I was hearing from a person recently how he used a pretty low end camera for some client work where all they really needed was some photos and videos of a home to sell. Usually when you do things like a movie or wedding a lot of people would expect the highest quality for hiring professionals at a steep price. In this case the person didn’t even use a camera that had 4K resolution. But still, at the end of the day apparently the client didn’t really care too much as long as they got the visuals that they needed to sell and advertise the property.
It makes you think in that case do you think it makes sense to give lower quality services in a sense to save yourself and the client if they don’t need the bells and whistles? Or would you simply just sell and provide the standard quality that you usually provide everyone else with? I suppose another example to make the point is say let’s pretend you are selling an apple that looks visually perfect. Most people would want that and is used to that kind of quality for you. However, you have a customer that could care less about the look as long as it is perfectly okay as they are going to turn it into apple cider. So like there would you just sell your regular premium looking apples to them or would you actually give them the “lower quality” visual items because even there is nothing wrong with it for their need?
Sometime people truly can’t tell between an expensive item and a cheap one for their specific needs. Or like here, if the client was only going to view the video on like a small tablet I highly doubt you can tell the difference if it was shot in 4K or not. But like there would you still offer the absolute best quality? Or would you offer them the lower quality package that fits their needs?