Product Shot Pricing.

[xj0hnx]

TiredIron. That would bankrupt the Client. Did I mention I'm located in the south? Do I need to move to Canada?

If $500 will bankrupt them, they aren't much of a jeweler. There is no way that I'd price a 40pc shot at only $100. I've done product photography for a local business and it is very time consuming, especially if you are editing each picture too. Granted, if it's all similar items, once you're set up, it's pretty quick going from item to item, but it's still going to be a couple hours shooting, and a few hours editing.

 

[KmH]

So the guy that's shooting say Ford's product line for web. what is he taking in?

Way more than than the $16,050 the photographer got in the successful estimate for a regional restaurant chain in the example I linked to.
Mostly because it would likely take more than 1 day and Ford would use photos in more media types than just online which would jack up the use licensing fees considerably.
Figure around $250,000 for the photographer for a Ford shoot that produces still images.

This is from 2005, so ramp up to estimate today's numbers:
Online Gets 15 Percent of $1B Ford Marketing Budget - MarketingVOX
Ford planning to spend more on advertising and marketing
Ford Motor Company Annual Reports - Annual Ford Financial Reports

 

[Gavjenks]

Knock 1/3 of that off for tax

:meh:

Maybe you SHOULDN'T move to Canada after all...



Anyway, @OP, $100 is way too cheap no matter what. But I completely understand charging only for your time, if you bought all your equipment, etc. without intending to use it for anything other than a hobby. It's just that $100 or even $175 seems like crap pay even for your time. You also need to account a bit for other overhead for just this project + chances of things going wrong like them keeping you there longer than you think or complaining about images and going all weird on you.

Hour negotiating and writing emails + couple hours driving and shooting probably + 10 minutes per photo = aroudn 10 hours. $20 an hour = $200 + bits of overhead + room for stuff to go wrong let's say $100, I'd do about $300 minimum. And if it's just a client not your cousin, however much more than that you can get out of them when haggling a price without losing their business or their advertising of you. Plus have your contract limit the usage to make it clear they can't sell this stuff to other people, etc. Not just carte blanche. With that sort of license, $300 seems reasonable, and maybe up to $500 if you can convince them.



On the other end of the spectrum, people suggesting thousands of dollars seem pretty delusional to me though for a photographer that the business surely realizes is a hobbyist. And who probably doesn't have any brick and mortar business credentials or extensive portfolio or guarantees, etc... And even if you do have those things, maybe add another 2-300 dollars for peace of mind. But why the hell would I as a business pay 10x as much when there are droves of people out there willing to shoot for 2-300 dollars? One of them does a terrible job, so what? HIRE THREE MORE if you need to, and still save tons of money... It's not a movie trailer. It's some jewelry on a piece of velvet.

 

[BobSaget]

Gavjenks, thanks for the reply. you've given me a lot to think over. This is the first time I've been approached by a non-relative or friend, which has basically been the reason for my questions.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

... It's not a movie trailer. It's some jewelry on a piece of velvet.

Pro's don't shoot jewelry on velvet.

As a jeweler that takes great pride in my work, and in my attention to detail, I'd gladly pay a few grand for really good professional images for advertising. A movie trailer is used to advertise a movie and entice people to come pay money to see it. Images of jewelry used for advertising ARE NO DIFFERENT. It's your only chance to grab an audience, and entice them to come buy your product. Quality photography for advertising is extremely important!

It comes down to the jeweler though. Is it a fine jeweler trying to convey the high degree of skill, detail, and craftsmanship? Or is it an MWAT (mom with a torch) selling craft jewelry on Etsy? Or somewhere in between. The latter won't be paying thousands for the shoot, and the former wouldn't be well served by the $100 weekend warrior.

Jewelry is difficult to shoot well. It can also take quite a bit of editing to achieve the desired finished product.
Good luck, Bob.

 

[BobSaget]

... It's not a movie trailer. It's some jewelry on a piece of velvet.

Pro's don't shoot jewelry on velvet.

As a jeweler that takes great pride in my work, and in my attention to detail, I'd gladly pay a few grand for really good professional images for advertising. A movie trailer is used to advertise a movie and entice people to come pay money to see it. Images of jewelry used for advertising ARE NO DIFFERENT. It's your only chance to grab an audience, and entice them to come buy your product. Quality photography for advertising is extremely important!

It comes down to the jeweler though. Is it a fine jeweler trying to convey the high degree of skill, detail, and craftsmanship? Or is it an MWAT (mom with a torch) selling craft jewelry on Etsy? Or somewhere in between. The latter won't be paying thousands for the shoot, and the former wouldn't be well served by the $100 weekend warrior.

Jewelry is difficult to shoot well. It can also take quite a bit of editing to achieve the desired finished product.
Good luck, Bob.

Thanks, Bitter.

I havent seen the jewelry yet, but the work I've done in the past has been, well you would be better to describe it. usually, antique costume jewelry recreated into new pieces. Use of stones, but not precious (semi-precious?). Not fine jewelry. Much more casual.

I have dealt with difficulty shooting these. Some materials are very reflective while others absorb light (contrast issues and clipping). Arrangement's can be a pain. Finding small hairs and dust on the piece once viewing at 100% can be annoying.

 

[davisphotos]

I've photographed some jewelry, and it is incredibly time consuming both in the shooting and in the post, plus you need way more lighting than you would think, and a good macro lens. I would be charging probably $800 or so for a shoot like this, and it would take me a good 4-6 hours to do the photography, and probably the same again for post production.