Stock photos cost more than you think

I do not use stock photography, and it is not for aesthetic reasons. It is because of what stock images quietly communicate to someone deciding whether to trust you.

People are better at spotting it than you think

Most visitors could not tell you which image is stock. But they can tell that a page feels generic, and that feeling does the damage whether or not they can name the cause. A smiling team in a bright office that is obviously not your office reads as: this business could be anyone.

For a local business that is exactly backwards. Being a specific, findable, real business in a real place is the advantage you have over a bigger competitor. Stock imagery throws it away.

What real photography does

A photo of your actual workshop, your actual team, the actual thing you make, does three jobs at once. It proves you exist. It shows the standard of your work without you having to claim anything. And it gives a visitor something concrete to picture when they imagine working with you.

None of that is available from a photo library, no matter how good the photo is.

If you do not have photography

Most people do not, and that is fine. Photography is one of the things I handle myself, so it can be part of the build rather than something you have to organise separately. On larger projects that means a shoot day, planned during the strategy stage so it is ready before design starts rather than holding up launch.

If a full shoot is not in scope, we work with what you have. Phone photos of real work, shot with a bit of guidance, beat polished stock every time. The bar is not perfection. It is being genuinely yours.