What are your thoughts

[Danielle10]

I read on facebook over and over again about "photographers" aka mum has a a dslr now and is a professional family/baby photographer... Sorry lol
Having a special on at the moment.
Eg: $90 for up to 50 digitally enhanced images on a disc to print at your leisure.

I personally hate the idea of burning a disc and giving it to a client mainly because if they have photos printed at Harvey Norman or big w etc the print quality is absolutely terrible. I would not like my name associated with poor prints.

I would prefer to give prints that i have printed at a pro lab than a disc burnt at home- its just tacky

What do u think
Ps sorry if I have rubbed anyone up the wrong way, just my pet hate

[Adrian Fischer]

I have used both pro labs and BigW and HN for prints. The latter generally for small print runs that dont warrant the cost of courier to get them delivered to me. Depending on what your printing, I have had no complaints about the quality of prints. I should also point out that a parents expectations are not what yours might be, print wise. I do a lot of T&I shots and what I consider to be a bad photo will still get purchased, because it is someones little princess. The same would go for printing. The parent who is willing to buy a cd of images and print them at Big W is ok with the quality of the printing they get. They may in fact not know any better as this has probably been their printing of choice for their happy snaps. The bigger issue I think is the burning to CD. Once burned and delivered you have lost any potential follow up prints. Its a sign of the times though. I compete with parents with cameras quite often but they cant achieve what I achieve because at the end of the day, my gear is better and more capable in more conditions (and I know which buttons to press :D ). Ive seen the shots from some of these "Mums" and a lot of what is produced is happy snappish. You also have to wonder how long it takes her to get to the point of putting 50 images to cd. To get 50 I would think you would be shooting 200 plus images. If on location there is travel time to and from. So maybe a couple of hours shooting (yeah I know you could snap off 200 in 15 minutes or less but Im being kind) and an hour (?) travel. So we are down to $30 an hour. Then factor in adding to LR or software of choice and then selecting your keepers. Lets say another hour so we are down to $22.50 per hour. Now to edit those 50 keepers. Adjust WB, contrast, clarity, etc etc...(again, yes I know you can run a preset or synchronize settings but thats only the starting point). So again an hour at least and then burn and deliver. So we are up to at least 5 hours so $18 per hour. No if this was a side income and not your main source then maybe thats ok but if your doing that for a living (and this is the business of photography forum) then your future isnt that bright. But if it is just a hobby with some earning capacity then it might earn them enough to get a better lens than the kit one that came with the camera :lol: Thats jut my 2c worth anyway.

[arthurking83]

While the cheaper print labs such as HN/OfficeWorks/BigW/etc are never going to match it with the best professional lab prints, they're still quite ok.. as Adrian says ... for general [public consumption.

If mum is happy to have a few well captured images of her bub printed at the lowest common denominator, then that is for them to decide.

Sometimes as photographers, we seem to place too much emphasis on the quality of or reproductions, and while there is nothing wrong with that in itself.. there should be a better understanding on the part of the photographer as to what the client wants.

I've printed some of my images in all manner of variations in quality, having large sets of OfficeWorks prints done for my mum, and at the same time an A4 print of one of my favourite images and was happy with the quality for the intended purpose .. but then on the flip side, I did a larger 30" print for a friend as her birthday pressie, and would only accept a higher quality print from a pro lab.

I see nothing wrong with supplying images on easily transferred media if that's what the customer asks for.

If there is any issue by the client as to the quality of the final prints that they do themselves, it's up to the photographer to be able to prove that they can do better and to highlight the fact with evidence to support themselves.

[William W]

. . .Having a special on at the moment.
E.g.: $90 for up to 50 digitally enhanced images on a disc to print at your leisure.

I personally hate the idea of burning a disc and giving it to a client mainly because if they have photos printed at Harvey Norman or big w etc the print quality is absolutely terrible. I would not like my name associated with poor prints.

I would prefer to give prints that i have printed at a pro lab than a disc burnt at home- its just tacky

What do u think
I mainly supply prints to non commercial customers – e.g. portrait sittings and such.
I mainly use one of two professional labs depending upon the print medium.
Very occasionally I will supply digital files, but only if requested and the job is suitable: no I don’t find this approach limiting.
I am not sure that you (the Photographer) should necessarily be worried that your (their) name would be associated with poor prints if the files are sold to the client. I think the question necessitates an understanding that although both primarily Photography, ostensibly these are two different products which are being purchased.

***


I see nothing wrong with supplying images on easily transferred media if that's what the customer asks for.

I agree . . .

but . . .



If there is any issue by the client as to the quality of the final prints that they do themselves, it's up to the photographer to be able to prove that they can do better and to highlight the fact with evidence to support themselves.

WHY Arthur?

Maybe I should not be reading the words literally:

But why is it incumbent upon the Photographer to prove that the file which was purchased (and assumed previewed by the Client) can be better printed?

And why should the Photographer have to pay with time and money to have that or supported by the evidence with print or prints from those files?

Sure, I can understand the Photographer having a portfolio of Prints – and establishing with the Client (prior to sale of files) that: “this is the Print quality I get from my lab.”

But to have the blanket rule that there is a burden of making same prints just to establish the Client’s choice of Photofinisher is poor or in error: this is neither necessary nor warranted.

WW

[I @ M]

Danielle, stick to your guns and have the images printed by someone you trust and don't supply the digital files. :th3:

The facebook photographers offering the "specials" are probably the ones that all of a sudden don't have any clients and in desperation to convince their "friends" that they are getting a good deal start dropping their prices.

I too have seen well taken photographs printed through less than optimal mini labs that have turned out looking very very bad.
I have also seen the exact scenario that you spoke of where the client who had the images printed at the local chemist then turned on the photographer and said that the photographer was at fault for not making sure that they printed OK at said chemist. :confused013 That is despite the client admitting that the images looked OK on their own computer.

But the truly worst case is where the "client" is supplied the digital files and then proceeds to apply some "arty" effects with editing software and proceed to load them to their facebook page and tell everybody who the photographer is / was. :eek:

[Danielle10]

Maybe it's me being a bit of a perfectionist. I think that if I was to be paid for my work I want to put the best effort in possible and supply the best product I can.
I don't really want to do this type of photography, it's just a thought I had reading 'specials'.

[Danielle10]

Danielle, stick to your guns and have the images printed by someone you trust and don't supply the digital files. :th3:

The facebook photographers offering the "specials" are probably the ones that all of a sudden don't have any clients and in desperation to convince their "friends" that they are getting a good deal start dropping their prices.

I too have seen well taken photographs printed through less than optimal mini labs that have turned out looking very very bad.
I have also seen the exact scenario that you spoke of where the client who had the images printed at the local chemist then turned on the photographer and said that the photographer was at fault for not making sure that they printed OK at said chemist. :confused013 That is despite the client admitting that the images looked OK on their own computer.

But the truly worst case is where the "client" is supplied the digital files and then proceeds to apply some "arty" effects with editing software and proceed to load them to their facebook page and tell everybody who the photographer is / was. :eek:

Exactly my point!!

[Danielle10]

The facebook photographers offering the "specials" are probably the ones that all of a sudden don't have any clients and in desperation to convince their "friends" that they are getting a good deal start dropping their prices.



The thing is they have 800-1000 likes on their pages, I just don't get it???

I have 84 lol :)

[I @ M]

The thing is they have 800-1000 likes on their pages, I just don't get it???

I have 84 lol :)

But how many spam messages did you send out to your 345,962 friends asking them to like your page? :rolleyes:

[Adrian Fischer]

tells us your page name Danielle and we will boost your likes :th3:

[Scotty72]

Dan,
Did I like your page?

[Danielle10]

Dan,
Did I like your page?

No you didnt, what kind of friend are you? LOL
just kidding. :D

hey I still have your flash!! OMG!!! what kind of friend am i? hahaha
are you going to the penrith meet on saturday?

[Danielle10]

tells us your page name Danielle and we will boost your likes :th3:

:lol: https://www.facebook.com/danielle.sheehan.photography

[arthurking83]

FWIW, I have zero likes on my FB page ... but! .....

.... makes me want to join FB now, simply to like Danielle's page!! :p


William, apologies for the slight misunderstanding on my comment on the burden of proof being on the photographer.
This wasn't meant to be taken literally in that the photographer should waste resources(ie. money) on unnecessary prints of no worth to them.

But the photographer may have high quality prints they could share (possibly of other subject matter .. as an indication that there are differences in quality between KMart prints and the real thing from your chosen supplier.
The photographer would their bluff if they question your ability as a photographer based on the quality of the print, and ask the unhappy customer to get at least one of the images printed by a known high quality source.
Of course the photographer would have to be absolutely confident that the printing source could in fact print the image with a higher level of quality.

If printing images is something that the photographer is certain that they would prefer to do as part of the entire deal/package, then it should be incumbent on the photographer to have a portfolio of printed images on hand to showcase what is possible when printing requirements left up to the photographer.


We as interested parties to the vagaries of something like a print, become too attached to the importance of the quality of it .. which may be in opposition to the simple matter of the prints existence!

I know I do.
That is I, as most likely most of us do, place a strict level of importance on the quality of the print, where the average person simply places the importance on the print itself, not the quality of it .. other than it's not a pixelated mass of smeary colours.
It's because we're committed photographers and want to see a high level of quality to the nth degree all throughout the process.

My mum(taken as an example of the average person!!).... all she wants is the print. She doesn't care that there are 4 billion tones all visible to the naked eye because I had the image printed from an aRGB tiff file at 16bits!
She gets her prints(all 200 6x4's) during the course of her usual routine of cooking for 300 people ... and with greasy, garlic smeared hands, and blobs of dried filo pastry flaking off her fingers, traces of tsatziki, tarama, dolmathes, roast goat, freshly steamed mussels and the remains of a souvlaki all still clinging for dear life onto her hands, all eventually blends onto the print surface of the 200 6x4 images within about minutes of having freshly opened the package.
You wouldn't bother wasting your breath explaining the importance of not getting her fingers over the printed area, and to hold the prints by the white border!! :rolleyes:
All you know is that at least the 200 prints only cost $15, and that you can easily get a new batch done after the acids from the food stuff begin to attack the dye's on the surface of the paper.

Contrast this to the multiple pairs of white silk gloves we probably use to tentatively handle our personal prints by the edges of the laminated foam core board so as to not touch the surface of the printed area, and then purchase expensive 100% UV resistant glass, nitrogen filled environmentally conditioned cabinets to keep our prints in tip top shape.

Different people have different levels of tolerance, and for Danielle, the point is to not get too hung up on the topic(or prints or files on CD) if it's going to be a cause for not making a sale.

In a few years time, when you're competing at the same level as the likes of Annie Leibovitz, you then have the power to command how your images are to be distributed.
For now, the important thing is to make a sale, as efficiently as you can.

[ricktas]

Just like cars. People can afford a Cherry (http://www.cherymotors.com.au/) or a Bugatti (http://www.bugatti.com/en/veyron-16.4.html). There is a market there across the entire spectrum, and customers in all those markets.

[MiniFighter]

I try not to think too much.

But this is yet another reason i dont have FB :)

[William W]

apologies for the slight misunderstanding on my comment on the burden of proof being on the photographer. This wasn't meant to be taken literally in that the photographer should waste resources (ie. money) on unnecessary prints of no worth to them. But the photographer may have high quality prints they could share (possibly of other subject matter .. as an indication that there are differences in quality between KMart prints and the real thing from your chosen supplier.


. . . . I can understand the Photographer having a portfolio of Prints – and establishing with the Client (prior to sale of files) that: “this is the Print quality I get from my lab.”

Thank you for your response. No apology is necessary. I was seeking the clarification of the meaning.

WW

[Redgum]

Success in photography (as a professional) is judged by the amount of money you make, not your Facebook page. Morals aside. :)

[ricktas]

Success in photography (as a professional) is judged by the amount of money you make, not your Facebook page. Morals aside. :)

Interesting. I would say success in BUSINESS is about how much money you make. Success in photography as a professional not necessarily so. Did Ansel Adams end up with a heap of money? Annie Leibovitz is very successful, but went bankrupt. I think success can be assessed in many ways, not just monetary.

[milesy]

The thing is they have 800-1000 likes on their pages, I just don't get it???

I have 84 lol :)

Facebook is a funny thing like this....there are a couple of people who are 'friends' with me on FB and some if the images they put up there are ok however it becomes a sort of religion with people that any crap that they post people will tell them how wonderful the photo is etc etc .........they also post things almots hourly to keep the traffic moving so i wouldnt put any value in the number of 'likes' they have on FB

[ricktas]

There are also a lot of 'photographers' on FB who campaign for likes. ie "Like my page and if I reach 1000 likes, I will be giving away a free print from any of my photos, tell all your friends to like me too!". People are using a social networking (viral marketing?) website as a business networking one.

For good quality professional photographers, facebook can offer a great marketing tool to get new clients, if used well. After all people on FB announce their engagements etc on the site. There is a market there. Just yesterday I was sent a wedding invitation..via facebook. No more high quality printed invitations= money saved to spend more on a quality wedding photographer:D (no not me), I am going as a guest.

But over-supply, especially at the cheap end of the market, often by photographers who do not have the skills to really be calling themselves photographers, is going to see none of them become profitable businesses. They use FB cause it is FREE. Unlike putting an ad on radio, in the local paper etc.

Just cause you have lots of 'likes' doesn't mean you are a good photographer.

Re prints and digital files:

Depends on the skill of the person buying the photos. I would happily take digital files and edit them myself (I would want the RAW files).

Someone with a teenage kid doing graphics design etc at school. "Oh mum, can you just get the files, I am learning about processing photos at school and I could do em". Could be an influence on the client.

'but the photos are for use on our website only, we don't need prints'

There are untold reasons why one person wants files and another wants prints. Neither are wrong or right, and I think any photographer who does not listen to the client and have a pricing plan for both options, is selling themselves short, and losing business. Why limit your business, when your clients want something that you can deliver?

[peterb666]

These days with digital photo frames so common it would seem strange to turn your nose up at supplying files on CD or DVD. Many people now only share via email so supplying reduced size images for sending or printing to 6x4 is a good strategy. You can keep higher res images for extra value work including high quality printing. You can get a good 6x4 print from a 2mp print (even if the "ex-sperts" tell you otherwise).

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

[arthurking83]

These days with digital photo frames so common .....

LOL!

That's what I got my mum for Christmas last year :D

Just so much easier now for me to load her images onto this device and for her to view them like this ... the finger prints wipe off easily enough ;)

The frame's ability to display images is woeful, but for someone like my mum who doesn't understand the concept of quality prints .. it's perfect.

[NikonNellie]

I have JUST started a little side business with my photography. I don't want it to become too large as I have a steady job that I really love. So far I have had six jobs and I have presented all those clients with a CD of 50 images. I offer to have prints done through a lab as well as offering the CD option but they have all opted for the CD. I present the CD's with a nicely designed label and cover featuring one or two of the images and the family/child's name on the cover and label. I advise the clients that I own the copyright of the images and that they are not to be used on FaceBook without my permission and I get them to sign a form stating that fact. I always include some low res images with my logo on them for FB in their CD package. I advise the clients that if they want good quality prints to use a professional lab and not to use Harvey Norman etc, as the quality of the inks and papers isn't as good and they might experience fading with their prints.
I charge $250 for the session, processing and the CD.....I know I am probably too cheap at the moment but I am just starting out and I want to gradually build it up and then charge a more appropriate fee. I haven't had any complaints yet! :D
The CD thing really works for me as I can have the labels printed at the school I work. It is much more convenient for me to do it this way rather than sending away for prints. I always advise clients that I am only an amateur photographer at this stage but I always try and be as professional as I can when dealing with them.
I have opened a FB business page but I only have 10 likes so far :lol:......I am so not into the FB thing but I could see that it is a very strong marketing tool, so I decided to have one, along with a webpage and a blog.

[Scotty72]

There's a meeting on Sat?

As for business success being solely based on profit: what a sad statement.

We are seeing this slash and burn mentality all too often in Aus business.:action:

Social dividend?

[Scotty72]

Oh,

Danielle, if I like your photo - thing, will I get mega-spammed? :Doh:

[Redgum]

Interesting. I would say success in BUSINESS is about how much money you make. Success in photography as a professional not necessarily so. Did Ansel Adams end up with a heap of money? Annie Leibovitz is very successful, but went bankrupt. I think success can be assessed in many ways, not just monetary.
I suppose it's a bit OT but from that statement we can assume Ansel and Annie were successful but not professional?
My remark was in the context that people visiting this particular forum (photography business) would like to turn professional and make money. As many have said, worrying about Facebook "likes" is of little consequence and not a yardstick for good business or good photography. :)

[CHardy]

Did you know that you can rent likers on facebook? Much like the old "rent -a- crowd" . I suspect that some of the people on facebook utilize this form of promotion.

[Kym]

Annie made millions - literally! and due to very poor business management skills (and probably personal financial management) blew the lot.
So, as with any business, you must get the basics right.

[photomike666]

The long and short of this, is that it terrible easy to get a reasonable picture these days.

A reasonably cheap camera can focus well, expose well and give high quality images. Post processing is easy and anyone can create something that looks 'good' to the general public.

When cameras used film, and could not decide when to shoot based on focus and smile photography was left to those skilled.

Now, really good photography is based on creativity, understanding composition and light control. Professional photography has lost some of the bread & butter jobs and so less people can make a true living from the art. However, those with a good eye and the ability to 'capture the moment' will shine out above the mire.

[Danielle10]

Oh,

Danielle, if I like your photo - thing, will I get mega-spammed? :Doh:

Lol not much!
Just kidding

[Longshots]

Umm I deliver the majority of my work to my clients on cd or dvd - so does this make me a bad photographer ?

[ricktas]

With all the rumours of FB going public, and that business pages etc, might end up being a subscription service(ie pay for your business page on FB), it will be interesting to see how many of these photography 'businesses' suddenly disappear from FB if they have to pay to advertise on the site.

Interesting times ahead for FB and how it is being used.

[William W]

Umm I deliver the majority of my work to my clients on cd or dvd - so does this make me a bad photographer ?

It depends: do you post it or hand deliver?

[William W]

Interesting times ahead for FB and how it is being used.

Remember Geocites, Myspace, Blogger etc . . .
Remember 8Track, Cassettes, minidisc . . .

Both are an evolution – the difference being is that many “business people” who jump into the marketing for “free” don’t realize that for “free” there is actually a cost.

And that similar cost, will eventually (soon) be realized.
The same as if they bought a truckload of 8Track players, just because they are now, cheap.

WW

[Dan Cripps]

Annie Leibovitz is very successful, but went bankrupt.

That says more about her success at financial management. Annie made PLENTY of money through photography. She just didn't know how to deal with it.

[Aussie Battler]

Business - any business - is tough, have no illusions.

There are plenty of people out there who are very successful both money wise and from the personal satisfaction they gain from what they do and ain't famous. Fame don't equal dollars or happiness.

I'm with Redgum - "Show me the money".

[ricktas]

That says more about her success at financial management. Annie made PLENTY of money through photography. She just didn't know how to deal with it.

Agree, but the point was that success should not be judged on financials alone, as my reply you quoted was a response to another post "Success in photography (as a professional) is judged by the amount of money you make."

[srowlandson]

I read on facebook over and over again about "photographers" aka mum has a a dslr now and is a professional family/baby photographer... Sorry lol
Having a special on at the moment.
Eg: $90 for up to 50 digitally enhanced images on a disc to print at your leisure.

I personally hate the idea of burning a disc and giving it to a client mainly because if they have photos printed at Harvey Norman or big w etc the print quality is absolutely terrible. I would not like my name associated with poor prints.

I would prefer to give prints that i have printed at a pro lab than a disc burnt at home- its just tacky

What do u think
Ps sorry if I have rubbed anyone up the wrong way, just my pet hate

Let's be honest, someone paying $90 for 50 images isn't really interested in high quality prints. They probably want the images to whack em on Facebook and possibly get a print done at HN.

I think this day and age, more and more people are not interested in prints. I think, like film, the days of prints are numbered.

You need to 'sell' the benefits of prints and photo books, the fact you can still view them in 50 years vs digital files that can be simply lost and become obsolete.

Most people can't justify the cost... They prefer the cheap show that look 'good' to them to show their friends and family on Facebook.

[Danielle10]

Umm I deliver the majority of my work to my clients on cd or dvd - so does this make me a bad photographer ?

Not at all, I know that your work is fantastic. The point I'm making is there is one lady I kind of know through a friend (who i originally posted about) the images are really bad and some of them just tasteless.
Some are blurry (sorry most)
Kind of makes me think well of she can do it why can't I? I'm more into live bands anyway, but feel I couldn't charge someone as I'm not a professional... Maybe I will start to offer photo shoots and charge people. I just don't feel I'm that great at it. Oh well, u never know what people want do you?

[srowlandson]

Not at all, I know that your work is fantastic. The point I'm making is there is one lady I kind of know through a friend (who i originally posted about) the images are really bad and some of them just tasteless.
Some are blurry (sorry most)
Kind of makes me think well of she can do it why can't I? I'm more into live bands anyway, but feel I couldn't charge someone as I'm not a professional... Maybe I will start to offer photo shoots and charge people. I just don't feel I'm that great at it. Oh well, u never know what people want do you?

Soon as you charge, your a Professional :th3:

Sounds like your Morals are holding you back.

A friend, whom I have taken photos of their newborn, consistently insists I should start charging and taking photos for people. I am not interested though. I don't shoot for money, but for the love of doing it.

Also, they look at the photos thinking they are amazing, but in reality, to them, its the subject that is amazing, their baby boy... its just my photos look a little better (modest huh?) than he ones they take on their iphone.

A friend (yes, i have a couple) also just got married. As with my weddings i attend, I always pack my camera. Well, the 'official' photographer shot some photos, and got a little up set with me when I fired a few bursts with my 1D in High speed + 580EX flash, It got the attnetion of the bride and groom who looked at me. I nailed the shot. She missed it. I felt bad, but thats life.

I have since seen the photos this 'pro' took. I actually thought she was just a friend who was asked to shoot, but now, i see she has a FB page... The photos were average. Simple mistakes, bad light, cropping the tops of heads, shoulders etc. Not good, not good at all. All rookie mistakes, not ones you should be making when taking photos for someones wedding day.

Anyways... enough of my waffle.

in parting, If you feel you can make a buck from your hobby, do it. but don't risk your reputation for a few $$.

[ricktas]

A friend (yes, i have a couple) also just got married. As with my weddings i attend, I always pack my camera. Well, the 'official' photographer shot some photos, and got a little up set with me when I fired a few bursts with my 1D in High speed + 580EX flash, It got the attnetion of the bride and groom who looked at me. I nailed the shot. She missed it. I felt bad, but thats life.


So you should feel bad. Etiquette is that YOU let the professional at the wedding take their shots, and then you take yours.

[srowlandson]

So you should feel bad. Etiquette is that YOU let the professional at the wedding take their shots, and then you take yours.

I disagree. Most professional photographers at a wedding, stage the cutting the cake shot well before the receiption.

There was a ring of about 30 people (I think everyone at the receiption who had a camera) took the same shots at the time.

The 'offical' photographer wasn't a professional, more just another person to spend $1000 on a DSLR who then 'thinks' they are a pro ;) and start charging because they are a pro ;) Thats the point i was trying to make. Charging makes you a Pro.. but doesn't mean you are any good at it.

[davsv1]

I disagree. Most professional photographers at a wedding, stage the cutting the cake shot well before the receiption.

There was a ring of about 30 people (I think everyone at the receiption who had a camera) took the same shots at the time.

The 'offical' photographer wasn't a professional, more just another person to spend $1000 on a DSLR who then 'thinks' they are a pro ;) and start charging because they are a pro ;) Thats the point i was trying to make. Charging makes you a Pro.. but doesn't mean you are any good at it.

I think, if they are "Professional" they should be in control of the event (wedding or whatever) and that means being in control of the guest photographers as well as the bride and groom etc. That to me is one of the main things lacking in amateur pro's, even if they can take good photo's they need to be in control 100%.

[srowlandson]

I think, if they are "Professional" they should be in control of the event (wedding or whatever) and that means being in control of the guest photographers as well as the bride and groom etc. That to me is one of the main things lacking in amateur pro's, even if they can take good photo's they need to be in control 100%.

I agree

[William W]

Most professional photographers at a wedding, stage the cutting the cake shot well before the receiption.


Really?

WW

[srowlandson]

I'm in that Age bracket where I have been to a LOT of weddings in the last few years.

A lot of Wedding Photographers don't hang around much in the receiption side, do a staged cake cut when arriving at the reception and split.

[William W]

Thanks for answering.
Understood.
Your original comment worded another way:
Of mostly all of the Weddings you’ve been to, the Wedding Photographer was (likely) only engaged (paid) up to arriving at the Reception and therefore staged the cake cutting.
?
WW

[AutumnCurl]

I think Facebook is a great marketing tool, I'm of the age that all my friends are now getting married and having babies (errg).
My wedding photographer, put a "preview" of my photos on fb, it was linked to me and all my friends saw it, in turn when my friend got married she contacted the photographer i used because she had already seen the work, and lets face it, she was already on Facebook while wedding planning and clicked on the photographers page got the number and called and went straight back to face booking.

10 couples i am friends with got married last year, 3 different photographers were used, all posted photos to Facebook, all only received a cd of photos.

I also have a friend who is a florist, and does weddings, she has about 800 followers and had been in business for about 6 months, she had a month where she had not booked anything yet, so she put up a promotional package that offered button holes for free, and by the end of the night she had a booking.

its a massive networking and word of mouth tool and its free, i know some people are not into it, I'm in my late 20's and all my peer group and the lot under me are super into it, and its us guys that are having weddings and babies etc which would be a lot of peoples target markets.

[Sobriquet]

I don't get it either Danielle, I see some of the people advertising for weddings, i go and see their page and there are heaps of likers and the work is absolute crap, looks like it's been taken with an entry level DSLR with kit lens and processed badly. I think they have so much gall to even suggest they are pro, but they do and it is full of them. I know personality matters and maybe that is a part of it. I do have trouble promoting myself but I am getting more brazen, I think it is the biggest thing I have to develop now.

[Redgum]

Facebook is simply a larger form of Yellow Pages (international versus local advertising) and therein lays its problem (FB). You promote yourself on Facebook to the whole world and the whole world promotes themselves to you. Sure it creates awareness but you can't really compare it to "word of mouth". Yellow Pages really only worked well for major branded products or even "groups" but often failed on a one to one basis (word of mouth) and was in decline prior to its on-line transformation. You also paid for YP but not for FB and with FB this simply attracts everyone to compete. More competitors, less work for the individual.
Facebook can help your branding but if you really want work many traditional forms of advertising will work better.
Advertising has nothing to do with professionalism. A well written, well placed ad can defeat a good photographer any day and that's the way it's always been.

[William W]

A well written, well placed ad can defeat a goodphotographer any day and that's the way it's always been.

Sage.

The Pen is mightier than the sword.
A well penned, strategically placed penning: is mightier and more potent, still . . . especially when directed to the masses.
I agree – no question about that.



WW

[jim]

What on earth is the point of complaining about how other people run their businesses? Their business is their business.

And this:


I think they have so much gall to even suggest they are pro

What, now? Claiming to be a pro isn't a claim to excellence. Just a claim to try and make some money.

[MaTBoY]

I read on facebook over and over again about "photographers" aka mum has a a dslr now and is a professional family/baby photographer... Sorry lol
Having a special on at the moment.
Eg: $90 for up to 50 digitally enhanced images on a disc to print at your leisure.

I personally hate the idea of burning a disc and giving it to a client mainly because if they have photos printed at Harvey Norman or big w etc the print quality is absolutely terrible. I would not like my name associated with poor prints.

I would prefer to give prints that i have printed at a pro lab than a disc burnt at home- its just tacky

What do u think
Ps sorry if I have rubbed anyone up the wrong way, just my pet hate

50 shots on a disc... I'm pretty sure the quality of printing wouldn't be the thing letting these 'awesome value' discs down ;)

[aweiss]

I would have no problem with that ... to get the digital pictures are a must for me. What is the problem with giving away the digital pictures? The client paid and should get them ... we live in the age where you look at your pics on HD TVs, digital picture frames and show them off on a high res iPad, post them on Facebook and share via email. (I am not a pro ... just a weekend shooter).

There is still a lot of use for prints so ... I love some big prints of my pictures on the wall ... but I would classify this as a nice to have.
So far I only did the cheap prints ... no idea how a pro print would look like. Should try it. What are the best printers in Australia (or overseas with fair shipping rates?) Any suggestions?

[NatalieM]

Just want to add, but as a photographer I can see the negative with giving discs. As a MOTHER, I want friends/family to see them posted on facebook. Just how it is now. I'm moving into newborn/family photography and I *will* be giving photos on disc. Not for ultra cheap and not full high res copies, but this is what people want. I don't see any value in holding their images hostage.

[pearson]

Selling prints burnt to cd should be a last resort. You then release any further earnings associated with those images and as you say, someone can have those images printed poorly and then show them to their friends who will ask "who took these??":eek:. Naturally your client will say you did and you may just lose a potential customer over it. I prefer to make cds rather expensive to discourage someone from wanting one and then explain your point of view regarding high end printing and the much better quality they will receive. Who will say no to a better quality picture of their son or daughter looking absolutely lovely, or their own wedding for that matter? Stick to your guns and it will help elevate other peoples idea of what kind of service you offer.

[NatalieM]

I think it depends on your pricing package. I've seen some charge an average sitting fee of about $170, and then prints begin at $65 plus. Now that's all good, but as a client, if I get a gallery of 30 images of my child and just ONE of those prints is close to $100....it's a lot to ask unless you're brilliant. I want to charge fairly, without feeling like I'm holding images of their family hostage. I haven't figured it all out yet but that's how I feel.

[MissionMan]

I tend to agree with the original author but I think it's unfair to tar everyone with the same brush.

There are some new pro photographers that are just plain awful and that's fair enough. Just like anything in life, it could be that that they honestly don't have the talent for it or that they don't care enough about their work to learn more. It could even be that their friends are nice and say they take great shots without actually realizing what they are like compared to proper professional shots.

But there are also a group of people who are good, trying to break into the field and just looking to fill their portfolio's. I used a guy recently who was looking to drop out of the corporate world to take on photography because he only discovered his passion later in life. He had his plans set to leave in 2 or 3 months time and we picked up his details through one of my wife's colleagues who knew him. After looking at his photos (something anyone who hired a photographer should do), it was clear he wasn't a random fly by night. He was immensely talent, inexpensive (because we caught him early in his career) and provided 350 photos on a DVD post processed. We didn't want prints because most of the photos go up on Facebook for family in another country. Most of our parents have iPads to carry their photos around so they don't print much these days. Of the 350 photos, at least 100 were absolutely amazing and I would have happily paid the price for those alone. The balance were really good and all still keepers. I.e. they didn't look like random snapshots, the composition was good, focus was good, but in some cases there were 3 similar shots and these were as good as the best of them. He also provided some prints in both black and white and colour (obviously aimed at less tech orientated parents) which was a nice touch.

I think the point is, it's easy to judge but it's difficult to judge the circumstances. Sure it could be some mum with a D50 who doesn't know what she's doing, but we all started somewhere and maybe the internet and Facebook have made it easier for some people to get into the market where they would otherwise not have survived. In some respects it's great because it gives better access to up and coming photographers and perhaps gives people access to photographers at a price they can afford (is a $50 photoshoot really competition to any professional?). On the other side, if they really aren't that great or dedicated, it'll probably be a passing Fad in their life that they get bored of and move on.

[Dan Cripps]

Charging makes you a Pro.. but doesn't mean you are any good at it.

I disagree.

Professionalism is an attitude. You don't posses it.