There are times I communicate with potential clients regarding a project that they ultimately elect to either tackle themselves, or hire another photographer who may not have adequate experience in the applicable genre. The decision is usually made with the intention of helping their business by saving money. The problem with that philosophy is that photography is generally not an area where cutting corners actually helps a business. Before consumers buy a product or hire a service provider, they are usually drawn to images of the product or the service provider's work. Poor quality of images can actually work against a business having a reverse effect. In architecture photography for example, while a contractor may be a phenomenal craftsman, if the images they use to display examples of their work contain slanted walls caused by odd camera angles, or distorted counter tops, vanities, and furniture because of "wide-angle" lenses, potential customers may miss the intended message. This is where an experienced professional can be a huge advantage.
In the example below, a client of mine who's a very talented fabricator and artist, shot his own photo of a table he'd completed and used it for an ad in a local publication. Later, he decided that the image simply didn't do the table justice. He hired me to reshoot the table which we both feel better represents the stunning quality of his work.
Which image would capture your interest when thumbing through a magazine or newspaper? Better yet, which table would you be more inclined to buy?