| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/01/2006 04:42:00 PM · #1 |
We were very kindly bought a family portrait gift for Xmas, and used it for our free session with a company that is based in the UK. The studio session went well (kiddies a little tired but they were fairly lively) and I think the photographer got some great pictures.
He was using a lovely Hassleblad with a 22 Megapixel digital back, and had a fairly hefty softbox remotely triggered by the camera to illuminate us in the white walled room. We did all the playing etc, and I think he will have got some great scenes.
We go back in a week or so to get the "presentaton", which involves the images being projected while we have soothing music and a glass of wine to enjoy them. Then we get our free framed 8x10 and the pitch to buy a few more.
I think they're going to be great pictures, and while I love taking pictures of the family, I'm seldom in them as I'm behind the camera so it will be extra special.
However.
Wow.
The cheapest item is a 7x5 cheap desk frame. £75.
Their lovely looking frames with say, three images in, start at around £795. Their deluxe 16 x 5"x5" in a nice acrylic frame comes in at £2000.
Even a basic album of 10 pictures is £895.
I almost fainted when I saw the price list.
Are people really paying this for photos? They're clearly quite high end, but still, the cost of a family holiday instead of some pictures on the wall? Payment options, you're not kidding.
It's just going to be so hard as I know they'll be lovely pictures, but I'd rather spend £500 on some lights and white backgrounds to acheive similar (-ish open to discussion) results with my D200.
I'm clearly in the wrong business.
Jamie
(sipping wine just to recover) |
|
|
|
03/01/2006 04:47:05 PM · #2 |
I have learned that some people think the price directly reflects the quality and therefore they enjoy buying high priced items! Yes, people are buying them! Many companies will market three different times to get this same concept going - a bar of soap for example,
1. in plain white wrapping and "new and improved" on the label for .99
2. soap in decenly shiney wrapping with pastel colors for 2.99
3. same soap in a nice foil and box with shiney ribbons for 45.99
All three will sell. There are just some people out there where money is not as important to them and they would love to spend tons on something they can later brag about. We as photographer know how much a person is getting gyped though (I find it hard to over price my stuff for my clients).
|
|
|
|
03/01/2006 04:50:22 PM · #3 |
yeah they can be pretty steep. i guess people must pay that much for them, but i just couldnt afford it. i was quoted around £300 for the shoot, £75 per photo (cant remember the size), and then as a special agreement £50 per digital file.
i wanted the shot as a gift, but just dont have that kind of money. in the end i got exactly the shot i wanted using my 5100, a black backdrop from ebay, some gaffer tape and a desk lamp :) it is by no means professional, but being able to achieve the shot i wanted myself was a great step for me. i got a few 12 x 10 prints done at Jessops- which came out really well. |
|
|
|
03/01/2006 04:51:32 PM · #4 |
I say enjoy the soft music and sip your wine slowly, ask to see the photos a few times(maybe you can get a refill glass of wine) and then tell them that you know how much money goes into photos and your just not going to pay that for photos...then run like hell...LoL
|
|
|
|
03/01/2006 04:52:42 PM · #5 |
| Yeah, I used to work in a studio that regualrly sold $3-4,000 packages... It made me ill watching them try to sell these huge packages to the customers.. It's one of the main reasons I'm no longer there... But even more disturbing to me was the willingness of the customers to spend that kind of money... It's absurd. |
|
|
|
03/01/2006 04:56:52 PM · #6 |
Put bluntly, it's the same mentality that makes some supposed "art" shots sell for $25000.
Enjoy your wine.
Laugh.
Walk away.
Buy another bottle of wine.
Enjoy it.
Yes, this is very expensive. Ridiculously so. |
|
|
|
03/01/2006 05:10:55 PM · #7 |
WOW.... I don't know how I feel ethically charging that however I have seen some work that could easily sell for grands. Do these people feel okay selling their work at such high prices.?
|
|
|
|
03/01/2006 05:13:15 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by nards656:
Put bluntly, it's the same mentality that makes some supposed "art" shots sell for $25000.
|
I don't really agree that it's the same mentality here. If the photos this guy was taking were truly something unique and artful, I don't think the prices would be much - you're paying for one of a kind stuff. However, it sounds like they are just some relatively nice studio shots and nothing all that insanely art-tastic, so yeah, these prices seem ridiculous.
It really depends 100% on what he was able to capture. If he's got some shots in there that really pull out some emotion and personality and really illustrate, artfully, the subject, then those could be considered priceless. You never know.
I have no idea what I'm talking about and probably just killed this thread.
|
|
|
|
03/01/2006 05:14:26 PM · #9 |
I feel that way about HS senior photos here - for $750 or so one gets a trifold portfolio with 8 4x6s, a few 8x10s, perhaps a gallery wrap 16x20, 50 or 100 wallets...the cost of the materials, even if you go high endish, is $150. You get perhaps 45 minutes of studio time or time inthe garden out back - don't ask about on -location! I figure the photog has 2 to 2 1/2 hours of time and $100 in materials - you can do 4 or 5 seniors on a saturday and make $2400 to $3000 above your product costs. More money for less time that shooting a wedding, and less pressure cause you can reshoot it if you have to.
And that is an average studio and working class kids...
|
|
|
|
03/01/2006 05:19:43 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by smilebig4me1x:
I say enjoy the soft music and sip your wine slowly, ask to see the photos a few times(maybe you can get a refill glass of wine) and then tell them that you know how much money goes into photos and your just not going to pay that for photos...then run like hell...LoL |
They are very expensive, yes. But that's a meaningless statement ("tell them you know how much money goes into photos"). You're not paying for the paper and the ink, you're paying for the work, expertise, and even the reputation, of the photographer. These people have set their prices where they want them to be, up there at the high end, and apparently enough other people agree they are worth it that they have a viable business.
I don't seen anything wrong with it. Any more than I see anything wrong with a high-end jeweler selling a custom-designed gold ring for 100x what a low-end jeweler charges for the same weight of gold in the ring. We all have choices to make. It disturbs me to see people in here running down photographers that succeed and make a really decent living because they have managed to market their skills effectively.
Back when I sold my architectural photography business my day rate was $1,500 a day plus expenses, my B/W 16x20 prints went for $125 a pop, and I was considered "reasonably" priced. A friend of mine with whom I sometimes worked on big jobs was a very famous photographer in my line of work, and he was billing $5,000 a day. He paid me MY day rate and we worked together, me on the exteriors mostly alone and he on the interiors, with me assisting him on those usually.
I competed with entry-level architectural photographers, charging in the $500/day range, and I lost clients to them sometimes, sure; in fact many of them started as my assistants. But a lot of the time I got the clients back after a job or two went to the other guy, because I could be counted on to deliver predictably superior work. I worked hard to get to that level. I deserved to be paid well, and I was.
As a rule, these high-end studios can be counted on to do the same. I don't see why they shouldn't ask for what they think they are worth. If the market will support them, more power to them.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
03/01/2006 05:26:10 PM · #11 |
Wow - I guess anything is only worth what somebody will pay, so it's a subjective call - and who am I to say they are wasting money as it's their call. If they are still in business then somebody must pay, so what do I know :0) If you think there is value then by all means drop them some cash, otherwise hide the wallet and enjoy the wine. I suspect most people around here would think that is, at best er.. um.., expensive.
On the other most of us probably hate paying for the Santa photos, done by a tmp with a Rebal and 18-55 kit lens :-/ [Don't go there, It's still a touchie subject here and I am trying to figure out how to dress up in a red suite and take the pic myself without the kids recognising me :)]. |
|
|
|
03/01/2006 05:26:22 PM · #12 |
I suppose I need to start charging more then! My photo shoots that include a CD of 200 pictures (even edited with PS) one roll of B/W, one roll of color from my manuals and a few print outs costs 350.00.
:(
|
|
|
|
03/01/2006 05:29:44 PM · #13 |
Robt,
You make an excellent point, and true skill and ability will always command a premium, as it should to reward such talent. However, reserving judgement on the photos as we've not seen them yet, and having taken a few myself, I know that getting that special look is as much down to the relationship with the model as anything else.
This place just surprises me as it is nice and high end, but getting this as a relatively inexpensive gift the sheer cost takes my breath away as I wasn't looking for the top end. One colleague at work that I've spoken to has already commented on the hard sell that he got, and that's what concerns me. I know I can recreate most of the look of his photos (ok I'll have to buy some cool new lights, and maybe a nice new lens), and that the printing costs are a lot less.
Your last comment is the key, "if the market will support them", and I'm still just surprised that anyone is prepared to pay that amount for photography, especially a one off session. I spent a lot of money on a D100, and now a D200, so that I can capture these priceless moments over years, not 60 minutes in a studio. I hope I've spent my money wisely.
Jamie |
|
|
|
03/01/2006 05:35:16 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by smilebig4me1x:
I say enjoy the soft music and sip your wine slowly, ask to see the photos a few times(maybe you can get a refill glass of wine) and then tell them that you know how much money goes into photos and your just not going to pay that for photos...then run like hell...LoL |
They are very expensive, yes. But that's a meaningless statement ("tell them you know how much money goes into photos"). You're not paying for the paper and the ink, you're paying for the work, expertise, and even the reputation, of the photographer. These people have set their prices where they want them to be, up there at the high end, and apparently enough other people agree they are worth it that they have a viable business.
I don't seen anything wrong with it. Any more than I see anything wrong with a high-end jeweler selling a custom-designed gold ring for 100x what a low-end jeweler charges for the same weight of gold in the ring. We all have choices to make. It disturbs me to see people in here running down photographers that succeed and make a really decent living because they have managed to market their skills effectively.
Back when I sold my architectural photography business my day rate was $1,500 a day plus expenses, my B/W 16x20 prints went for $125 a pop, and I was considered "reasonably" priced. A friend of mine with whom I sometimes worked on big jobs was a very famous photographer in my line of work, and he was billing $5,000 a day. He paid me MY day rate and we worked together, me on the exteriors mostly alone and he on the interiors, with me assisting him on those usually.
I competed with entry-level architectural photographers, charging in the $500/day range, and I lost clients to them sometimes, sure; in fact many of them started as my assistants. But a lot of the time I got the clients back after a job or two went to the other guy, because I could be counted on to deliver predictably superior work. I worked hard to get to that level. I deserved to be paid well, and I was.
As a rule, these high-end studios can be counted on to do the same. I don't see why they shouldn't ask for what they think they are worth. If the market will support them, more power to them.
Robt. |
I totally agree with you. Most people don't want to pay for expertise these days, they want to pay for hardware. I used to work as a salesman in high end electronics, spending hours explaining differences between products and analyzing customers needs in order to have them buy the right thing. Some of them asked me the questions (after the sales pithc) why would they buy from me when they can get the same at best buy for a few hundreds dollars less. My answer was: "because if there was no guy like me who know the products and who are willing to explain it to guys like you, you would go directly to them and buy the one the salesman make the most commission on it. If I was not here you probably wouldn't choose the best products for you because no one would care to explain it to you. I acquired the knowledge to do this through many years of experience and this is worth the extra money. Plus if you have questions later I will answer them and not tell you to go spend a few hours on the web for your (probably inaccurate) answer. And this is also worth the extra money" |
|
|
|
03/02/2006 03:17:34 PM · #15 |
He was using a lovely Hassleblad with a 22 Megapixel digital back, and had a fairly hefty softbox remotely triggered by the camera to illuminate us in the white walled room. We did all the playing etc, and I think he will have got some great scenes.
Not for nothing, but that camera goes for what--$30k+? Which means this guy's overhead must be quite high. Yes, those prices seem VERY steep, to say the least. But clearly he is going the extra distance equipment-wise to justify it. And hey, if he can get people to pay it (in other words, if the market will bear it) why not? If NO ONE would ever pay those prices, he would either a) lower his prices or b) go out of business. Having said that, I would guess that his business success is as much a function of his sales / marketing as much as it is the quality of the work. |
|
|
|
03/02/2006 05:56:11 PM · #16 |
From what he said, the digital back alone was £30k. And that is pounds.
I shall report back with the photos once I've seen them, and more importantly just how much they lay on the pressure sales, cos they certainly have some overheads to recoup.
Jamie |
|
|
|
03/02/2006 06:40:54 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by Jamester:
From what he said, the digital back alone was £30k. And that is pounds.
I shall report back with the photos once I've seen them, and more importantly just how much they lay on the pressure sales, cos they certainly have some overheads to recoup.
Jamie |
actually the Hasselblad H1D with 80mm lens and 22Mpixel digital back is about $20.000 and is getting cheaper now after the H2D was introduced with 39Mpixel digital back :)
but still it's a rippoff... this price would be ok if it was a world famous photographer like Bresson, Ansel Adams, James Nachtwey or Herb Ritts
I would have paid £2000 for a good portrait of myself shot by Herb Ritts but not by someone unknown ;)
|
|
|
|
03/02/2006 06:57:09 PM · #18 |
There's a sucker born every minute...or so someone said.
Playing the devil's advocate about the argument that "if you can get the price, it's fine" I don't think we'd be feeling the same way with salesmen selling vinyl siding to Aunt Gladys for 5x the cost.
There is a point where we cross into avarice and no matter how "high-end" you are achieving you cross into a morally unstable position.
In my book $4000 for a nice acrylic 16x5x5 frame and a few hour's time crosses that line.
But I'm sure there will be many to disagree... |
|
|
|
03/02/2006 07:01:12 PM · #19 |
Good word Doc! For those, like me who did not know what the word meant.
avarice \AV-uh-ris\, noun:
An excessive desire of gain; greediness after wealth; covetousness; cupidity.
LOL
|
|
|
|
03/02/2006 07:27:49 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Good word Doc! For those, like me who did not know what the word meant.
avarice \AV-uh-ris\, noun:
An excessive desire of gain; greediness after wealth; covetousness; cupidity.
LOL |
now I gotta go look up cupidity... |
|
|
|
03/02/2006 07:29:03 PM · #21 |
|
|
|
03/02/2006 07:33:53 PM · #22 |
I would have payed lots of money for this photo
fortunately I shot it... I would hardly buy something THAT expensive... but when they touch your feelings... you gotta have lots of money to pay for your feelings |
|
|
|
03/02/2006 08:14:46 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by DanSig:
Originally posted by Jamester:
From what he said, the digital back alone was £30k. And that is pounds.
I shall report back with the photos once I've seen them, and more importantly just how much they lay on the pressure sales, cos they certainly have some overheads to recoup.
Jamie |
actually the Hasselblad H1D with 80mm lens and 22Mpixel digital back is about $20.000 and is getting cheaper now after the H2D was introduced with 39Mpixel digital back :)
but still it's a rippoff... this price would be ok if it was a world famous photographer like Bresson, Ansel Adams, James Nachtwey or Herb Ritts
I would have paid £2000 for a good portrait of myself shot by Herb Ritts but not by someone unknown ;) |
But when herb would shoot you for the prices below, he was probably unknown.
He also didn't say what model of MF back it was just that it was used on a hassy body. He could of bought it a couple of years ago...
It also very humurous to here people say it's immoral to charge that much...it's called capitalism folks, you can only charge as much as the market will bear.
Also equally humorous, hereing about charging to much from a doctor... ;o)
Message edited by author 2006-03-02 20:16:51.
|
|
|
|
03/02/2006 09:01:32 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
It also very humurous to here people say it's immoral to charge that much...it's called capitalism folks, you can only charge as much as the market will bear.
Also equally humorous, hereing about charging to much from a doctor... ;o) |
The smiley saved ya dude... (j/k) I'm sure this guy is getting 4-10x the amount per hour that I'm earning. He didn't likely go through 13 years of training after high school and nobody's gonna sue him for $1 million because they don't like the pictures...(that was all mostly for fun, I'm not gettin' defensive.)
I go back to Aunt Gladys and the vinyl guy. You happy to let him get whatever he can out of auntie?
Message edited by author 2006-03-02 21:03:28. |
|
|
|
03/02/2006 10:33:29 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I go back to Aunt Gladys and the vinyl guy. You happy to let him get whatever he can out of auntie? |
That's freaking ridiculous; the vinyl-siding guy is a salesamn trying to inflate his bottom line. The photographers are committed professionals with a concept of their own worth. Pay it or don't pay it. But don't dump all over them.
R.
|
|
