, connect with a client, and manage my own social anxiety to get the shot. If my brain is split between watching my subject’s genuine expression and worrying about whether a phone camera caught a good vertical angle of me doing it, the client loses every single time.

Or if you are a street photographer trying to practice quiet, discreet observation, but you are constantly thinking about capturing narrative audio clips for a Reel, you’ve completely destroyed the story in the frame. You aren’t observing life anymore; you’re staging a performance.

Every ounce of energy you spend producing content for an online audience during a live shoot is energy stolen from the person who actually hired you.

BTS for by William Adwin for Flodesk
Photo by William Adwin

Content for the Client, Not the Algorithm

Now, let me clarify something. I actually do mount a phone to the hot shoe of my camera sometimes.

When I am out photographing surprise proposals, I frequently have a phone clamped right on top of my rig. But here is the difference: that camera isn’t running for my TikTok or Instagram. It isn’t pointed backward at my face, and I’m not thinking about my “good side” or framing up a sleek marketing transition.

That phone is locked down, pointed forward, and recording a continuous video of the proposal itself.

I do it entirely for my clients. The moment someone drops to one knee, the adrenaline hits, and the couple completely blanks out. They rarely remember what was said or how it felt because their hearts are hammering. By hitting record on that phone, I can hand them a raw, unedited video of their exact moment right alongside their professional gallery.

That is an example of using a workflow tool to over-deliver for the person paying you. It adds real, emotional value to their experience. The second you flip that phone around to record yourself working so you can post it with a trending audio track, you’ve shifted the focus from your client’s memory to your own ego.

Couple's proposal video

Get Off Rented Land

The only reason we tolerate this pressure to document ourselves is fear. We’ve been trained to feed the social media monster, hoping for a sliver of organic reach, while the landlords of those platforms change the algorithm rules every single week.

If your final photographs cannot stand on their own merits, a video of you taking them isn’t going to save your business.

Instead of performing for followers who might never buy a thing, shift that energy into building a direct relationship with people who care about your work. Put your time into an email list. Talk directly to your audience, share the deep stories behind your images, and provide real value on a platform you actually own.

Flodesk calendar view

Making Technology Work For You

I love technology. Because of my dyslexia, I rely heavily on AI tools and grammar assistants just to get my thoughts onto a screen cleanly. I use AI-powered culling and editing tools in my studio workflow because they handle the tedious, time-sucking tasks and give me hours of my life back.

That is technology serving the creator. It lets me finish my work faster so I can actually go spend time with my wife and kids.

Forced BTS content is the exact opposite. It is the creator serving the technology. It turns you into an unpaid intern for a social media app, working a second job during your own paid gigs.

If someone happens to capture a quick, organic clip of you working, fantastic. Share it if you want to. But stop making it a line item on your session checklist.

Let’s go back to focusing 100% of our attention on the people on the other side of our lenses. The curtain doesn’t always need to be open. Sometimes, the magic should just be the photograph itself.

Lenses and Lyrics podcast
Hypersensitive panchromatic film container

Step Into

The Dojo

📖 Sign up and join the thousands of other photographers on your journey to success. be the first to know about fresh content, special offers and so much more.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
What's your name?

Comments

31 responses to “The Death of the BTS Marketing for Photographers?”

  1. Clayton Avatar
    Clayton

    Positive reaction here from someone who has felt that split attention. The detailed example of mounting a phone to record a proposal for the clients rather than an audience was especially persuasive. It shows a way to use technology that adds meaning without turning the creator into a traveling camera operator for strangers.

  2. Thomas Avatar

    The author raises an operational point photographers rarely discuss publicly. Documenting process for marketing imposes hidden costs on attention and rapport, which can directly impact the final deliverable. Practically speaking, a studio might compare client satisfaction and retention metrics between sessions that were uninterrupted and those where creators were multitasking for social posts.

  3. Informative and practical article that balances tools with ethics. The author explains why automatic posting does not substitute for relationships built off platform owned channels and why investing in email communication and direct contact with clients can yield better long term results than chasing ephemeral reach.

    1. Zachary Avatar

      I appreciated the tool examples and the admission that assistive software can help with the heavy lifting. The key point is that technology should reduce drudgery and free creators to be present, not create an extra performance obligation. That distinction will matter more as platforms evolve.

    2. Alaric Avatar

      This explained a real blind spot for me. I used to think constant posting was simply how to get work. Now I see that direct channels like newsletters and thoughtful follow ups may convert better. The article gave a concrete strategy to shift where creative energy is spent without abandoning modern tools.

  4. Comical aside aside, the idea that someone thinks their profile will save a shaky wedding photograph is amusing. Jokes aside, the piece points out a serious trade off between attention and craft. I laughed at the imagined choreography but then realized the consequences are real for couples who want honest memories.

  5. This article gave me permission to stop pretending every session must become a mini production for strangers online. The point about divided attention resonated hard. Clients deserve the full focus of the photographer rather than a performer who is worried about angles, trends, and whether a short clip will go viral.

  6. Argumentative view here because the stakes are both aesthetic and commercial. If photographers refuse to show any process they risk a lack of transparency that some clients want. However, the author rightly argues that there is a difference between serving the client and self promotion, and establishing that line is crucial for professional integrity.

    1. I agree with the need to argue for boundaries while remaining open to client preferences. The piece sets up a useful framework where recorded material is evaluated by purpose. If it directly benefits the client, like proposal footage, it is beneficial. If it exists largely for the creator s exposure then it requires reconsideration.

  7. This reads like a necessary corrective but it glosses over market realities. Social platforms drive discovery for many independent artists and refusing to participate can reduce visibility. The better path is a clear policy that defines when recording is client centered and when it is for promotion, paired with consent protocols.

  8. Oh great, another manifesto declaring that social media gurus ruined another craft. The argument lands because so many shoots now feel like auditions for reels. The sharp observation about focus being stolen from paying clients rings true and should prompt photographers to set boundaries before the next trend convinces them to film every awkward prep moment.

  9. Ironic how photographers used to value silence and patience and now some feel compelled to perform. The post points out that staging a life to please a feed actually erases the very moments people hire professionals to capture. That inversion of priorities is not just sad, it undermines the point of hiring an observer.

    1. This irony hit me too. My last client said they wanted authentic images yet I saw creators moving like actors to get a snippet for social platforms. The article made me rethink how I manage my workflow to protect sincere moments and still offer clients options that actually matter to them.

  10. The write up highlights a structural problem with current content expectations and offers sensible tactical moves. Using automated culling and editing tools to free time and recording meaningful moments for clients are both examples of technology working in service of craft. The piece also rightly urges photographers to build direct channels to their audience instead of relying on third party attention.

  11. This is a practical take on workflow and boundaries that many creatives need. The example of mounting a phone to record a proposal for the couple is a concrete technique that improves client deliverables. The suggestion to invest in owned channels like email lists instead of chasing platform reach is also a solid, implementable recommendation.

  12. I disagree with the blanket rejection of any behind the scenes footage. Clients sometimes want a peek at the process and seeing a bit of the shoot can build trust and goodwill. The argument that any phone use distracts is overstated because thoughtful practitioners can record without harming the interaction.

    1. I hear that, but I think recorders should be discreet and intentional. A continuous forward facing phone for proposals is clearly for the client and that example works. Extra clips meant for social gain can change behavior mid shoot and alter the emotion in ways that are hard to fix later.

    2. There is nuance here and the post explains it well. The real question is whether the footage serves the paying person or primarily the creator. When content creation during a session benefits the client directly it seems justified, but when it exists only to feed algorithms it feels exploitative.

  13. I appreciate the strong stance but worry that an absolute rule against filming during sessions could hurt emerging artists who need exposure. A nuanced policy that prioritizes client experience while allowing optional, brief clips with consent could bridge the gap. Training clients about what will be recorded and why can create transparency and avoid the feeling of performance.

    1. That compromise strikes me as sensible. Clear consent practices and time boxed opportunities for harmless, unobtrusive clips would preserve the client first ethic while giving creators some of the marketing material they need. The key is intention and limits so the shoot does not become a parallel production that shortchanges the people paying for the work.

  14. Sarcastic take here, but sure, by all means flip the phone and perform a choreography for a trending sound while a bride waits for a natural smile. The post was blunt about how that destroys authenticity, and I appreciate the bluntness because polite euphemisms let poor practices continue under the guise of marketing.

    1. I agree with the critical tone and found it refreshing. Too many creators confuse visibility with value and end up doing both their clients and their craft a disservice. Protecting the experience of the person in front of the lens seems like a far better route for long term reputation.

    2. The sarcasm is understandable and it exposes a real problem. When marketing goals overshadow client care you get manufactured moments that feel hollow. The article encourages some discipline, and that discipline can actually improve word of mouth when clients sense honesty and focus during their session.

  15. A thoughtful and humane post about prioritizing real human moments over manufactured spectacle. The discussion of mental energy and social anxiety in sessions is especially important for introverted creators who need permission to protect their focus. Offering examples of client centered uses of phones makes the case practical rather than purely theoretical.

  16. This read made me smile and think. Imagine being hired to capture a quiet street scene and spending the whole time narrating your every move for an audience who will forget it by tomorrow. The suggestion to put attention back on the subject and to use tech only to serve the client struck a chord and felt like common sense delivered with wit.

  17. I disagree with the blanket rejection of behind the scenes clips as a marketing tool. For many small studios a steady stream of short posts brings leads and pays the rent. Saying stop makes sense emotionally but ignoring how attention works on social platforms can leave freelancers invisible to potential clients who discover services through those posts.

    1. The piece raises a useful distinction between content made for clients and content made for strangers online. There is space for short, client focused clips that show a moment without turning the shoot into a second job. Over time those honest snippets can build trust without forcing every session to be a staged performance for algorithms.

  18. The author makes a persuasive case that splitting attention damages the core product. However, there is also a responsibility to sustain a business. A better argument would outline specific policies photographers can adopt so they secure marketing benefits when necessary while protecting client experience. Clear rules for when to record and what to record would settle the tension.

  19. This piece felt honestly freeing. I am tired of seeing every job turned into a show and I agree that the person paying should come first. The writer explained a clear choice to protect the experience for clients, and that idea makes sense to me in plain practical terms.

    1. Thank you for saying what I keep thinking. I try to focus on the couple in front of me and not on clips for someone scrolling later. It takes energy to be present and I worry when phones become props instead of tools. This post reminded me it is okay to prioritize the job over the feed.

  20. How refreshing to see someone admit that staged backstage footage has become performative and hollow. The piece points out the absurdity of selling authenticity while manufacturing it. It is amusing that we reached a cultural point where documentation of making art has eclipsed the art itself, and now someone has the nerve to suggest putting the curtain down.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Listen on Apple Podcasts
Listen on Spotify