New Photographer for Band Shoot

[sanderso]

I shot my cousin band once in a bar, they paid for the booze and i met some pretty nice girls. fair enought for me.

i did shoot bar events a couple times for 200$ a night including licence to use the pictures at will.

sounds like a good time was had by all!!

 

[e.rose]

craiglist.

^^^:thumbup: :er:

And $50 for each band member, is not free.

I think each band member should pay the photographer $30 each to shoot the photos, since they will be planning on getting other gigs, and make more money, because of the photographers photos.

In fact, the photographer should get a cut for each gig they subsequently get by using the photographers photos. I think the photographer should get 5%. If there are 4 band members (collectively getting $200, the photographer would get $10 a gig as a use license fee.

Thnx KmH....a good idea. Especially if he signs up with someone who is established and not a beginner. Such an arrangement would make a good ptnrship...one which could generate a few $ for each.

My concern is if he uses someone with a glint in his/her eye to be a pro, then G** knows what sort of pix he'll see. Using a pro means getting proven quality (at least more than a p&s user).

Ha... someone established and not a beginner is going to charge much more than that...

Sh*t, I'm not even *that* established and I would charge more than that...

Thnx KmH....a good idea. Especially if he signs up with someone who is established and not a beginner. Such an arrangement would make a good ptnrship...one which could generate a few $ for each.

My concern is if he uses someone with a glint in his/her eye to be a pro, then G** knows what sort of pix he'll see. Using a pro means getting proven quality (at least more than a p&s user).

$30 each per band member, and 5% per gig would be beginner photographer pay.

Yep...doesn't seem that unreasonable.

To clarify, by "established and not a beginner" I meant someone who is holding themselves out as a pro (selling their work) and has a portfolio/samples. Maybe not based on a large body of work, but not someone who just has the glint and hasn't done it before. Such an unknown has higher risk of getting usable pix. Regardless, I gotta believe he'll be further ahead than with the p&s user.

Thnx again!

See above response.

If they want *good* shots... unless they get lucky, they're looking at AT LEAST $200 to start, not including photos... I know someone who charges $800 to shoot a show and they're not even that good.....

So if they're looking for cheap n' dirty... ... Tell him to try Craigslist.

The only photographers that are gonna go for any type of partnership with a band only getting paid $200 a night are super beginners who are desperate to shoot, even for next to nothing, because that band isn't going to pay them $120 every show they play to get photos... but then you're not going to get that quality you're looking for either...........

 

[sanderso]

So if they're looking for cheap n' dirty... ... Tell him to try Craigslist.

The only photographers that are gonna go for any type of partnership with a band only getting paid $200 a night are super beginners who are desperate to shoot, even for next to nothing, because that band isn't going to pay them $120 every show they play to get photos... but then you're not going to get that quality you're looking for either...........

Thanks e.rose! (was hoping you'd post, since I recall you've done tons of band shoots based on other posts)

Sounds like CL is his option. Or, unless a super beginner....a very desperate beginner....agrees to do the shoot. I think it also confirms the big picture question for his new band: how professional do they want to be? If they're really a pro band...then step up. Otherwise, enjoy the thrills of being an upscale garage band.

Thanks all for your help and input!

 

[Village Idiot]

Thnx KmH....a good idea. Especially if he signs up with someone who is established and not a beginner. Such an arrangement would make a good ptnrship...one which could generate a few $ for each.

My concern is if he uses someone with a glint in his/her eye to be a pro, then G** knows what sort of pix he'll see. Using a pro means getting proven quality (at least more than a p&s user).

$30 each per band member, and 5% per gig would be beginner photographer pay.

Yep...doesn't seem that unreasonable.

To clarify, by "established and not a beginner" I meant someone who is holding themselves out as a pro (selling their work) and has a portfolio/samples. Maybe not based on a large body of work, but not someone who just has the glint and hasn't done it before. Such an unknown has higher risk of getting usable pix. Regardless, I gotta believe he'll be further ahead than with the p&s user.

Thnx again!

Some one that is "holding themselves out as a pro (selling their work)". as you say, would likely not give you the time of day if they were worth their salt as a photographer.

Giving a photographer exclusive access to shoot for that band does absolutely nothing for the photographer unless the band is Metallica or U2, and even the benefits of having your name attached to those photos can be negligible. Do you know who shot the photos for the Twilight movies that were used on all the theatrical posters? It's a pretty big name in photography. I'm betting that if he didn't get paid for doing the photos for the advertising campaign that he wouldn't have made any money at all off the photos for being so well known for taking those photos.

 

[Forkie]

And $50 for each band member, is not free.

I think each band member should pay the photographer $30 each to shoot the photos, since they will be planning on getting other gigs, and make more money, because of the photographers photos.

In fact, the photographer should get a cut for each gig they subsequently get by using the photographers photos. I think the photographer should get 5%. If there are 4 band members (collectively getting $200, the photographer would get $10 a gig as a use license fee.

Remind me never to hire you take photos for my band!

You'd want $120 out of their collective $200 they were paid for the gig, AND a cut for every gig afterwards? That's ridiculous.

First of all, bands don't get gigs on the back of photos, they get gigs on the back of recorded demos. And you call $50 per band member making money? The cost of hiring rehearsal space, buying equipment plus consumables, travel and recording per year, is many, many, many times the amount you ever get paid by clubs and bars for playing.


If I lived in Chicago Sanderso, I'd do it as a favour for free entry to the gig, a pint of beer and having my name credited for the photo.

 

[Zrock]

..... I thought a new startup photographer might provide his/her time for free to do the shoot, in exchange for exclusive visibility. (Assuming not of interest to anyone established.)

Does the band play for free?

Thnx KmH. In a word...basically yes. From what he's told me, $50/band member is typical. (That just wouldn't do it for me.)

Wow when can i sign them up. When i ran a bar with live band i could never get a good band in their for less than $100 per member plus drinks. It usually cost me around $200 per member. These were also local bands with no record labels etc. I don't know of a band that will work for $50 per member thats really just a slap in the face for the band. The band has to sell themselves better and make some money. Its not even worth their time for that price by the time they figure out setup and sound check and then playing for 4 - 6 hours.

 

[e.rose]

Does the band play for free?

Thnx KmH. In a word...basically yes. From what he's told me, $50/band member is typical. (That just wouldn't do it for me.)

Wow when can i sign them up. When i ran a bar with live band i could never get a good band in their for less than $100 per member plus drinks. It usually cost me around $200 per member. These were also local bands with no record labels etc. I don't know of a band that will work for $50 per member thats really just a slap in the face for the band. The band has to sell themselves better and make some money. Its not even worth their time for that price by the time they figure out setup and sound check and then playing for 4 - 6 hours.

No kidding.

It's the same as with any industry though... Kids wanna be rockstars and will do it cheaper... and not as good... so these bars are hiring them.

My husband works as a full time musician, and his band gets AT LEAST a grand to play anywhere, but there's a particular owner, of a particular bar, that just axed one of their best bands because he didn't feel like paying them the $1,700 he pays them to play because he can "hire some kids to come in here to play for $600 and get people to drink. I don't need to pay you $1,700 for that."

My husband's band is the next band in line after them as far as pay scale goes... which is not a fun thing because this dude owns several bars that they play.

However he eventually went back to the first band that he axed because he realized that THEY pull people into his bar... not just any group of kids willing to play for peanuts. So *that's* good...

But that's what's happening.

NOT to mention... people won't pay for original music any more. People would rather pay a $10 cover to see a cover band play all of the radio hits they hear every second of every day than to pay a $2 cover fee to see an original band.

We see THAT happen every weekend too. It's depressing.

They don't even get drinks anymore. Rarely anyway. :er:

 

[Village Idiot]

Depends where you play. I was in a band several years ago and we were making $400-$600 a night and playing 2-4 times a month. Special gigs pulled in more, but hiring sound was an expense. When I left that band and joined another we were playing less regular and got something like $150-$200 + door. Fortunately with friends, family, and opening band groupies, we were still pulling $400-$600 @ $5 per head.

Free beer was of course part of our payment.

I have friends playing in Baltimore and a lot of the smaller venues are pay to play. A band will pay $75-$150 (generally from what I've seen) to be able to play a spot at the venue and depending on how many fans show up for them (recorded on tickets sold and at the door), they'll make a certain percentage of the profit, and can essentially not recover their initial investment if no one shows.