Am I getting ripped off?

<p>$500 for 10-12 hours work as a sub-contractor is a more than a decent day's pay. You're just handing over the images after the shoot correct? Then again if you don't need the money and find the offer insulting just say no.</p>

<p>ok so I spoke with her on the phone and told her my concerns. We came to the conclusion that I can shoot the photos all day but instead of editing them, I can hand over my card at the end of the night. I already feel alot better. This sounds much more appealing than the original agreement.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"She has already changed the situation a bit, at first she said I needed to be at the wedding at 1pm in a town about 20 minutes from here, now I got an email this am saying I need to be in another state (about an hour from here) at 12 noon."</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Is this even the same wedding? If it is a different wedding, when did she book the out of state wedding for this Saturday? Is she conducting a a Craig's List brokage?</p>

 

<p>It is the same wedding and where the ceremony is - is close to the state line, and the brides house is just over the stateline. She says it's only 10 miles from the ceremony.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>She was almost outraged at the amount of money I was asking for, claiming thats the most anyone has quoted her so far.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Negotiating technique. She was more than likely BS'ing you.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Anyway she continued to tell me that she has lots of people interested in this opportunity to join her group and that she starts people off between $500-$800 to be a second shooter.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>So? Who cares what she says she starts people off. You have you're cost and profit structure.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>She even implied "more qualified people" were being considered, or something along those lines.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Pffft. Whatever. She's just trying to knock you down - both monetarily and confidence in your own marketability.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>She called me last night to ask me to do a wedding this Saturday and she would offer me $500.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Gee! Where are <em>all </em>the others she was considering? Hmmmmm? Aren't there folks jumping at the "opportunity"? I would have countered at $2000 because it was such short notice.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>My gut tells me I'm making as little money as possible for that day.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You have 4 years of experience in the business. You're guts are probably telling you the truth. I say put some distance between you and this .... person.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Dave your thoughts are mine exactly. I do feel better that the day no longer includes me going home to edit these photos. I've commited to the job and I'll do it Saturday and see how it goes. As of now I am working 10:30 am to 9 pm. Lord Help me! ha. All I can say is that this has been a big learning experience and if nothing else, I'll be $500 richer that day- which will probably pay for the headache I'll have at the end. Did I mention I'm shooting a wedding for my own company Friday night!?!</p>

<p>Elizabeth --</p>

<p>Here's a few more thoughts since you have posted more information and have had another phone conversation with "the company" <em><strong>At this point, the money is a moot point... $500 is good pay for a day's work as a second.</strong></em></p>

<p>Point 1: It still appears that you don't have a written in stone agreement with "the company" <strong>GET EVERYTHING <em>IN WRITING </em>!!!</strong></p>

<p>Point 2: When I second, I like to know who I'm working with. At a minimum, I speak with the primary over the phone a few days before the wedding just to coordinate arrival times, who is shooting what, (i.e., bride getting ready and groom getting ready), and what my role will be in their eyes.</p>

<p><em>See if you can get the contact info for the primary to coordinate with each other. If "the company" can't give you the primary's contact info, I'd plan on shooting the wedding solo.</em></p>

<p>Point 3: <em>"</em><em>She is a pro herself but looking to move away from the photography part and focus more on the business part."</em> Are you sure? Have you seen anything she has shot before? I'm not talking about a portfolio... I'm talking about seeing entire wedding shoots.</p>

<p>Point 4: Now that you're handing over your cards, do you have any rights to the photos or will "the company" claim them as their own... Or "her" own?</p>

<p>Point 5: Where is "the company" getting their clients? Craig's List? Fleabay? Weddings.com? Is she really trying to start a photography house like Bella? Does "the company" have a website? Is that where the clients come from?</p>

<p>I'm not trying to scare you, I'm just trying to figure out what "the company" is trying to accomplish. It really sounds like "the company" is not very good at doing business yet. I understand that starting up is tough, but "the company" should have a business plan, lawyers, contracts, and <strong><em>contracted photographers</em></strong> before getting clients. "The company" seems to be doing things half-@$$ed and I'm just not sure I would want my name, let alone my work, associated with such a company.</p>

<p>Keep in mind, I'm not saying to burn bridges. I'm just telling you to cover your @$$.</p>

<p>RS</p>

<p>Richard- great points, here is what I can tell you:<br>

1. She is sending me a second shooter contract that she got from PPA (that I asked for)<br>

2. I spoke with the primary and the owner on the phone today and we set up details for Saturday including what time and where to meet (although if I was the owner, I'd want my two shooters to know more about each other than that!)<br>

3. She actually has been in the business for a while and changed names about 2 years ago to make this more of a "bella" company but specific to only one geographical area. Another photographer friend who has been in the business about 30 years more than me was familar with her and her work and her studio.<br>

4. I do have rights to the photos but I need to have some sort of watermark that says my name and something like "in association with " and then her company name.<br>

5. I am not sure where she is getting her clients at this point. I think a lot of it is people who already know her, so past people and referrals. But I couldn't tell you 100%<br>

I agree that for the starting up of a company there are some big red flags. Like I said, I've commited to it, so I'm going to go forth but I'm sure I'll have lots to say after.</p>

<p>All I can say is "Good Luck" I hope everything turns out well. Please post when it's all over an let us know how everything turned out.</p>

<p>RS</p>

<p>Since you have decided to do this.... I would NEVER hand over my own cards. Ever. If cards aren't being supplied and I am using my own, I will turn over a disc of images. Don't turn over cards or disc until you have payment in hand (at least until you have worked out a good working relationship with a studio). As to how management is running things: who cares (provided I get paid). Show up, do your job well, collect a check, sleep well. That is part of the beauty of not having to run the show. I have shot for some studios in the past that certainly don't do things the way I would do them but the Bride & Groom I am working with appreciated me and I got paid. As to the rights to the images, I am not sure that is that big of an issue (to each their own). Again, $500 is a premium- what most first shooters get paid. And if I am normally shooting $5000+ events (to pocket $2000-$3000), then I don't know where I would want to even take the time to sort through an event where as was a 2nd shooter, let alone use any of the images for marketing.</p>

<p>I thought I read you already said yes you will do it, kinda late to be worrying about something that you have already obligated yourself to do. Enjoy it and learn from it.</p>

<p>Wow, you people love to make moutains out of molehills; create problems instead of solutions, your clients must really love your style.</p>

<p><strong><em>Since you have decided to do this.... I would NEVER hand over my own cards. Ever. If cards aren't being supplied and I am using my own, I will turn over a disc of images.</em></strong></p>

<p>I echo this sentiment. I turned over disks to some of my main shooters for 5 months before they finally wised up and bought my own. I guess they got tired of waiting a month for me to send them. :)</p>

<p>And good luck Elizabeth. Don't burn any bridges and I hope this pans out for you. Good to hear you don't have to do any PP.</p>

<p>Man..I'll take $500 for 9 hours of shooting! I'll do 10 for that! But than again I work full time out of photography and would love to make any amount of money on it!</p>

<p>US&A is big country, but in my own country i would not do it. why? for example your are charging in your own bizz 2-3 $k. But when you are working in other company you are charging 6 times less. Clients might ask why there is that huge difference ?<br>

1 or 2 years ago i was working for another company just like you. Now I don't cooperate with them because sometimes my "boss" agreement with clients was not the same as mine with him . My concclusion that it is better to work on my own in photo bussines.<br>

But in 3D i like to work in team. Maybe that is because of the people which i am meeting everyday. Anyway good luck! </p>

<p>Bill Dewberry - it's about covering bases, anticipating problems, and NOT HAVING LEGAL HASSLES after the fact. That's why there are contracts & lawyers in the world.</p>

<p>Cash?</p>

<p>Elizabeth,<br>

I am not an experienced wedding photographer. I an not even a professional photographer.<br>

I once practiced law.<br>

Often when I had cases, something about them I couldn't define told me that there was some reason I didn't want to proceed with them. Sometimes when courts then did not insist we push them forward I would sit on them for weeks, months, and in certain times, years.<br>

Almost always time bore me out. At the time of discovering a 'bad element' I often could 'fix' it, then proceed to victory or a successful resolution, often a favorable settlement when before I would have lost at trial or not been able to settle at all.<br>

I inevitably discovered some hidden element that would have stood my hair on end had I been able to analyze it, but sometimes things are presently incapable of being analyzed.<br>

It is the sum total of experience in our 'GUT' that tells us the answer and often it is in conflict with what our 'rational' experience or reasoning tells us is right and proper.<br>

You want to make more money, but something in your GUT is offended by the offer; you have even thrown it open as a forum question (under your name where it may be searched for generations even by the party who is proposing to hire you).<br>

There may be something wrong, your GUT is telling you -- perhaps the person has a manner that doesn't sit well with you or your GUT is telling you that other potential problems exist in the future that you should not only be wary of, but you will be ill prepared to deal with - perhaps a challenge to the quality of your work and a proposal to pay you even less at the end when you deliver.<br>

There have been recent studies about people with great experience who cannot rationally and completely analyze their decision-making process, but invariably they come to the right choice if they consider ALL things their mind and body tell them.<br>

There is much to be said for GUT instinct.<br>

I'd listen to my GUT and ask why your GUT is telling you certain things, then see if you either can silence those objections, or pass on the whole thing, since your next meal doesn't hinge on the outcome.<br>

I'd make appropriate excuses, even try to make friends and be a a friendly colleague, even lush fine compliments over the person's work and work setup, in an attempt to make and preserve good relationships.<br>

There is in the world of negotiations a style of negotiating called Soviet style negotiating. If someone says 'meet me half way', and then cuts the difference between the bid and asked by 50%, the Soviet-style negotiator may cut 1 to 3 per cent, or in a fit of seeming generosity cut 5 or 6 per cent (a fictional example, but you get the picture), instead of actgually meeting half-way. That's hard-nosed, give me all sort of negoating. You may be up against a negotiaing style that offends you, or a personality type associated with such a negotiating style.<br>

You have seen this person's negotiating style.<br>

That photographer's negotiating style instead of seeming to 'attack' your fees might have been instead to say, 'well, darn it anyway, you are really good, but the economics of my situation just do not permit me to pay you that kind of money . . . but I'd sure like to have you come on board for this weekend . . . . and it's cash money . . . .I need you to edit by deleting out-of-focus and similar shots, and use a simple program for white balance after the shooting, but other than that all post processing is mine. Got any questions? I'm really easy to deal with, and I'd love to work with you. Can you please find the time to work with me for $500. I know it's a long day's work but it's $500 you would not have in your pocket if you didn't work that day . . . . .<br>

See the difference?<br>

You were approached one way, and you have 'reacted' and now you have to analyze your reaction to see (1) if you have presented the approach completely and honestly to us (not deleted any sugar coating and diplomatic talk that photographer might have used that would have invited discussion) and (2) why you have the GUT reaction that you have.<br>

If in doubt after that analysis, trust your GUT, unless you are insatiably hungry for business.<br>

Or are heedless of consequences.<br>

You may write me directly; address on my bio page.<br>

(I practiced law very successfully for about two decades always negotiating, but ending over 20 years ago, and am not licensed now, do not intend to practice again, and am NOT your lawyer, nor will I become your lawyer, only give general, non-legal advice as a colleague -- pardon the required disclaimer.)<br>

john<br>

John (Crosley)</p>

<p>You make $500 after a full day work. You turn over images and you are done. You didn't have to advertise, plan, make the phone calls, deal with the bride/mother-in-law/groom/planner/etc. You show up and you make, effectively, $100k/yr if you could should at that rate daily. And you only had to show up, shoot competently and burn a disk. Tell me where that's bad.<br>

Fine, you have no right to the images as you did work for hire, but you have your own business where you are the primary artist, so you build your portfolio there. Unless you some how make stunning art as a second, does it really matter to have a few spare images? You have your contract to shoot and turn over images. Sounds like any job most of us do every day.</p>

<p>Elizabeth, an afterthought.<br>

Just the wording of your post indicates substantial negative GUT reaction.<br>

'Am I getting ripped out?' is your language rather than the more neutral 'Is this a fair price' suggests that instead of wanting to know the fairness of the proposal, you have reached a preliminary GUT conclusion and are looking for backing.<br>

You probably should look to why you worded it that way -- is this your common way of speaking, and a general personality trait of yours, or specific to this particular circumstance. It suggest a most unflattering personal assessment by you of the proposal and the party making it.<br>

john<br>

John (Crosley)</p>

<p>I love it when people ask a question ("how much do you want?") and you answer it, and they proceed to tell you you shouldn't be getting that much. </p>

<p>I'd avoid her like the plague.</p>

<p>Most everything has been covered. I would make sure the contract has a clause that hold you harmless for liability. You don't need the bride's family after you because the primary or this intermediary has kludged up the editing. </p>

<p>I don't think $500.00 is so bad as long as it doesn't affect your personal branding. You don't want this lady telling others that she can "buy" you for $500.00. </p>

<p>If I were offered $500 to second someone, with no post required, and on a day where I could spare the time I would probably do it. But I would have a good contract. </p>

<p>I wonder.....If you are getting $2-3K for weddings what does this primary shooter normally earn? I wonder is you are second shooting because the contractor hired a bargain basement primary then got scared. </p>

<p>Elizabeth: a note about 'hold harmless' clauses. They sound good, and in the world of big business they are great; for small transactions among individuals and small business matters they are not very satisfactory. <br>

They essentially mean that if the hiring person/photographer screws he job up or it otherwise gets screwed up and the bride/groom sue, that if there are damages awarded, and they are awarded against all parties, you can seek indemnity (payment) against the hiring party, IF you can find the hiring party, if you can prove it wasn't your fault (perhaps), if that person has any money, and moreover, you might be able to intervene and participate in the original lawsuit, defending yourself, saying you don't have liability, perhaps after you or your insurance carrier has hired an attorney for $10,000 to $15,000 retainer or whatever other minimum retainer they will accept, to claim you don't have liability at all.<br>

Such a clause does not protect you (1) against being sued and (2) against being collected against, but gives you the right under certain circumstances to get your money back from the hiring party (the photographer/labor contractor who proposes the job) if is taken, or even in certain circumstances (depending on how the clause is written) for your attorney fees, time, expenses, etc. - there may be public policy or state limitations to those reimbursements which I will not address.<br>

Beware of hold harmless clauses. <br>

ALWAYS BUY <em>PROFESSIONAL ERRORS AND OMISSIONS (MALPRACTICE) INSURANCE THAT COVERS SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, AND IF YOU HAVE SUCH INSURANCE DO NOT ASSUME IT COVERS THIS CIRCUMSTANCE, ESPECIALLY IF THE HIRING PARTY HAS HER OWN INSURANCE. </em><br>

<em>ASK TO SEE HER POLICY, PROOF THAT IS IS PAID UP, AND THAT IT COVERS YOU (ATTORNEYS OFTEN GIVE NO OR LOW-COST 15 TO 30 MINUTE LAST MINUTE CONSULTATIONS THROUGH BAR ASSOCIATION LAWYER REFERRAL PANELS IN THE HOPE OF GETTING MAJOR CASES AND THE MINIMAL FEE THEY COLLECT GOES USUALLY TO COSTS OF ADMINISTERING THE LAWYER REFERRAL PANEL. THEY REALLY EARN NO FEE JUST FOR A LOOK-SEE AT YOUR CASE AND THE HOPE OF ESTABLISHING A LONG-TERM RELATIONSHIP.</em><br>

In such circumstances, a 'hold harmless clause' or agreement has substantial defects in protecting you from major harm; insurance that covers you is of far greater importance, but you must make sure you are covered and it is 'paid up' and 'in force'.<br>

This should be on every 'second shooter's' checklist I think, anyway, even if you no longer have time to carry this one out yourself for this weekend.<br>

<em>john</em><br>

John (Crosley)</p>

$500 is a very fantastic price in most parts of the country. We pay that to the main shooter and we don't use 2nd shooters anymore.

<p>Thanks for all the responses. I have decided to go ahead with it since I made the commitment and I'll be getting a contract as well. I completley understand John what you are saying and that statement about how I titled this forum came from my gut- not my personality or how I speak. But I do feel better now that I don't have to edit them. I probably woudn't have even posted this if she had said to begin with- $500 for the day, no editing.</p>