A good way to start??

[Gav1n]

Hi All,
Just want some opinions. I am looking at trying to turn my photography in to a little money making hobby (to fund my expenses if nothing else). I am probably going to start by approaching local accommodation businesses to see if I can take photos for their web sites etc. I run an accommodation business myself and have a good idea of what to look out for and have had some good feedback on some of my accommodation photos.

To get started, I'm thinking I will offer to take photos for businesses, time is free, any photos they like I will sell to them for $5-10 each or something. This way it's not costing them anything unless they want the photos, it gives me good practice doing what I'd like to do, and also help me build a portfolio & experience.

I'm currently setting up my own website dedicated to this.

Sound like a fair deal and good place to start???

[Dan Cripps]

Shoot for free to build your portfolio

When you can demonstrate your ability through experience and portfolio charge (properly).

[SRR33]

^ I agree with the above comment.

But no harm in trying to sell your photos. See what works and doesnt work. Experiment a bit with your marketing and go from there. Perhaps just do a quick survey for yourself and see if they actually want photos in the first place.

gdluck.

[kiwi]

Charge like a wounded bull...if you shoot for free or for little no-one will ever pay you again

[Dan Cripps]

Charge like a wounded bull...if you shoot for free or for little no-one will ever pay you again

Nah, I disagree.

It's easier to progress from free to charging well than it is from cheap to charging well.

Be up front that you are taking on limited amount of free assignments to build a new segment of your portfolio. Most businesses will be agreeable to that scenario, assuming they have a need.

When you can represent a professional portfolio, charge accordingly.

[kiwi]

I dunno, they might be sitting there willing to pay well, you never know until you ask.

[Dan Cripps]

I dunno, they might be sitting there willing to pay well, you never know until you ask.

And if the photos (that you're inexperienced in capturing) suck, you look like a chump.

[stoogest]

So what do you think you are Gav1n, a chump or a champ?! :lol:

Not that I make any money from my photography, but to me $5-10 sounds very low for what could be a valuable marketing tool for the client.

Andrew.

[Gav1n]

If they buy 20 or so pics from me, I'd be happy with $200 for a few hours work to start with. Once things get moving I would obviously change my pricing structure. If I can get paid anything while I build a portfolio I'd be happy....

[Gremlin]

what about insurance and stuff incase you fall over trip and cannot work for a period of time, or someone trips over your camera bag and hurts themself, not trying to put a dampner on your idea,
insurance may be a pita, but, having been on the out of work scenario myself due to someone elses negligence I can attest to its need.

[Redgum]

Nah, I disagree.

It's easier to progress from free to charging well than it is from cheap to charging well.

Be up front that you are taking on limited amount of free assignments to build a new segment of your portfolio. Most businesses will be agreeable to that scenario, assuming they have a need.
When you can represent a professional portfolio, charge accordingly.
Every week you hear about some poor chump that's been sprung for not paying insurance/government fees complaining he couldn't afford it because he only charged $5/$10 for the job. Doesn't carry any weight if there's an accident or someone dobs you in.
Much better charging nothing and when you're ready set up your business properly.

[Longshots]

While I completely agree with Zekke, Redgum and others, I'd get some public liablity insurance anyway. An annual policy isnt too expensive.

[ricstew]

yep cover your bum first if you are charging anything at all. Ask me how easy it is to put your tripod leg thru a glass fronted cabinet.....:(

[kiwi]

Just on this, whether you charge or not is to me irrelevent reharding liability is it not ? In this case youd still be liable I would have thought regardless if you charged $0 or $100000

[Longshots]

Just on this, whether you charge or not is to me irrelevent reharding liability is it not ? In this case youd still be liable I would have thought regardless if you charged $0 or $100000


Absolutely right Kiwi :)

[stevo01]

Yeah I wouldn't think it would matter what you charge in terms of liability.

Also, I would decide what you want to charge for your services ideally (i.e. once you have your portfolio, make sure you don't undersell yourself here though, and factor in all the hidden expenses and then take in to account how much you value your time and what you want to make out of photography) and then offer a discount to whatever clients are willing to take a "risk" with you to allow you to build your portfolio. That way you are upfront with what you would normally charge, and that you are offering a discount now due to the fact that you are still building a portfolio to represent your work. The benefit with this is that once you want to start charging at a "normal" rate clients are aware that you haven't just hiked your fee for no apparent reason and shouldn't feel like you are ripping them off.

[avid images]

I've have always stuck to the rule of free or full rate (nothing in between). If I am going into a new area without any experience (and I need to obtain that experience before charging clients I try and find a job to do where there is no pay and no responsibility).

Once I am happy with the results I will charge clients the full rate. Over the years I have found it never works to start out by offering your services at a discount to what you really want to be paid (let alone working on the basis that you will be paid only if the clients want to buy some of the images). Every return client or refferal from a discount job will expect the same discounted rates forever (i.e. no matter what you have said to them the cost of the first job will be what they expect every job to cost).

[jasevk]

While I completely agree with Zekke, Redgum and others, I'd get some public liablity insurance anyway. An annual policy isnt too expensive.

Absolutely... as an OH&S professional, I can't stress the importance of this enough! My policy cost me a little over $400 per year for $10m cover.

[Redgum]

Jasevk, is that specifically for a professional "photographer"?

[jasevk]

Red, thats correct - photographers public liability for personal injury, property damage & advertising injury.

[Longshots]

FYI
I'm just about to renew my photographers Public Liability insurance and what with the usual tax, duty, agents fee etc, I'm paying just over $450 for $20,000,000 (Million) cover

[jasevk]

FYI
I'm just about to renew my photographers Public Liability insurance and what with the usual tax, duty, agents fee etc, I'm paying just over $450 for $20,000 cover

Hmmm... now you have me wondering why 2 policies very similar in premium price would have such a huge variance in amount covered? $20k vs $10m... ??? any ideas William?

[TigerEyeFP]

May I ask what is advertising injury??

[jasevk]

May I ask what is advertising injury??

It's where your 'advertising' affects a third party... like breach of trademark & copyright, making false claims regarding competitors etc etc...

[Longshots]

Hmmm... now you have me wondering why 2 policies very similar in premium price would have such a huge variance in amount covered? $20k vs $10m... ??? any ideas William?

Because I cant type properly :) I edited it shortly afterwards to reflect what it should be :) Which is 20Million

[jasevk]

Because I cant type properly :) I edited it shortly afterwards to reflect what it should be :) Which is 20Million

:laughing1: pheeew... for a moment you made me think i'd fallen for a 'too good to be true' deal... :)

[TigerEyeFP]

Thank you

[Longshots]

I should also add that the PL Policy accompany's a rather large photographic equipment policy

[Redgum]

I should also add that the PL Policy accompany's a rather large photographic equipment policy
Not included in the one policy, William?

[Longshots]

Not included in the one policy, William?

No

It used to be and then the insurance agent produced a different cover with two policies - as I'm not an insurance agent or have any other experience other than being a consumer, as the cost was reduced fairly considerably (close to $900 saving overall from previous insurer), the end result being cheaper, and improved cover was my main concern.

[Pearly]

May I ask who you have this PL insurance with? Or who I should contact to take out a policy?

Cheers

[Longshots]

May I ask who you have this PL insurance with? Or who I should contact to take out a policy?

Cheers

these guys handle my cover:

http://www.wscbrokers.com.au/