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

DPChallenge Forums >> Business of Photography >> what hourly rate to charge?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 28, (reverse)
AuthorThread
07/31/2007 01:10:10 PM · #1
one of the toughest parts of freelancing is setting an hourly rate. it's hard finding that happy medium between what you need and what the market will bear. at the very least, you need to know what you need. that will give you a baseline as to whether or not you are charging enough. one thing you absolutely have to keep in mind is that you have to account for ALL of your time working, not just your time shooting.

here's a handy calculator to figure out your hourly rate: freelance rate calculator
07/31/2007 01:14:59 PM · #2
Not bad at all! Came out at about $50/hour for me, about right.

ETA: that calculator works for any kind of freelance work or contracting. Not just photography.

Message edited by author 2007-07-31 13:16:04.
07/31/2007 03:02:18 PM · #3
Skip's the man - thanks for the link!
07/31/2007 03:18:06 PM · #4
hmm... I am going to have to try it agian it told me $6.81 per hour.
07/31/2007 04:27:37 PM · #5
My break-even hourly rate should be $164.66

I'm probably planning too much vacation days... :)
07/31/2007 08:49:45 PM · #6
let's just say, for grins, it cost you only $10,000 a year to run your business.

if you worked 4 days a week, and billed 4 hours a day

you would break even at $30/hour.

however, if you bill $2970.59/hour, you would clear one million dollars

;-)
09/05/2007 08:32:24 PM · #7
Thanks for the link. That was extremely helpful! I had no idea how to figure that out on my own. Have been struggling to figure out pricing.
09/05/2007 08:42:02 PM · #8
Originally posted by Skip:

let's just say, for grins, it cost you only $10,000 a year to run your business.

if you worked 4 days a week, and billed 4 hours a day

you would break even at $30/hour.

however, if you bill $2970.59/hour, you would clear one million dollars

;-)


.... And I was just thinking I should raise my rate to $2970.59! Weird. ;)
09/05/2007 08:55:21 PM · #9
I came out at about $86/hour. That's with 50% non-billable time.

Do you think that's a reasonable figure to start out with on billable time?
09/05/2007 09:01:08 PM · #10
the type of clients i work for prefer to pay a day rate plus expenses.
09/05/2007 09:02:29 PM · #11
You know, just asking here, but if someone earned $86/hour and worked full-time, they would gross $172,000 a year. Do people think this would be a reasonable wage for a photographer who worked 2000 hours a year like the rest of us?

(I'm not picking on your wavelength, you were just the last one to post a number...)

09/05/2007 09:03:03 PM · #12
Originally posted by sher:

the type of clients i work for prefer to pay a day rate plus expenses.


So take this and multiply by 8 :)
09/05/2007 09:03:55 PM · #13
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

You know, just asking here, but if someone earned $86/hour and worked full-time, they would gross $172,000 a year. Do people think this would be a reasonable wage for a photographer who worked 2000 hours a year like the rest of us?

(I'm not picking on your wavelength, you were just the last one to post a number...)


I wouldn't earn that, I would only take home about $50,000, actually. Which close to what I earn now.
09/05/2007 09:04:30 PM · #14
No category for drugs and alcohol?
09/05/2007 09:05:11 PM · #15
Sheesh, you guys donĀ“t charge enough! I usually work for about 150-200$ an hour, but then again the pricing here is a bit higher, a 5D costs about 5000$ here witht he current exchange rate... :P
09/05/2007 09:06:05 PM · #16
And really, since I targeted only 50% billable hours, your numbers are sort of off :|
09/05/2007 09:06:48 PM · #17
Originally posted by pawdrix:

No category for drugs and alcohol?


Place that under "Office Supplies" :D
09/05/2007 09:09:01 PM · #18
Originally posted by wavelength:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

You know, just asking here, but if someone earned $86/hour and worked full-time, they would gross $172,000 a year. Do people think this would be a reasonable wage for a photographer who worked 2000 hours a year like the rest of us?

(I'm not picking on your wavelength, you were just the last one to post a number...)


I wouldn't earn that, I would only take home about $50,000, actually. Which close to what I earn now.


Right, I assume that's because you aren't working 2000 hours a year doing photography.

Another way to arrive at the number is to ask what a reasonable annual salary should be for a photographer given the expertise and training required to become one. $50,000? We then assume a full work week and arrive at $25/hr plus whatever your expenses work out to be. If you don't work full time, then why expect to earn full-time wages?

Again, this is all asking in general, and I'm sorta being Devil's Advocate here. I'm not pointing at anybody.
09/05/2007 09:16:47 PM · #19
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by wavelength:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

You know, just asking here, but if someone earned $86/hour and worked full-time, they would gross $172,000 a year. Do people think this would be a reasonable wage for a photographer who worked 2000 hours a year like the rest of us?

(I'm not picking on your wavelength, you were just the last one to post a number...)


I wouldn't earn that, I would only take home about $50,000, actually. Which close to what I earn now.


Right, I assume that's because you aren't working 2000 hours a year doing photography.

Another way to arrive at the number is to ask what a reasonable annual salary should be for a photographer given the expertise and training required to become one. $50,000? We then assume a full work week and arrive at $25/hr plus whatever your expenses work out to be. If you don't work full time, then why expect to earn full-time wages?

Again, this is all asking in general, and I'm sorta being Devil's Advocate here. I'm not pointing at anybody.


No, this is for billable hours, more like 1,000/year. The rest would be spent on clerical, billing, promotions, client meet-n-greets, running photoshop actions and post-processing, web site maintenance.

I don't think it's an unreasonable salary for a really good photographer to earn much more than $50,000 even. This rate would take care of a single person quite well, but would leave a primary income holder a little strapped (as I can well testify to)
09/05/2007 09:17:29 PM · #20
$86 an hour is nothing. Chefs, Teachers, Lawyers, Accountants, Construction Workers make that and triple that. A competent photographer can pull that number with ease if they position themselves properly.

09/05/2007 09:29:22 PM · #21
Originally posted by pawdrix:

$86 an hour is nothing. Chefs, Teachers, Lawyers, Accountants, Construction Workers make that and triple that. A competent photographer can pull that number with ease if they position themselves properly.


I'm not sure you have your numbers right. Most chefs, accountants, and construction workers don't gross $172,000 a year. Lawyers may (although I'm sure many don't) and teachers work part-time so we'd be looking at more a salary of $129,000 a year.

$86/hour by 40 hours a week minus 2 weeks vacation comes out to that figure...
09/05/2007 09:40:27 PM · #22
Originally posted by pawdrix:

$86 an hour is nothing. Chefs, Teachers, Lawyers, Accountants, Construction Workers make that and triple that. A competent photographer can pull that number with ease if they position themselves properly.


Yes, and if you can get to the point where you become highly specialized, such as advertising specific photographers, you bill per job, and maybe only do one every two weeks. If you think about it, wedding photographers who do 30+ weddings per year are still only grossing $120,000. I'm sure there are lawyers and doctors who take home that every year and have hospitals or firms that take care of the rest.

It's all about perspective and scale. If you do 10 hours of shooting in a week, you probably have about another 20 hours culling, photoshopping, and proofing those pictures, dealing with the client afterward through e-mails and calls, blah, blah. and blah.
09/05/2007 09:51:06 PM · #23
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by pawdrix:

$86 an hour is nothing. Chefs, Teachers, Lawyers, Accountants, Construction Workers make that and triple that. A competent photographer can pull that number with ease if they position themselves properly.


I'm not sure you have your numbers right. Most chefs, accountants, and construction workers don't gross $172,000 a year. Lawyers may (although I'm sure many don't) and teachers work part-time so we'd be looking at more a salary of $129,000 a year.

$86/hour by 40 hours a week minus 2 weeks vacation comes out to that figure...


Billable hours, doc. billable, not actual hours worked. If the billable is 50% of actual total hours worked...
09/05/2007 09:55:35 PM · #24
Originally posted by wavelength:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by pawdrix:

$86 an hour is nothing. Chefs, Teachers, Lawyers, Accountants, Construction Workers make that and triple that. A competent photographer can pull that number with ease if they position themselves properly.


I'm not sure you have your numbers right. Most chefs, accountants, and construction workers don't gross $172,000 a year. Lawyers may (although I'm sure many don't) and teachers work part-time so we'd be looking at more a salary of $129,000 a year.

$86/hour by 40 hours a week minus 2 weeks vacation comes out to that figure...


Billable hours, doc. billable, not actual hours worked. If the billable is 50% of actual total hours worked...


Ya ya, I hear ya. If you are only billing for 4 hours work, but that comes with 8 more hours of "free" work, then $86/hour for those 4 hours could be quite reasonable. I'd think you'd quote a price by just figuring out how many hours total the job will take and giving them a figure based on that. But if that is what we're talking about then I'm just speaking in different terms.
09/05/2007 09:57:34 PM · #25
But when you are self-employed your hourly rate * hours worked does not equal your take home pay. You have to take all of your costs (overhead, equipment, expenses, blah, blah, blah) out of your revenues in order to get to anything resembling a profit/take home pay.

When you work for a company and are payed salary, your take-home pay is your hourly rate times hours worked (minus taxes).

Two different things.

Liza

Message edited by author 2007-09-05 21:58:29.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 05:25:11 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 05:25:11 PM EDT.