To PRO. When customer ask for CD with files instead of prints

[chigirev]

<b>Pro Ethics and $$ Question.</b><br>

Portraits, head shots, family and any event photos.<br><br><b>Now my

customers ask for CD with files very often.</b><br> And I always feel

like I don't really want to give my files away. Here is a couple of

reasons:<br><br><b>1. I don't like when somebody print my photographs

because I can't guaranty quality this way.</b> <br>People usably don't

know how to print it right way. <br>Bad printed photos can affect my

reputation. There is still my name as a photographer there. <br>So

this is about my responsibility and reputation.<br><br>

<b>2. Printing - is a part of my income and I simply loosing money

when I give my work on CD.</b><br><br>.... But when I think from my

customers point of view.... Looks like it is unfairly to decline this

request if they pay for shooting and editing. <br>They paid for it and

why they can't have a CD?<br>

Also I have a risk to loose some customers if I say NO.<br><br>

------<br><b>

Could you please share your experience and thoughts about this.

<br>And if you give CD to your customer - what will be a fair price?

I think this is more then just cost of CD .... </b>

[joshroot]

Either set up your pricing so that you make the money that you need to make just from the "sitting fee", and then hand over a CD and be done with it.

 

Or, charge the equivelent of 75% (or so) of your typical print sale. So if your average client orders $300 worth of prints, charge $225 for the CD.

 

Personally, I choose not to fight people. I pick a price that my time/skill/expenses/etc justify, and then happily give them the CD when I'm done. I don't have to waste time "selling" prints, and the client is happy.

 

Many photographers dislike this method of pricing, but it works fine for me.

[think27]

I've had requests for CD images twice. I shoot film and like you I don't want customers printing images themselves. I know from first hand experience how my images look even with a reputatable pro lab vs the lab I use and have used for 15 years. <p>So - What I do is tell the couple that they need to pay for the CD images up front (scanned at the time of processing the proofs)at near cost. <p>Then - Once they have the proofs and have ordered reprints/albums - they can have the CD's. Once I show them a select group of pics from one lab and the same prints from my lab - they seem to agree and understand that I should print the final prints and albums.

[wedding-photography-denver]

What Mary said.

 

I charge all costs and profit before I press the shutter button.

[Jerry_]

If you have time, you can imprint each and every CD image with

 

 

 

 

Copyright © 2005 Joe Smith Photography All Rights Reserved

 

 

 

about 1/2 inch from the bottom of the image.

 

 

 

___________

 

 

Otherwise, you are, indeed, giving away your work.

[billy_sprague]

I no longer shoot professionally and I haven't for years. In the meantime, my how times have changed. :-)

 

It seems to me that you are fighting a losing battle by refusing to give your customer a cd. The reality is that they could buy a very few prints from you and scan them. Their printing options from there are many and the quality can be quite good. Why not revamp your pricing structure wherein you are charging for your time rather than for prints.

[Spearhead]

<i>Bad printed photos can affect my reputation. There is still my name as a photographer there.<br>

So this is about my responsibility and reputation.</i><p>

Anyone who shoots for publication these days has had to deliver digital files. Now the publication chooses how to print them, and the photographer's name is usually there. If so many of us are doing this and not worrying about it, despite a fairly significant amount of bad printing out there, there must be a reason.

[larry schaefer - chicago,]

Nik I haven't shot my first revenue wedding yet. I am doing a lot of research and studying to find out, that selling the images on disk is catching on. I clearly understand you concerns about the quality management too. I would simply disclaim print quality in my contract when only the images are being purchased.

 

Now you dont have by a proof book, sort, assemble, and maybe deliver.

The management time for reprints is gone too. If you are making thousands on the reprints I would dismiss the disk idea. But if reprints are bringing in just a few hundred or so you should sell the disk for the average cost of proof/reprints minus the time you no longer invest. Experiment sample some labs for their quality in uploaded image printing. I was very impressed with Kodak's Easy Share and Perfect Touch Processing. You could graciously recommend reliable services to hedge the print quality.

 

If there was a survey taken here I as to to where any of us would like to improve the most I think it would be in skill & technique along with income derived from masterful marketing.

 

I hope I can sell a disk packed with the best work I can presently deliver and spend the time in between developing as a photographer not as a developer. And for a price when circumstances dictate, a full service package wont't be shunned.

 

If I am headed in the wrong direction here, someone please spin me around and lead me down a better path.

 

Best regards Nik, great input Josh.

[george_crawford]

We genrally give the customer a cd of the images selected for printing at cost. However files are reduced for presentation on the web (IE no more than 800 pixels wide in the long direction). If they a printing cd ( Ie christmas cards or the like the price goes up and we ask for specifics of where they anticipate printing. ( usally Sams club) Then i will do my best to set color space and print setups right fo rthe files produced and charge for the digital processing at a reasonable rate.

[think27]

Jeff - There are still some publications that refuse to take digital files.. Like Arizona Magazine for instance. I know a graphic designer/pre-press place that prefers transparencies and he hates digital files... he claims that slides (especially medium format) have more information in them than digital files. Better quality. Eventually though it could all go that way. But - we're not talking about publication photos. I'm talking about the album the couple shows friends (future business)...and family. Or, the images, framed on the walls. <p>I've told the story before - but here is how I work my marketing. <p>I used a "pro" lab that many other wedding photographers use in this area including a guy that used to work for National Geographic. I thought the images were terrible by my standards (even though couples may not know any better). The color was just awful and the contrast in the facial lines (smile lines etc.) were dark and muddy. <p>I thought it was my film or something I did wrong! I did about 5 tests with this same lab with negatives that my original lab in Vermont had processed. I even gave the lab proofs to match. NO luck! I even had them do what is called a "ringaround" (or something like that)...where they produced 10 prints of one negative so I could steer them in the right direction! Blocked up greens and details...flat...bad color. <p>I then sent a few rolls from that first wedding up to Vermont. I got back great prints! <p>I saved the originals of that first wedding from the Virginia lab that were bad, the tests the Virginia lab did and the great results from my Vermont lab. <p>When couples come to me and talk about printing their own CD's or negatives... I show them why I need to handle the final product. When they first see the "bad" prints.. They think they are fine. When they see the Vermont lab's work they are always shocked. I only book the type of clients that have a passion for photography and care about quality. Some have actually gone on to see other photographers and then called to book me. Often the reason they give is that they didn't have an understanding about how important color was until they saw my examples. <p>What I'm doing is educating my clients. I have print/album orders in house all the time and most orders exceed $800 and the great percentage of them are over $1500. <p>I've increased my album orders by getting double proofs and putting together a very inexpensive/small favorites album using the PK (Art Leather) album and blank black pages. I put 45-50 shots in there sequentially that tells the story of the wedding day featuring the BEST shots. I think the whole thing costs me about $30. It is well worth it. <p>What that has done is motivate couples to go for a large upscale album for themselves and sometimes also for parents. <p>I don't worry about client's scanning proofs. The proofs have labels on the back with my copyright and phone number. The couplees have been educated on quality and they want the best result. That's how I get around the issue... Thought I'd share it.

[EricM]

"If so many of us are doing this and not worrying about it, despite a fairly significant amount of bad printing out there, there must be a reason."

 

because most non photographer clients couldn't tell a bad print from a good one...$0.17 4x6's from the drug store shot on a 10k 16 meg dslr...too funny...

[think27]

Eric - That is why we have to educate the consumer ;-)

[Spearhead]

Mary -

 

My point was that pros work all the time in situations in which they don't have control over the final product. And I've even sold photos to publications based on poorly reproduced magazine images. Someone else's printing standards haven't been the deciding factor on whether or not I get used.

 

If the designer you talked to is still using a stat camera and paste-up, that's pretty amazing - I don't know anyone working with that stuff anymore. Most publications - even at the highest quality - are doing digital prepress.

 

And for event photography, the standard submission format is digital files.

[EricM]

well, i don't sell prints. so i'll have to say i shouldn't or couldn't argue too much on this matter. however, when i have handed off the dvd of files or negs, i usually accompany it with a word document that explains everything that i have gone over verbally, including the e-link and address of the best, and now only, real lab that remains here. i haven't cared for years what others do with my negs and files. they hired me from word of mouth, and these last few years, from my dated web site. so, what it comes down too, is that I'm now booked from displays on a monitor and that's the indication of how important printing is to the average.

[ilkka_nissila]

I don't shoot for money but when I shoot events, I insist on making the prints myself or having a lab I choose do it. If people want to get crappy prints from a crappy lab, that's their problem. However, they should be given at least one full representation of the best possible quality prints from your originals so that they know what they are missing.

 

If you give a DVD with full-size images, price it much higher than the full album. So they'll at least think about giving you a chance of showing what is possible from your work.

 

People look at images on a monitor and think they look great, and assume that prints automatically will look great too. Then they adjust the files on an uncalibrated monitor and send the files off to a cheapo automatic lab, and get crappy results. As a result, I predict that with digital, photographic printing industry will be reduced below 10% of what it used to be (maybe it already is?) Most people will just look at images on a monitor, and prints will be considered art.

[jeffrey_blake_adams]

IMHO If you count on reprint sales, you will need to learn a new career, soon.

 

Old school, book shoot with cheap (hook) price, (hold images hostage) make it back on print sales... YUCK! Bait & Switch? Client will think so, can you say used car salesman?

 

Newthink;

Charge an honest upfront price for what you need to make to cover fixed and variable costs, yes all of them, plus a healthy profit so you can thrive. Deliver more than they expect.

 

When people buy DVD's I only sell the lowres screenshow type from pictage.

 

When selling "images" you should sell the image, not the "paper" in some size or the "file" what they are buying is something they needed you to create, the image.

 

When people say how much is an 8x10 I say about $4, now if you want an image I created for you on it, its slightly more of an investment.

 

No different for a given amount of pixels,,,,.

 

Now if I were to sell a print ready digineg to a portrait or wedding client, it would cost the same as a professional photographics reprint. In my case I have already made what I need to before the shoot when they pre-paid, so reprints are not that high, ex mini desk portrait (8x10) or smaller could be had for $40ea same with a file, however, that would NOT include the right to reprint. Just like prints don'r come with reprint rights, pro images are copyrighted. You own it.

 

If your clients steal your images by copying them, up your rate, so that you deal with honest clients with attachable assets that won't knowingly expose themselves to civil and criminal liability.

 

Some confuse portrait work with commercial work, or exec/model headshots. Different biz, different biz model.

Commerical shoots are day rate, plus expenses, plus rights.

Headshots are whatever shoot price, inc a good reference print with specific limited rights to repro.

 

Best wishes, Jeffrey