How much to charge for this?

[mrodgers]

Many of the comments on this forum about the "business" side of photography are the reason so many people go to Walmart for $6.95 for their portrait pictures.

I am still confused at why it is so expensive for portrait photography. Many comments on travel and such thoughts. I travel to where I work too. I don't charge work my travel time.

There aren't many photographers around where I'm at. I see the prices they charge and I can see why.

$150-250 sitting fees? For going to a studio for half an hour while you take our picture? I'd have to work half a week to pay you for a half hour's work. It's a bit ridiculous.

Same with all this photographer rights stuff. Sure, it's your picture, but it's my little girls and I don't want pictures of my little girls floating around everywhere uncontrolled by me in this day and age.

 

[jols]

Many of the comments on this forum about the "business" side of photography are the reason so many people go to Walmart for $6.95 for their portrait pictures.

I am still confused at why it is so expensive for portrait photography. Many comments on travel and such thoughts. I travel to where I work too. I don't charge work my travel time.

There aren't many photographers around where I'm at. I see the prices they charge and I can see why.

$150-250 sitting fees? For going to a studio for half an hour while you take our picture? I'd have to work half a week to pay you for a half hour's work. It's a bit ridiculous.

Same with all this photographer rights stuff. Sure, it's your picture, but it's my little girls and I don't want pictures of my little girls floating around everywhere uncontrolled by me in this day and age.

i agree.

do you think i charge a lot?

when the prints are as cheap as chips im amazed at what some people charge.

but they will reply its for their experience and time.

its no point in arguing with them.

i think if they made the basic minimum wage most would nt do it.

they do it cause its easy money and if anybody replies and says its hard work i will laugh to myself and not reply

 

[JerryPH]

Look at it this way, if it was easy, everyone would be doing it. Its not that easy. 'Togs do it for years and have paid their dues and gained experience. They also (should) have equipment that will permit them to attain above average results. Those results do not come 2 weeks after slipping the cashier at Best Buy your credit card for a new dSLR and kit lens.

Think that this is out of the norm? Look in ANY industry, its the same. Experience and known good results cost you more than if you hire the guy fresh out of university.

On a lightly related note...

I stood in line today in a local Walmart... in front of the cashes they had their "Professional" photography booth. I was curious, and had to look.

Approximately in a 10-15 foot room, full time on moon lighting (must have been 85 degrees in there!)... nice muselin backdrop, a small bar chair, very nice little area actually! 'Tog comes in (looked about 14, was likely in his mid 20's)... poses the gal rather a little too physically for my tastes (hands off, mr Octopus!), and starts pulling an Austin Powers on her ("yeah bably! <snap!> smile for me! <snap!> now purr! <snap!> gimme your dangerous look! <snap!>...), I almost cracked up (do you other pros really do that???).

What really almost caused me to crack up was when I clearly saw what he was using... A Fuji FinePix S700.

I stifled a chuckle, out of politeness covered my mouth, but the guy must have heard something, turned and glared... then made a mistake... asked me very arrogantly if I owned something better and thought I could do better *very* haughtily.

With a smile I said "I sincerely don't know... want to give me 15 min to go get my Nikon D200 and studio strobes? I'd love to try!"... his mouth kinda dropped, he gave me a few "uhh... uhh..." kinda sounds. I then said "After thinking about this, perhaps I'd better not, we wouldn't want you to lose your job, especially during this busy time of the year".

I then walked out waited a few more seconds for my sister to finish paying. As I did that, I turned and looked at his "portfolio" all in nice frames out on display. Not one was properly exposed (mostly way underexposed), and 5 out of 9 pics were clearly out of focus. I turned, started to whistle Jingle Bells, and we left.

Walmart... you get what you pay for. :lmao: :thumbdown:

 

[Teresa]

well i can get 4x6's at 12 cents so i am not going to charge too terribly much more since i still get a good profit and most the time i get discounts but the customers dont know about it.
and i get them shipped
i have a contract stating that all the photos i take are my rights and my property but they can order a disc with the prints on them and they have to sign a separate form to state that i can post the photos online.
i have never ever said to a client "ya baby" "right there"...that is cheesy and hillarious at the same time!

 

[mrodgers]

What really almost caused me to crack up was when I clearly saw what he was using... A Fuji FinePix S700.

Since I've joined here no more than a week ago, have a few threads on my perils of purchasing a camera (non-professional of course) and have statements in those thread on my purchasing an S700/5700, could that be a stab at me?

Funny story indeed though.

I don't have a problem paying someone of skill with a camera for their time. $150 sitting fee, just for you to take my picture? $250 sitting fee? That isn't paying for your time, that is the photographer ripping people off and being greedy.

Yes, in this day and age of semi-affordable DSLR cameras available to the consumer, anyone can have the same equipment. In this day and age of the wealth of information that can be found on the internet, anyone can get the knowledge on how to operate that camera (indeed, the reason I am on this forum, is to learn that knowledge).

It's easy to see how much it would cost for the consumer to go out and get prints on their own. As quoted in a post here....

30 cents more than the price of the prints. is that a mistake?

you should charge much more than that in my opinion.

a 10 x 8 cost 2pound [4 dollars]

i charge 20pound for it [40 dollars]

plus the sitting fee

A mark up of 1000%, for nothing! This quoted person has already gotten paid for his time, in the sitting fee. I of course, don't mind seeing a slight markup for the time for the bother of getting the prints done, but $40 for a $4 print is nothing but greed and it's ridiculous.

I only used Walmart as an example. Of course, I don't expect for $6.95 for it to be as quality an experience as with a real photographer. But, it's a bit outrageous that the photography profession seems to think that they are worth someone elses 2 week paycheck for what? an hour if that sitting and an hour to view them and prepare them for sending to print?

Yes, I know, I know, there's all the time spent in photoshop blah blah.... If time is needed spent in photoshop to print nice portrait pictures from a studio, I think the photographer needs to reassess his skills and abilities as a photographer.

As a family, we do go to Walmart for our kid's pictures every year. Why? Because it doesn't matter what camera they use (barring the little point and shoots), it doesn't matter what skills they have as a photographer, the end result is no different to the consumer's eye than what is produced from a real photographer that would charge hundreds over the $6.95.

My oldest daughter is now in school and gets her pictures done by the leading professional photographer in our area. My youngest goes to Walmart for the $6.95 package. Their pictures are hanging side by side on the wall in 11x14 size format, matted and framed. Looking at them, there is not one bit of difference in the quality of the pictures.

The whole "photographer's copyright and rights" thing is a crock as well. I've paid for the picture to be taken in the sitting fee. If the photographer wants me to purchase the prints from him, then make the cost reasonable. Like I said, no problems with a slight markup to pay for the time the photog takes to send the prints in and get them back to me. If not, then why shouldn't I be allowed to make prints on my own of the photographs I paid for?

 

[JerryPH]

i have never ever said to a client "ya baby" "right there"...that is cheesy and hillarious at the same time!

Thats what I thought too. When doing portraits, I always direct some amount, but either kinda mimic a position or talk them through it, but I prefer "thank-you" or "nice" to "yeah baby!".

 

[Holy Ghosted]

I should also note I was thinking around $100 for first real time.....all 10 prints included, and maybe even a cd with small quality photos???

Hi Terri I would look at this in a couple of deferent ways if you did not have anything set up before hand it is more important to your business to want them as return customers. if you posted your 2 best photos then $100 + $10 per 5x7 in my mind is too high if you are looking for that much money try the cd angle separate because they would be purchasing the © on those photos to uses for personal use even if they are small.
One thing you need to do is sit down and figure out how much you feel your work is worth. It is a balance between keeping return customers and having them advertise for you and chasing people to your competition.
There is a gentleman in my area that is a very accomplished photographer with over 20 years experience and is ranked in the top 10 photographers in the state. His setting fee is $55 to travel to your house, mine is $50. If your area is supporting more you can charge more but if you charged that once here on a shoot like that once they looked around you would never get there business again and any body else that asked them about what photographer to go to.
Just my thoughts and how I stay busy through the winter.

 

[jols]

Since I've joined here no more than a week ago, have a few threads on my perils of purchasing a camera (non-professional of course) and have statements in those thread on my purchasing an S700/5700, could that be a stab at me?

Funny story indeed though.

I don't have a problem paying someone of skill with a camera for their time. $150 sitting fee, just for you to take my picture? $250 sitting fee? That isn't paying for your time, that is the photographer ripping people off and being greedy.

Yes, in this day and age of semi-affordable DSLR cameras available to the consumer, anyone can have the same equipment. In this day and age of the wealth of information that can be found on the internet, anyone can get the knowledge on how to operate that camera (indeed, the reason I am on this forum, is to learn that knowledge).

It's easy to see how much it would cost for the consumer to go out and get prints on their own. As quoted in a post here....


A mark up of 1000%, for nothing! This quoted person has already gotten paid for his time, in the sitting fee. I of course, don't mind seeing a slight markup for the time for the bother of getting the prints done, but $40 for a $4 print is nothing but greed and it's ridiculous.

I only used Walmart as an example. Of course, I don't expect for $6.95 for it to be as quality an experience as with a real photographer. But, it's a bit outrageous that the photography profession seems to think that they are worth someone elses 2 week paycheck for what? an hour if that sitting and an hour to view them and prepare them for sending to print?

Yes, I know, I know, there's all the time spent in photoshop blah blah.... If time is needed spent in photoshop to print nice portrait pictures from a studio, I think the photographer needs to reassess his skills and abilities as a photographer.

As a family, we do go to Walmart for our kid's pictures every year. Why? Because it doesn't matter what camera they use (barring the little point and shoots), it doesn't matter what skills they have as a photographer, the end result is no different to the consumer's eye than what is produced from a real photographer that would charge hundreds over the $6.95.

My oldest daughter is now in school and gets her pictures done by the leading professional photographer in our area. My youngest goes to Walmart for the $6.95 package. Their pictures are hanging side by side on the wall in 11x14 size format, matted and framed. Looking at them, there is not one bit of difference in the quality of the pictures.

The whole "photographer's copyright and rights" thing is a crock as well. I've paid for the picture to be taken in the sitting fee. If the photographer wants me to purchase the prints from him, then make the cost reasonable. Like I said, no problems with a slight markup to pay for the time the photog takes to send the prints in and get them back to me. If not, then why shouldn't I be allowed to make prints on my own of the photographs I paid for?

ok. my charges are far the cheapest in my area and i have found if you go too cheap people say you must be rubbish and as for the fuji s5700 i have one and it takes great portrait pictures, you just have to know how to use it.

[so thats could of been a dig at me too ha ha ][who cares though]

i understand what you are saying about pricing but it is usually more than three hours work including meeting them, doing the session, post processing, getting them to pick thier pics. so i think i deserve a few quid in my pocket, oh and my pics are good otherwise they would not buy them.


i charge a sitting fee [non returnable ]in case they say they do not want to purchase anything then i would be out of pocket.

 

[JerryPH]

Since I've joined here no more than a week ago, have a few threads on my perils of purchasing a camera (non-professional of course) and have statements in those thread on my purchasing an S700/5700, could that be a stab at me?

Was that YOU in the Walmart trying to play "professional photographer"? LOL

It was not a stab at the camera, nor you... it was a "pointing the finger and laughing" at someone who thought they were a pro but had issues even getting out consistantly focused pics.

Now if that was you... man, find other ways to pose pretty young gals without pawing them 20 times per pic, and stop with the Austin Powers imitations!!

 

[mrodgers]

Was that YOU in the Walmart trying to play "professional photographer"? LOL

It was not a stab at the camera, nor you... it was a "pointing the finger and laughing" at someone who thought they were a pro but had issues even getting out consistantly focused pics.

Nah, I'm aware of the context of your post, hence my smiley at the end of my statement .

I fully understand what you mean. The Walmart photographers are like the "electrical professionals" at Lowes and Home Depot. Last week before they became the photography or electrical "professionals", they were working the register in the garden center as gardener "professionals".

I've just been browsing around in the "business" section here and have seen some ridiculous thoughts on "get paid for my work" in there.

Then again, the wife may think that I should be trying to play "professional photographer" with the family. She's already got a list of things she wants to do, like Christmas cards, calendars, 8x10 or bigger pic of the girls for grandmas, blah blah.

 

[JerryPH]

God bless her... if I was you, I'd do it all, its a fast way to make her happy and for you to have some fun with the camera for Christmas!

___________________

So Terri, did you finally come up with a plan of action?

 

[MACollum]

Regarding pro print prices and sitting fees...there is always a choice. If you don't like the prices, don't get a pro to take your pictures. JMO. Something to keep in mind is that a small studio photographer has a high overhead. Professional equipment isn't cheap, neither is the software the photographer will use to edit the pictures (Photoshop, anyone?). Then there is experience, time and the photographer's reputation to think about.

A small studio is in a better position to give your pictures special attention. Big chains rely on getting decent pictures at the time, and I highly doubt they do any editing at all, except cropping for size. Not to mention the volume. This is why they can charge less money.

Getting good pictures of my kids for less money is one of the major reasons for me to get into photography in the first place. My kids are more comfortable with me and I'm more likely to get those genuine smiles that make my kids beautiful . In addition, I can get those candid moments that aren't likely to happen in a studio.

 

[Joves]

I would charge what is charged locally or, a little below since you are really just starting out. While at first you may not make good money it is a start. Especially if you have a regular job too. Who know it may lead to where you dont need the regulaer job or, only be part-time.
I diagree with photographers who shoot portraits or, weddings and, think they own the rights to the photos. You are hired and, paid by a private individuals. To me being hired by someone is like the artists of old who had benefactors, the art they painted did not belong to them but, to the benefactor. That may rub some of you the wrong way but, oh well. But the fact is you were paid and, they own the work. While yes you may display your work, I dont see it as you have the rights to the peoples images to do what you feel with.