- This topic is empty.
Value perceptions of photography…
-
PS. Thorsten.. just a thought.. imagine yer man went on to be a huge international superstar… I wonder who photographed “Please Please Me” by the Beatles?
nfl-fan wrote:
PS. Thorsten.. just a thought.. imagine yer man went on to be a huge international superstar… I wonder who photographed “Please Please Me” by the Beatles?
I’m not sure I get your point.
On the discussion overall so far, I think it’s been very interesting so far – much more than I expected it to be
I’m intrigued by the fact that nobody has mentioned intellectual property rights and licensing fees, particularly in the context of commercial work. Anyone care to comment on this aspect? It seems to me that (some) musicians, who are after all involved in the business of intellectual property, are more than happy to trample all over the intellectual property rights of photographers or other creatives (I speak from experience here!). Then again we also have (some) photographers prepared to trample over the IP rights of software designers!
For anyone that has contributed here to date (thanks!) would the issue of licensing make a difference to any of the arguments you have put forward?
Not disagreeing with you NFL, and speaking from experience offering a choice of options and prices is a good way to educate clients.
Gillian has a day rate and a half day rate for commercial photography.
There are options for food stylists, assistants, models, shooting film or digital, retouching, sourcing props, set builders, yadda yadda yadda.
Sometimes a client will have their own props available, or food stylist, or not want to use models, etc.
Depending on the job her estimate could include options for all the above.
Her day rate doesn’t change though.We do something similar with websites we build.
Outline various options as per the brief – CMS, XML integration, bespoke development Vs plugging into off the shelf solutions, consultancy, yadda yadda.
Everything the client asks for, plus options for extras and options for spending less.
Our day rates don’t change.That said, sometimes, not often, Gillian will do a job for less, as does my company, or even pro bono.
It depends on the client and we both pick and choose who we’re willing to do it for.
When Gillian shoots weddings her day rate is either vastly reduced or not charged at all – because she only does them for family, friends or clients.
Usually she’ll tell them how much film cost per roll and processing, they then decide on how many rolls.
Gillian will organise processing and contacts, then hand the lot over to the client simply because she doesn’t want the hassle of organising prints – typically this is where portrait and wedding photographs make the majority of their profits.A long time ago we did a wedding (I usually tag along and do the B&Ws -carry bags and load film – while she does all the organising and colour shots) which got a good bit of exposure in a wedding magazine. For two or three months afterwards the phone was off the hook with calls, easily 100+, looking for her to do weddings. The vast majority of people took her refusal well and she recommeded people she knew, but a few offered multiples of her daily rate for her to do their wedding and were harder to dissuade. We thought about it seriously as a business proposition for a good while but decided against it. In the end we realised neither of us enjoy shooting weddings and we’d rather stick at what we enjoyed and make a go of that. There were times when we half regretted it, but we certainly don’t now.
Anyways, enough rambling for one day.
;)This is interesing, my usual answer to somebody who questions my prices is “well i could do it cheaper but I don’t want to have any reason to cut corners or not go for the best quality because im doing this cheap” plus “on the other hand if it comes back that its costing me more money than i initially thought i wont be coming to you looking for more money either” This usualy works a treat. The majority of people have no respect for the guy who does it cheap, and similarly they wont have the same value of the end products.
Best bet is to stick with your prices, otherwise everybody will be trying to beat you down and after a while you’ll be wondering how cheap you could do something.nfl-fan wrote:
… what I’m saying is if it’s possible offer cost options.
Option 1 might be a week’s work €X per day providing A
Option 2 might be 2 week’s work €X per day providing A, B
Option 3 might be 1 month’s work €X per day providing A, B, CThat way you’re not sacrificing your rate but the client might choose an option with fewer deliverables to fit their budget.
The main thing that will determine the amount a client is prepared to pay you, is how much use they can get out of your images.
I havent really had this yet, i know i dont charge enough as i have had 3 out of my last 10 clients saying i dont charge enough. But i have worked a few packages that suit most people and i still make good margins but not as much as the high street photograher and untill am on the high street i wont be charging as much as them. I found if you try and stick the arm in they wont come back most of the people i have done work for have been to another photographer within the past 2 years and got ripped off and i am quite confident that when the next kid or family shoot comes up i will get a call. Everyone wants value for money, what a certin coleraine photographer is charging £600+ for i can charge £150 for more or less the same product after that its down to the images you can produce. I am sure as my overheads go up so will my prices but untill then i will try and build a valuble customer base and reputation for reasonable rates and quailty products.
Thorsten wrote:
…or alternatively, “Educating the Client”
Good negotiating skills are critical to the success of any independent photographer, yet this talent is frequently not what comes naturally to us.
I recently got married and the pro that did my shots charged me 840 quid. For this I got 2 pros , around 3.5 hours of both their time. A catalogue of thumbnail shots (300+ shots) and all these hosted on a site to allow me and mt wife to fill the album. We picked around 54 shots in various sizes. We then got a cracking italian leather bound album and matching case. The shots turned out excellent in comparision to the shots I have seen of friends and family wedding albums.
For this service I think the price was very good and for the amount of time at the shoot locations and post process. Granted, they did get the arm in for extra prints. but I think this is where the real profit can be made. They charged 150 quid or there abouts for 13 pics at either 9*5 or 8*10
My two cents.
Dee
Very interesting thread, and something I’ve been struggling with myself lately. I’m glad it’s not my bread and butter and that I’ve room to chop and change as I gain experience in these things.
I was asked to photograph a gig recently, the response being ‘oh that’s much too high, I can find others a lot cheaper than that’ to which I let them on their way with my blessing and explained that I have to put a value on my work and that’s the value that I put. When asked about what they thought was reasonable they didn’t get back to me. They’ve seen my pics and think they’re ‘really really good’ which is why they asked me but hadn’t thought about expectations of what they were prepared to pay, assuming perhaps it’ll be some loose change from their takings at the door.
A promoter here keeps telling me me to bite the bullet, that I could potentially earn a good crust as no-one is doing the kind of stuff I do (there’s at least one I know of but to be honest I don’t rate his stuff.. but fair play for making money out of it!). The same promoter asked me for a day’s work last year and turned me down after I quoted. Nice.
I do think that value and usage are linked. On top of that I would put quality. As a photographer I would not tender pics that I deemed sub-standard for the job. As a client I’d want the pics to make me smile and think ‘that’s what I wanted’. To meet or exceed expectations. Expectations is a very fluid perception!
I also think that the client needs to be educated, especially if they’re not used to hiring a fotog.
Probably the same fright that accompanies musicians when they first contact a recording studio. They want a fancy recording but *how much?!?!?!*. Or employing a sound engineer at a gig – the person who ultimately decides how the band sounds on the night (subject to available equipment). Some gigs could have been so much better if only for the bass being too loud, the singer to quiet etc etc. A photographer ultimately decides how the band looks on the night (subject to available lighting obviously).
Education also about what goes into producing that photograph, and what they get for their money. I’ve offered watermarked web samples for free and charged for full size/full res copies, describing what they’ll receive and what it’s suitable for (plus usage rights). This seems to strike a happy medium as they get ‘something for nothing’ even though they are limited in what they can do with it. However I’m still brewing over this and other ideas!
stasber wrote:
Or employing a sound engineer at a gig – the person who ultimately decides how the band sounds on the night (subject to available equipment). Some gigs could have been so much better if only for the bass being too loud, the singer to quiet etc etc.
I’ll just drag this off topic for 2 secs to correct some of this assumption.. If the bass player is too loud on stage, or the singer sings lower than the stage spill into the mic, then no amount of sound engineering can fix it. No more than a photographer could shoot with a 20W bulb on the far side of the room, behind a couch..
And *gasp* Ashley Morrison here on PI.. Wow… welcome.
Not sure where you were going with that, Sean, the last sentence sounded a bit sarcastic, unless I’m way off the mark (quite possible).
Where I was heading was simply saying that hiring a sound engineer is perceived differently to hiring a photographer; the job seems more tangible to justify a cost, and I don’t suppose that sound engineers have to haggle and stress as much as photographers do over having to justify their fee to a client.
Every job has it’s ifs and buts. Being hired to photograph a gig where your only light is a 20W bulb and your only position is the far side of the room, behind a couch will determine it’s own consequences. My reference to bass or singers was perhaps a naive attempt to cobble together an analogy that people could grasp. I don’t know who else on this forum cares much for stage spill into the mic, but they will invariably enjoy a gig or a concert more engineered by someone with more skill/experience, and whose fee justifies that skill/experience. Ditto for photographers and the pictures they (we!) produce.
Stas
I used to be a sound engineer, they/we do have to haggle over price. But it depends on the level of gig
Like if your mixing for some superstar no price is not the issue
but anything else price IS haggled over
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
