How to Brief a Photographer for a Brand Campaign (From a Photographer's Perspective)
TLDR: A good creative brief isn't about telling a photographer exactly what to shoot, it's about giving them enough context, deliverables, and references to make good decisions on the day, and the single most common gap in briefs isn't budget or timeline, it's creative direction for video, followed closely by a basic misunderstanding of how long editing actually takes after the shoot wraps.
Most briefs get the big things right and miss the details
A recent project is a good example of this. The creative deck was strong, the client knew they wanted 27 photos and three motion assets, and the overall direction was clear. But the deck only included still creative references. Nothing for video. So before the shoot, I had to go back and ask directly for motion references, because without them, I was guessing at what "three motion assets" was actually supposed to look like.
That's not a criticism of the client. It's a genuinely common gap. Stills are easier to reference, you can pull a mood board together fast. Motion is harder to communicate without either a reference video or an explicit statement that you're trusting the photographer's own creative direction. Either approach works. What doesn't work is leaving it undefined and hoping it sorts itself out on set.
Deliverables and quantity matter more than almost anything else
If I had to rank what actually needs to be nailed down before a shoot, deliverables and quantities are at the top. How many final images. How many video cuts, and how long is each one. This is the information that shapes everything else, crew size, shoot length, editing time, and ultimately price.
Creative references come right after, especially for video. Photography references are relatively easy for clients to gather and share. Video references are where briefs tend to fall apart, either because nobody thought to include them or because the client genuinely hasn't decided what they want yet.
When the brief hands over creative control
Sometimes a client doesn't have references because they're deliberately leaving the creative direction to the photographer. That's a completely valid way to work, but it needs to be stated outright, not assumed. On a recent project, the production team left the creative decisions for video up to me. In that case, I looked at the brand's overall vision, pulled references on my own, and used my own visual style to meet what I believed they'd be happy with.
The difference between "we forgot to include references" and "we're trusting your eye" matters enormously. One is a gap that needs filling before the shoot. The other is an intentional handoff. Naming which one you're doing, explicitly, in the brief, saves both sides a lot of friction later.
Why vague creative briefs lead to endless revisions
A big part of a photographer's job happens after the shoot day, not during it. Waiting on rounds of notes and revisions can eat up as much time as the shoot itself, sometimes more. When the brief is vague, revisions tend to spiral, because nobody agreed in advance on what success actually looks like.
This is exactly why I use a Scope of Work document on every project. It defines deliverables, how many rounds of revision are included, what assets the client is responsible for providing, and what happens if something falls outside that scope. The SOW isn't paperwork for its own sake. It's the tool that prevents the back-and-forth from becoming unpaid, unplanned work on either side. If we agree from the start on what a successful outcome looks like, I know exactly what needs to happen and when, and the client isn't left wondering why a "simple" video note turned into three more rounds of changes.
Timeline versus turnaround time
These two get confused constantly, and it's worth separating them clearly. Timeline is how far in advance a shoot gets booked and briefed. Turnaround time is how long it takes to receive the final deliverables after the shoot wraps. They are not the same conversation, and a brief needs to address both.
Ideally, a shoot is booked months in advance, with creative direction locked in during the month leading up to it. In practice, a lot of bookings come together the week of, or a couple of days before. That's not ideal for scheduling or for the creative itself, work made under pressure is rarely as strong as work made with room to think. When a shoot comes together on very short notice, a rush fee often applies, not as a penalty, but because pulling together a studio, equipment, and a full plan in 24 hours costs real time and real coordination that a normal timeline doesn't require.
The tight timeline problem gets easier when the rest of the brief is airtight. If every creative and deliverable detail is locked, there's no guessing for me or my team, editor, assistant, lighting, whoever's involved. That doesn't make a rushed shoot ideal. It just means a tight scope can offset a tight timeline, to a point.
The misconception that costs the most friction after the shoot: editing time
If there's one thing that consistently surprises clients, it's how long editing actually takes. People tend to think the real work ends when the shoot wraps. It doesn't. Video editing alone often takes significantly longer than the shoot day itself, a preliminary edit, a final edit, color, sound design, then rounds of revision on top of that. Photo editing has its own time cost too, culling through a large volume of images to find the strongest selects, then retouching the final choices, which can take a long time depending on how much work each image needs.
Editing time isn't 1:1 with the shoot date. Sometimes it's several days longer, depending on what's actually being asked for. And usage rights and the edit itself are not automatically included in the capture rate. Shooting, editing, and licensing usage are three different jobs, sometimes done by the same person, but priced and scoped separately regardless.
What to actually include in a brief to get a fast, accurate quote
If you're putting together a brief right now and want to avoid a slow back-and-forth, here's what actually speeds things up:
- Final deliverables: number of images, number of video cuts, and the duration of each cut
- Creative references, especially for video, or an explicit statement that creative direction is being left to the photographer
- Project timeline (when the shoot needs to happen) separate from turnaround time (when you need final files in hand)
- Resolution and file format needs
- Retouching or editing expectations
- Usage rights: where the content will run, and for how long
- Location and who the point of contact is on shoot day
- Whether styling is handled by the client or needs to be part of the scope
If BTS coverage is part of the plan, that belongs in the brief too, not as an afterthought added the morning of the shoot. BTS works best when it's booked and briefed at the same time as the main shoot, and it performs best when the person shooting it understands the brand's tone going in, not when they're improvising on the spot.
What this actually gets you
None of this is about making the process harder. It's the opposite. A tight brief means fewer surprises, fewer rounds of unplanned revision, and a final result that actually matches what you had in mind instead of a generic interpretation filled in by guesswork. Budget matters too, it costs money to make something look good, and someone genuinely creative can make something out of very little, but the work is almost always stronger when a photographer isn't stretched thin trying to solve problems that should have been settled before the shoot.
If you're planning a campaign, product launch, or event and want the brief, the budget, and the timeline sorted out clearly from the start, let's talk.
All the best,
Oliver
Oliver Jaskowski is a Brooklyn-based commercial photographer and creative director working with agencies and brands on commercial, product, event, and documentary photography, including behind-the-scenes coverage built into the production from day one.
What Behind-the-Scenes Content Actually Gets Engagement (And Why Most Brands Get It Wrong)
TLDR: The BTS content that performs best isn't the most polished version of your brand, it's the version that feels lived in, and most brands kill their own engagement by making behind-the-scenes content look as staged as the campaign it's supposed to be teasing. The fix isn't less production value, it's someone who knows how to shoot for the moment instead of the shot list.
The paradox nobody wants to admit
Here's an uncomfortable truth about content and engagement: sometimes, the less produced something is, the better it performs. Creators posting quick, unscripted reels often see stronger engagement than the ones with full production behind them. It's frustrating, because sometimes you genuinely need production and scripting to tell a story well. But the trend keeps pointing the same direction, people respond to things that feel like someone just picked up a camera and started filming, even when a lot of skill went into making it feel that way.
That doesn't mean production doesn't matter. It means the goal has shifted. The best BTS content isn't trying to look expensive. It's trying to feel true.
Good references for what this actually looks like
A few examples worth studying if you want to see this done well at very different budget levels. The behind-the-scenes photography from the show Pachinko captured genuinely cinematic, euphoric moments on set, largely because the lighting on a production like that is already beautiful, and the photographer knew how to be in the right place to catch it.
JW Anderson has done something similar with their shoe-making process, cinematic shots of the actual production line, shoes being built, hands at work. It's more produced than a lot of BTS content, but it works because it's honest about what it's showing.
And then there's the stripped-down end of the spectrum: Luigi Ghirri's documentation of the Ferrari factory. Simple, unforced, and probably the least "strategic" of the three in terms of modern content marketing, but arguably the most beautiful, because it never tries to be anything other than what it is.
Three very different budgets, three very different styles, same underlying idea: the content works because it feels lived in, not staged.
What "staged" actually looks like, and why it kills engagement
When BTS content feels fake, it's usually not because someone set something up. I stage BTS moments all the time. The problem is when the angles get too clean, too proper, too refined. BTS is supposed to feel spontaneous, a little messy, caught rather than composed.
On set, when something starts feeling too polished, I'll adjust in the moment: get someone interacting with the item instead of posing near it, find a textured or slightly skewed background instead of a clean one, let something go a little out of focus instead of keeping everything crisp. What that adjustment looks like depends entirely on the brand. Some clients want rough, grimy, textured. Some want clean, warm, crisp light. There's no single "authentic" aesthetic. Authenticity means matching the actual story and space you're in, not applying one formula everywhere.
How BTS content should actually work alongside your campaign
There's no fixed ratio of polished content to BTS content that works for every brand. But the two aren't competing for the same space, they work together. Polished, high-production content and rougher BTS content go hand in hand. BTS can act as a teaser before a launch, or a way to extend the life of a campaign after it drops, pulling people deeper into a story they already saw the finished version of.
Think about how Euphoria's behind-the-scenes photography worked. Those images were still cinematic, still beautifully shot, but having a light stand or a crew member in frame brought the fantasy back to reality just enough to make fans feel like insiders. That's the real function of BTS: not replacing the polished story, but giving people a way further into it.
Where it actually lives matters too. Most of the BTS content I shoot ends up performing best as story posts, sometimes as a teaser in the lead-up to a launch, sometimes rolled out afterward to keep a campaign's momentum going. The right rollout depends on the project and the strategy behind it, but story format tends to be where this content feels most at home.
Why format matters as much as content
The camera you shoot on matters here too. A cinematic 70mm film camera captures something beautiful, but it's the wrong tool for TikTok. Lo-fi, iPhone-style footage, more grain, more out of focus, less polished, tends to perform significantly better on platforms like TikTok specifically because it feels more real. That same footage might not land the same way on YouTube or Vimeo, where a more cinematic approach still works.
This isn't about lower quality being inherently better. It's an aesthetic and strategic choice tied to platform. Pairing a high-end camera with something like a digicam or Super 8 on the same shoot gives a brand more than one version of the same moment, so the content can actually be matched to where it's going to live.
So why hire someone instead of handing a phone to whoever's around
If less-produced content sometimes performs better, it's fair to ask why you'd hire a specialist instead of just having someone on set film it on their phone. Here's the honest answer: knowing how a production actually works matters more than the camera in your hand.
Knowing when to step in and when to stay out of the way. Understanding lighting, sound, how to operate different cameras and film formats. That knowledge is what turns "someone filmed some stuff" into a curated set of moments that actually tell a story. Anyone can point a phone at something. Fewer people can walk onto a working set, understand the flow of it, and know exactly when to be ready for the moment that's about to happen.
And the work doesn't stop when the shoot wraps. Going through everything captured afterward, culling it down to the strongest, most honest storytelling moments, is its own skill. That curation is where a lot of the actual craft lives. I think of myself as an observer first, someone who watches, waits, and knows when a real moment is happening. There's a specific feeling that comes with knowing you got the shot you were waiting for. That instinct is the actual product you're hiring, not just the footage itself.
Where this fits into a bigger production
Everything in this post applies whether it's a brand campaign, a product shoot, a fashion set, or something less traditional, I've shot BTS on short film productions too, not just commercial work. The through line is always the same: someone dedicated to observing, not directing, who understands the production well enough to know where to be.
What to do next
I work with agencies, brands, influencers, and creators, basically anyone who needs content for their socials and wants it to feel like something real happened, not something performed. If you're planning a shoot, a launch, or an event and want BTS built into the plan from the start instead of figured out last minute, let's talk.
You can also see more of the range covered here, from cinematic to lo-fi, across different brand tones, on my social content page.
All the best,
Oliver
Oliver Jaskowski is a Brooklyn-based commercial photographer and creative director specializing in behind-the-scenes documentation for agencies, brands, and productions, from fashion sets to product shoots to short films.
What a BTS Photographer Actually Does on a Commercial Set (And Why Your Agency Needs One)
August 6th, 2026 by Oliver Jaskowski Studio
TLDR: A BTS photographer on a commercial set captures the process, the people, and the moments between moments, not just proof that a shoot happened. The best BTS work requires a dedicated person whose only job is to observe, not a task bolted onto someone already busy running the main shoot, and agencies that treat it as an afterthought consistently end up with less usable content and a weaker connection to their audience.
Behind-the-scenes content is not a nice-to-have anymore
Brands need to post constantly to stay top of mind. Social media is oversaturated, and if you're not showing up regularly, people forget you exist, no matter how good your product is. That's true for a solo creative and it's true for a global brand.
The brands doing this best right now, like Bandit Running and Minted New York, aren't just posting polished campaign imagery. They're showing the struggle inside the beauty. The late nights, the chaos, the moment something finally comes together. That's what makes a brand feel relatable, and relatable brands build audiences that actually buy. Bandit Running didn't advertise their way to a loyal customer base. They documented their way there.
It's a similar instinct to what photographer Luigi Ghirri did documenting the Ferrari factory decades ago. That wasn't behind-the-scenes content in the Instagram sense. It was brand archiving as an art form, and it still holds up because it was honest.
Why I care about this so much
I spent three years inside a jewelry brand as creative director, documenting everything from the inside. Grimy, grungy jewelry-in-progress shots. Late nights in the studio. The good days and the hard days. A few times, well-known artists came through the studio for collaborations, and in those moments, I always made sure I had a camera ready, because everyone else in the room was focused on the interaction itself. Someone needed to be thinking about the future of the brand while it was happening.
That meant staying in the shadows. Not interrupting, not becoming the center of attention, not making anyone feel like they were being photographed by paparazzi. Just watching for the moment something genuine happened, a chain gets finished, a piece gets unboxed for the first time, good light randomly hits a prop table, someone interacts with the product in a way that wasn't staged.
Looking back at that archive now, it's clear what would have been lost if nobody had been in the room with a camera. That brand had content to post constantly, because there was always something real to pull from. Brands without that kind of documentation fall behind, and they sell less product, because there's nothing left to remind people they exist.
Why the main photographer can't do this too
I've been the main photographer on plenty of shoots, and I can say honestly that it's nearly impossible to also capture good BTS at the same time. When you're the main shooter, your brain is locked into capturing the clean, crisp deliverable the client is paying for. Switching back and forth between that mode and the observational mode BTS requires kills the spontaneity. You lose the genuine moment because you're overwhelmed trying to do two creative jobs at once.
BTS needs to be a dedicated role, not a task someone squeezes in between real shots. That's the single biggest misconception agencies and brands have: that someone already on set, a producer, an assistant, the main photographer, can just grab it themselves. They can grab something. It's rarely the same quality of storytelling as someone whose only job is to watch for it.
What good BTS coverage actually requires
On a fashion shoot, I'm usually capturing video of the makeup, the rush, the grind, the in-between moments most people never see. The job is to be an observer first. Stay out of the way. Don't pull attention toward yourself, especially when there's already a main photographer whose job is to be the focal point of the room. Watch for genuine action that relates back to the brand story, not staged reenactments of it.
I also like to shoot BTS across multiple cameras when it makes sense. Sometimes I'll rig a small digicam alongside my main camera to get a similar angle at a different quality, something that feels more approachable and social-native than a polished commercial frame. Having that range of textures, high quality and lo-fi, gives a brand more to work with across different platforms and different audiences.
I also like to shoot BTS across multiple cameras when it makes sense. Sometimes I'll rig a small digicam alongside my main camera to get a similar angle at a different quality, something that feels more approachable and social-native than a polished commercial frame. Having that range of textures, high quality and lo-fi, gives a brand more to work with across different platforms and different audiences.
How agencies should actually plan for this
BTS coverage works best when it's briefed and booked the same way you'd approach hiring a campaign photographer, not as an afterthought. That means:
- Clear deliverables and quantity (how many photos, how many video clips)
- Format expectations (vertical for social, specific lengths for video)
- A quick reference for the look, whether that's matching the campaign's aesthetic, going for a raw DV or film feel, shooting on film, or capturing on a high quality digital body like a Nikon Z8
- As much lead time as possible
The ideal scenario is locking in a BTS photographer at the same time you book the main photographer, not scrambling to find someone day-of. I understand that's not always realistic. A lot of productions get booked last minute. But the more advance planning there is, the better the coverage tends to be.
What this actually costs
Like most freelance creative work, pricing depends entirely on scope. A few reference points:
iPhone capture, raw handoff, no editing: around $500. This is the low end, useful for quick internal documentation or when budget is genuinely limited.
Pro camera kit with editing and multiple deliverables (short clips under 30 seconds, a set of stills): typically runs $1,200 to $1,500, sometimes more depending on how much prep, gear, and post-production the project requires. Editing takes real time, and that time has a cost.
Full commercial-rate BTS coverage with multi-camera setups, extensive editing, and a larger volume of deliverables can run higher than $2,000, similar to a standard commercial photography day rate.
The variable that moves the number most is what happens after the shoot: how many deliverables, how many formats, and how much editing is involved. Prep time and gear matter too, but post-production is usually the biggest driver.
iPhone capture, raw handoff, no editing: around $500. This is the low end, useful for quick internal documentation or when budget is genuinely limited.
Pro camera kit with editing and multiple deliverables (short clips under 30 seconds, a set of stills): typically runs $1,200 to $1,500, sometimes more depending on how much prep, gear, and post-production the project requires. Editing takes real time, and that time has a cost.
Full commercial-rate BTS coverage with multi-camera setups, extensive editing, and a larger volume of deliverables can run higher than $2,000, similar to a standard commercial photography day rate.
The variable that moves the number most is what happens after the shoot: how many deliverables, how many formats, and how much editing is involved. Prep time and gear matter too, but post-production is usually the biggest driver.
What I want you to take away from this
Most people don't actually know what it costs to make a shoot happen, or how much team and gear it takes to get a specific look. That's true of BTS just as much as it's true of a full campaign production. My hope with this post isn't just to get you to reach out, though I'd genuinely love to talk if you're planning a production. It's to help you think differently about your next shoot, and to treat BTS coverage as a real part of the plan instead of something you figure out on the day.
If you're an agency or brand planning a campaign, product launch, or event and want BTS coverage built in from the start, let's talk.
All the best,
Oliver
Oliver Jaskowski is a Brooklyn-based commercial photographer and creative director who spent three years documenting a jewelry brand from the inside before founding his own studio, now working with agencies and brands on commercial, product, event, and documentary photography.