we should all work for free

[craig]

Not like free or low priced photography cuts into my business, but it does have a negative impact on the industry in general. That point can not be reiterated enough. It may be a concept that people in the retail end of photography will never understand. Which is fine by me. I (as always) had to but in.

Love & Bass

 

[Senor Hound]

Cool! Why don't you under cut every photographer in town.

She has the right to do whatever she wants. Its called capitalism. The market (in this case for the service of photography) ALWAYS finds a way to stabilize. If people are able to offer lower prices, then they should. Supply and demand will always win out over "ethics and morals". You can either go with the flow, or die fighting the current.

Or you could form a local photographer's union... You shouldn't have much problem with outsourcing.

Not like free or low priced photography cuts into my business, but it does have a negative impact on the industry in general. That point can not be reiterated enough.

I disagree with this, also. Just because it lowers the prices does not mean it has a negative impact on the industry. After a cycle of surplus supply, many of the bottom feeders will be forced out, and in the end it will have a positive effect on the quality of product. It just means you'll have to step up your game due to increased competition for a while. Then it will stabilize.

 

[craig]

With all due respect it sounds like you know nothing of the field of photography. Of course photographers can do what they want. I guess my question to this forum is at what point do we take pride in our work and realize nothing is free? At what point do we realize that there are photographers that work hard just like everyone else? At what point do we stop being selfish and understand that giving away your work could be hurting others?

How many cops, electricians or engineers do you see giving away their work? Photography is a profit deal for me. I refuse to sit back and let toy photographers trample on an industry that has basically sustained me my whole life.

Love & Bass

 

[Senor Hound]

With all due respect it sounds like you know nothing of the field of photography. Of course photographers can do what they want. I guess my question to this forum is at what point do we take pride in our work and realize nothing is free? At what point do we realize that there are photographers that work hard just like everyone else? At what point do we stop being selfish and understand that giving away your work could be hurting others?

With all due respect, it sounds like you know NOTHING about capitalism if you seriously think one person in an industry should look out for the others. You need to realize this is a dog-eat dog world. But feel free to wait around for people to have a sudden change of heart. And if you think your clients are loyal, you can forget it. I guarantee you that when you quote a price to do a shoot, and someone else quotes a price that's only 2/3rds of that, they'll try the other guy out, even if you have given them good shots in the past. THERE IS NO LOYALTY IN BUSINESS. And those who stay loyal, get crushed.

I refuse to sit back and let toy photographers trample on an industry that has basically sustained me my whole life.

I find it funny you think you have a choice in the issue. The industry is changing and within a few years you won't be able to charge the same prices you have in the past. Many more people are interested in it, and will pursue professional photography as a job. And it doesn't matter if they're "toy photographers" or not. The point is they're going to take away from some of your business and there's NOTHING you can do about it. Its happened to other jobs in the past, and now its photography's turn. Getting upset at your colleagues isn't going to change this.

BTW, many electricians and engineering firms will do some pro-bono work to establish a clientèle. The truth of the matter is photography is a hobby some people can make a career out of. Rarely do people NEED a photograph like they NEED electricity. Try comparing photography to something more similar, like being a musician or artist. You don't hear professional artists complaining when amateurs give away paintings, nor do you hear professional musicians complain when a house band does a gig for free. Perhaps you could take a lesson.

 

[craig]

You seem to be speaking about the retail end of the business. On the commercial/editorial side my clients constantly remind me of the sub par work they have had in the past. If I can get one person do a good job it will have a positive effect on me and the industry. It certainly is a dog eat dog world, but I refuse to accept that. I will school young photographers on their work and I will try and unite a divided community. I have heard that sad story about a changing industry for years. I still have yet to see it. Retail photographers are the ones shooting themselves in the foot. I am here to say that if you call yourself a photographer you better start charging a rate that reflects your skills. People are willing spend thousands of dollars a year on photography and they need those photos sometimes worse then electricity. Question is who is man enough to take it.

Your thoughts are your own. I respect that. I still and always believe that I can help other photographers and have a positive effect on the industry one thought and one person at a time. I have been doing it for years and I am not about to stop now. Who knows as time goes I may even have a positive effect on you Senor Hound.

Love & Bass

 

[Senor Hound]

You seem to be speaking about the retail end of the business. On the commercial/editorial side my clients constantly remind me of the sub par work they have had in the past. If I can get one person do a good job it will have a positive effect on me and the industry. It certainly is a dog eat dog world, but I refuse to accept that. I will school young photographers on their work and I will try and unite a divided community. I have heard that sad story about a changing industry for years. I still have yet to see it. Retail photographers are the ones shooting themselves in the foot. I am here to say that if you call yourself a photographer you better start charging a rate that reflects your skills. People are willing spend thousands of dollars a year on photography and they need those photos sometimes worse then electricity. Question is who is man enough to take it.

Your thoughts are your own. I respect that. I still and always believe that I can help other photographers and have a positive effect on the industry one thought and one person at a time. I have been doing it for years and I am not about to stop now. Who knows as time goes I may even have a positive effect on you Senor Hound.

Love & Bass

I doubt it. My dad owns his own business and I've worked for too many small companies to ever think positively of them. This is why I'd never be self-employed; I don't have the cutthroat mentality it takes to win. I'm a softie, and I'd end up going bankrupt in a week.

And sorry if I was rude. I re-read my post and it was way too harsh. But you already replied, and there wasn't much I could do about it. Best of luck to you in your future endeavors, cause I have a feeling you professional photographers will need it. But the proof is in the pudding like you said, and the great ones have nothing to worry about.

 

[MarcusM]

THERE IS NO LOYALTY IN BUSINESS.

I had to reply to this...this statement is completely inaccurate IMO. I myself and I believe a lot of others are willing to pay a little more to support businesses that have shown themselves to be honest, provide a superior, quality product, interested in a win-win relationship with their customers/clientele, give back to the community, practice environmental stewardship, etc., etc.

So yes, there is loyalty in business. Customers will not always go to the cheapest source. If they can find that business that they trust and the product serves them well, sometimes it is not worth the effort to try to get a cheaper deal.

 

[MarcusM]

I've worked for too many small companies to ever think positively of them.

Wow...I would choose to work for a small company over a large corporation any day.

I work for a great small company right now, and my wife works for a corporation that is too big for it's own good - different departments in different states (and countries for that matter) and no one knows what the hell is going on.

One of the major problems with the U.S. (and the world) is large corporations that consume everything in sight with absolutely no regard to their community and environment.

 

[Senor Hound]

Wow...I would choose to work for a small company over a large corporation any day.

I work for a great small company right now, and my wife works for a corporation that is too big for it's own good - different departments in different states (and countries for that matter) and no one knows what the hell is going on.

One of the major problems with the U.S. (and the world) is large corporations that consume everything in sight with absolutely no regard to their community and environment.

The only reason I said small company is because its the only places where I can actually see the owner at work. I've seen bosses not give their employees insurance or vacations yet go spend two weeks in Europe. I've seen my dad hire people as a favor, only to have to fire them because they never showed up or did anything.

And IMO, There's little to no difference between a small company and a large one, other than the amount of leverage they have. Many small companies would love to dominate the market or outsource their labor if it was possible or feasible. Its a sad fact of life that people are primarily interested in themselves. I have yet to see an owner of a business who started his enterprise because he wanted to stimulate the economy or create new jobs. He does it for him, and in the end, that's the only one who matters.

I'm sorry, but I'm horribly jaded to the whole corporate world. As I said before, it takes a very cold heart to run a profitable, successful business IMO.

I had to reply to this...this statement is completely inaccurate IMO. I myself and I believe a lot of others are willing to pay a little more to support businesses that have shown themselves to be honest, provide a superior, quality product, interested in a win-win relationship with their customers/clientele, give back to the community, practice environmental stewardship, etc., etc.

So yes, there is loyalty in business. Customers will not always go to the cheapest source. If they can find that business that they trust and the product serves them well, sometimes it is not worth the effort to try to get a cheaper deal.

BTW, they will always go to the one with the highest value (satisfaction/cost). But I will admit customer service plays in to this. But if someone else is as charismatic as you, does just as good of a job, and only charges half, then you'll PROBABLY be out of luck. Luckily satisfaction is difficult to measure. And in industries where it isn't (gasoline, groceries, etc.) people are a lot more likely to buy based on cost.

 

[craig]

I doubt it. My dad owns his own business and I've worked for too many small companies to ever think positively of them. This is why I'd never be self-employed; I don't have the cutthroat mentality it takes to win. I'm a softie, and I'd end up going bankrupt in a week.

And sorry if I was rude. I re-read my post and it was way too harsh. But you already replied, and there wasn't much I could do about it. Best of luck to you in your future endeavors, cause I have a feeling you professional photographers will need it. But the proof is in the pudding like you said, and the great ones have nothing to worry about.

Thanks! You were not rude or harsh. This a discussion forum. We throw out our viewpoints and hope someone listens. Your thoughts are insightful. We just disagree. That is what this forum is all about.

)'(

 

[Mike_E]

i have a part-time job at a photo finishing place, and while it offers a nice discount on almost anything i need, customers don't seem to understand the concept of photography as a profession. more so, copyright.

when someone comes in to scan a watermarked image, i have to say no. not only is it a company policy, but morally i can't reproduce work while cutting out the photographer.

"well, it's a photo of MY daughter" or something similar is what i often hear. "doesn't matter," i say "you didn't take this photo, so you don't own the rights to reproduce it or manipulate. you can purchase the rights from the photographer, or if you have already, you can provide a release form to show it." this is when people get angry, for some reason. i try to explain it from my point of view. it pays my bills. buys my groceries. it's how i survive. it's theft to reproduce an image without consent - i lose money - same as the shoe store next door would if you were to walk away with new shoes you didn't pay for.

Back to the original, NotElliot, if you think just a minute the reaction is most likely a mixture of frustration and embarrassment. People don't behave too well when feeling either much less when experiencing a combination of both.

Try starting with something like "You know a lot of photographers forget to tell their clients about the copywrite laws but if they catch us printing one of their photos do you think that they would hesitate to sue us right out of business? Noo, and me right out of a job? Noo!"

"So look, here's what you need to do..." and from here you can instruct them and then sell them whichever item you like because now they owe you right?

This presuposes that they were not in fact trying to get the photos done knowing exactly what they were doing. And even if they were, they still have to act like they didn't.

 

[Emerana]

I am not a toy photographer...I am new. Even you were new at one point...unless you were born a photo god. I went into photography because of the sub-par photos I was getting from professionals. They would hype a low-pressure, relaxed photosession with room for delays (we are talking kids here!) and I would still leave soaked in sweat with no pictures that captured who my kids really are. So I bought a good camera but actually found a passion for the art and science and found that I am fairly decent. It has become part of who I am, I love it.

So what would you have me do? Hang up a shingle and start charging rates as to not undercut your prices? I have been shooting for 5 whle months, I am not comfortable with that. Just shoot my own kids until I feel I have gotten enough education to have a business? Or maybe insist people show my a receipt from a real photorapher before I allow them a session?

I happen to love doing children's portraits and people like my work. Iam not really into making a business of it at this point in my life. I think there is nothing morally or ethically wrong with doing art for free...and if my subjects get something out of the end deal, awesome, we both win.

 

[maytay20]

Not quite, you can use it for as long as you want, but you can't legally make a copy of it as it falls under the copyright law




Paying an arm and a leg for a wedding photog is choice - you don't have to. In fact you don't have to get married - saves a hell of a lot of cash. The choice is yours really.

People pay $5k for a dress that they will wear once, and baulk at half of that price for things they will use forever - I know where I'd put my money - and it wouldn't be in either of them!

I have to agree here. They do CHOOSE to pay a wedding photographer and get married. It is not something that is forced. And they can always find a photographer that is less or maybe try and find some random person buy them all of the equipment they will need, train them and see how much money they actually save. One thing I know there was a recent story on the radio on how many women say no to a marriage proposal because the rock in the ring is too small?? What happened to making that decision based on the person and the love you have for them?? And remember all of the equipment, back up equipment, training , books any other misc supplies that photographer has invested in to be a good photographer. Oh and it is right in my contract that I don't expect to be fed at a wedding, but why should I not eat if they are offering it?? In fact the wedding I did yesterday did not feed me and I thought nothing of it. As far as charging for the music that is a little far, we do not get to dance or enjoy the music in ANY way. And any money a person spends on photography is a choice, the same with the rest of the wedding expenses. If they didn't want to put the money towards that they don't have to. I chose to put the money my hubby would have spent on a wedding ring on my 30D and now I make money off it does this mean we are many less married??? No we signed the same paper everyone else did regardless if the spent $20 or 5K on their wedding. That is just my 2 cents on the subject.