A second shooter to take extra shots for the client.
Yes I would expect they would use their time and experience to do this, not too many other ways they could get the shots.
No, I wouldn’t like to see clients images being posted on blogs, facebook or anywhere else by a second shooter.
And I only mentioned that they would have a full frame camera, in my case I supply a 35mm f1.4, 85mm f1.4, 70-200 f2.8, 600ex-RT flash, mini softbox, batteries, memory cards and backup equipment and lots of training and advice including setting up all of the formal portraits the second shooter is shooting so it’s not exactly the squeeze you seem to be suggesting that I’m putting on anyone. And I’m definitely not posting here looking for a second shooter, I’m just curious if my idea of a fair rate is really fair. As it happens I don’t add any profit to my second shooters cost, and I have loads of extra processing time but it does make my work look better with lots of variety in the shots which is my main concern.
Of course there is always the opportunity for the second shooter to say that it’s not worth it even though there is very little pressure, no clients to book, no post processing, no invoicing or chasing up payments, no advertising or marketing or meetings that end up without bookings etc. To be honest if someone asked me to second shoot a wedding and I just had to turn up, shoot, hand over the card I’d definitely do it if the price was right.
So my question remains as to what would be a fair price, you appear to believe it shouldn’t happen on principle which is fair enough, everyone to their own opinion.
Looking at another example – If I had a leaking roof and I asked a roofer to drive to my house, spend the day fixing the roof using all his own tools, and I paid him 300 euro to fix it and it took him a day’s work, would it be such a bad deal for him? Why so different just because you are using an “artist” who in most cases is starting out and looking for experience.