10 Reasons Why Professional Photographers Charge What They Do!

dinneenp

Wages of 70k ( I presume this is for photographer)- nice salary.
Assistant- 40k, nice salary for them too.
Equiptment- 10k per year. Must be a hell of a lot of equiptment. After 5 years so you'd have a a tonne of equiptment....
Phone 3,600. Even if you're on a mobile 24,7 it would be a LOT cheaper.
Profit of 15k- where does this go then? if to photographer then salary is 85k.
If back into the company then expenses next year are lower.

I'm not saying that there aren't a lot of costs & expenses though...

It is amazing the price difference you'll get for quotes.
It's true though that people are willing to pay for good pictures & service.
And for weddings etc you're paying for the assurance that you'll get great pictures, it's a one off so that's why a professional is taking the pics- for the guarantee.

(still costs a lot though)

mindundalk

Like i said thats ok if your working from home but if your on the high street different ball game regarding the overall costing of your business

outspann

Wile E. Coyote wrote: »

I got married in October, our photographer is based in London. She flew over 3 times to meet with us at the venue to discuss things and go through all our options and she still worked out a bit cheaper than most of the local photographers.

Wow! Can I ask you what she charged? Assuming minimum 5 trips to Ireland (3 pre, 1 wedding day, 1 post), how much must that have cost in travel alone? Especially when you add in taxi's, car hire, accomodation? You must be talking 6-700 euro costs before even clicking the shutter.

And that doesn't even include what she was paying herself per hour. 5 days plus (say) another 5 editing, laying out the album, dealing with a printers, etc. Suddenly you've 600 euro in costs plus 80 hours (ten days) labour. Even if she was charging 20 Euro per hour, you're up to total costs of well over 2 grand. Is that in the ballpark?

I definitely know people that do it for well less than that....

Dundhoone

Eirebear wrote: »

See your "semi fancy album"? It probably cost about 300 quid.
See the prints that went in it? Assuming the photographer uses a good lab, maybe another 100.Thats 400 right off.
Lets take it over the course of a year.
Say a photographer manages 152 weddings a year
Thats 104 grand turnover.
take away (400 x 52 = 28,000) you left with 76,000
Insurance costs, maybe another lets call it 1200
So your left with 74800 before taxes.
(Im unsure of Irish tax brackets but im guessing around 25%?)
So were down to 57,000.
Thats before we take in unquantifiable expenses such as travel, and general sundries such as wear and tear on equipment.
Chances are that guys earning around 50k a year.
Is he paying an assistant for 52 weddings? Thats maybe another 6 grand.
Hes still earning a good wage. But its not the massive money people seem to think hes earning.

I dont need a 300 euro album, but I dont have the option of a 300 discount if I just want the prints. 1 day shooting, a little photoshop on 30 images , say 2 days plus printing-prep etc, being generous is 3.5 days work. 50k for 3.5 days work is a top wage in most peoples books.

I shouldnt have to pick up the slack for "if the photographer only manages 152 weddings in a year" or if he/she cant pick up other jobs during the week.

@ Buzz lightyear - 70k +40k + 15k profit is a really nice gross income if the photographer doesnt hire an assistant/secretary...is it not? So that daily rate is nice an generous in all fairness.

Eirebear

Dundhoone wrote: »

I dont need a 300 euro album, but I dont have the option of a 300 discount if I just want the prints. 1 day shooting, a little photoshop on 30 images , say 2 days plus printing-prep etc, being generous is 3.5 days work. 50k for 3.5 days work is a top wage in most peoples books.

I shouldnt have to pick up the slack for "if the photographer only manages 152 weddings in a year" or if he/she cant pick up other jobs during the week.

There are plenty of photographers out there who will do a "Disc only" package, maybe you just didnt look hard enough.

As for the 3.5 days work, your right. On your wedding there was maybe 3.5 days work.
But do you honestly think thats all there is to running a business?
Dont be so naive.
Its a full time job, and as i said. Yes its a good wage...but vertainly not the con job that people make it out to be.

And not picking up jobs during the week? Whats that about?
Most wedding photographers at the prices your quoting are simply that. WEDDING photographers.
Wedding photography is a rather specialised area. Much like sports photography or any other professional version of photography you can think of.

Do you think the average plumber decides to go and do some electricians work on their time off?

Freddie59

Eirebear wrote: »

There are plenty of photographers out there who will do a "Disc only" package, maybe you just didnt look hard enough.

As for the 3.5 days work, your right. On your wedding there was maybe 3.5 days work.
But do you honestly think thats all there is to running a business?
Dont be so naive.
Its a full time job, and as i said. Yes its a good wage...but vertainly not the con job that people make it out to be.

And not picking up jobs during the week? Whats that about?
Most wedding photographers at the prices your quoting are simply that. WEDDING photographers.
Wedding photography is a rather specialised area. Much like sports photography or any other professional version of photography you can think of.

Do you think the average plumber decides to go and do some electricians work on their time off?

OK. There are some photographers charging astronomical fees for weddings, etc. If people are dumb enough to cough up then that's their problem. Not the photographers. You keep paying - they'll keep charging. Vote with your feet, as you would with any other business.

On a side note, our daughter's graduation ceremony took place in WIT last week. Two shots, one of us with her, one on her own €100.

There were HUNDREDS queuing for the snap. And yes, it's voluntary - we chose to pay, as it's a one-off occasion.

They were going through roughly 3 every five minutes. €300 x 12 = €3600....PER HOUR. And the ceremonies lasted three days. Now, even allowing for breaks, give them an average of four hours per day. That comes to the tidy sum of €14400....PER DAY.:eek:

Try and rationalise THAT one.:D

Freddie59

Eirebear wrote: »

Do you think the average plumber decides to go and do some electricians work on their time off?

In all fairness, that's not really a legitimate comparison.:)

And any local photographers doing weddings in Waterford are also portrait photographers, etc.

WATM

I think with wedding photography, you need consider what level of risk you are comfortable with taking.

With wedding photography, you're not just paying for one person to work for one day. You are trusting them to record a once-off event that can't be recreated. Risk: It's the difference between buying a cheap shirt in Dunnes and buying a cheap ticket with Uncle Frank Airways. If your shirt falls apart after one week, so be it. If your plane falls out of the sky, well, that's a slightly bigger inconvenience for you. Risk. It's why sometimes the cheaper option isn't always the smarter deal.

And I don't know how many weddings people have shot, but I can guarantee that when you take photos for a couple, you make very sure to do absolutely everything you can to produce the best set of images that you can possibly get. If that means spending 3 or 4 hours editing a photo and trying different options/looks/styles, then so be it. That's what you've been paid to do.

It's like lots of things. There's no right or wrong. It's just to do with what works for you.

www.WeAreTheMastersons.com

Eirebear

Freddie59 wrote: »

In all fairness, that's not really a legitimate comparison.:)

.

I know...couldnt think of another one of the top of my head though!

Eirebear

Freddie59 wrote: »

On a side note, our daughter's graduation ceremony took place in WIT last week. Two shots, one of us with her, one on her own €100.

There were HUNDREDS queuing for the snap. And yes, it's voluntary - we chose to pay, as it's a one-off occasion.

They were going through roughly 3 every five minutes. €300 x 12 = €3600....PER HOUR. And the ceremonies lasted three days. Now, even allowing for breaks, give them an average of four hours per day. That comes to the tidy sum of €14400....PER DAY.:eek:Try and rationalise THAT one.:D

No, i wont.


Thats daylight robbery to be fair, but as you said...if people keep paying, theyll keep charging!

Fionn

hmmm how do I get a gig like that WIT Grad thing???
I'll call myself a professional for that even!

Buzz Lightyear

dinneenp wrote: »

Wages of 70k ( I presume this is for photographer)- nice salary.
Assistant- 40k, nice salary for them too.
Equiptment- 10k per year. Must be a hell of a lot of equiptment. After 5 years so you'd have a a tonne of equiptment....
Phone 3,600. Even if you're on a mobile 24,7 it would be a LOT cheaper.
Profit of 15k- where does this go then? if to photographer then salary is 85k.
If back into the company then expenses next year are lower.

The figures that I quoted are not unrealistic. Dinneenp has baulked at my salary expectation of 70k for a professional and 40k that for an assistant.

For a married person with a family, mortgage, kids in school, and all the usual expenses, plus the responsibility of running a business and employing people I think that 70k is a reasonable expectation. Without belittling anybody's personal circumstances, you'd need at least 40-50k to live. With the mortgages of the last few years even this would be tough.

The figure of 10k for equipment is allowing for investment in new and better equipment. If you employ part time staff to do other smaller jobs, you'll need to supply them with 'tools' to be able to complete the job compentantly. Even at that younger staff members as a rule don't give a care about equipment and tend to either break or loose them. This costs money to repair and replace. Also with commercial work your shutter actuations go up and the life of your camera goes down, requiring replacement and/or upgrading.

Phone bills - you obviously have never seen commercial phone bills. This would not be unusual !

15 K profit. Well I haven't included for renting a premises and rates. This could be well eaten into by these. Also if you go to take on anybody, you need to ensure they have their wages every week. So when your waiting couple of months for clients to pay you, you and your employee have to live. This eats into any cashflow, which the profit helps to buffer. Also in order to expand your business you need to have cash to do this. Then if you have a couple of quite months, you don't want to be losing a valuable employee in the interim, so this eats into your profit.

It's not all plain sailing

Dundhoone wrote: »

@ Buzz lightyear - 70k +40k + 15k profit is a really nice gross income if the photographer doesnt hire an assistant/secretary...is it not? So that daily rate is nice an generous in all fairness.

If the photographer is not hiring an assistant, it can seem as nice money, however, most people who charge this type of rate generally giving employment to others.

eas

wow, Deja Vu thread.

I think with wedding photography, you need consider what level of risk you are comfortable with taking.

Just an example of something that happened to me this week - A couple who I worked for 2 years ago had their house burgled over Christmas. I received an email from the bride explaining that their laptop was stolen and guess what - all her wedding photos where too because they'd somehow lost the original disk after copying them to their laptop.

I'm sure any misgivings she had about my fees (if any at all) disappeared when I told her not to worry, all her photos where in my archive and I'd post her a new DVD ASAP.

Now I know this isn't really such a big deal, however it could have worked out differently if I wasn't a "responsible" professional.

dinneenp

Buzz Lightyear wrote: »

Dinneenp has baulked at my salary expectation of 70k for a professional and 40k that for an assistant.
.

I didn't baulk at the salary expectations; I just said that it's a nice salary, which it is.

ColmDawson

The OP's points are fair enough, but the tone is somewhat pompous.

nilhg

eas wrote: »

wow, Deja Vu thread.



Just an example of something that happened to me this week - A couple who I worked for 2 years ago had their house burgled over Christmas. I received an email from the bride explaining that their laptop was stolen and guess what - all her wedding photos where too because they'd somehow lost the original disk after copying them to their laptop.

I'm sure any misgivings she had about my fee's (if any at all) disappeared when I told her not to worry, all her photos where in my archive and I'd post her a new DVD ASAP.

Now I know this isn't really such a big deal, however it could have worked out differently if I wasn't a "responsible" professional.

Yeah but it works both ways, my neighbours highly priced professional photographer (and if he says highly priced it's probably enough to make my hair stand) rang him a week after his wedding in Ashford Castle to tell him that there had been a "computer incident" and almost all of the shoot was gone.......

I think they finished up getting a refund and an album made up of guests photos.

mindundalk

Just to clarify "wedding photographer" because you do wedding photography everyone automatically thinks there loaded cause they must be doing 50-100 weddings a year, well let me just say thats not the case at all, now i am not speaking for everybody and i know there are still some guys out there whom have this cushion (well done if your one of them) but for most who have a very young business unless your charging €500 with no overheads (like rent & rates) the figure is unrealistic.....more like 20-40 if your lucky.

mindundalk

There is no point in taring every professional with that same price.

mindundalk

elven wrote: »

That'd be just dandy if it were the case that the people charging the most money are actually the best. I've seen evidence to the contrary though, unfortunately

Thats a good point

Hugh_C

Rb wrote: »

Good article. Formatting could do with a bit of a look though as the spaces between bullet points changes in the middle, then the line spacing grows also.

Sorry but that's about the most nonsensical contribution i've read all week! why bother criticise the format of the information ffs?

mindundalk

nilhg wrote: »

Yeah but it works both ways, my neighbours highly priced professional photographer (and if he says highly priced it's probably enough to make my hair stand) rang him a week after his wedding in Ashford Castle to tell him that there had been a "computer incident" and almost all of the shoot was gone.......

I think they finished up getting a refund and an album made up of guests photos.

In Between destinations between the wedding my assistant makes back-up copies of everything.

ColmDawson

Hugh_C wrote: »

Sorry but that's about the most nonsensical contribution i've read all week! why bother criticise the format of the information ffs?

Why not? He praises the article, then gives a small piece of constructive criticism, which could help the article look more presentable.

mindundalk

ColmDawson wrote: »

Why not? He praises the article, then gives a small piece of constructive criticism, which could help the article look more presentable.

It was helpful critique

higgins2010

some great points in this blog. Also love the pictures in the link, the fashion pictures are amazing.

Artist!!

Thanks for the link!! Cool site

mindundalk

Artist!! wrote: »

Thanks for the link!! Cool site

your welcome

Stephentlig

landyman wrote: »

I find that very condescending statement. The "pfft there amatuers, they cant take good photos. I'm getting paid to take photos, of course i'm better" attitude by many professional photographers really pisses me off sometimes. :mad:

We understand light.
We understand positioning.

Just because were not taking photographs for payment does not automatically mean our work is inferior.

Some of the best work I see in on boards.ie or photography magazines or flickr ect is by non professionals

Yes but you imposed your own view upon the text, nowhere in his body of text does he mention that he is superior to the non-professionals. the fact that you think a non pro's photo is better than a pro's is your own opinion, but the certificates the professionals receive such as the OP's speaks a different language about what makes money and what people want and dont want ( I think ). there is a big difference between professional and unprofessional, it depends on what kind of photograph a person wants, but look at it this way, if you were gettin married would you hire a non pro to photograph your most special day? if you would hire one then I'd say your one sick puppy :pac: :P

Waking-Dreams

[font=Arial Black, sans-serif][font=Verdana, sans-serif]The OP does kind of give the impression that we're supposed to say “ah, poor you, people trying to haggle you down, not fair”, but if one looks around, we live in a very, very competitive world and consumers know this only too well. Up until now, most people have been drawn into wanting to look richer, cooler, or more successful than they really are, or can afford to be, which (due to the easy access to credit) has meant spending huge sums of money on things and not thinking twice about the price. The bigger, the better. However, that line of thinking has been reigned in somewhat of late.[/font]


[font=Verdana, sans-serif]So, if pro photographers feel they are being haggled down to unjustly prices then simply turn down the work or get another kind of job to support yourself. It sounds harsh yeah, but the value of your services exists in the heads of other people – you can't change that, ever. And with the sheer volume of photographers about these days, the public's perception of what constitutes “professional” has been altered.[/font]
[/font]

eas

[font=Verdana, sans-serif] And with the sheer volume of photographers about these days, the public's perception of what constitutes “professional” has been altered.[/font]
[/font][/SIZE]

that's why it's so important to try and distinguish yourself from your competition any way you can.

No offense to the OP, but this is where I believe your blog post lets you down. You should be trying to educate your clients on how and why YOU are worth the money, not just photographers in general.

Stephentlig

eas wrote: »

that's why it's so important to try and distinguish yourself from your competition any way you can.

No offense to the OP, but this is where I believe your blog post lets you down. You should be trying to educate your clients on how and why YOU are worth the money, not just photographers in general.

But as a paying customer I felt that the OP's blog explained to me why he is worth the money.

I felt that he was being very honest...infact...more honest than most men of business these days who dont wanna show their cards, yet I felt that buy reading his blog the OP was laying his cards on the table and telling it like it is.

Stephentlig

The OP does kind of give the impression that we're supposed to say “ah, poor you, people trying to haggle you down, not fair”,

I dont think he is looking for sympathy, I think he has his fair share of trying to haggle down people in his personal life for goods he buys, so he understands the mind of the customer, yet is only informing them and being honest as to why he cant be haggled down?

eas

Without going back to read the blog post again, I recall he was offering general (but valid) reasons why people should hire professional photographers, but offered no reason why people should hire him specifically, there is a difference.

This is in relation to the point that someone made about he amount of photographers trading these days.

Waking-Dreams

I understand the validity of each of the points (which are all spot on) but the average consumer who knows nothing of the plight of photographers in the profession have their own minds about what's worth paying for. You can list them all the moral reasonings in the world, just like a salesman would do likewise for whatever product they're selling but if the price is too "high", it's a losing battle.

And it's because people ascribe different values to different services. The average price for consumer products are for the most part, more a less the same in most retail shops. But putting a price on a photo, a piece of art...

If someone sells a painting to someone for 10K, the buyer might think they were paying for something of significant higher quality than say a painting for 3K. But who decides what's quality? The same perception spills into the heads of people looking for a photographer. Then you have friends who give them all kinds of conflicting info about costs and good/bad results and they start to wonder how much they should offer.

Case in point, a friend of mine who is a pro-photographer was asked by an aquaintance about the possibility of shooting their wedding. So, knowing the person had probably asked a few other photographers in the area, he rang up a few places for a quote, and then halved that price. It got him the job and enough to make a nice profit.

That's business for you.

Stephentlig

I understand the validity of each of the points (which are all spot on) but the average consumer who knows nothing of the plight of photographers in the profession have their own minds about what's worth paying for. You can list them all the moral reasonings in the world, just like a salesman would do likewise for whatever product they're selling but if the price is too "high", it's a losing battle.

then they should buy their ice-cream somewhere else, the only difference is the ice cream they'll be buying is ( lets put it in supermarket terms ) tesco value and not as good as the real thing.

Case in point, a friend of mine who is a pro-photographer was asked by an aquaintance about the possibility of shooting their wedding. So, knowing the person had probably asked a few other photographers in the area, he rang up a few places for a quote, and then halved that price. It got him the job and enough to make a nice profit.

That's business for you.

but not every pro photographer are equal to one another, I've watched pro photographers and have seen one better than the other. think about it this way, are all pro singers in the world equal in talent? no, some have more talent than others and some sell more records as a result, its the same with pro photographers, yeah he might be cutting his prices but does it mean he'll be as good as the pro photographer who doesnt?

thanks for your reply

Stephen

Stephentlig

Without going back to read the blog post again, I recall he was offering general (but valid) reasons why people should hire professional photographers, but offered no reason why people should hire him specifically, there is a difference.

Thank you for your reply but I disagree, I feel that his blog post really helped a lot of photographers currently in his position in these hard times. Like I said before he laid his cards on the table and was honest with his customers rather than be ( forgive my course language) an ass and dismiss the other busisnesses around him, he was the only pro photographer who spoke up rather than hide behind a polictians answer which isnt an answer at all, and thats how most businesses act today.

Honesty is the best policy and its honesty that makes us money, which is why his honesty explains to me why his blog gives me many reasons as to why I should hire him specifically without him having to spell it out for me in one sentance.

Waking-Dreams

but not every pro photographer are equal to one another

Quite right. But... you can't rule out that someone who charges less will produce inferior work either - they just might work within tighter profit frames, to get business.

MooseJam

Repeating the word professional a hundred times doesn't make it so, anybody can pick up a camera and they are a professional.

democrates

OP I'd rewrite that as if you were responding to a prospective customer face to face, my thinking is that it would serve you better to present yourself as someone who will be a pleasure to deal with. I know it's a challenge to restate each point positively, almost as sales copy, but it would be worth the effort.

mindundalk

democrates wrote: »

OP I'd rewrite that as if you were responding to a prospective customer face to face, my thinking is that it would serve you better to present yourself as someone who will be a pleasure to deal with. I know it's a challenge to restate each point positively, almost as sales copy, but it would be worth the effort.

Thanks for the tip.

Joey the lips

mindundalk wrote: »

Im New to all this

Thanks for the tip

mindundalk wrote: »

I am only just getting used to my new blog so as the weeks go on I should get better at this.

Ahh that would be no 5 on your list.

I am a beliver that supply and demand dictates price. I do believe photographers are over priced

However like all service industries they are the first to feel the recession.

mindundalk

higgins2010 wrote: »

some great points in this blog. Also love the pictures in the link, the fashion pictures are amazing.

Thanks for the support.

Stephentlig

MooseJam wrote: »

Repeating the word professional a hundred times doesn't make it so, anybody can pick up a camera and they are a professional.

want me to shoot your wedding album?

mindundalk

The word professional simply means you receive money for doing so.

humberklog

mindundalk wrote: »

The word professional simply means you receive money for doing so.

I thought his for a while too but that oversimplified equation doesn't leave much room for flare, experience, expertise and above all: application.

humberklog

humberklog wrote: »

I thought his for a while too but that oversimplified equation doesn't leave much room for flare, experience, expertise and above all: application.

That would be a 'good' professional.

democrates

Professional... If you're not you don't have to call yourself unprofessional or even non-professional. Instead you can talk about commercial v non-commercial. Some other words I like are enthusiast and artisan.

Being averse to taking up residence in a pidgeons hole I try to remember not to ask this of others. We've all got lots of hats.

humberklog

Deleted User wrote: »

That would be a 'good' professional.

I think it's more about "being" professional. "Good" implies there's an alternative: bad. But a bad professional wouldn't really be a professional at all (well in photography anyway, it doesn't work for all strands of labour that can attain the multi-faceted term "professional"). A good professional in photography is just being professional. Regardless of if there's money at the end of the endeavour.

elven

humberklog wrote: »

I think it's more about "being" professional. "Good" implies there's an alternative: bad. But a bad professional wouldn't really be a professional at all (well in photography anyway, it doesn't work for all strands of labour that can attain the multi-faceted term "professional"). A good professional in photography is just being professional. Regardless of if there's money at the end of the endeavour.

so do you think someone who gets paid for it but does it badly isn't a professional?

humberklog

elven wrote: »

so do you think someone who gets paid for it but does it badly isn't a professional?

Yeah, they're wriggly maggots.

Carrigman

As regards professional photographers knowing about posing, placement etc...most do, but a lot don't.

When I browse wedding albums produced by some professionals I am amazed at the number of individual and group shots where the subjects have their hands in the penalty shoot position or have trees or other objects growing out of their heads. The punters probably don't notice so the photographers don't seem to care.