Minimum charges....what do you think?

[Lani]

In light of the various threads discussing photography as a business, there are a few comments regarding "weekend warriors" (for want of a better description :D) charging inappropriately. I would suspect that people are undercharging because they have no point of reference to know what is a ridiculously low price. They look at the 12c HN prints and work from there.

Now, I know that what people charge should be dependent on their actual business overheads etc, but what should the minimum amount be....to maintain the value of the industry (again for want of a better description).
People tend to be quite shy about discussing pricing whenever anyone asks, so here is the challenge.

What do you reckon is a fair minimum charge for say an hourly rate, 5x7, 8x10, 11x14 quality prints (fully retouched) for example. This is for a straight shoot either portrait or wedding, for examples sake, as I am guessing this is the area most ww's work in.

Travelling etc not included.

Keep in mind, this is an ideal minimum charge, not what you actually charge.

I'll start the ball rolling....

Hourly rate: $80
5x7: $15
8x10: $30
11x14: $50

What do you reckon?

[Kym]

It can only depend on your costs and the profit you want...

1. Cost of marketing / web site etc
2. Capital depreciation (gear)
3. Business costs (ABN, Accountant, GST, Insurance)
4. Travel and accommodation (if out of town)
5. Printing costs
Etc.

Now figure how many jobs, how many hours a week etc. Then set the rate.

BUT that's the argument in a nut shell! A part timer may not want to, or even need to, fully cover business costs as its not their primary income.
Any income for a PT is better than none.

That said, those rates are not out of line for what I've done on the few paid gigs I did.

[kiwi]

Ive always thbught $100 per shooting hour is fair and reasonable

Prints are entirely dependent on the tarket market/genre....no way I can sell sport pics at $30 a pop.

[Lani]

It can only depend on your costs and the profit you want...

1. Cost of marketing / web site etc
2. Capital depreciation (gear)
3. Business costs (ABN, Accountant, GST, Insurance)
4. Travel and accommodation (if out of town)
5. Printing costs
Etc.

Now figure how many jobs, how many hours a week etc. Then set the rate.

BUT that's the argument in a nut shell! A part timer may not want to, or even need to, fully cover business costs as its not their primary income.
Any income for a PT is better than none.

That said, those rates are not out of line for what I've done on the few paid gigs I did.

Exactly Kym, but my point is for a discussion for those who don't work for their primary income to be given an idea of what is a rough figure to start with.


Ive always thbught $100 per shooting hour is fair and reasonable

Prints are entirely dependent on the tarket market/genre....no way I can sell sport pics at $30 a pop.

Yep, I know that it is genre specific, hence my portrait/wedding shoot example.
For interest tho, what would sport prints sell for?

[kiwi]

Exactly Kym, but my point is for a discussion for those who don't work for their primary income to be given an idea of what is a rough figure to start with.



Yep, I know that it is genre specific, hence my portrait/wedding shoot example.
For interest tho, what would sport prints sell for?

I sell 8x10's for $10, they cost me $1.50 to print

I initially had $20 on them but they didnt move

Next year I am moving to a prepaid only model and digital files only

[matilda]

I charge $90 for 30 mins, but that is not including printing, but does include pp and 10 images on a disk.

[atky]

Ill chime in, first though I shoot motorsport on speck so there is no hourly rate and most of the time no one has asked me to shoot them. I sell prints only (will sell digital files to some existing customers and with print orders)
My prising is on the front page of my web site.
$10 6x4
$30 8x12
$40 12x18
This may seem low, it dose to me but talking to a shooter that shoots Speedway the going rate there I'm led to believe is
$3 6x4
$25 8x12
So it would be nice to charge a descent hourly rate but something a lot of people giving advice on what to charge forget there is a price point at which people don't by. This price point varies with the type of shoots, for example motor bike ride days I can do quite well at the price point I'm at, but at kart meetings the price I charge is to high and they wont by so do I lower my price or wait for the price to come to me.

[atky]

Just to ad to the original question what would you expect to get paid by a magazine for images shot on speck say 1/4 page 1/2 page full page and anything in between. Would be nice to know one is not selling oneself short.

[jasevk]

Portrait shoot:

I don't generally do prints smaller than 8x12 ish... but here's what I do...

All Matted & Framed:
14" single picture - $200, Composite layout (14x11 & three 4x5's) - $400
20" single picture - $300, Composite layout (20x16 & three 5x7's) - $500

When I figured out all my costs and priced these I thought they were way OTT, but every paid shoot I've done I've always sold at least a 14" single print... I use a framer to do all my matting & framing too, which can be expensive. With clients buying usually 1 or 2 of these products per shoot, my costs and time are covered. If I don't sell anything... then I don't have any costs other than my time and a few clicks of the shutter, so I don't lose out much... but this is yet to happen hehehe

[Wayne]

I sell 8x10's for $10, they cost me $1.50 to print

I initially had $20 on them but they didnt move

Next year I am moving to a prepaid only model and digital files only

Agreed, I shoot some sports and getting the players or their parents to part with $10 for 8x10 is bloody hard.


Ill chime in, first though I shoot motorsport on speck so there is no hourly rate and most of the time no one has asked me to shoot them. I sell prints only (will sell digital files to some existing customers and with print orders)
My prising is on the front page of my web site.
$10 6x4
$30 8x12
$40 12x18
This may seem low, it dose to me but talking to a shooter that shoots Speedway the going rate there I'm led to believe is
$3 6x4
$25 8x12
So it would be nice to charge a descent hourly rate but something a lot of people giving advice on what to charge forget there is a price point at which people don't by. This price point varies with the type of shoots, for example motor bike ride days I can do quite well at the price point I'm at, but at kart meetings the price I charge is to high and they wont by so do I lower my price or wait for the price to come to me.

Much the same thing here, I shot a car show here recently, couldn't get a dime and I'm charging (or trying to) 8x12 $10 or 20x30 $30 and not a single bite. In contrast, I shot the recent Rodeo and a Campdraft and with prints at the same size/price, I sold $270 worth.
All this in an outback mining town where average salaries are often 6 figures and well above average by miles.

[junqbox]

This appears to have split into two main categories, work that is done on spec in the hope of selling prints at the end. The other a commisssioned job with an opening brief.
The person doing on spec is always going to struggle here as you are unlikely to cover your 'costs' for the day. Eg- if the wedding person is charging $100 per hr, they're already ahead, as any prints, etc., would be on top. Meanwhile, over at the racetrack, a 'sport' enthusiast has arrived with his camera to take shots of what appeals to him and hopefully some others and starts snapping in the hope they'll have some customers later in the day, or just as likely, on another day.

[Lani]

Reminder of the original question..."What do you reckon is a fair minimum charge for say an hourly rate, 5x7, 8x10, 11x14 quality prints (fully retouched) for example. This is for a straight shoot either portrait or wedding, for examples sake, as I am guessing this is the area most ww's work in."

I was hoping some of the full time pro photographers would provide some input on what they think is reasonable....in light of the common complaint that part timers are under-charging.

[Mile]

the original question is a bit like how much should a car cost?


$80/hr is a good rate but what if that is using entry level pro gear like a canon7d and ok lenses.

someone who has lots of experiense and gets awsome shot and has great por gear can charge way more because their work might be of the highest quality.

i cant answer the question as i have no idea on prices in this industry but i know in all industry it all depends of certain factors.

also its all about supply and demand. my cousin does nice photo's but what he found and it looks like its true is that so many people here have good gear and there are so many photographers to choose from. If there is an over supply of photographers they must start undercutting the competition IF they are equal on every other level, ie same experience and similar gear. either have a unique selling point or go on price. thats just business no matter what business... hope that helps even thou it didn't really answer the question.

[zollo]

we cost $150 dollars an hour for a commercial shoot. single shooter. very light pp included - crop, sharpen, levels maybe. these are digital files

promotional shoot ie theatre with assistant/2 shooters and pp $220/hour + 100% again for image rights. i usually use medium format or something like d3x. usually digital files printed B-I-G by pro labs later.

"affordable wedding packages" - 4 hours photographic coverage $1250 - 1 free edited 12" x 18" inch print and high resolution jpegs on dvd for clients convenience and printing. I sometimes help arrange printing services/albums if asked to.

- 6 hours photographic coverage $1550 - 1 free edited 12" x 18" inch print and high resolution jpegs on dvd for clients convenience and printing. I sometimes help arrange printing services/albums if asked to.

extra photography hours - $150

I then offer more upmarket packages that include more prints/albums/hours/pp etc and are highly customisable. I DONT offer dvd with these packages. but the base price of $150 still applies.

model shoots - $150 hour

[zollo]

btw this is a look at a few of my prices in no way am i saying these are minimum or what you should be charging. that is for you to work out.
and i guess to try to answer
I was hoping some of the full time pro photographers would provide some input on what they think is reasonable....in light of the common complaint that part timers are under-charging.
IMO give or take 20% for the wedding prices is fairly reasonable and common around here for what you get. i've researched this, but make sure you do too. it probably varies from state to state or even your local area.

and final thing IMO if you think you are good enough to charge for a wedding, then charge properly and dont drastically undercut established prices in your area. if you want to be more competitive, throw in some extras that you think the client would appreciate instead. small business courses will teach you this as part of the course. you dont do yourself any favours by cutting down each others prices until you start to lose money on a job.

and those with full time jobs please dont write in and tell me that $200 for a wedding is fine cause you're already earning huge dollars from your ft job, because I really dont care. I'm trying to hopefully help those who are looking to make a living from photography.

[farmer_rob]

It can only depend on your costs and the profit you want...

....

Kym, as you have charged yourself out as an IT contractor, you must have already found out that:
* It can also depend on what the customer will pay - as Kiwi found out.
* What the customer will pay depends on experience, skills and "support" (equipment etc.)

Lani, I can't offer any detailed contribution, but think it is a great thread idea.

[Longshots]

For the record, I charge completely differently to Zollo, and I'm in the same commercial area I believe.

I know how much my runnings costs are. I know how much I need to turnover to keep my head above water.

I tend to charge on the basis based on a similar business model to a builder. Client tells me what they want, I interpret that and discuss with the client what I understand them to be wanting, and then quote on that basis.

I quote on producing what they've asked for (and in general value add on to that by accomodating small additions without an increase in costs). The total fee will be quoted prior to the job, which is broken down into pre production, photography, any additional shoot costs, post production, method of delivery, and licence; then we can all get on with it, and it matters not one bit how long I take on the job, other than to always meet or beat the agreed deadline. As its very rare for me to produce prints for clients, if on the odd occassion I would produce prints, the potential prices are agreed before the shoot. Although its worth saying that if the print is a large one off print, the amount of post production to the image is included in the print price, if not already quoted prior, in the original quote. Quite simply I do not choose to use my print pricing to cover costs of the actual shoot (which is the business model most portrait photographers choose - an industry market forces led situation).

How long I spend on the job - to my client - should be quite irrelevant. My aim is to produce the best possible job. My approach is not a one for everyone rule, but one that I'm comfortable with and one that the type of clients who use me are more than happy with.

The often asked the question of how much do you charge per hour, started to change to how much per 1/2 hour, and then one client started to question if I could charge every 15 mins, is one that if your potential client is focussed on that alone, then its a potential client I dont particularly want. Its like agreeing on a fixed price for anything. The only major trouble is that other than past or similar work, I have nothing to "take off the hook" to show them what they will get after the quote is agreed on. And that is the major difference between a commercial shooter, and a wedding or portrait shooter. So its going to really depend on exactly what photographic area you work in and how much you want to be brave to get past that "how much do you charge per hour".

And BTW utterly agree with Rob & Mile

[Lani]

the original question is a bit like how much should a car cost?


$80/hr is a good rate but what if that is using entry level pro gear like a canon7d and ok lenses.

someone who has lots of experiense and gets awsome shot and has great por gear can charge way more because their work might be of the highest quality.

i cant answer the question as i have no idea on prices in this industry but i know in all industry it all depends of certain factors.

also its all about supply and demand. my cousin does nice photo's but what he found and it looks like its true is that so many people here have good gear and there are so many photographers to choose from. If there is an over supply of photographers they must start undercutting the competition IF they are equal on every other level, ie same experience and similar gear. either have a unique selling point or go on price. thats just business no matter what business... hope that helps even thou it didn't really answer the question.

I acknowledged that in my thread opening Mile....but what I am getting at is surely there is a minimum point which full time pros think is a reasonable place to start. I notice William agrees with your post, but surely if people are going to educate part timers, it wouldn't hurt to suggest ballpark figures for my scenario?
I never suggested for a minute they should be the be all and end all, just a rough place to consider as being feasible.

[kiwi]

I'll come back lani to a figure approximate $100 per shooting hour - looking at all the responses regardless of the package or genre it all will come roughly back to that number, excluding direct costs

Eg wedding, 6 hours shooting and roughly that again in Pre and post production for 1200 or so seems a reasonable minimum

[kiwi]

Even on spec, if I'm not clearing $100 an hour I'm not going back there again

[zollo]

yeah my pricing is nowhere near as rigid as it sounds. of course a commercial shoot is all quoted and contracted before I even start to shoot.

I totally agree with Longshots about the end result being important & I dont always quote by the hour. the hour rates are there only to give this thread an idea of what i was charging when lump sum was divided by the hours the job took. so try not to read too much into it. cheers

[kiwi]

I agree about not necessarily charging by the hour, but if you know how many hours the job will likely take this can help you price on this basis; then you can add margin for prints and extras

[Longshots]

I acknowledged that in my thread opening Mile....but what I am getting at is surely there is a minimum point which full time pros think is a reasonable place to start. I notice William agrees with your post, but surely if people are going to educate part timers, it wouldn't hurt to suggest ballpark figures for my scenario?
I never suggested for a minute they should be the be all and end all, just a rough place to consider as being feasible.


Lani it makes me sigh to see someone being led to the information, being shown some suggestions as to how to work out costs, and yet still suggesting that pros arent educating you.

Thats what I'm trying to do !

Seriously, there is no set prices - do you not understand that part ? If there was first of all people would be jumping up and down and accusing people of price fixing - which people have in other forums. Ballpark figures have already been offered here. What more do you want ? Those ballpark figures will for one person be utterly ridiculous, and for another person utterly reasonable.

I gave quite a detailed explanation as to how I charge. And at the same time I've also said in another relevant topic that there is no point in saying ballpark figures as many would consider them to be either too high or too low. And an hourly figure (As I've explained) is quite honestly meaningless unless you are working out how many hours a year you intend to charge or can rely on selling.

So perhaps stop suggesting that pros dont want to help, as I'm afraid its a case of you not reading what has been, and is being offered. There is no answer that can be considered acceptable on "how much should I charge ?" , because of the following variables

A) everyone will have different needs, costs and expectations
B) quality will be a factor - spend more time on something and you have a better chance of the end product being better
C) there is no recognised minimum charge in the portrait and wedding industry because of the ACCC not allowing price fixing as such, the other variables I've already listed and the differences in the client's predetermined expectations.

So its a case of you sitting down and working out what you want to charge to ensure that you pay for your costs, and if you wish make a profit - its that simple.

People - informed or not - will always complain about others not charging enough, and I can assure you that its not always directed at part timers, but at many full time pros. To some levels, I've been accused many times of not charging enough, and from the opposite side of the view, on the same potential jobs, there have been others suggesting that I'm charging like a wounded bull. Its a no win situation.

The conclusion is that you should go back and read what I have already posted into this topic in an attempt to help you - then read others own personal views on what you should charge; take all of those factors into consideration and produce a fee structure that suits you and your personal conditions.

In addition you offered in your original pricing a list of your suggested min prices - if you're happy with that then sure they look ok.

But what if your client tells you (as they often try to with me), that such and such will take less than an hour, and what you to charge in increments of an hour, and say they only want a few "decent" shots.

Taking Kiwis example, where his $1200 coverage for a wedding - which suits him and clients who've clearly used him, doesnt fit this scenario because the client's telling you effectively what to charge (as an hourly rate encourages IMHO), then the wedding could be completed in 2 hours both shooting and post - so its only $200. Do you see how it becomes so difficult to suggest what you should personally charge ?

[Longshots]

I agree about not necessarily charging by the hour, but if you know how many hours the job will likely take this can help you price on this basis; then you can add margin for prints and extras


Completely agree. Thats your prerogative as the supplier though.

[Longshots]

I'll come back lani to a figure approximate $100 per shooting hour - looking at all the responses regardless of the package or genre it all will come roughly back to that number, excluding direct costs

Eg wedding, 6 hours shooting and roughly that again in Pre and post production for 1200 or so seems a reasonable minimum

OK I'll turn it around Kiwi - not that I'm arguing with your figures, as they seem quite reasonable, based on what I know that you've personally told me about your personal situation - so it would be helpful if you could explain how you arrived at that per hour figure ?

[kiwi]

ahh good question

Really a few things if youll indulge me

What I think is a fair market rate for photographers of similar experience and skill to myself, based on talking to others and looking at their similar markets and outputs

A rate that I dont think is undercutting my peers, I dont think that's good for business in general

An appropriate family time dividend for my back pocket

Covering costs for me isnt really relevant.

[Longshots]

Excellent answer Kiwi :)

So do you think the same considerations would apply to someone else ? Or do you think that would be different for everyone (ie they may want a new lens, or working towards a holiday, or paying the last electricity bill - ) ?

[kiwi]

I think the family dividend changes, that's all. I think the other two considerations are still very relevant no matter what your circumstances

In saying this, this is a zero sum game sometimes. If you are struggling/saving, $100 in the back pocket is better than $1000 in an unaccepted quote. This is a personal choice alone I think.

[Longshots]

Thank you.

The "If you are struggling/saving, $100 in the back pocket is better than $1000 in an unaccepted quote." is hitting the nail on the head.

I've lost quotes by being too expensive and too cheap. It comes down to personal choice based on personal circumstances, and while I may seem evasive on the specifics Lani, other than the variables I've highlighted, the additional issues are that one cannot suggest a min charge without ACCC coming down on people in business like a ton of bricks.

[Lani]

Thank you for responding William. I am sorry I made you sigh :)
Can I firstly say that this was a hypothetical situation...I have done my numbers including insurance, overheads etc.....and am happy with what I am charging, thank you.
...and I have read everything that has been posted recently, some of it quite entertaining, much of it helpful.

My reasoning for this thread is that it has often been mentioned that part time photographers are "charging inappropriately" , hence devaluing the industry. Numbers are rarely discussed....the money thing always seems difficult for people to be open about. :confused013

My aim was to have a discussion that bandied around some reasonable starting points for rates so that a reasonably experienced photographer producing consistently good results would know that if they charged $25 hour, they are working too cheaply.
I already acknowledged that this would be dependent on a range of factors, and that it was not meant to be a "you must charge this amount."
I was far from thinking that a forum discussion would lead to an ACCC enquiry re price fixing. :D

I would think that there are part time photographers who would never dream of being charging $100 an hour, so I imagine Kiwis contribution for example would be very helpful in helping them reassess their current pricing.

[Longshots]

Thank you for responding William. I am sorry I made you sigh :)
Can I firstly say that this was a hypothetical situation...I have done my numbers including insurance, overheads etc.....and am happy with what I am charging, thank you.
...and I have read everything that has been posted recently, some of it quite entertaining, much of it helpful.

My reasoning for this thread is that it has often been mentioned that part time photographers are "charging inappropriately" , hence devaluing the industry. Numbers are rarely discussed....the money thing always seems difficult for people to be open about. :confused013



Thats OK Lani - I sigh a lot :) !

Yes good to discuss it, and I'm glad that you've done your number based on you own costs.

Trouble is we "the industry" are in a Catch 22. Its not a case of not wanting to be open about it.

The ACCC really frown upon discussions of setting min rates. So its simply not legally allowed.

This is why:
http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/322980

ITs IMPORTANT TO READ

Many years ago (over 15), a group of wedding photographers got together at a meeting to discuss how to answer the low costs being offered by some suppliers. One person felt excluded, and the next thing that happened, ACCC was writing to each of the individuals that attended that meeting with a legal letter threatening them with fines or worse, jail. So while the industry can discuss and suggest how much things cost, and how much it costs to run your business, what it (and this would include this forum when I say industry) cannot do is suggest a min rate.

And as I said earlier, the costs, charges is all relative to different individuals; and it doesnt matter who you are, or at what stage in your photography, someone is always going to accuse you of not charging enough :)

[zollo]

But what if your client tells you (as they often try to with me), that such and such will take less than an hour, and what you to charge in increments of an hour, and say they only want a few "decent" shots.

does happen. one way to counter this situation and one that should be pretty much standard practice in business, is to ask the client what their budget is then. ie the maximum they are willing to spend. this will save time wasting from either party. if i cant do the job i will refer them to someone i think can. (if asked)

[Longshots]

does happen. one way to counter this situation and one that should be pretty much standard practice in business, is to ask the client what their budget is then. ie the maximum they are willing to spend. this will save time wasting from either party. if i cant do the job i will refer them to someone i think can. (if asked)

Oh I know it does :)

And last time someone asked me that, I actually broke the charges down to something quite ridiculous -

"yes I can charge by the 1/4 hours then, but I can do better - I'll charge per time taken for each shot - so $200 per hour divided by 60 mins = 3.33 pe min. 1 Min is now worth $3.33. Take 1 min divide by 60 seconds = each second is worth 1.6 cents. Take each second and divide it by oh lets see an average shutter speed of say 60th of a second - because really I'm only working when I actually take a photo right ? - and then if I'm shooting at that rate,

well each shot then is costing just 0.02666 of a cent ?

Well unless its brighter, then I'll be using a higher shutter speed, and it will cost you at least half of that"

...............:Doh:

[bigdazzler]

and those with full time jobs please dont write in and tell me that $200 for a wedding is fine cause you're already earning huge dollars from your ft job, because I really dont care. I'm trying to hopefully help those who are looking to make a living from photography.

:lol: still stewing on that mate ...

Back to the question ...

I think $100 per shooting hour is fair for most things.

I also have a deal for port work or portrait sittings;
2 hour studio/location (local only) shoot with 5 fully retouched hi res JPGs on DVD for $250.

I was doing on average two of those per weekend a while back. Not so much lately as weve been busy planning the wedding.

On the odd occasion I do a wedding or event, I work on my $100 per hour rate, and then add 50% for post time. Usually works out ok for everyone. :)

[bigdazzler]

Oh I know it does :)

And last time someone asked me that, I actually broke the charges down to something quite ridiculous -

"yes I can charge by the 1/4 hours then, but I can do better - I'll charge per time taken for each shot - so $200 per hour divided by 60 mins = 3.33 pe min. 1 Min is now worth $3.33. Take 1 min divide by 60 seconds = each second is worth 1.6 cents. Take each second and divide it by oh lets see an average shutter speed of say 60th of a second - because really I'm only working when I actually take a photo right ? - and then if I'm shooting at that rate,

well each shot then is costing just 0.02666 of a cent ?

Well unless its brighter, then I'll be using a higher shutter speed, and it will cost you at least half of that"

...............:Doh:

:lol: gold William.

[Longshots]

I would think that there are part time photographers who would never dream of being charging $100 an hour, so I imagine Kiwis contribution for example would be very helpful in helping them reassess their current pricing.

While you may not think that ACCC would be interested, I can assure you that the group meeting I refferred to also thought the same ? :)

You may recall I asked Kiwi, what he thought was a good question (one to highlight the differences between each individual producing their own pricing structure).

Please not the last line of that response - which I havent edited other then to highlight that last line:


ahh good question

Really a few things if youll indulge me

What I think is a fair market rate for photographers of similar experience and skill to myself, based on talking to others and looking at their similar markets and outputs

A rate that I dont think is undercutting my peers, I dont think that's good for business in general

An appropriate family time dividend for my back pocket

Covering costs for me isnt really relevant.

[hoffy]

OK, instead of starting a new thread, I will continue with this one and ask a similar question to the OP, except I am going to mention the key phrase of the now - Selling high res files.

While its easy to see what people charge in relation to prints, its hard to get a handle on what people charge for high res files, especially for sports shots, where most are interested in a few shots at most, not a DVD full.

In the past, I would have thought that High res command a premium. I have done some research and really have only found one or two who have mentioned how much they charge ($40 for one pic, 3000px X 2000px seemed to be around the money). To me, that seems reasonable, but to an inquiry I received this week, HALF that was too much.

Again, is it know your market? Or is there a way people calculate what they charge?

Cheers

[kiwi]

I sell only high res, but nowhere near as many 8x10 prints I sell, I sell the high res dig file for $20 and 8x10 for $10..... I'm going to try to double the price next season, will see how I go

My reasoning is that my customers don't usually order big prints from me so $20 for a file is way above average for a print sale and it's less work and less cost of sale for me

[hoffy]

I sell only high res, but nowhere near as many 8x10 prints I sell
Exactly. Not that I have sold in the same volume of most, but TBH, I have never had an inquiry about high res until the last event I did. For me, personally, I would prefer to sell prints. This is probably the only bit of control freak in me coming out, but this way, at least I have full control of the product and I find it more quantifiable then a bunch of 0's and 1's.


I sell the high res dig file for $20 and 8x10 for $10..... I'm going to try to double the price next season, will see how I go

My reasoning is that my customers don't usually order big prints from me so $20 for a file is way above average for a print sale and it's less work and less cost of sale for me

I am not sure if I get your response. What price are you going to double?

Cheers

[kiwi]

Both....But I'm really trying a few different business models

[etherial]

I've been wondering about this a bit too. I've done some research around the dog photographers (which I imagine to be similar to horse events, or the sports ones that do kids carnivals and the like). It seems the going rate for a hi res file is only around $10 with various minimums, or 1 or 3 to 5 or so. One I found asks $50 per file.

There are a tonne of them going to events often not even as official photographers for the event just taking thousands of photos and posting them on their website or facebook and trying to sell them. Most of their photos are very ordinary I might add, not work that I would ever put on public display. I just wonder how much these people sell at $10 each and whether it is worthwhile.

That method isn't for me, I'm thinking of heading more towards individual clients and jobs. I'm not sure what I'll do, just taking my time, learning as much as I can and sussing out threads like this to learn where to pitch myself in the future. I'd appreciate any thoughts!??

[Inspired]

I charge $150 for a session fee (which i state covers the session and the processing).
Then have a minimum print purchase off $300 - which guarentee's me $450 (altough i do have to take out print/product expensense out of that).
Then after i take out expenses for my website, internet, fuel (as i shoot on location) etc
It works out to be about $25 per hour.
If they spend extra obviously i get more per hour. But i set the session + minimum product spend to that to guarentee myself the $25 per hour.
Anything extra is just a very welcome bonus!!