View Full Version : Your minimum hourly rate
I'm conducting a bit of a fishing trip to see if you were offered a photography job, what you would charge:
Here's the brief:
It's an awards night
There is 8 hours work involved (5pm to 1am)
You need to take the photos, you might need a studio light/backdrop for the formal shots of the winners with their trophies.
Take as many shots as you can of people at tables, dancing etc
Don't need you to edit the photos, just hand over a DVD or CF card
We will provide you with a dinner and you get a 30 minute break
So, what's your charge ?
jasevk
13-08-2010, 11:28am
Fairly simple job with not much effort involved with post processing... I said around $80 p/hr with about $350 thrown on top to cover the use of a basic studio light for winners shots and the supply of high res pics on DVD.
By the way, the poll is secret, so, this isnt about judging your rate or anything, Im just interested in what really you would quote if you would, so, honesty in your low-ball offer rather than what you think you should quote would be valued
jasevk
13-08-2010, 11:57am
I guess that the risk with going in with what I would consider a good quote is that I'd be up against Mr or Mrs 'I just got an SLR camera' who'd do it for a couple of hundred dollars.... but that's another discussion all together...
To me, a couple of hundred dollars or maybe even 500 for eight hours shooting isn't worth the night away from my wife and boys
Pretty easy work with no PP. Money for jam really.
Diogen3s
13-08-2010, 1:00pm
Kiwi -But that's my point, I might value my time because of a myriad of factors at $100 per hour. You might value your time as you normally are unemployed or work at macdonalds at $13 an hour at $20 an hour.....only you know, what anyone else charges for their time is totally abstract.
http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=64337
No need for a poll, kiwi. You answered your own question in the above thread :wd:
I'd say $1000 given 8 hrs is a long shoot and the late hour.
http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=64337
No need for a poll, kiwi. You answered your own question in the above thread :wd:
hmm, so ? Saying what your personal time is worth in both. Answer as YOU see fit.
MarkChap
13-08-2010, 2:27pm
I'm conducting a bit of a fishing trip to see if you were offered a photography job, what you would charge:
Here's the brief:
It's an awards night
There is 8 hours work involved (5pm to 1am)
You need to take the photos, you might need a studio light/backdrop for the formal shots of the winners with their trophies.
Take as many shots as you can of people at tables, dancing etc
Don't need you to edit the photos, just hand over a DVD or CF card
We will provide you with a dinner and you get a 30 minute break
So, what's your charge ?
hmmmmmmmmmm....................
Might be off the mark here but this sounds like the Regional and Community Awards ??
SO what would I quote or what did I accept to cover the event here in Rocky ???
I have no idea what event it is, but no, prob in Brisbane....but Mark, I do know what my friend who does this stuff for a living quoted, and I know what the photographer who charged last year cost $600
Longshots
13-08-2010, 2:43pm
de ja vu Kiwi
oh, I said to him I bet that if they advertised that $500 was how much the job cost that they'd still get a lineup of part-timers (like most of "us' here) quoting.....based on the poll response so far, maybe not eh
de ja vu Kiwi
yeah, interested to see how many here qould quote $500-$600......fairly interesting that hardly anyone.
Diogen3s
13-08-2010, 2:53pm
hmm, so ? Saying what your personal time is worth in both. Answer as YOU see fit.
kiwi - Dunno, how much is your time worth ? Only you know the answer
rattus79 -Thanks Darren, but I was asking how much would YOU charge?
kiwi - But that's my point, I might value my time because of a myriad of factors at $100 per hour. You might value your time as you normally are unemployed or work at macdonalds at $13 an hour at $20 an hour.....only you know, what anyone else charges for their time is totally abstract
When rattus79 asks how much YOU would charge, you tell him the charges for anyone elses time is totally abstract. Having answered him with that, you then open a thread and ask the same thing. You seem to be missing your irony, kiwi.
No, I get your point, but, youve obviously missed mine. What you charge is up to you. But, Im still interested in what you'd charge.
Diogen3s
13-08-2010, 4:04pm
No, I get your point, but, youve obviously missed mine. What you charge is up to you. But, Im still interested in what you'd charge.
As was rattus79. I haven't missed your point. The difference seems to be, whether it's rattus or kiwi asking the question.
If rattus asks how much would you charge, your answer is it's totally abstract.
If kiwi asks how much would you charge, the answer is, it isn't totally abstract anymore.
What would I charge?
What would the market stand?
Supply and Demand!
$1k ... $2k is realistic for the skills, gear and time; but it's probably a non-profit outfit - so that complicates it.
You are losing copy in effect by supplying DVD with JPEGs.
As for no processing, I would at least run them through Lightoom, kill the duds and make sure the rest are 'good' or better.
i said $500... I guess i am no pro so I cant charge too high a price. not much processing.... i think $500 for me is reasonable.
ricstew
13-08-2010, 4:55pm
hmmmm do they supply the alcohol? or am I buying my own?
$150/hour no pp. lightroom etc yes because that is part of the workflow (ie raw to jpeg)
Its weird when you think about it, esp. the devaluation arguments that have been had before
and as I suspect this is a non-profit outfit.
If I compare myself in a previous job where I was sold out in an IT consulting role at $1,800 / day + GST (my market worth?)
and then I write software for AP for the love of it. Is the same comparison valid for 'togs?
The Deputy Photographic Editor of our local daily newspaper did an engagement I attended last year for $0 (it was close fiends).
Does that devalue photography or was he just helping out friends?
In fact I'm going to shoot at a 50th on Sat for $0 - just for friends.
Pretty easy work with no PP. Money for jam really.
Depends on your interpretation of easy. 8 hours straight of shooting with what would probably be tough lighting and a tough crowd (after the :beer_mug::beer_mug::beer_mug:) is not as easy as it sounds. but its easier than shovelling for 8 hours I spose :th3:
Its weird when you think about it, esp. the devaluation arguments that have been had before
and as I suspect this is a non-profit outfit.
If I compare myself in a previous job where I was sold out in an IT consulting role at $1,800 / day + GST (my market worth?)
and then I write software for AP for the love of it. Is the same comparison valid for 'togs?
The Deputy Photographic Editor of our local daily newspaper did an engagement I attended last year for $0 (it was close fiends).
Does that devalue photography or was he just helping out friends?
In fact I'm going to shoot at a 50th on Sat for $0 - just for friends.
I say it comes down to whether its your job or a hobby. I installed my own home theatre because i"m an enthusiast, doesnt mean installers are going to charge less.
Xenedis
13-08-2010, 5:42pm
I'd be charging in the vicinity of $3K+, which I don't consider unreasonable for this sort of gig.
An awards night is something I'd consider a demanding and tiring job.
A photographer doing this job would be constantly moving, rarely sitting or resting, would have to be watching the action, shooting in low light, shooting people moving in low light, and shooting people who aren't necessarily going to stay still while he gets his shots.
I wouldn't be handing over unprocessed images either, so there'd be time involved in that.
I have charged four figures for two hours of my time, and the right to use the images in any way the client wants for the promotion/marketing of the business.
Longshots
13-08-2010, 6:50pm
I'd be charging in the vicinity of $3K+, which I don't consider unreasonable for this sort of gig.
An awards night is something I'd consider a demanding and tiring job.
A photographer doing this job would be constantly moving, rarely sitting or resting, would have to be watching the action, shooting in low light, shooting people moving in low light, and shooting people who aren't necessarily going to stay still while he gets his shots.
I wouldn't be handing over unprocessed images either, so there'd be time involved in that.
I have charged four figures for two hours of my time, and the right to use the images in any way the client wants for the promotion/marketing of the business.
I'd agree with everything you just said.
Not that it matters too much - but a bit of a maths problem here - shooting from starting from 5pm to finish at 1am is actually seven hours work and not eight.
Xenedis
13-08-2010, 6:56pm
I'd agree with everything you just said.
Not that it matters too much - but a bit of a maths problem here - shooting from starting from 5pm to finish at 1am is actually seven hours work and not eight.
5pm to 1am is eight hours by my count.
Adds up to an 8hr job to me....
Longshots
13-08-2010, 7:03pm
good job I'm not doing maths today - yep its 8 hours - doh :)
Xenedis
13-08-2010, 7:07pm
good job I'm not doing maths today
Yeah, you're clearly one of the three kinds of people in the world: those who can count, and those who cannot. ;-)
$1000 since there's no PP to be done. If there was, $2000, easy.
Dan Cripps
13-08-2010, 7:16pm
Wouldn't shoot it for under $2K.
Steve Axford
13-08-2010, 7:53pm
Sounds like a lot of work to me. I guess it depends how desperate you are, but if you don't have to have the job, then at least 2k would be bearable (just).
Art Vandelay
13-08-2010, 8:15pm
It's interesting to see the 'value' of a photographer vs what people would expect to pay a tradesman to come to your house, with his tools and experience and spend the same amount of time doing a job.
I'm really blown away at some of the indicative prices here considering we're talking about 8hrs shooting, burning a DVD and job done.... 2k is talking $250 an hr!!! I'm not sure my dentist is even that expensive.... i know all images are being handed over for full use but IMO the job doesn't call for nearly as much creativity as say a wedding!
What would I charge?
What would the market stand?
Supply and Demand!
$1k ... $2k is realistic for the skills, gear and time; but it's probably a non-profit outfit - so that complicates it.
You are losing copy in effect by supplying DVD with JPEGs.
As for no processing, I would at least run them through Lightoom, kill the duds and make sure the rest are 'good' or better.
Yeah, its a commercial organisation, not NFP
And whoever said 3 grand is asking for 375 an hr! How much value are you putting on the relatively non artistic high res images??
Xenedis
13-08-2010, 9:03pm
And whoever said 3 grand is asking for 375 an hr! How much value are you putting on the relatively non artistic high res images??
How much value does anyone put on images?
That varies depending on who wants the images, and why.
I place more value on images captured by someone who knows what (s)he's doing during a challenging and lengthy shoot than the sort of person who'd pay Aunty June $200 for the night to shoot the event with her new DSLR and kit lens.
BTW, I was paid much more per hour (when broken down into the time I spent vs. the money I was paid) for a job I did last year. And I didn't charge anywhere near as much as another photographer asked.
It's not just a photographer's time for which a client pays.
Yip, you should be taking into account your expenses (accounting, legal, insurance, memberships, training, books, camera depreciation etc) of course.....
How much value does anyone put on images?
That varies depending on who wants the images, and why.
I place more value on images captured by someone who knows what (s)he's doing during a challenging and lengthy shoot than the sort of person who'd pay Aunty June $200 for the night to shoot the event with her new DSLR and kit lens.
BTW, I was paid much more per hour (when broken down into the time I spent vs. the money I was paid) for a job I did last year. And I didn't charge anywhere near as much as another photographer asked.
It's not just a photographer's time for which a client pays.
I understand this... but let's put this in context.
The client requires no editing or touching up, and the images would more than likely not be used for anything more than an internally distributed company newsletter.... If I had the gall to charge 3k for that I could never complain about the cost of a tooth removal again!
Now if the pics were being used as marketing material then that's a different story and 3k is looking more ideal. But surely you'd agree that a company awards dinner is almost a 'happy snap' job in a sense?
Xenedis
13-08-2010, 9:13pm
Now if the pics were being used as marketing material then that's a different story and 3k is looking more ideal. But surely you'd agree that a company awards dinner is almost a 'happy snap' job in a sense?
Hire Aunty June then. |-)
Yip, you should be taking into account your expenses (accounting, legal, insurance, memberships, training, books, camera depreciation etc) of course.....
Agree mate, but 80 to 100 per hr would surely cover this for most who do a fair few jobs in a year right?
Hire Aunty June then. |-)
This gets back to one of my first replies... This kind of job reeks of aunty June! Lol, btw... I wasn't saying charging that much was unethical... Just that I was surprised given the details and a few assumptions of the job :)
Againstme
13-08-2010, 9:18pm
Even after taking into considerations $3000 is a ridiculous price. Standing around with a camera is not hard work. Having the ability to control a few variables on a camera is not skilled work. You can try to convince yourself otherwise, but its really not.
I'm think it more about what the market will bear, to my mind I doubt the market would bear any more than about $750 - $1000 so if you quoted $1500 - $3000 you don't want the job and thats fine. Just ask this question do they want a Rembrandt or a Bob Smith (apologies if your name is Bob Smith).
So while saying the job is worth $3000 sounds good it is only really worth what they (the Customer) is willing to pay. So if your to good for the job don't complain when some one else is not.
This is not to say I would do the job for $1000 but I just might.
Xenedis
13-08-2010, 9:20pm
I was surprised given the details and a few assumptions of the job :)
Well, we don't know a lot about the job at this stage, so it's all hypothetical. :-)
Some assumptions can be made, though, given the duration of the job, the conditions in which you're likely to be shooting, etc.
Well, we don't know a lot about the job at this stage, so it's all hypothetical. :-)
Some assumptions can be made, though, given the duration of the job, the conditions in which you're likely to be shooting, etc.
Yeah that's what I meant... I was saying I was surprised given the details and the assumptions I had made on the job... Wasn't having a go mate :)
Xenedis
13-08-2010, 9:26pm
Even after taking into considerations $3000 is a ridiculous price. Standing around with a camera is not hard work. Having the ability to control a few variables on a camera is not skilled work. You can try to convince yourself otherwise, but its really not.
Could you give an indication as to what you consider to be skilled work that justifies four-figure sums for eight-hour photoshoots?
Why do some wedding photographers charge upwards of $5K? After all, they're just standing around with a camera.
PS: What would you charge for the job in question?
OK, more details
It's an industry awards night
A big hotel reception room
attendees are paying $100 a head to attend for dinner & dance, 200 attendees
band is a queen tribute band
images are to be used for company website, and to send out as complimentaries to attendees
Internal newsletter
commercial secondary use unlikely
(hypothetical buy typical)
Interesting we have answers ranging from $0 to $3000 so far
Xenedis
13-08-2010, 9:29pm
Yeah that's what I meant... I was saying I was surprised given the details and the assumptions I had made on the job... Wasn't having a go mate :)
It's all good. I didn't feel attacked. :-)
Naturally we're only going with limited details here. We know it's a commercial organisation and it's an eight-hour shoot. It's fair to argue that such a night isn't going to be cheap to host even without the photography component.
I'd imagine that a company hosting an awards night of that length would be having a pretty decent spread, and would want professional images of the night, not just snapshots anyone in the crowd could take.
Maybe Kiwi can provide more information at a later stage.
I really don't think these details change much for me Darren... the situation remains that you have taken pictures which not many people would be interested in purchasing from you... Unlike a wedding where the couple and all their families are queuing to buy prints etc...
Xenedis
13-08-2010, 9:34pm
OK, more details
It's an industry awards night
A big hotel reception room
attendees are paying $100 a head to attend for dinner & dance, 200 attendees
band is a queen tribute band
images are to be used for company website, and to send out as complimentaries to attendees
commercial secondary use unlikely
As I suspected (I was typing my previous post as you posted yours), it doesn't sound like a cheap do, and definitely not Aunty June material.
You can bet that the band will also command a considerable four-figure sum, being a corporate gig and not just Friday night at the pub.
As a retired (well, on indefinite hiatus) performing musician, I feel confident to state that if you're in a four-piece band, a hypothetical $1,000 for the band ($200 each, minus expenses) really isn't going to be worth the time invested in travelling, rehearsing and being there for a good 10-12 hours.
When I was playing, I'd often spend more time on a gig than a typical day at my day job.
Xenedis
13-08-2010, 9:37pm
I really don't think these details change much for me Darren... the situation remains that you have taken pictures which not many people would be interested in purchasing from you... Unlike a wedding where the couple and all their families are queuing to buy prints etc...
I'd agree that the people photographed receiving awards, dancing, etc., won't be likely to purchase images.
The company, however, may place a higher value on the images.
And with wedding photographers making money from prints, that's after the thousands of dollars they've charged for the package in the first instance.
here's food for thought
http://www.photoeventz.com.au/conference_photography.html
I just don't tend to agree that the price should depend on what the client can afford to pay... Doesn't seem like an ethical way to do business, but then again I'm relatively green in this area so would be happy to be proven wrong.
by the way that company i linked to was on the first page of hits on google, not related to this particular event
Xenedis
13-08-2010, 9:47pm
I just don't tend to agree that the price should depend on what the client can afford to pay... Doesn't seem like an ethical way to do business, but then again I'm relatively green in this area so would be happy to be proven wrong.
It's not about what the client can afford to pay; it's about what the client will get, and the experience and skill of the person delivering what the client will get.
I dare say that a company hosting a lavish awards night would not skimp on photographers. You get that for which you pay, like any business.
If I were paying a photographer to shoot some event that is important to me, I'd want a professional who looks and acts the part, can meet the challenges of the subject material and ambient light, who can produce and deliver images of a high standard, and make the whole process painless.
For a few hundred dollars I really doubt I could get that.
The main problem in this day and age is that people don't see the value of photography. Digital photography has placed cameras into the hands of so many people, many of whom would never have bothered had we only had film.
Consequently, a lot of people think "have camera = professional photographer", and the value of photography and the photographic image has gone down. People who want photos (which seemingly ANYONE can take) cannot imagine why it would cost so much to get good images. "$10K to take photos of my wedding? C'mon!".
Barristers charge thousands of dollars per day. A lot of people cannot understand that either.
It's not about what the client can afford to pay; it's about what the client will get, and the experience and skill of the person delivering what the client will get.
If I were paying a photographer to shoot some event that is important to me, I'd want a professional who looks and acts the part, can meet the challenges of the subject material and ambient light, who can produce and deliver images of a high standard, and make the whole process painless.
For a few hundred dollars I really doubt I could get that.
The main problem in this day and age is that people don't see the value of photography. Digital photography has placed cameras into the hands of so many people, many of whom would never have bothered had we only had film.
Consequently, a lot of people think "have camera = professional photographer", and the value of photography and the photographic image has gone down. People who want photos (which seemingly ANYONE can take) cannot imagine why it would cost so much to get good images. "$10K to take photos of my wedding? C'mon!".
Barristers charge thousands of dollars per day. A lot of people cannot understand that either.
Hey... I really don't disagree with you about providing a good product and the price reflecting this... But I just question that 3000 was maybe a tad high but now looking at more details, I think I'll now submit a variation on my first price... I think $1500 to $2000 is more on the mark for me... And I'd be reviewing the handover of images... I'd provide low res with people being able to purchase prints from an online gallery
One last message from the organiser
"last year we paid $600, we are looking to choose based primarily on price"
does this change anything ?
Xenedis
13-08-2010, 9:58pm
Hey... I really don't disagree with you about providing a good product and the price reflecting this... But I just question that 3000 was maybe a tad high but now looking at more details, I think I'll now submit a variation on my first price... I think $1500 to $2000 is more on the mark
$2K seems reasonable.
I think we both agree that a few hundred dollars is not reasonable at all. :-)
jasevk
13-08-2010, 10:01pm
One last message from the organiser
"last year we paid $600, we are looking to choose based primarily on price"
does this change anything ?
That's where I refer to aunty June.... Or Xenedis :P
Xenedis
13-08-2010, 10:02pm
One last message from the organiser
"last year we paid $600, we are looking to choose based primarily on price"
does this change anything ?
It changes my response to "good luck".
If the company is budget-conscious and places price before quality, the quality it gets will generally reflect the price it's willing to pay. As long as it is prepared to accept that, no problem.
I wonder what other expenses the company must bear for things like the band, the catering, the venue, etc. None of it would be cheap.
One last message from the organiser
"last year we paid $600, we are looking to choose based primarily on price"
does this change anything ?
yep... the photographer he gets
Even after taking into considerations $3000 is a ridiculous price. Standing around with a camera is not hard work. Having the ability to control a few variables on a camera is not skilled work. You can try to convince yourself otherwise, but its really not.
i'd be interested for comparison knowing what say a plumber from 5pm to 1am on a saturday night would charge? If its not in the vicinity of $150 an hour i would be surprised. hard work or not doesnt come into play. he's being paid to do what he does. in saying that i agree that 3 gorillas is a bit over estimating
DAdeGroot
13-08-2010, 10:58pm
Caveat: I've read through the whole thread before replying.
Based on prior experience, and on the limited information we've been supplied, $1,500 - $2,000 is not unreasonable. These are big events to shoot and do take a fair amount of skill and the right kit to pull them off successfully. The fact that there's posed studio-like shots as well as candids means more mucking around on the night, possibly an assistant, etc.
Realistically though, you'll find most companies will opt for someone in the $500-$800 range and hope for the best.
bigdazzler
14-08-2010, 3:57am
Id do it for $1000 ..... just because I can, and Im not greedy.
I can tell you one thing though, price doesnt always dictate "what you get" .. Ive seen wedding photos from a $750 shoot-and-burn-enthusiast-photographer that will rival anything Ive seen in the $5K end of the market, and thats a fact. They were my sister-in-laws photos.
Ok, well I suppose to complete the story, which is mainly real. The market price for a ft pro business to do this job, for one photographer, was at minimum about $1500.
For "us guys" I think 100 or so an hour is probably the right mark
The problem is as you can see is that someone lowballed last year and has set the price expectation for thus year, and you can also see that some here would do an adequate job and would be happy to charge 500
That's life in the lane I guess
Longshots
14-08-2010, 7:27am
Even though someone suggested recently I should diversify, my past professional life has been highly diversified. For approx five years, I worked as a marketing manager and sponsorship consultant. At no point did I ever choose a supplier based on the cheapest possible price. How I, and the organisations I worked for, never had a system of cheapest price wins attitude.
There will always be someone/something cheaper. And many consider that approach as the way into the industry, and those that stick with that tend to eventually find that they havent done their sums and in the end, no matter how busy they are, the figures do not add up, and surprise, surprise, they're making a loss and cannot continue.
I posted a link some time ago on my facebook page - have a view at this spoof, and you'll get the message.
http://www.vendorclientvideo.com/
In the past, when I've jumped into these arguments - and I've stopped myself three times on this one before I did eventually give into the urge - I've come up with an experience which made me think differently, and an analogy which I use all of the time.
The experience resulted me coming to the conclusion of what is the job worth, and what value do I place on myself ?
That experience was not based on just one. I have a Queenslander (aka money pit), and although I enjoy a certain amount of DIY, I dont always have time for every job and some are simply beyond me in terms of experience or qualifications (ie electrical). When I asked people for quotes, while how long something would take would be a factor, I wouldnt want to be walking around watching each tradie to see how much they were working, or wether they were talking or working. All of them had given me a price to get the job done. Did I give the job to the cheapest ? Or to the person/company that I had a degree of trust in; that I'd possibly seen examples of their work; or were a recommendation that I based my choice on ? Did I also demand a breakdown in cost to the finest details - how much wood, how many metres of electrical cord, how much paint etc ? The answer was always - never.
Then one day I needed a fairly simple job done, but I had no time, and have never been keen on plumbing. My kitchen mixer tap needed to be replaced. I could buy the replacement tap from Bunnings, and it would have cost me $120. There was also a bit of replacement pipe work involved. I employed a good plumber who did the job for $250. It took him 10 mins from the moment he arrived to the time he left. There was no mess, and no fuss. It was also one of the tidiest jobs I've seen with not even a drop of water anywhere but the sink. I initially thought, phew that was an expensive ten mins, and then I remembered the idiot who I'd got to plumb in the replacement laundry sink that took 2 days and was an absolute mess, and the taps on that still drip.
Then followed a new approach by myself to how I charge.
Now on the difference in values
I've read this type of request from prospective clients before and most of the time they're not worth addressing IMHO. In short, this client needs some educating.
I ask them if they chose the clothes their wearing based on the cheapest price ? Did they get their job based on the cheapest price they would work for ?
Funnily enough, the reaction is always "taken back" :) And I then ask them if they're "taken back", why they would think a supplier such as myself wouldnt also be taken back.
The analogy
I want to buy a car - four wheels, four doors, able to get me from A to B.
Cheapest price ?
Or do I want one with a bit of class, something that is going to represent who "I am", one that has a certain degree of quality, and something I can have some trust in ?
Most people do not choose the cheapest possible price.
Sure some people buy themselves a Lada, whereas others want a Holden - but do they always buy the very cheapest, base level versions ? No they dont.
I then change this type of approach, by asking if they want to consider what level of car maker would they be thinking of - Lada, Holden, or maybe BMW ?
Now that doesnt mean that there isnt a market for the cheapest possible price. Plenty of real world examples of that happening - but cheapest isnt always cheapest - I looked at buying an air ticket to Melbourne recently - Tiger were apparently the cheapest. But a quick check on the fine print meant my luggage would be severely limited, and then there was the issue of countless stories, and my viewing experience of the Tiger airline documentary, and I came to the conclusion that it would be nice to go with an airline that had more faith in getting me there and in a manner which would be in more comfort.
So the very opening question would after so many years of learning that this type of opening question would be an invitation to trouble and would not be seriously worth answering. $600 for 8 hours on site work would translate into at least 10 hours total work, would using my business model not be worth pursuing, because it simply would not make financial sense. I would certainly have quoted (if not given the "last year etc etc " info, in the region of $2000 plus to produce a quality product.
And all of this goes to prove that despite someone coming in with a cheap price the previous year, (after all, I cant see the $600 price of being sensible) that the client is still price driven to the point, where they will eventually place zero value on the photography and be offering the opportunity to someone to produce the images for free on the basis that they will be given a chance to show off their photography.
Steve Axford
14-08-2010, 8:41am
I agree with what you say William. I'll just add that in this case the photographer might be employed because it is expected that a photographer will be there (they've always had a photographer). The employer may not really care if the photographer is good or not (they all take photographs, don't they?). So, the price may be the only consideration.
rowdy23
14-08-2010, 10:01am
x2 on all points
Longshots
14-08-2010, 10:15am
I agree with what you say William. I'll just add that in this case the photographer might be employed because it is expected that a photographer will be there (they've always had a photographer). The employer may not really care if the photographer is good or not (they all take photographs, don't they?). So, the price may be the only consideration.
Actually I know the source of this, and no the photographer is not employed.
Steve Axford
14-08-2010, 11:28am
Not employed??
Redgum
14-08-2010, 11:35am
Horses for courses. Williams theory may work at the small end of the market (one on one) but has little relevance with government, corporate bodies or multi-nationals. This includes councils and NGO's.
The larger end of the scale is driven by a budget or funding (grant). In other words the organisation simply needs the job done and has little interest in the nuts and bolts. For example I recently quoted on thirteen corporate videos for the government. My competitors put in thirteen different quotes hoping to snag at least one job. We put in a single quote for all the work and won it hands down simple because the vendor didn't want to stuff around and we made an effort to find out what the budget was. So it was price driven.
The same is applicable for National Geographic. They want a set number of photos on a particular theme. You shoot and they choose. If they don't get what they want you don't get paid.
There's always a risk in chasing business and people not prepared to look outside the square will always miss out. So sometimes you will get the short straw price wise and other times a windfall. The whole idea of doing good business is to look for continuity. Offer the client a three year deal and discount your price by say 10%, whatever your price may be. Just make sure it covers costs and pays a wage or dividend.
And, as to anyone doing the job for free, you'll gain nothing by the experience and certainly not future paid work. You're simply being used.
Longshots
14-08-2010, 1:19pm
Horses for courses. Williams theory may work at the small end of the market (one on one) but has little relevance with government, corporate bodies or multi-nationals. This includes councils and NGO's.
The larger end of the scale is driven by a budget or funding (grant). In other words the organisation simply needs the job done and has little interest in the nuts and bolts. For example I recently quoted on thirteen corporate videos for the government. My competitors put in thirteen different quotes hoping to snag at least one job. We put in a single quote for all the work and won it hands down simple because the vendor didn't want to stuff around and we made an effort to find out what the budget was. So it was price driven.
The same is applicable for National Geographic. They want a set number of photos on a particular theme. You shoot and they choose. If they don't get what they want you don't get paid.
There's always a risk in chasing business and people not prepared to look outside the square will always miss out. So sometimes you will get the short straw price wise and other times a windfall. The whole idea of doing good business is to look for continuity. Offer the client a three year deal and discount your price by say 10%, whatever your price may be. Just make sure it covers costs and pays a wage or dividend.
And, as to anyone doing the job for free, you'll gain nothing by the experience and certainly not future paid work. You're simply being used.
So, you're saying that you got the job on your price alone ? - not what you're capable of, not your experience, not your previous work ? Because if you're not saying that, then we agree completely and I think you may have missed my point.
And just for the record, my main work is with government, corporate bodies and multinationals.
And, as to anyone doing the job for free, you'll gain nothing by the experience and certainly not future paid work. You're simply being used.
This quote should be a sticky.
Longshots
14-08-2010, 1:27pm
And, as to anyone doing the job for free, you'll gain nothing by the experience and certainly not future paid work. You're simply being used.
Just wanted to repeat Zollo's comment that this is 1000% right and repeating it so that the message is remembered. Its hitting the nail right on the head, and I agree completely with Redgum.
Dan Cripps
14-08-2010, 1:28pm
I think the question was somewhat loaded by the initial hourly rate terminology.
I don't generally consider photography assignments to be primarily time-based. The linear time element in any assignment doesn't really have a significant impact or bearing on how I price my service.
Every assignment I shoot has effectively taken my whole professional life to complete. Every time I pick up a camera I learn something. Angles, light and environment is constantly changing. Relationships are constantly evolving. My past experience dictates my approach to and results from my work with a camera.
Just because an assignment takes me one hour to complete does not mean it is subsequently worth some arbitrary round figure, imo.
Supply and demand, Zeke. That's true.
My newspaper work might pay $1k per week and be continuous when Nat Geo pays $150k per shoot over a couple of months but only comes up on an irregular basis. The hourly rates can't be compared but essentially both jobs need the same skill levels.
Getting this work is a "business" skill, not a technical skill.
Opportunity plays a big role too! :)
Steve Axford
14-08-2010, 5:11pm
You keep mentioning the Nat Geo link Redgum, but I have read that even they don't pay very well anymore. I did read an article by an old Nat Geo photographer that the golden days were gone. They used to spend days getting that perfect shot, now it is in, get what you can, and out again. There's not enough money to spend much time on it.
I guess they have to some extent. I don't do as much as I use to (six weeks in Africa last year and a couple of weeks in Indonesia, Borneo and the Philippines this year). It's a good ploy to keep the riff-raff out. My connection is through film and documentary work for the NG Channel. It's much more economical to shoot when you're already on location.
The first doco we ever shot for Channel 7 in 1988 was CentrePoint (central Australia) and we tagged a NG tog on that expedition. He got paid more for his two weeks than I earned from the doco sale. That started the ball rolling for me.
Steve Axford
14-08-2010, 5:53pm
Ah - Nat Geo TV has more money than Nat Geo magazine. I think doco tv generates good money for quite a few people, but it's really still photography that is the subject here, and that doesn't support many people.
Not really, TV is a subsidiary of publication and I'm only talking about photographic work. TV is a lot more than that.
Steve Axford
14-08-2010, 6:07pm
You must be one of the few to get $150k for photographs from them, Redgum. All indications would be that they don't hand out that sort of money to many people. Good luck to you.
Xebadir
14-08-2010, 8:52pm
$1000 would be my charge roughly (probably more like 100 per hour, but there aint that option. Part of it is working conditions and the expectation....8 hrs with a 30 minute break can be a little rough on the body...I think this is also reasonable given the expectation of a setup for award winners plus candid/event coverage. If it was for something I thought to be a worthwhile cause (IE a sporting competition in which I was involved or associated) I might drop it to 500-600 as a sort of contribution to that event.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.