My first thought was, Really?! A creative portfolio does not need to be under lock and key. Plus I am usually short of time when looking at books and having to take that extra step tends to bug.
Is this a Glamour Don't? Well, I sent a note to the person and said I was curious as to why they locked their portfolio. His answer made me think twice about this extra step.
"I'd rather not lock up my portfolio but I've got some spec work that clients would prefer to keep private. I've also had some problems with former colleagues using pieces of my work in their own book when they really shouldn't have."
Smart on both points. Protecting the spec work that wasn't bought by a client but is still strong work. He's right, the client might not want that all over the internet. And protecting your work from the sticky fingers of former colleagues (I am floored this even happens in this world!) is a rightful concern as well.
Lock or Not? I'm leaning towards not, solely because I am a recruiter and I hate taking that extra step to get into someone's book. But for you, a creative, you might want to spend some time deciding if locking up your goods might be a smart choice.
3 comments:
This is a good topic - especially when we consider the dreaded "C" word, copyright. It was no big deal when you just passed a book or a disc around, but when you're publishing work on the internet, it's a whole new ball game. It's good to see your take on it :)
It seems like there would be a better way. Maybe making a subdomain with the work that you send to recruiters? Not as secure as lock and key, obviously, but more convenient and mostly private.
This issue recently came up at work. My CD is FORCING the all Creatives to password-protect their site, even though the work we feature has already been published. I agree, Recruiters don't have the time to hunt for and enter usernames and passwords, and it's really unfortunate that myself and a few colleagues have no choice but to turn you away from seeing our great work :(
Post a Comment