Checking a conference gallery against programme coverage

Receiving the gallery is not the end of the commission. A review shows whether the coverage matched the plan, and gives the evidence you need to improve the next brief. It works best when it is factual and structured, not based on a general impression.

This page belongs to our overview of conference and convention photography.

What to compare

Three documents define the review.

1. The programme. The sessions, rooms and times, with any changes on the day.
2. The brief or priority list. What you agreed was essential, desirable or sampled. See choosing the photographic priorities of a conference.
3. The quotation. What was promised in coverage, crew and deliverables.

Put them side by side with the gallery. Do not add expectations that were not in the documents; the aim is to see what happened relative to what was agreed.

Go session by session

Take each session or key moment and give it a status: covered well, covered lightly, not covered. Add a note about why, where you know.

Include the people. Check that named speakers appear for their sessions, that the opening and closing are present, and that delegates and sponsors appear as the brief said. The photo delivery acceptance checklist offers a structure for the check.

Separate planned gaps from unplanned ones

Some gaps were expected. A restricted session, a room visited briefly, a parallel workshop with lighter coverage: these should match the plan. Our pages on conference coverage when some sessions prohibit photography and parallel workshops explain these cases.

Unplanned gaps are different: an essential session missing, a speaker not captured, a time block with no images. Mark these and bring them to the conversation with us.

Check captions and names

If captions or file names were supplied, compare them with the confirmed speaker list. Errors often come from late substitutions or outdated programmes. Our guide to accurate captions, credits and event context explains why they matter.

Ask how images were selected for the delivered gallery; see how event photographs are selected. A gallery is not every frame taken, and the reasons for selection are legitimate to ask about.

An example scenario

For example, imagine a three-day conference with forty sessions. The review finds thirty-two covered well, five lightly and three not covered. Two of the three were restricted sessions, planned as such. One was a Wednesday workshop, ranked "desirable".

The organiser raises the workshop with the photographer, who confirms that it overlapped with a higher-ranked session. For next year, the organiser adds the workshop to the essential list and asks about a second photographer. This is a hypothetical case.

Do not invent requirements afterwards

A review can reveal wishes that were not in the brief, such as "we needed more delegates laughing". These are useful for next time, but they were not requirements, and it is fairer to treat them that way.

Our guide to reviewing photography against the original business brief discusses this. The post-event photography review worksheet helps you record findings without confusing them with commitments.

Using the findings

Turn the review into specific changes: more crew in a particular time block, a clearer speaker list, earlier access to a venue. The photographer work review worksheet can also help when you compare photographers for a future commission.

For different galleries for delegates, speakers and organisers, see different conference galleries.

What we confirm

We go through your review with you and confirm, in writing, what was in scope, what the gallery contains and what can be added. We say plainly where a gap resulted from our planning or a change on the day.

Sharing the review with the team

Share the review with the people who will plan next year, not only the person who commissioned the photography. A one-page summary with the findings, the gaps and the changes proposed is enough. Keeping it with the programme and the brief means the next team can compare directly, and the comparison becomes quicker each year.