10 Reasons Why Professional Photographers Charge What They Do!

superflyninja

ThOnda wrote: »

Well, I haven't read everything in this thread, but personally, I have few ideas based on absolutely no knowledge of professional photography trade:

1. because they have to
2. because they are worth it
3. because they find people willing to pay such money

As far as I understand it, the price jumps from the basic survival level higher depending on type of work, cost of the work and type of customer.

But as usually, I am just typing anything to avoid some real work

I concur!!! oh to be able to actually sell photos..sigh maybe once I retire Ill have the time to do this stuff properly

yuloni

This post has been deleted.

democrates

Condi wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Is it paying customers Ted?

Fajitas!

Condi wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Common Misconception Re; Photography #235.2 A photographer should never need to edit an image, doing so means they are a cheater. A dirty cheater.

Er... Yes there is a need to edit and retouch. Image processing is a huge part of photography, digital and darkroom, and an extensive and professional knowledge in it is essential in providing an excellent photographic service.

Retouching and editing is standard process, and I'd question any photographer that disagreed.

Freddie59

eas wrote: »

OK, you're wrong.

Think about it - you come into my studio (some day...drool) and pay €100 for an hour long portrait session. There's half an hour admin work directly related to your booking. For an hour session, say that's 80 mins in total after formalities and such. So, up to 110mins of my time so far. Another hour in front of the computer, another 30mins admin, another hour for viewing. So, over 4 hours work for your €100 hour session.

After taxes I'm getting less than €20 an hour.

I'm sure if you ask around, you'll find that it costs much more than €20/hour to run a photography studio, not to mention feed a family of 4, pay a mortgage and support a prescription drug habit.

Sorry, but I have to take you up on a couple of points there. Our children are now adults, but we always went to a local professional, who we were friendly with.

Book the session over the phone - 2 minutes.

Session itself 45 minutes tops.

Collect and pay for photos - under 5 minutes.

In all fairness, if you have taken the initial photographs properly , especially in a portrait session, there should be minimal PP.

As I've said before, it's a free country so you (or I) choose to pay, but those figures you quote above are a teeny bit exaggerated.;)

thebaz

doctors and plumbers rightly charge for their knowledge and services - but for some reason people expect photographs to do it for free - I think some people believe "sure he's only clicking a button" - if so do it yourself - i've given up ever attempting to make money from photography, if it comes along great , but i look elsewhere to earn a crust

stcstc

freddie

i have to disagree with you


maybe the figures quoted are a little more than actual, but yours seem very very low too
you for example dont mention any time for looking at the photos etc


I only do the printing for people, but it is quite similar

firstly the photographer wants a deal, and barters down the price, then they want help with fixing the files, then they want to spen ages looking over each shot, so time is eaten away.

I would say its the same with taking shots in a studio.

NOW i would say that not all of my clients are like that some are in an out etc, an give me things right an ready to print.

Freddie59

thebaz wrote: »

doctors and plumbers rightly charge for their knowledge and services - but for some reason people expect photographs to do it for free - I think some people believe "sure he's only clicking a button" - if so do it yourself - i've given up ever attempting to make money from photography, if it comes along great , but i look elsewhere to earn a crust

Yeah, I've heard the 'there isn't much to it' comments also (one from a mechanic), but people genuinely don't realise the skill involved. Particularly since the advent of digital.

democrates

Freddie59 wrote: »

Yeah, I've heard the 'there isn't much to it' comments also (one from a mechanic), but people genuinely don't realise the skill involved. Particularly since the advent of digital.

Maybe if we called ourselves trades(wo)men instead of professionals people wouldn't think twice about questioning fees.

Any carpenters out there who can frame a few 8"x10" custom wallpapers?

Mike Litoris

Wile E. Coyote wrote: »

Have to agree unfortunately. I think a lot of 'professionals' (not all) charge really high prices simply because they can and because it's what others are charging. Nothing to do with how good they are. 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.

Thats nuts.

My sister in law is getting married in july and she asked me to find a good photog for it. After a bit of research I was shocked at the less than avarage samples on some of their websites, really shocked. Especially when compered to some of the good amateur stuff people post on forums for C+C. It seems a lot will get the standard shots with little or no art involved. Maybe being into photography you notice these things.

We ended up settling on a guy from Ringsend who's stuff was excellent. He was more expensive than what seemed to be the norm but yeah, you get what you pay for.

jaypeg

democrates wrote: »

Is it paying customers Ted?

This is so true, if you take a picture that your customer is both happy with and is willing to pay you for your photography(there is nothing more satisfying.

tiffmister

Fajitas! wrote: »

Common Misconception Re; Photography #235.2 A photographer should never need to edit an image, doing so means they are a cheater. A dirty cheater.

Er... Yes there is a need to edit and retouch. Image processing is a huge part of photography, digital and darkroom, and an extensive and professional knowledge in it is essential in providing an excellent photographic service.

Retouching and editing is standard process, and I'd question any photographer that disagreed.

Anyone that says they don't in my opinion is not very good at what they do or they are bullXXXXing

Borderfox

I shoot Horse shows and what comes out of the camera is what's printed. I said it before in this thread that it depends on the client and type of job.

Does this make me not very good or bulshi**ing?

I think not

Freddie59

Condi wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Cost? Brass Neck in some cases? But is not every profession/trade the same?
Some very good - some abysmal. But they get away with it. Much like the comment about the Donegal photographer, there is a similar guy here in Waterford - and he gets the work.

What many forget is that the majority of the population are not overcritical. They want a reasonable job at a decent price. A lot aren't into the 'arty' shots which proliferate photography nowadays. Oh, and as for PP. Yeah, even the newest enthusiast, such as myself, uses it. Mainly, in my case, to correct minor errors. Nothing major. It is a very useful tool.

jaypeg

Freddie59 wrote: »

Cost? Brass Neck in some cases? But is not every profession/trade the same?
Some very good - some abysmal. But they get away with it. Much like the comment about the Donegal photographer, there is a similar guy here in Waterford - and he gets the work.

What many forget is that the majority of the population are not overcritical. They want a reasonable job at a decent price. A lot aren't into the 'arty' shots which proliferate photography nowadays. Oh, and as for PP. Yeah, even the newest enthusiast, such as myself, uses it. Mainly, in my case, to correct minor errors. Nothing major. It is a very useful tool.

People want the best that there budget can afford and then some.
saying people are not over critical is like saying they don't really give a dame but in my experience THEY DO! and when it comes to parting with money they don't need another enthusiast!

Mensch Maschine

Condi wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You remind of Pink Floyd being interviewed on the Live In Pompeii DVD where they were asked if they may become slaves of their own equipment etc. Roger Waters and David Gilmour replies something like:

"It's just a question of using the tools that are available - when they're available."

"More and more there are lots of electronic goodies that are availlable for people like us to use, if we can be bothered - and we can be bothered."

"It's all extentions of what coming out of our heads. You've got to have it inside your head to get it out all anyway. The equipment (Photoshop/editing software) isn't thinking what to do any of the time! It couldn't control itself!

"It would be interesting to give 4 other people the equipment and they don't really know much about it and just say 'get on with it.' I think we'd come off better." lol

"It's like saying give a man a Les Paul guitar and he's gonna become Eric Clapton. That's not true. But give a man an amplifier and a synthesiser and he doesn't become whoever - he doesn't become us (Pink Floyd).


See what I'm getting at here. Also, it's if you can make a great photo better with some editing. Excellent. Most people will agree that if the photo is **** to begin with and you edit it - your only damage limitating.

Here's the interview...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-J08mjAl-yw

(starts after about 2mins)

Freddie59

jaypeg wrote: »

People want the best that there budget can afford and then some.
saying people are not over critical is like saying they don't really give a dame but in my experience THEY DO! and when it comes to parting with money they don't need another enthusiast!

Hmm. Interesting comment.;):rolleyes:

The reality is that, in the main, once the product is acceptable, the mainstream public, if presented with both the 'professional' version and the 'enthusiast' version would sometimes be pushed to tell the difference. Until it comes to the price. Reality.:) And who's this dame?:)

tiffmister

Freddie59 wrote: »

Hmm. Interesting comment.;):rolleyes:

The reality is that, in the main, once the product is acceptable, the mainstream public, if presented with both the 'professional' version and the 'enthusiast' version would sometimes be pushed to tell the difference. Until it comes to the price. Reality.:) And who's this dame?:)

ACCEPTABLE! huh you make it sound like thats all there is to it "ACCEPTABLE" thats seems to be the problem certain enthusiast thinking that so long as i do an "OK JOB" and i think its "ACCEPTABLE" and maybe the customer is stupid and wont see that most of the shots are either under or over and heavy handed in photoshop and look all arty.STOP your killing me.

Freddie59

tiffmister wrote: »

ACCEPTABLE! huh you make it sound like thats all there is to it "ACCEPTABLE" thats seems to be the problem certain enthusiast thinking that so long as i do an "OK JOB" and i think its "ACCEPTABLE" and maybe the customer is stupid and wont see that most of the shots are either under or over and heavy handed in photoshop and look all arty.STOP your killing me.

My friend, you obviously have major problems with enthusiasts/amateurs. FWIW I merely enjoy photography as a hobby (I never did a wedding), but it does not preclude me from offering comment on things like an overpriced product by a small amount of people with apparently very large egos.;)

For example, here in Waterford there is a chap who does a wedding for €1200, including album. Very good photographer, and an absolute gentleman at his job. The way he puts his clients at ease has to be seen to be believed.

Then there are the boys who charge €4k+. Not as popular (for obvious reasons), and while the product would appear superior to a trained eye, perhaps maybe your own self-proclaimed one, to the average punter there is no difference.

And therein lies the nub of the problem. His product is as good as, and surpasses, some of his fellow peer 'professionals'.

But he's got everything right. And the local public vote with their business and cheque book.:)
I probably should have said 'almost as good at a quarter the price' instead of acceptable.

The best example I could give was when Sky came on air at the same time as BSB. Sky's analogue signal was nowhere near the quality of the BSB DMAC transmissions. Yet the more popular platform was Sky - beacause it appealed to the mainstream public in two ways - price and content. The rest, as they say, is history.

Nisio

Am I being too simpistic saying:

"Profesional photographer" only means that they are making 100% of their living from photography.

It should carry no preconceptions of the quality of their work. That can only be judged; in your own subjective terms; by you looking at their past work and asking " how much would I pay them to do that for me?"

melekalikimaka

people people clearly a professional is someone with a degree in the field

<ducks>

<tucks in genitals>

<awaits backlash>

i think a professional is someone who uses photography as a means to make money and work is to a standard acceptable to peers

dinneenp

The photographer for my wedding doubled her rates in little over 18 months.
That says a lot about photograhers and rates to me.
I'd imagine part of the reason is to do with demand. The more popular your work is the more you can charge.

Chorcai

Today I got a feel for and why, photography is charged at high rate for what appears to be easy thing to do, when its not. I wasn't taking the photos someone else was, I watched and learned quite a bit today, was a bit of an eye opener infact.

Set up of gear + lighting, dealing with customer + their products which turned out to be (to me anyway) the hardest part. Before + aftertime, touch ups etc etc

You get what you pay for. If you want something done right you pay a bit more, to me scrimping on things like photos for your company website/catalouge etc will at the end of the day, look ****e and so will your company or whatever use you had in mind.

Thats my 50c worth.

mindundalk

Chorcai wrote: »

Today I got a feel for and why, photography is charged at high rate for what appears to be easy thing to do, when its not. I wasn't taking the photos someone else was, I watched and learned quite a bit today, was a bit of an eye opener infact.

Set up of gear + lighting, dealing with customer + their products which turned out to be (to me anyway) the hardest part. Before + aftertime, touch ups etc etc

You get what you pay for. If you want something done right you pay a bit more, to me scrimping on things like photos for your company website/catalouge etc will at the end of the day, look ****e and so will your company or whatever use you had in mind.

Thats my 50c worth.

There is nothing like the buzz a great photography gives you, hope you got it.

higgins2010

dinneenp wrote: »

The photographer for my wedding doubled her rates in little over 18 months.
That says a lot about photograhers and rates to me.
I'd imagine part of the reason is to do with demand. The more popular your work is the more you can charge.

I don't think so i think this photographer has genuinly taken the mick. most photographers worth there weight in gold would not do this.

mindundalk

higgins2010 wrote: »

I don't think so i think this photographer has genuinly taken the mick. most photographers worth there weight in gold would not do this.

I Agree Totally

ozzirt

S'easy, if they charge what you consider too much, don't patronise them. I know a couple who had a friend (me), take their wedding photography (outdoors) and they paid nothing more than for the film and processing.

Thirty years later they have no regrets. They not only got all of the photos and negatives, they have the rights to sell them on which they did at cost.

I had my own camera and several belonging to the wedding party and just duplicated all the shots with each camera as protection against some misfortune. They all came out and everyone had the choice of which photos they wanted.

Borderfox

dinneenp wrote: »

The photographer for my wedding doubled her rates in little over 18 months.
That says a lot about photograhers and rates to me.
I'd imagine part of the reason is to do with demand. The more popular your work is the more you can charge.

This is part of business, increase your prices and measure what your conversion rate is (enquiry vs customer booked) if your conversion rate is 90-100% then increase the prices again.

democrates

Borderfox wrote: »

This is part of business, increase your prices and measure what your conversion rate is (enquiry vs customer booked) if your conversion rate is 90-100% then increase the prices again.

Exactly, and when new photographers threaten to drive down prices some of the former capitalists form associations and unions to dream up measures hoping to stifle the free market ensure high standards are maintained.

Borderfox

Its all part of reputation building from my point of view, I dont care what any busybody organisations do so long as they stay out of my business.

I agree with your point Democrates about stifling the free market .

In terms of charging some people still think its 2006

Freddie59

OK - our recent experience.

Family portrait (to commemorate family event). 15 minutes tops. Photographer excellent and a great portrait.

Sitting fee: €150

Framed portrait supplied: €400.

Three 7x5 prints €150.

Total €700.

I won't comment but will leave it open to others to do so.:)

Borderfox

Freddie59 wrote: »

OK - our recent experience.

Family portrait (to commemorate family event). 15 minutes tops. Photographer excellent and a great portrait.

Sitting fee: €150

Framed portrait supplied: €400.

Three 7x5 prints €150.

Total €700.

I won't comment but will leave it open to others to do so.:)

:eek:

Very Expensive

Personally I wouldnt pay that and I wouldnt charge that.

Ballyman

Freddie59 wrote: »

Total €700.

This is insanely expensive.

However he didn't con you or take the piss. You went in to him knowing the prices he was charging so you cannot be unhappy with the costs.

stcstc

Although i wouldnt pay that much

I dont thinks its that far off market prices

AnCatDubh

Freddie59 wrote: »

OK - our recent experience.

Family portrait (to commemorate family event). 15 minutes tops. Photographer excellent and a great portrait.

Sitting fee: €150

Framed portrait supplied: €400.

Three 7x5 prints €150.

Total €700.

I won't comment but will leave it open to others to do so.:)

To offer an alternate perspective on this;

In the first instance, I guess the guys got to make a crust. I've no idea what the guy did for you - was it a single family pose for example or multiple poses? but in your assertion of 15minutes there could be the post processing time, which if it's done properly and the end result is good, can take a considerable amount of time - that is someone who doesn't think that post processing starts and ends with lightroom presets.

Would it be reasonable to suggest that perhaps he/she spent 1/2 day on post production (again i've no real idea as to what was done for you)?

Not that I particularly know what i'm talking about here but to have a go;

Starting at the end cost €700 - assuming there is 20% of vat included leaves about €580 net of VAT, then assume the guy has broken the lower tax rate and is paying 40% of this over to the revenue - gives him a net profit of €336 approx. Assume his material costs are €100 (feic - i don't know but based on some personal business with 360dpi that may be reasonable for what you got).

So you are now down to €226 for the guy for his 15 minutes and for lets assume he did 1/2 day in post production.

Chances of him getting such a sitting every day is slim - there will be good days and bad days I assume.

Did he travel to you or was the sitting in a studio? Was there correspondence etc....., Was there phone calls? Was there props/lighting? What else might there have been.

Having said all of that I think I would have been slow to engage in such a deal but it is down to the purchaser and the seller at the end of the day.

NB - there is a terrible amount of assumptions in the above so it probably won't be next or near correct - the point I suppose as much as it pains me to suggest it, is that if you want someone who's livelihood is producing great results (which I think is how you describe it - maybe i'm paraphrasing a little) then you can expect to pay a decent days pay for the guy. IMHO, if any of the assumptions are correct then €226 for the guy himself is probably not unreasonable.

At least you got quality product at the end of the day. My own engagements with professional photographers are well documented throughout this forum and I essentially didn't get quality and paid that and way more.

By the way, many here probably would have taken those images for you for at a cost of about €200 but here isn't the choice that people will make when seeking out photographers for this purpose. This is the reason you will go to the €700 job man.

Freddie59

AnCatDubh wrote: »

To offer an alternate perspective on this;

In the first instance, I guess the guys got to make a crust. I've no idea what the guy did for you - was it a single family pose for example or multiple poses? but in your assertion of 15minutes there could be the post processing time, which if it's done properly and the end result is good, can take a considerable amount of time - that is someone who doesn't think that post processing starts and ends with lightroom presets.

Would it be reasonable to suggest that perhaps he/she spent 1/2 day on post production (again i've no real idea as to what was done for you)?

Not that I particularly know what i'm talking about here but to have a go;

Starting at the end cost €700 - assuming there is 20% of vat included leaves about €580 net of VAT, then assume the guy has broken the lower tax rate and is paying 40% of this over to the revenue - gives him a net profit of €336 approx. Assume his material costs are €100 (feic - i don't know but based on some personal business with 360dpi that may be reasonable for what you got).

So you are now down to €226 for the guy for his 15 minutes and for lets assume he did 1/2 day in post production.

Chances of him getting such a sitting every day is slim - there will be good days and bad days I assume.

Did he travel to you or was the sitting in a studio? Was there correspondence etc....., Was there phone calls? Was there props/lighting? What else might there have been.

Having said all of that I think I would have been slow to engage in such a deal but it is down to the purchaser and the seller at the end of the day.

NB - there is a terrible amount of assumptions in the above so it probably won't be next or near correct - the point I suppose as much as it pains me to suggest it, is that if you want someone who's livelihood is producing great results (which I think is how you describe it - maybe i'm paraphrasing a little) then you can expect to pay a decent days pay for the guy. IMHO, if any of the assumptions are correct then €226 for the guy himself is probably not unreasonable.

At least you got quality product at the end of the day. My own engagements with professional photographers are well documented throughout this forum and I essentially didn't get quality and paid that and way more.

By the way, many here probably would have taken those images for you for at a cost of about €200 but here isn't the choice that people will make when seeking out photographers for this purpose. This is the reason you will go to the €700 job man.

Interesting.

No - we travelled. Around 30 mins viewing the shots afterwards. Yes, Ballyman is right. We went in with our eyes open, but I was a little shocked that a couple of 7x5s could not have been thrown in free gratis, considering the charge.

It would have been good PR for him also.

In fairness the quality was excellent (and I don't praise lightly) but I do feel it was a tad over the top price wise.