Last updated: 12 September 2026
Five lessons came out of a year of brand work: the brief decides the outcome, anonymous case studies read better than named ones, vertical is the primary frame now, retainers beat one off projects, and saying no to wrong fit work improves the practice more than saying yes.
Five industries, dozens of projects, hundreds of shoot hours. The lessons that stuck are the ones worth writing down before the next year buries them.
Because every project that performed well this year had a strong brief, and every project that underperformed had a weak one. The correlation is not subtle, and it shows up before any kit moves.
A strong brief answers four questions: what does this content need to do, who is it for, where will it live, and how will we know it worked. Weak briefs skip one or more, usually the last. Wanting it to feel premium is the answer you get when the questions have not been asked.
The work with measurable outcomes attached from the start made the production decisions sharp and the post production sign offs fast. The lesson going into next year is to spend more pre production time, not less, even on small projects.
Because the writing got better once the names came out. Most of my case study work this year ran through agencies, so naming end clients created conflict of interest exposure and the case studies got anonymised.
Without the pressure to make a client look good, I could focus on what actually changed in the project: the strategic shift, the production decision, the unexpected outcome. Readers did not seem to care about the names. They cared about the lesson.
Going into next year I am leaning further into this. Anonymous case studies, structural lessons, no logos. The work speaks louder when the brand is not being marketed.
No. A year ago I treated vertical as a derivative format, capturing for horizontal and cropping in post. By mid year I had flipped it to vertical first capture, with horizontal added in the same shoot for the assets that need both.
The shift was forced by the audience. Across every brand I worked with, the vertical content outperformed the horizontal version of the same material, often by a wide margin on engagement and wider still on completion rate. Audiences are watching on phones, with thumbs ready to scroll.
The shoots that came out best were the ones where vertical was the primary frame. Compositions worked, subjects sat naturally in the crop, and the cuts felt built for the channels they lived in. Where vertical was an afterthought, even when the horizontal hero film looked strong, the social cuts quietly underperformed.
Yes, and by more than I expected. I started the year quoting one off projects and ended it preferring retainers, because a retainer lets pre production accumulate over time instead of restarting every brief.
By month three the partner already knows the brand, the audience, the channels and the sales rhythm. By month six the production is faster and sharper than any one off engagement could be. Same kit, same craft, sharper output. The difference is institutional knowledge.
For next year I am structuring more engagements as quarterly or six month retainers from the start, with clear exit clauses. The fixed project model still works for hero films and one off campaigns, but the engine for everything else lives in the retainer.
Because the leads that did proceed were better qualified and easier to deliver against. About a third of the discovery calls I took this year ended with me telling the prospect they did not need what I do.
Either the brief was too small, the budget did not match the work, the brand was not ready, or the project shape was not a fit. Each no felt expensive in the moment. It was not. The relationships that started with an honest disqualification often turned into referrals.
Saying no to wrong fit work is the most underrated tool in a practice like this. The temptation, especially in slower months, is to say yes to keep the calendar full. The people who said no to me in the past, and referred me on when I was not right for the brief, are the ones I respect most.
Three things sit on the priority list for the next twelve months: more retainer relationships, more writing, and a tighter pre production process with published templates and checklists as free downloads.
The practical side has not changed. I work from Belgrave across Melbourne, the Yarra Valley and the Mornington Peninsula, carrying $20M public liability and a Working With Children Check for the shoots that need one.
If you are scoping content work for the year ahead and want to talk it through before any kit moves, that is what brand video work starts with. You can start a project when you are ready, and the first 30 minutes is free.
What makes a content retainer work better than one off projects?
Pre production accumulates. By month three the partner already knows the brand, the audience and the sales rhythm, so the production gets faster and sharper without the scope getting heavier.
Should every shoot be filmed vertical first?
For social, yes. Vertical is the primary frame, with horizontal captured in the same shoot for the assets that need it. Cropping a horizontal master afterwards produces the weaker cut.
How do you know whether a brand film worked?
The brief says so before the shoot. Success criteria written down in advance, quantitative where possible, is what makes the answer available afterwards instead of a matter of opinion.
What does a brand content retainer cost?
It is scoped per quarter. The building blocks are the published floors, photography from $1,380 plus GST for a half day and video from $1,860 plus GST, with the mix set by what the channels actually need.