How do you handle clients that want digital copies of their portraits?

<p>Recently, I have encountered some portrait clients that want only want digital copies of their photos and no actual prints. I would like some advice on how to handle this, and how much is reasonable to charge for it if I do it.<br />Because of the area I do business in, I can't charge a very high fee for a photo session, so a good portion of my income relies on photo sales. Because I live in a small town, there is a lot of competition for business, and the demand for photographers is not very high so business is slow, and I really need all of the photo sales I can get.<br />This is particularly a problem when I do a portrait session for a large family gathering (extended family) as I did recently. After I posted the proofs (I post my proofs on my Zenfolio website so my client can view and purchase them at their leisure), one of the family members contacted me and asked about buying just digital copies of the photos. My policy up to this point has always been that for a fee a client could buy a CD of low resolution watermarked copies of the photos the client orders prints of, but I don't sell just digital copies. In this case, they have not ordered any photos, and if I don't offer digital copies they may not buy any photos at all. They told me they love the photos, and I get the impression that it is a rare occurrence for that many members of their family to get together at once, so it is very puzzling to me that they have not bought any of the photos. The problem is, if I sell digital copies they can easily share them with the rest of the family, and if they are not low resolution and watermarked they can get their own prints made, and no one else in the family would buy any. Even if I tell them that they can't share the photos or have prints made, and to do so would be illegal, that would not deter most people from doing so. So as you can see, it is a big dilemma. Obviously I would be better off selling digital copies than selling no photos at all, but to do so under such circumstances I feel I would have to allow them to only buy a very small number of digital photos and charge a significant fee for them, but I am not even sure what would be reasonable in such a case.<br />I would greatly appreciate any advice as to the best way to handle situations like this, and if I do sell just digital copies of the photos, how many photos to allow and what to charge, or any other suggestions you may have.</p>

<p>How about charging 10x the gross profit you make on a paper print for one digital image?</p>

 

<p>Well that is an idea, but the price I charge is dependent on the size of the photo they order, and I'm not sure what size I would base it on.</p>

Base it on what profit you want to make, for the whole package.

 

You're going to find many (most?) customers will want digital copy alongside or instead of physical prints - people like e-mail, facebook,

personal websites, et al; and that's how they'll want to share their precious moments, especially when their friends and family may be spread

all round the world. This could be a good opportunity to learn how to survive and thrive in such a market.

<p>The client can just as easily buy an 8x10 print and scan it to get their own digital file. </p>

<p>I'm not sure there's an easy answer. The client might perceive it as double dipping if you're already charging for the session to acquire the digital images, but if your argument is that you're recovering processing time by selling prints and a client doesn't want hard copies, then you might consider another category of "packages" that caters to clients who only want digital files. Maybe based on incremental image resolutions. </p>

<p>If you were working back in film days this is like them asking to buy the negatives. My answer would be "no." If a client said ahead of any shoot they wanted to purchase the negatives I would quote a cost to them of -- oh, maybe a typical shoot. In other words they would have to pay a fee equal to a predetermined number of print sales plus sitting and regular fees. And there would be an extra stiff fee for releasing the negatives.<br>

The simple answer is to say "no" that you sell prints not digital copies. There will always be clients who want to get your work on the cheap. You need to put a decent value on your time and effort. That's what a professional does.<br>

If you need a new frabberjob for your car engine do you ask the mechanic to loan you the tools so you can do the work yourself in his shop? He'd run you out of the joint.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>do you ask the mechanic to loan you the tools so you can do the work yourself in his shop? He'd run you out of the joint.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br />I don't think that's a good analogy to someone asking to buy a digital file.</p>

<p>A successful business is one which supplies the customer with what they want at a price they are happy to pay. A business which tries to dictate to its customers what they should be buying will soon find they have no customers.</p>

<p>If people are requesting digital files then you have two choices: 1. Give them what they want. 2. Let them go elsewhere.</p>

<p>Shockingly few people want prints these days. Well, it's only shocking the first few times you run into the issue, and then you realize it's the new normal.<br /><br />So consider including LOW resolution digital images as part of the sitting fee - something that's suitable for them to pass around by email and to post on social media sites. These should tastefully include your logo. High resolution image files, suitable for printing, are something that you'd price separately, about like you would an 8x10. Understand that making money from the whole family buying prints is fading rapidly as a business model. It's simply going to end, and already has done so, years ago, in most larger markets. Honestly, I'm kind of surprised that this is just now presenting itself to you. It won't go away.</p>

<p>Yes, do listen to Smith and build a giant business purveying crappy copies. You'll get one heck of a reputation in your community. Why not just buy a Holga with light leaks?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>You'll get one heck of a reputation in your community.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Even if the effect were as real and widespread as this portrays, it won't matter if one is out of business in the first place for trying to sell things customers don't want. Roxanne's model may work fine. I don't know. It won't be a surprise, however, for this issue to increase in intensity as time goes by.</p>

<p>As to the question Roxanne asked, it might be explained that hi rez digital files are not offered so that the best price for the shoot itself can be given while allowing individual customers choices to fit their needs. If I provided hi-rez images for customers to share, I would have had to charge (whoever paid) a lot more. Then suddenly but subtlety change the subject to that customer's needs or desires as to what they will like to do with the imagery and talk a sale to fit that criteria as much as possible.</p>

<p>I would think about it in the following way.<br>

1. What was my profit (sales-cost of goods sold) for the last year for portrait sessions?<br>

2. How many portrait sessions did I do in the last year?<br>

3. Divide profit (#1) by number of sessions (#2) and this provide how much money you made specifically out of an individual portrait session.<br>

4. I would then offer a digital package that includes the digital files that is 120% higher than the number from #3 and add to that the costs related to the generation of the digital files for the client.<br>

In this approach you don't have to worry about how many prints they make, etc, because that will all be reflected in your calculation.<br>

For my business, I charge a fixed session fee which compensations me for my time and expenses related to the digital files. I came to this number using the approach described above. I provide all sort of disclaimers about if they print the pictures may or MAY NOT turn out ok. I also offer prints and pretty reasonable prices, because everything that I will likely make is built into the session fee upfront. <br>

I am in the process of refining this model, but have not finished the modeling.<br>

I went this route because 99% of my clients want the digital files whether or not they want prints from me. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>build a giant business purveying crappy copies</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Why do they need to be crappy copies? They can be full resolution, post processed files for the customer to print at whatever size is required... or not.</p>

<p>I think, Steve, that he meant the prints the customers print or purchase elsewhere on the cheap may lack quality control such as proper color balance and then the photographer will be blamed out of ignorance. Its a fair issue but I'm not sure the degree to which that will occur is as high as the comment suggests.</p>

<p>Yes, John, you are correct. I advise the client that if they choose to not print thru me, I can not assure them of the quality of the print. Remarkably, many clients get great pictures off of my digital files, and some do not. Depends on where they go.<br>

For me the model is simple. Charge for the process of photography and avoid profit generated off of prints. It will restore your business to a valuation of what you do that is not dependent on prints and when people realize the value of prints, you have added some additional profit.<br>

Just a thought.</p>

<p>The thing that is most odd in this case is that when she booked the session, she said "There are lots of family members to take photos of so lots of photo orders for you!", so she obviously intended to order pictures herself, and she is about 60 years old, and the older the customer the more likely they are to want prints in my experience.</p>

<p>It's entirely possible that the lady has younger tech-savvy family members encouraging her to ask for digital files so they can try their hand at (further) tweaking. </p>

<p>Steven, that is good in theory, but in my case I can't charge a higher photo session fee than I already do. If I did, my clients would go elsewhere because there are other good photographers in the area that charge about the same as I do now. By the time I add in my time for editing the photos I'm lucky if I make more than minimum wage.</p>

<p>Roxanne, I am a bit confused so bear with me<br>

Can you provide numbers for yourself and for your competitors?<br>

Session Fee?<br>

How much you/they make on prints?<br>

If you are saying that your session fee plus print costs are higher than competitor session fee plus print costs, then perhaps you have a problem. But the cost of goods for prints is substantial while the costs of generating a disk with digital files is tiny. You could keep your total the same, take away the prints, provide digital files and make more money. The difference depends on your total sale of prints per session on average and your cost of goods for those sales.</p>

 

<p>I charge the same or slightly less for my sessions and my prints as other photographers in town who have my level of expertise.</p>

<p>Figure out how much you are making on average in prints (sales minus costs), add to your session fee, and advertise you provide high resolution digital files that clients can print from. You make the same amount of money. Or at least offer that as an option.<br>

The value add is your expertise in photography and creating great images. Printing use to be were lots and lots of post processing occurred, but today, printing is just that... printing.<br>

Do you market yourself? Do you have a website? </p>

 

<p>Yes I have a website:<br>

<a href="http://www.roxannedavisphotography.com/">http://www.roxannedavisphotography.com</a><br>

I do as much marketing as I am able to. My business does well in the search results for photographers in my town, but it has just been extremely difficult to generate clients.</p>

<p>Clients want digital files, that's the story nowadays. They want their images on their iPads, iPhones, Facebook pages etc. But a lot of photographers don't care that this is what the market wants in the 21st century because they haven't figured out how to make money from selling digital files. I stopped selling prints about 5 years ago and my business took off. I just upped my hourly rate and hand over a certain number of files with each package. If they want more they pay. I average at least a job per day between Oct and early Dec. My hourly rate is now 2X my old day rate.</p>

 

<p>Charge for your time and expertise, not your prints.<br>

I'd want digital copies too. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>It's entirely possible that the lady has younger tech-savvy family members encouraging her to ask for digital files so they can try their hand at (further) tweaking.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Is there something that needs to be fixed? Getting much cheaper prints from the file is the more likely motive.</p>

<p>I'm afraid you need to change your structure: charge high setup fees, and print cheap. They came to you as a big group because it's unlikely Walmart or Penney could do the job, and you have to charge for that. For people without a lot of money to spend these days, your biggest (mine too, also a small town with lots of competition) is the department store and discount store studio, 10x8 print for $19.99.</p>