DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Business of Photography >> Another one "How much to charge?"
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 16 of 16, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 09/16/2007 11:33:02 AM · #1
It's a birthday party for a guys. I think it is also an opening day for his bar.

He needs someone to document event on Saturday night from 9PM to 2AM. He wants full size JPEGs on CD/DVD and very little processing. Just crop, rotate and fix exposure if needed.

Is $400 too much to ask?

Thanks

Nick
 09/16/2007 11:42:09 AM · #2
Its likely not enough. :D

I'd suggest agreeing on a day rate with him based on an hourly wage. Even with minimum editing your going to spend some time with the images because you will want your best foot forward, meaning that no matter what he says, you will spend extra time making them look good. And the fact that you are handing over full res file, with what I'd say is unlimited use, thats worth something. Besides if you make the photos look good enough he might need a copyright release to have them lab printed, thats extra right? :D

MattO
 09/16/2007 11:48:27 AM · #3
Originally posted by MattO:
...
Besides if you make the photos look good enough he might need a copyright release to have them lab printed, thats extra right? :D

MattO


Was not part of the plan. What price do you suggest for this?

Thanks
 09/16/2007 04:13:29 PM · #4
It all depends on how he wants to use them - you need to find out exactly what he's planning in order to set a price.
 09/16/2007 04:28:03 PM · #5
Around $100 an hour for shooting and processing to the proof state is reasonable IMO.
Any idea on how many images he expects?
What does he plan to do with them? Personal use is worth less than commercial (web or similar) vs use in advertising (newspaper, magazine).

You can get him to agree to limit the use, but realistically if you've given over the hi-res files you've given him control - should he violate the terms of use you'll have a near impossible time getting compensated - so it's best to get all your money up front and not worry about it after.

He of course want as much as possible for as little as possible. You want to do as little as possible for as much as possible.

Perhaps $400 for shooting and proofing, then $5/image or something like that. $40 per file is more like it, but I doubt you'll get him to pay that from what you've stated here.
 09/16/2007 07:14:56 PM · #6
Originally posted by Nikolai1024:
Originally posted by MattO:
...
Besides if you make the photos look good enough he might need a copyright release to have them lab printed, thats extra right? :D

MattO


Was not part of the plan. What price do you suggest for this?

Thanks


As stated the intended use will ultimately dictate what the "going rate" will be for this job. IMHO set an hourly rate, or a bulk day rate, and then if going to be used for anything other then personal use, get a per photo fee for copyright release for them.

MattO
 09/16/2007 11:14:03 PM · #7
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
Around $100 an hour for shooting and processing to the proof state is reasonable IMO.
Any idea on how many images he expects?
What does he plan to do with them? Personal use is worth less than commercial (web or similar) vs use in advertising (newspaper, magazine).

You can get him to agree to limit the use, but realistically if you've given over the hi-res files you've given him control - should he violate the terms of use you'll have a near impossible time getting compensated - so it's best to get all your money up front and not worry about it after.

He of course want as much as possible for as little as possible. You want to do as little as possible for as much as possible.

Perhaps $400 for shooting and proofing, then $5/image or something like that. $40 per file is more like it, but I doubt you'll get him to pay that from what you've stated here.


$5 per image is dirt, so is $40 per file. The license should be the most expensive product.

When I did a shoot of a corporate vice president I charged $150 to do the shoot ($75 per hour) and charged $2750 for the license.
 09/16/2007 11:17:19 PM · #8
The real question is: do you want to do it?

If so, do it for some nominal fee. If you don't already have a rate structure in place, don't worry about it. Do it for free drinks. If you want to do it, don't price yourself out of it. Ask yourself if YOU would pay someone else what you would be charging. If you wouldn't, chance are, they wouldn't either.
 09/16/2007 11:34:31 PM · #9
^^^

Don't do that - it screws over photographers who are trying to do it for a living.
 09/17/2007 09:49:01 AM · #10
I think this guys is on the bugget so my final quote was $400. I'm pretty sure he will not go higher than that. I also found out it is a bad area so now I'm not sure if I want to do this at all.

As far as photos for drinks: I would only do that if it someone I know for a while and I want to help them out.

Thanks for the ideas everyone.

Nick
 09/17/2007 02:04:22 PM · #11
Charge whatever you like. Whatever you charge you are in no way screwing over photogs who do this for a living. That is an irrational argument that can be disputed by the most basic understanding of economics. That argument has been on this site forever.
 09/17/2007 10:17:33 PM · #12
Originally posted by Jmnuggy:
Charge whatever you like. Whatever you charge you are in no way screwing over photogs who do this for a living. That is an irrational argument that can be disputed by the most basic understanding of economics. That argument has been on this site forever.


It trains customers that they can get what they need for very cheap. Once the public thinks they can get something for very cheap, they will never pay full price.

Why do you think Wal Mart is so popular and driving the more expensive shops out of business. That's your economics lesson for the night.
 09/17/2007 10:35:16 PM · #13
Originally posted by KevinG:

It trains customers that they can get what they need for very cheap. Once the public thinks they can get something for very cheap, they will never pay full price.


Thats not necessarily true. If they want the quality of pictures a certain photographer can offer, they will pay the price for that photographer. Charging a high rate, and not getting the job isn't better than charging a more reasonable rate, and at least getting the job.

Originally posted by KevinG:

Why do you think Wal Mart is so popular and driving the more expensive shops out of business. That's your economics lesson for the night.


Using this argument, I can say the same thing happens in the photo world. You can go to Walmart's photo studio and have your picture taken there too for relatively cheap, however I still see plenty of independent portrait photographers in the business, which refers back to my first point of "if the people want YOUR photos, they will pay for them."
 09/17/2007 11:48:40 PM · #14
Originally posted by KevinG:


$5 per image is dirt, so is $40 per file. The license should be the most expensive product.

When I did a shoot of a corporate vice president I charged $150 to do the shoot ($75 per hour) and charged $2750 for the license.


I agree, but you shot a corporate VP. Go to the small business owner and try that pricing - won't work.
is the work worth it? Is that the going price? Sure.
Are they going to pay it? no. why not? Several reasons, one of which is they can ask around and somebody with a camera will say 'sure, i'll do it for $100 - sounds like fun!'. If they asked around and everyone quoted $500 for shooting and $4000 for rights then they'd either pay that price or do without....which is how things usually work.

Want tires? Dentistry? Peanut butter? You house painted? A babysitter? There are high and low prices for all those things, but there is a minimum that no one goes below - not so with photography.
 09/18/2007 11:11:53 AM · #15
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
Originally posted by KevinG:


$5 per image is dirt, so is $40 per file. The license should be the most expensive product.

When I did a shoot of a corporate vice president I charged $150 to do the shoot ($75 per hour) and charged $2750 for the license.


I agree, but you shot a corporate VP. Go to the small business owner and try that pricing - won't work.
is the work worth it? Is that the going price? Sure.
Are they going to pay it? no. why not? Several reasons, one of which is they can ask around and somebody with a camera will say 'sure, i'll do it for $100 - sounds like fun!'. If they asked around and everyone quoted $500 for shooting and $4000 for rights then they'd either pay that price or do without....which is how things usually work.

Want tires? Dentistry? Peanut butter? You house painted? A babysitter? There are high and low prices for all those things, but there is a minimum that no one goes below - not so with photography.


I didn't say it would work at a small business and I wouldn't charge a small business that same price.

All I was saying is that the license (depending on the difficulty and length of the shoot) should usually be the most expensive part.

You shouldn't do a shoot for $350 and then sell the license for $25 - that doesn't make any sense.

Message edited by author 2007-09-18 11:12:11.
 09/18/2007 11:32:51 AM · #16
Originally posted by KevinG:


It trains customers that they can get what they need for very cheap.


And if they can, what's the problem? If they are satisfied with the quality of the cheap photographer then why on earth should they pay you more?

If you offer a better service and quality to the cheaper photographers AND the customer feels that difference is worth the extra price, then you'll stay in business.

You're not owed customers; the rise of cheap photography will cost you sales, but there will always be a market for a dedicated, expensive professional. It's just going to be a much smaller market.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/07/2025 09:49:15 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/07/2025 09:49:15 AM EDT.