Valuing Photography

jpb · May 6, 2009

I recently signed onto a community website that coordinates customer needs and vendor bids in a fairly open but well organized forum. But then I discovered that the majority of photography bids fell well below acceptable market standards. I grew tired of browsing though potentially interesting titles and then finding bids to perform “professional” photography” for $100.00. The audience seems to consist of clients who pay extremely low fees and struggling photographers willing to accept them.

This inspired me to write the following article, which aims to provide brief insights into the value of photographic labor. I’m hoping it helps clients better appreciate the efforts a photographer will make if allowed the proper resources, and also to help struggling photographers better understand why they cannot afford to undercut the industry.

I hope it's helpful. If you have any suiggestions for improvements, please let me know!

The Value of Choosing the Right Photographer

Whether you need photos of your wedding or of products you’re selling, chances are the photographer you’ll hire will specialize in serving your particular needs and will offer valuable expertise in creating imagery just for you. Understanding a bit about your photographs needs will help your photo shoot result in the best images he or she can create.

Working with a photographer is an often misunderstood concept. The vast developments and price reductions in digital photography equipment have made the craft seem more accessible than ever to the general public.

Today, many people can now pick up a very good camera inexpensively and become proficient through their own research and practice. But learning to take consistently great photos as a profession requires much effort, which shouldn’t be underestimated.

Still, for the average photography consumer, the costs of hiring a photographer often seem excessively high.

It is not uncommon for an emerging wedding photographer to charge $2500 or more for a basic “package.” His or her client might experience a few brief meetings, a day of shooting, and then the resulting albums. But, a lot of unseen hard work goes into capturing the best moments in their best light and delivering them to you with perfection.

When a small business owner needs photography, let’s say product shots on a white background, it might seem that the photographer simply turns on the light and snaps photos. In fact, hours of studio set up, lighting adjustments, prop styling, problem solving, and post-production may be required to make the images good enough to attract customers.

The following information offers an idea of just some costs that every photographer must consider in producing beautiful imagery just for you.

Being creative and professional takes time and effort

For every day of shooting, two more days might be spent on the job. Sometimes much more time than that is required. Your photographer might need to find the perfect location for you and secure permission to use it. Maybe they need to find a model or build a set. And what about editing and retouching? Printing well takes time too, and time literally is money to every business person. When you hire a photographer, you’re buying more than just images.

Photography is not usually a 9-5 job

Many photographers don’t work often or consistently. Some may only be able to find work a few days per month. During the frequent and sometimes prolonged periods not shooting for clients, photographers constantly need to market themselves and maintain their business. They need to practice shooting too. If a full time employee makes $20 an hour, that’s $2400 per month. If a photographer charges the same rate but only works three days in a month, that’s $480, which probably won’t even meet his or her costs of living, not to mention growing a business.

Equipment costs

Equipment doesn’t “make” the photographer, but a professional generally needs a lot of it. It comprises one of the highest capital costs of the business. In order to afford that capital – and the overhead costs of maintaining it – the photographer must offset those costs with revenue.

Treat your photographer fairly

Even if you’re reading this article and saying, “I understand, but I still only have $250 to pay a photographer for my project,” please consider this:

-- Your photographer faces great challenges in succeeding. If you like your photographer you should want him or her to succeed.

-- Anything you can do to help your photographer, even just answering their questions thoroughly, will help them do better work for you, and possibly at less cost to you both.

-- Give your photographer credit if you like the work he or she has done for you. Often a printed credit line can benefit any creative entrepreneur and serve as partial payment.

Photography budgets may seem hard to understand by the average consumer, but the axiom holds true that, “You get what you pay for.” By supporting and appreciating your photographer’s efforts to create images for you, you may even get better results than expected.

May 5, 2009 (Rev.)

eric merrill · May 6, 2009

If a photographer charges the same rate but only works three days in a month, that’s $480, which probably won’t even meet his or her costs of living, not to mention growing a business.

</blockquote>

I don't think you'll find many people sympathetic toward somebody wanting to make a full time living working 3 days a month. I'd like to sign up for that job, myself. :)

Often a printed credit line can benefit any creative entrepreneur and serve as partial payment.

</blockquote>

The last thing I need is a photo credit, unless it's on the comment line of a check. :) I think you're doing a disservice suggesting that publicity can serve as payment.

Eric

enlightened-images · May 6, 2009

Yeah; way ditto on Eric for that credit line as partial payment;

Credit lines don't equal exposure; exposure is standing naked on a wind-swept glacier during an Alaskan winter storm.

I've been in this business nearly 20 years. I can count on one hand with a majority of fingers left over the number of times when someone has called and said, "I saw your photo in XYZ and want to buy it / hire you. It just doesn't happen enough to warrant any practical value worth losing cold hard cash over. Anyway, the 95%+ of people that even read credit lines are other photographers. Not my target market; selling images to photographers.

Besides, if someone only has $100.00 - $250.00 to hire a photographer, my guess is they only care about getting something that's "good enough", not good, not great, just good enough. And chances are at those fees, they may only stand a 50-50 chance of getting something that is even good enough.

But I do know how you feel....

jim_jones22 · May 7, 2009

I recently ran accross a website of some wedding photographers who only shot medium format film. Very expensive to book and they are booked solid. Meanwhile the countless other digital photagraphers are battling it out in the creative services section of craigslist. I think now days you just gotta have a super skill or some amazing artwork to get paid. Its just like anything else in the world that is competetive, The bar is constantly being raised.

Spearhead · May 7, 2009

I saw your photo in XYZ and want to buy it / hire you.

</blockquote>

I get quite a bit of work this way. I shoot in fairly "closed" communities, like the professional fighting world and the stripper world, and I get work this way. Some editor or book publisher sees my credit and looks me up on the internet. Works for me.

Back to the original post, I think it's silly to lecture clients about the photographer's life. Who cares if photography is low paying and doesn't provide consistent work? That's the photographer's problem, not the client's. It's not the client's job to support my family, it's the client's job to pay me reliably for whatever I can negotiate with them. It's also not the client's job to worry about what I pay for equipment. For every sob story I could concoct, they will have one equally as sorry, so there's no point in going there. The equipment is my burden. This whole thing just sounds silly, like we aren't grownups doing business together. I don't even meet some of my clients, why do I need them pitying me when we don't even know anything about each other, and I certainly wouldn't want them to see this "manifesto."

alec_myers · May 7, 2009

Often a printed credit line can benefit any creative entrepreneur and serve as partial payment.

</blockquote>

This will be true only when my local supermarket will take a "printed credit line" instead of my debit card. I agree with Eric that " you're doing a disservice suggesting that publicity can serve as payment."

Credit is in addition to, not instead of, payment. It's your right as the creator of work, not something you should have to buy back.

enlightened-images · May 7, 2009

Jeff:

Glad that the credit lines work for you in your niche. From what I've heard across the boards that seems like you're on the exception side of the rule. But must also assume that you're getting editorial credit lines in books & magazines as part of the industry standard requirements, and not accepting an offer of a credit line as value in lieu of a reduced cash payment?

I'll admit, I'm not too much into fighting, but if I understand you correctly: If I photograph strippers and get those photographs into books and magazines with a credit line, I'll get people calling me to photograph more strippers? - Why am I liking the sound of this more & more? :)

Spearhead · May 7, 2009

<blockquote>But must also assume that you're getting editorial credit lines in

books & magazines as part of the industry standard requirements,

and not accepting an offer of a credit line as value in lieu of a

reduced cash payment?</blockquote> That's true. But if I were just starting out, I might consider a credit line in the more prominent publications in the field as partial payment. A lot of it comes down to reputation, and in a business where access is a major factor, reputation can get you access can get you paid publication.<blockquote> If I photograph strippers and get those photographs into books and

magazines with a credit line, I'll get people calling me to photograph

more strippers? -</blockquote> Those are web-only, there aren't many publication opportunities. What comes out of the credit line is publicity work, portraits and setups for fliers etc. I don't get paid for the live stuff, nobody does as far as I know.

ed mendes · May 7, 2009

It seems that many "photographers" today spend a lot of time devaluing the craft of photography. It's sad and foolish.

jpb · May 7, 2009

Thanks to you all for your insightful comments. I am glad to have them.

Since the majority of responses related directly to a single concept in the article, I’ll just address that by saying, it seems like those willing to pay the least are also those least aware of the appropriateness of a credit line. I've heard several anecdotes and experienced the benefits of a credit line myself, but I didn’t mean to stress that a credit line could be considered in place of a payment, only that it is one way of many to respect a photographer’s hard work.

Obviously, the article misses its mark, which we’re all likely to do now and then, so I’ll let it die here without further comment.

Otherwise, maybe you’ll like this better. It’s a short new video I just finished, which I hope you’ll enjoy!

intro-duck-tion (00:01:48) on YouTube: <a href="

00TIBH-132681684.jpg.aaf242a030aafa4aad37fa63465ccad3.jpg

</div>

gregory_c · May 8, 2009

Back in the 50's & 60's my uncle used to photo weddings with a Graflex with the 1 shot interchangable backs. Between weddings he had a suitcase with these backs in it. He would qucikly reload these in a total black closet or in a bag. In the 70's & 80's, & most of the 90's the skill was needed to shoot great film shots. Exposure, composing posing, making sure no trash; even a speck was anywhere in the area. Then came the digital age. Spend 800.00 on nice body, $500.00 for nice lens, set camera on auto, then your photos could; and often happened; were as good as any pro around. Just fix it in photoshop ! Photography was a true art, now photoshop is taught to 6th graders, 3 year old on TV takes photos & downloads into lap top. I saw the work of a 17 year old, it was better than some that I see on this site. She shoots a wedding for under $200.00. Sure she is young. Could any of us shoot with equipment and quality like my uncle did ? NO ! These weddings consisited of 50-75 perfect photos. The Value of Choosing the Right Photographer, 2 types of photographers now, expensive or like this 17 year old. All us middle of the road guys are struggling Being creative and professional takes time and effort mmm, creative,,time in front of the computer yes, less effort due to auto cameras. Professional, yes, all the way from how you dress to controlling people & equipment. Photography is not usually a 9-5 job correct, I have spent many of nights to midnight carding negatives or correcting photos on the computer, arriving home at 12:45AM Sun AM from a late wedding, leaving Sat AM at 9:00AM. Equipment costs, yep, crossed the $15,000 mark a few years ago. Have 2 hasselblads not being used, now it is a struggle to have a better digital camera than Uncle Joe. When I shot Hasselblad, no one at a wedding ever had a Hasselblad. Plus my Hassy's never became outdated like digital cameras eventually do. Treat your photographer fairly, that is a tough one, back to photoshop being taught to 6th graders, 17 year old's very good work. Hey I will not touch a wedding outdoor portrait sitting for what she does one for. But is reality, I saw a photo this guy took of his son. It would have won a photo competetion, it was perfect, I asked him about it, he said all I did was turn camera on & shoot it. Could have he done it over & over with different children, different times of the day, & different locations ? no, that is what divides us pros from dads shooting with auto cameras. But with photoshop & auto cameras, it is easier to get professional looking photos from anyone, espically the trend to shoot 5000 shots at a wedding, do that with my Hasselblad. Bottom line: photo business is falling into 2 catagories: 1. High priced pros, Denis Reggie type, great websites, great photos, expensive additional photos, $3000 & up for a wedding 2, low priced pros, some great photos, usually all photos on CD's, no albums, usually young female photographers, shoot a wedding for $500.00. then there are the millions of 17 year olds, who do very good work, weak on posing & dealing with people, but are right behind us "getting older pros". Photoing at 1/3 of what we charge.

gregory_c · May 8, 2009

Jim Jones said something interesting:

"I recently ran accross a website of some wedding photographers who only shot medium format film. Very expensive to book and they are booked solid."

This goes back to photography being a art. To me,,shooting film takes more skill than digital. Digital is too easy, shoot it , look at LCD screen, don't look good, adjust f stop ( that is us people who shoot digital on manual) shoot again, & again. These guys do not shoot 5000+ shots of everything, it is back to the "quality over quantity"

Spearhead · May 8, 2009

It seems that many "photographers" today spend a lot of time devaluing the craft of photography.

</blockquote>

Where do you see anyone doing that?

peter_ferling · May 9, 2009

The convenience of technology is the price that we have to pay. If average Joe walks into Best Buy and picks up a 40D, then bothers to read the manual and shoots a bit. Suddenly he's getting images that are par for the course, and why? Because there was a time that it took talent, effort and know how just to get even mediocre or average quality.

It was only a few years ago that very few folks had 5MP camers and HP printers. So, just having access to the gear was reason enough to be hired.

People will only hire you if they can't do it themselves, or do not have access to a good friend or family member who can, or worse, the new kid on the block who will do it for free cause he or she needs the experience. The bar has been raised for certain. Even so, the current economy has everyone thinking long and hard before they part with their money.

The digital vs. film is a battle that we've placed upon ourselves. Our customers won't know, or care about the difference. Digital is tech, hip, new, whatever. There is a whole industry out there pumping dollars into marketing and devices to secure that. It's over. The actual path to create an image is no longer a selling point. What matters is how good your shots look, and whether or not your a problem solver.

The other issue is one of privacy. We live in a society that is overwhelmed with lenses pointing everywhere. They watch our driving habits, our shopping, and our workplace. Every cell phone has a lens, and youtube is chock full the results. The novelty of getting a picture or being on camera is long wore off and in some cases, something to avoid.

Third, we now have a young generation whose grown up in lens pointing everywhere world. The thought that one should have to pay for food on the table prices for pictures is just as dumb as having to pay for the air that we breath.

What this all boils down to is what matters in the first place: How good is your work, and do you work it?

mark_davidson · May 13, 2009

What this all boils down to is what matters in the first place: How good is your work, and do you work it?

Telling the world why something (anything) is valuable is pointless. Thousands of unique and valuable businesses have disappeared in communities across the globe. Today we have people lamenting the absence of these businesses from the world and the lack of quality/choice available today.

They can look in the mirror for the cause.

Everybody seems to support small businesses in general but in the next breath make a comment as to the greed of the local merchant.

Actually, many clients feel that most photo jobs are simple or interchangeable and thus the real differentiator is price. People can go on about awesome skills and talents but it doesn't matter to the vast bulk of potential clients out there. They feel that they are well informed in general and thus are not really going to listen to the self serving spiel about getting a "quality" photographer. (As if you could actually determine that in any meaningful way until the transaction was complete)

The first question is "How much?" the newbie (one of the 25 million) quotes a price that gives him beer money and hopes to go full time a little later. This is the background noise in which many pros have to compete. To say that the bottom feeders have no effect on established pros is to ignore facts.

There were always newbies fouling the market. Now their numbers are multiplied by thousands.

Sign In

Valuing Photography

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in