3 ms·

I've shopped at macys.com several times because of the awesome deals on there but every time, I've returned everything that arrived. I also shop Zappos a lot an

by leak 15y ago

I've shopped at macys.com several times because of the awesome deals on there but every time, I've returned everything that arrived. I also shop Zappos a lot and almost never return anything. For me, I think the site is really lacking on general product information through media (pictures/videos). Most of the products I click on usually have 1 picture (zappos has at least 4 and a video) and the picture doesn't even really help at all (ie: the shirt is tucked into the jeans so you can't see the fit). What are your thoughts on this? I know you guys have a gang of products but I figure if you have to setup a photo shoot for 1 angel, might as well get every angel. I admit that I don't know what i'm talking about when it comes to this stuff (I'm just using Zappos as a reference).

joshwa 15y ago
note: my own opinions, not those of the company, etc A few reasons: -- Zappos, to a certain extent, is selling commodities. Every shoe can get photographed exactly the same way, doesn't need to demonstrate fit, doesn't need to communicate a larger style vision. I think they do all their photography when the product enters the warehouse, and the photos don't get much of a touch-up. -- Macy's, on the other hand, has a creative vision of the various customers and lifestyles we're selling to, and the photos generally have to communicate that. That means: model selection, pairing with pants/shirts, posing, etc. Same with home products like bedding or towels. It's a fine line to walk between making sure to show all the product's features and attributes such as fit, fabric, pattern/embellishment, etc, and communicating the aspirational style vision-- who the customer wants to be when they buy that shirt. It's a tradeoff. -- Photography is expensive. It takes a lot of people and stuff to create a good fashion photo: model, photographer, hair, makeup, wardrobe stylist, art director, digital capture tech, retoucher, studio, lights, cameras, computers, catering, .. the list goes on. We're ruthless negotiators on this stuff and really efficient, but on a per-product basis it ain't cheap. -- Macy's fashion is highly seasonal so we might not buy as deep into a given style since it's only good for 6 months or less, so that cost is amortized over a fewer number of sales. All that said, we're working on it for sure. We're shooting a lot more views of almost everything going forward.
- silvestrov 15y ago
  Short at Macy's: http://www1.macys.com/shop/product/marc-ecko-cut-sew-shirt-welchs-shirt?ID=619426 http://www1.macys.com/shop/product/marc-ecko-cut-sew-shirt-w... Compare to a cheap online-only retailer in Denmark: http://www.smartguy.dk/toej/skjorter/lange-aermer/Roed_Blend_langaermet_skjorte_144531_1 http://www.smartguy.dk/toej/skjorter/lange-aermer/Roed_Blend... They have at least 2 photos of every shirt, no matter the price. This shirt is $32 which is dirt-cheap in Denmark (+$100 is the usual price for an average shirt). Having a model doesn't help me in deciding what to by, smartguy's photos are plenty fine for me. Macy's might think otherwise, but sometimes 'creative visions' gets in the way of a sale. There simply is no excuse for having only a single lowres photo. If you don't have very good photos online, you don't exist.

by leak 15y ago

joshwa 15y ago

note: my own opinions, not those of the company, etc A few reasons: -- Zappos, to a certain extent, is selling commodities. Every shoe can get photographed exactly the same way, doesn't need to demonstrate fit, doesn't need to communicate a larger style vision. I think they do all their photography when the product enters the warehouse, and the photos don't get much of a touch-up. -- Macy's, on the other hand, has a creative vision of the various customers and lifestyles we're selling to, and the photos generally have to communicate that. That means: model selection, pairing with pants/shirts, posing, etc. Same with home products like bedding or towels. It's a fine line to walk between making sure to show all the product's features and attributes such as fit, fabric, pattern/embellishment, etc, and communicating the aspirational style vision-- who the customer wants to be when they buy that shirt. It's a tradeoff. -- Photography is expensive. It takes a lot of people and stuff to create a good fashion photo: model, photographer, hair, makeup, wardrobe stylist, art director, digital capture tech, retoucher, studio, lights, cameras, computers, catering, .. the list goes on. We're ruthless negotiators on this stuff and really efficient, but on a per-product basis it ain't cheap. -- Macy's fashion is highly seasonal so we might not buy as deep into a given style since it's only good for 6 months or less, so that cost is amortized over a fewer number of sales. All that said, we're working on it for sure. We're shooting a lot more views of almost everything going forward.

silvestrov 15y ago
Short at Macy's: http://www1.macys.com/shop/product/marc-ecko-cut-sew-shirt-welchs-shirt?ID=619426 http://www1.macys.com/shop/product/marc-ecko-cut-sew-shirt-w... Compare to a cheap online-only retailer in Denmark: http://www.smartguy.dk/toej/skjorter/lange-aermer/Roed_Blend_langaermet_skjorte_144531_1 http://www.smartguy.dk/toej/skjorter/lange-aermer/Roed_Blend... They have at least 2 photos of every shirt, no matter the price. This shirt is $32 which is dirt-cheap in Denmark (+$100 is the usual price for an average shirt). Having a model doesn't help me in deciding what to by, smartguy's photos are plenty fine for me. Macy's might think otherwise, but sometimes 'creative visions' gets in the way of a sale. There simply is no excuse for having only a single lowres photo. If you don't have very good photos online, you don't exist.