How Much To Charge?

[dmccarty10]

I had someone log onto my photo website and request the price of an 11x14" print of one of my shots.

While, I'm not a professional photographer, I am a highly-paid Creative Director for a national ad agency. I understand the value of art. However, I'm not sure what the "going rate" might be for a decent print.

I'm thinking $150.

What would you suggest?

 

[KevinR]

Thats probably a fair price. I see prices from $50 on up. I think that if this is a digital print, the price should be on the lower side.

 

[terri]

I agree, a digital print should be less, and you must know that the inks are archival and the paper, top-grade.

Also, were you planning on shipping the print matted, with a foam core backing (ie, ready to frame)? I think that not only adds a professional touch, but adds value to your price.

 

[chocolate soup]

I am an up coming phtograoher and i want to do freelance work, please tell me how much should i charge as a new photographer

 

[craig]

150 seems a little low. The size alone may demand a higher price. Let us know the specifics of the print.

 

[dmccarty10]

I would not print it myself, but would have it printed professionally.
But why would a digital print be less? I art direct $100k photoshoots and we do everything digitally. Are you speaking of digital vs. film, or how it's printed?

I wouldn't sell it for less than $150. Frankly, it's not worth my time. I guess I was just wondering if you thought it was too low.

The image is black and white. Nice tonal range. Slightly warm. The shot is a portrait of an 82 year old nun standing on a surfboard at the edge of the water on a beach in New Jersey.

I would also have it matted and backed.

 

[KevinR]

But why would a digital print be less? I art direct $100k photoshoots and we do everything digitally. Are you speaking of digital vs. film, or how it's printed?

I am thinking in terms of art. A hand made photo down by the artist with archival techniques, mounted and matted by the artist, I feel should be more expensive then an image printer by a computer. It's not the digital vs film debate. It's the time invested by the artist to have a final product.

 

[JC1220]

Charge what you feel is acceptable, unless you are well known locally or nationally as a fine art photographer, you can only charge so much. If you feel it is worth $200 and only ask $150 you will only wish you had asked for that extra $50 down the road. Aside from the fact you are not printing it yourself, and as long as it is on fiber paper and archivally processed, including the mounting materials, $150-200 is very reasonable.

Why less for a digital print, simple archival permanence. Sure there are new inks and papers with "150 year" life. But just because you wont be around when something fades into nothing, doesn't make it archival. Put ANY digital print in the sun vs. a B&W fiber print and it won't be long before you see the difference of what is archival. I don't think it is a matter of time spent here as someone could spend hours getting a print right in a darkroom or on a computer. Although if you are spending an inordinate amount of time on single print, something else is a amiss...

 

[Eric.]

Dang, I just sold one for $20 dollars and I was happy. My sister's boss wants to buy a bunch for the office... I told her $25 a piece. It costs me $15 to get done haha. I honestly at this point don't care about the money I just like to take pictures.

 

[Hertz van Rental]

While, I'm not a professional photographer, I am a highly-paid Creative Director for a national ad agency. I understand the value of art. However, I'm not sure what the "going rate" might be for a decent print.

Then why not try asking one of the photographers you work with? They should know.
The 'value of Art' is only what someone is prepared to pay for it.

 

[DocFrankenstein]

Value of my art is the depreciation of my equipment + framing/printing costs + 12 bucks/hour for shooting, printing and hassles.

Simple economics.

 

[DocFrankenstein]

I mean the price... The value is way too high :roll:

 

[jmdterp]

Most photographers can understand the differance between a digital print (click click print), a "professionally" printed (you shoot, they do the dirty work) or your private darkroom (ahh...smell the chemicals, feel the frustrations).
In my oppinion, one thing that influences the value of the "art work" depends on howmuch the "artist" was involved.

Also, if you are processing with all FB, archival, the print will last for years to come. Digital, however, is too new. We are not aware of its capabilities for lasting through time. this too sould be considered.
It is always hard to price to sell. Good Luck!

 

[gypsyIX]

if you're really stuck for pricing, here are some ideas: there is software called fotoQuote made by the cradoc corporation. and books, "pricing photography: the complete guide to assignment and stock prices" published by allworth press, and "negotiating stock photo prices" by jim pickerell.

these aren't really relevent to the thread, but i came across these names in a book and thought they might be useful to some. cheers!

 

[photogoddess]

fotoquote is actually supposed to be really good and I've heard that a lot of pros use this software. I've never tried it though but if anyone does, let us know what you think.