Boudoir Photo Party Fees and etc.

[sarahcrossphoto]

<p>I am hosting my first ever boudoir photo party in which I'll have 6 spots to fill for an evening (5ish hours) of girls getting together being girly and doing 6 individual boudoir portrait sessions. (I've not done boudoir specific...but do portraits regularly)<br>

Just want to run this by to see if you think this is a good model and pricing fee.<br>

5 hours-ish, 6 girls (5 paying) the 6th is the host and friend which will have a free shoot.<br>

I'll be renting lights and lens which cost roughly $150<br>

pay myself at least $30/hour (6hours)<br>

charge $75 fee per participant. They bring their own clothing but there will be some extra to go around.<br>

will supply champagne and chocolate.<br>

They choose the image or two images they would like either an 8x10 or 5x7. And it's a great time!<br>

I've been trying to find some other models of such events with little success. Please let me know your thoughts (if this the right forum) and if I am missing anything in the pricing.</p>

<p> </p>

[bobcossar]

<p>That means that each girl pays 75.00, of which 30.00 is for you to rent gear. I think I would feel that the pro at such a great party should be self sufficient with respect to equipment. Regards, Robert</p>

[mike dixon]

<p><em>(I've not done boudoir specific...but do portraits regularly)</em></p>

<p>Shooting photos of scantily-clad women is much different than shooting portraits of fully-clothed people. You may need a completely different approach to lighting and posing in order to get flattering shots, especially if your subjects don't look like lingerie models.</p>

[sarahcrossphoto]

<p>I'd love to hear your approach to lighting. I plan on using a large softbox for starters and the 50mm 1.2 (which I will buy when I can afford...no need to knock a photog down cause they don't have ALL the toys in their bag yet).<br>

The house also has some great natural light which I of course hope to utilize with the fancy velvet couch.</p>

 

[carbon_dragon]

<p>In the one vaguely similar experience I had at a workshop I found I was considerably nervous and didn't do my best work. Maybe I was also a bit distracted. I wonder if there is some way to practice before the event. Not sure how. Wives or girlfriends maybe (but not at the same time).</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Sarah -</p>

<p>The girls don't need to know whether the lights are yours or rentals...the important part is that you know how to set them up to get the best effect. Yeah, so they are paying $30 each for light rental - big deal...I don't tell a wedding client or a portrait client how I'm spending their fees...so I don't get the point Robert.</p>

<p>I'd suggest dragging the shutter to get the ambient light effect...also look at setting up a "hair light" behind them to highlight - well - their hair / faces....</p>

<p>If possible have the lighting worked out and tested before hand. Maybe get the hostess to do a pre-shoot shoot.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[bobcossar]

<p>The point, David is that when you go to a professional for a service, you expect them to have the basic tools they will need.<br>

These girls are going, and paying for, portraits. So they have the right to expect the photographer to have at least the minimum equpment needed for the job.<br>

Is Sarah <em>'does portraits regularly'</em> then what does she use for equipment then? It's like going for a restaurant meal and finding a 35% rental fee tacked on for the plates and silverware.<br>

And you suggest dragging the shutter.......when you don't know the lighting setup....or even what she is going to rent? Amateur-ville all the way.</p>

[john_lynch5]

<p>Robert, if Sarah had left out the part about renting the lighting and just said "I plan to charge each person $75, would you have questioned her about the amount? It seems to me you are nit picking the fact that she is renting some equipment necessary to do a job. Pro's rent equiment all the time. That's why the rental companies are in business. Lighten up.</p>

[bobcossar]

<p>John, I wouldn't have questioned the fee at all. Pros do <strong>not</strong> rent basic equipment all the time.....you think pros sit around in empty rooms waiting for a client so they will then know what to rent? 'Course not.<br>

How you can defend a position like Sarah's boggles the mind.....</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>Sarah, you don't rent a 50mm lens. To start, it's inconceivable that you don't already own a lens that covers 50mm -- almost every camera sold comes today comes with a kit zoom that covers 50, and it you're shooting with lights the aperture isn't imporant so no need for 1.2. Secondly, you can buy a used 50 (probably a 1.8) for about $50 and a new one for maybe a little over $100, so it doesn't make econommic sense to rent. As for lights, before you rent, check out <a href="http://www.strobist.com">www.strobist.com</a>. If you read their Lighting 101 you'll find you can do studio-style lighting with a $90 Vivitar and a $20 umbrella. So for what you would spend renting lighting gear you could buy a basic setup of your own.</p>

[katrin_d.]

<p>I would reconsider the champagne part. What happens if you provide the alcohol, they drive home and a) get pulled over or b) get into an accident. Sounds like a recipe for disaster. <br mce_bogus="1"></p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Robert -</p>

<p>Sarah asked for suggestions on lighting setup I provided my thoughts... You're right - I don't know the lighting setup - I'm not in her house / studio. I do know what I would do in a similar situation.</p>

<p>As for the rental / buying / having equipment issue... hmmm... I guess that the pros covering the Olympics in Vancouver aren't really pros since they don't own their 400mm f2.8 lenses....that's why Nikon and Canon both trucked in tons of new equipment for people to look at and not borrow / rent, since all the pros own their own gear....boy...glad I now know that definition of "Pro" ;-)</p>

<p>I actually give Sarah credit for knowing that she a) doesn't have the proper equipment and b) renting instead of going into debt to buy something that she doesn't know if she'll use again.</p>

<p>Sarah - I do agree with the last point on the champagne - you could be found liable if someone drinks and drives... check with your insurance provider - make sure you're covered or lose the alcohol.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

<p> </p>

[mikael_karlsson]

<p>I agree with David. What difference does it make if Sarah needs to rent the lights or not? Occasionally I need to rent specialized lenses - does that mean I'm not a pro even though I've been doing this for a living for the last 20 years or so? Does the fact that many Nat Geo photographers borrow specialized lenses from the society rather than owning them themselves make these photographers less of a professional? Obviously not.<br /> <br /> If anything, realizing before a shoot that you might not have the needed equipment and would have to rent it is - to me - a sign of professionalism. I am a full-time pro and I don't own a single light. Why? I don't use lights all that often and it wouldn't make any fiscal sense for me to buy even one when I take into consideration how often - or not - I actually use it.<br /> <br /> Anyway, I think you charge way too low Sarah. Sounds like a lot of work for very little/hour. This is one of the most common mistakes I see these days, people charging too little. To be able to make it running any small business you'll need to put in enormously long days. All the time. If you look back on a 100+ hour work week and you realize you've made $3/hour worked you'll pretty soon be in serious risk of burn-out. Working extremely hard and taking big risks for extremely low pay/profit only works for so long and, IMHO, it's better to charge at least somewhat properly from the very beginning.</p>

[bobcossar]

<p>Mikael.....The emphasis is on the word <strong>"Specialized</strong> "</p>

<p>No one who is a working pro who "does" portraits needs to rent<strong> "Lights and a 50mm f/1.2 lens" </strong> for a small, single person portrait session.</p>

<p>The concept is ludicrous. As is the proposition that she should <strong>"Charge properly"</strong> Given her status....what amount might you suggest?</p>

[mikael_karlsson]

<p>Robert:<br /> <br /> Whatever is appropriate for her market. What would you suggest? That people starting out or starting over or switch focus (no pun intended) charge nothing? Or what, come up with a suggestion moving the discussion forward maybe?<br /> <br /> Did you ever stop to think that maybe by "does portraits" she meant she has started to do some portrait work, like what she's doing and want to expand? Maybe she's an amateur wanting to start working but simply worded her post a little "wrong". Why all the negativity? And why so <strong>very</strong> negative?</p>

[john_a5]

<p>HMMMMMM, I have been a pro and had to actually rent a 35mm camera to do a job for Nike, I guess I am not a professional?!? Certainly there are basic things a photographer needs, but I have no issue with any rental, even if it is someone else's idea of basic.</p>

<p>As to the lens, I am not sure the need for a 1.2, but you have to decide on that. You just want to be sure you have a lens that will draw them nicely, and generally that is a bit longer lens--depends on the amount of room you have as well.</p>

<p>As to lighting, I think you need to decide what style you want the shots to look like. I like dramatic light and would look at someone like www.williamcoupon.com for some beautifully lit 1 softbox portraits. But you might like something more open where you put the light over the camera or just slightly off to one side instead of as great an angle as Coupon uses. You need to decide that for yourself.</p>

<p>Pricing seems really light, but then it is a party and I doubt you would get many takers for a higher fee in such a setting.</p>

[bobcossar]

<p>Mikael, criticism does not equal negativity. I can't read the lady's mind, as you apparently can. I can only read her post, and draw the conclusions I must.<br>

But, I have noticed that the more obtuse the issue, the more the ill-informed will come out to defend it.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Robert -</p>

<p>I actually took the time and effort to look at Sarah's portfolio / website and found her to be, IMHO, far from an amatuer..... In fact she has quite a portfolio of journalistic / pj shots and portraits.</p>

<p>Sarah came to the forum seeking advice - I provided it to her based on the information at hand. </p>

<p>Based on her portfolio - I can completely understand why she doesn't have studio lights and would be renting vs buying at this point. As for a 50mm f1.2 - again - not something that a lot of pj's carry around...</p>

<p>I'm not sure how dragging a shutter or recommending rental of equipment is "Amateur-ville all the way"...enlighten me please... </p>

<p>As for the "obtuse" and "ill-informed" - I'm not going to go there... but as one of my favorite bands says - "by chosing not to chose you still have made a choice."</p>

<p>Dave</p>

[rachel_stephens2]

<p>The 50mm 1.2 is a great lens. I use it all the time for boudoir and that's all I shoot. Rent it til you can afford your own. It's a pricey lens but worth every penny. Your pricing sounds low to me especially if you are including a print but you have to start somewhere. If you are including product with the session fee as a package, you must consider your post production time and include that in the total fee. Particularly with boudoir since you will be spending more time in post retouching than you would for pretty much any other type of portrait. you'll also want to have them sign a portrait contract and include a waiver that protects you from lawsuit after the fact if someone were to fall or be really stupid and drink there and drive. best of luck and have fun. </p>

[sarahcrossphoto]

<p>Wow...what responses!<br /> I had no intention for this to turn into a battle over whether renting equipment was a sign of professionalism.<br /> Thank you David for taking the time to look at my website. I really appreciate. And thank you Rachel and others with sound advice as per the Boudoir Shoot.</p>

<p>AS PER BOUDOIR:<br /> The majority of the takers are my good friends who have approached me with this. Due to the time constraints of the set up, I won't be able to give each person a full few hours of shooting time which I normally would with a personal shoot. So being that this is Boudoir Party number 1, they are my friends, and they are getting probably a third of the time I normally give, I think may justify the cost. Maybe not. I'll keep thinking on that. I may however, take out the included print and offer that as extra. And if all goes well, the hostess and I will have another for friends of my friends with a much higher package and a higher level of service since we will be a well oiled boudoir shooting machine. :)</p>

<p>I've seen other boudoir shoots offer champagne. A friend actually offered to supply champagne. Does this release me from liability? Fortunately, all participants will be using public transit (they don't even own cars). But in the alternative and worst case scenario, should I include a portion about this on their photo release? Or is it an altogether separate release.</p>

<p>Anymore tips and tricks in the boudoir business is WELCOME.</p>

<p>NOW: A NOTE ON RENTING><br /> Renting is actually something new to me. I've always had it in my mind that I needed to buy and own everything outright..and in fact went into a lot of debt because of it..eventhough as a photojournalist, I shoot lite. DEBT IS NOT FUN. So my bag got a lot of gadgets including multiple strobes and umbrellas, a variety of lenses (covering the 50mm) and including gadgets I don't use. Now that I'm finally out of debt, I'm ready to play some more. YAY! Without a job (unemployed, can't even find part time work, outside of a very new photography business in a new expensive town) buying is not in my current cards. So I apologize for not being specific with my financial scenario...I tend to think it should be private...and my decision to rent till I can own is my decision and should not require a judgment on my professionalism. But I <em>will</em> be more specific in future posts.</p>

<p>I've recently discovered that VARIETY IS MARVELOUS and there is soo much to play with in photography. Give a gal a chance to learn and have some fun with it. We are photographers. We play. We want to try out new things...and then possibly buy those new things. And yes...when trying out something new on a client...I will be darn sure that I am no novice with the device come shoot time. So really ...unless you are going to give me a credit card with a barrel of money on it that I don't have to pay back, please stop thinking owning stuff makes a professional photographer. It makes one that has a lot of stuff.</p>

<p>So please all...lets move from this discussion. I come to these forums in search of support since I'm having a hard time finding support within my physical community. I thank you for your concerns and/or criticisms and would LOVE positive sound advice in the form of tips and tricks so that maybe we can all come to together and better the photography community.</p>

<p>Best. Sarah</p>

[mikael_karlsson]

<blockquote>

<p>But, I have noticed that the more obtuse the issue, the more the ill-informed will come out to defend it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Robert:<br /> <br /> Yes, naturally, so sorry. What was I thinking... Ill-informed that I am... I must at once stop consulting other pro photographers as well as call McGraw-Hill, Pearson, Scholastics, etc to remind them that they must not use the latest batch of images they've licensed from me, as I apparently haven't got the foggiest what I'm talking about. I better probably also go flog myself just in case...<br /> <br /> Nowhere did I say I could read the OP's mind. I merely suggested a different point of view, something you seem unwilling to even consider.<br /> <br /> Go ahead and call me whatever you want in your superiorness - I shall engage in this no further.</p>

[june_daley]

<blockquote>

<p>So please all...lets move from this discussion. I come to these forums in search of support since I'm having a hard time finding support within my physical community</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>You might wanna read that, Robert. Your first and subsequent posts are not useful to the poster so why are you even bothering? Sarah is asking for advice but all your doing is berating the other posters trying to help her! If you're here to pick an argument or show your Superiority then you might just be in the wrong place. </p>

<p>ANYWAY. On to your questions Sarah... I agree with what some other posters have written in regards to your lenses, you should look at buying a 50mm instead of renting, as a portrait photographer a good 50mm will be of great use to you (I'm curious what you currently use as a substitute?) The 50mm f/1.8 ii is an excellent, cheap lens - I bought mine new for AUD $99 (the original 1.8 sells for sometimes twice the price used as it has a metal mount and better build quality but the optics are identical) either way they're both excellent value and very sharp, grab yourself one of those and it won't break the bank.<br>

Renting your lighting is a great idea IMHO, I splurged and bought all my lighting equipment straight up more than 6 months ago and have not paid them off yet even now, as I use them very rarely.<br>

Good luck with your shoot it sounds like a lot of fun!<br>

June</p>

[june_daley]

<p>Oh, and in specific regard to boudouir photography - as others have said, make sure you know how to best utilise your rented lighting equipment to flatter your subject - I would suggest some research into lighting techniques as well - hop on to google and search for phrases like 'flattering lighting techniques' or 'glamour photography lighting'</p>

<p>PS - Your website is wonderful! I love your work.<br>

June</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Sarah -</p>

<p>No problem - it's the least I could do before I go trying to give someone advice <Grin></p>

<p>The alcohol thing still is a little concerning, yes you're all adults, and probably over the age of 21 so not a problem there... where the problem comes in is with the number of communities that are passing "host" ordinances which basically state that if I'm a host of a party, and someone drinks too much, and dies or causes an accident as a result of the drinking - then I'm to blame for providing them with the alcohol. </p>

<p>Mostly used for underage drinking, but I've seen it applied to adults as well... Then you add your new business on top of that and bam...you're in trouble. I think if you were just having friends over for a drink or two - then you'd be okay, but you're charging them, and providing alcohol...</p>

<p>Sounds like a fun shoot - relax, have fun with it.... Wish I could get into that end of the business, but women tend to prefer other women to shoot those - not overweight, married fathers... ;-)</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[bobcossar]

<p>Mikael.... I did not mean to suggest that you were in any way among the "ill-informed". Actually I had no one in mind when I penned that remark. What I meant was that when the issue <em>is </em> obtuse, that is when you DO see long threads, much of the content being written by people who don't understand the issue, or topic in the first place.</p>

<p>I might add that anyone who knows your work would never refer to you as being in that group. And I truly did not have that intention. Regards, Robert</p>