michaelchadwickphotography

I saw that. Just more proof that couples don't read their contracts and we have to be sure they understand anything that affects their end result and payment schedule.

taxes.marylandtaxes.com/Resource_Library/Tax_Law_and_Regulations/State_Regulations/COMAR/Title_03_-_Subtitle_06.shtml www.dsd.state.md.us/comar/comarhtml/03/03.06.01.16.htm Better to err on the side of caution. Don't ask an accountant. Ask the state.

Your state will have its own rules. Delivery method might matter, it might not. This is not a question you should be asking here, but rather to the Maryland State Sales Tax office. There is also a previous thread on this topic here. www.photo.net/discuss/threads/charing-sales-tax-in-d-c-maryland-and-virginia.229467/ A basic internet search came up with: taxes.marylandtaxes.com/Resource_Library/Tax_Law_and_Regulations/State_Regulations/COMAR/Title_03_-_Subtitle_06.shtml www.dsd.state.md.us/comar/comarhtml/03/03.06.01.16.htm www.taxrates.com/blog/2014/08/15/click-washington-photographers-need-know-sales-tax/ www.taxrates.com/blog/2012/03/13/maryland-digital-goods-internet-sales-tax-and-services/ taxes.marylandtaxes.com/Business_Taxes/Business_Tax_Types/Sales_and_Use_Tax/Sales_Records/exempt_materials_used_in_production_activities.shtml

More specifically in NJ/PA especially being close to the border, and close to Philadelphia, it matters not even where you do the shoot, but where you ship the final deliverable end-product. And, there can be specific additional taxes for certain cities (such as Philadelphia, which has them). Because photography is such a frequent subject of questions regarding taxes, some states (like NJ) have an entire document and/or web site devoted to information on it. Search on your favorite search engine for "[Your Location] photography do I charge sales tax" and you'll likely find an appropriate document.

Take a look at www.thelawtog.com which is an excellent resource for information on photography contract law.

Enough, guys. Michael has a point with the use of "but" which indicates a contradiction to what was previously stated. William has a point that he wasn't criticizing and has always been very supportive of others and their posts. His track record along those lines should afford him the occasional benefit of the doubt. Using "and" instead of "but" would certainly have helped, yes. Michael, your post implied (at least to me) that you felt no other approach was viable, and William was only saying that other methods combined with a web site are even more effective.

That is just awful. I will never send Wikipedia money now. The worst thing of all is, this really killed his joy of photography. I can completely understand why he'd feel that way. People suck. :-(

With weddings, the practical value of rights is different than with commercial shoots where the hiring party is expecting to have commercial use of the images. If we were to charge wedding clients the same way commercial photographers charge for giving over rights, most couples would not be able to afford it. In addition, the sports world is more concerned with an instant result and unlimited use of the image than weddings, where it's treated more like an art work created for a couple. I have done both, and in my experience this seems to be true. I'm sure there are different scenarios out there, though. Word of mouth is also an enormous factor, and having photographs out there with our name on them is very helpful with securing future business.

>snort< Yeah. It's not a coincidence my book is called "Balancing the Art and Business of Wedding Photography" It's a real problem with many photographers. Artists don't always make good business people.

It is a reasonable assumption to make that a person making a purchase of intellectual property understands the concept of usage rights versus copyright ownership. The OP didn't sucker that person, the OP acted within the very normal process of that type of transaction. I don't buy a piece of sheet music, make an unauthorized recording of the song, try to market and sell it, then get angry that the sheet music publisher didn't warn me that I wasn't buying the copyright to the song along with the sheet music. The buyer was uneducated, and it is not the OP's responsibility to assume that everyone who buys from her is uneducated. At no point, based on the OP's post, did I feel she was trying to cheat someone who didn't know better. In fact, she wrote a reminder indicating that proper photo credit would be required. Not only do I think the OP acted ethically, I think she gave the buyer ample opportunity to ask about photo credit and rights. On a second reading of the original post, it is evident the buyer didn't think the OP had the rights to use the photos herself later. This indicates to me that the buyer thought they were getting some sort of exclusivity. If they were trying to gain that exclusivity and made the purchase without a contract handing the copyright over, then they acted unwisely.

Okay, as someone who deals regularly with music publishers regarding copyrights both in audio and sheet music form, I most certainly disagree with you on the applicability of the music simile. The OP didn't disguise the copyright to the buyer, she specifically said she granted usage rights. I do not see where there is a violation of ethics or intent to defraud here. That seems pretty clear to me. The intellectual property is not the film negative, it is the art stored upon it. I give my wedding clients a USB drive with the images on it. They know, according to our contract, that that USB comes with usage rights, but not a copyright. In other words, and this is described thoroughly in my contract, they have rights to print and publish *with photo credit* but have no commercial ownership of the images. This is not an unusual approach, nor is it any sort of attempt to sneak the copyright ownership by the client. If a buyer purchased the negatives for use only and does not understand the difference between usage rights and copyrights, it is the buyer's fault for not being educated in the matter.

(sigh) Smith, You're (that's what 'you' and 'are' look like as a contraction) implying that I faced a little adversity and just gave up. Nothing could be further from the truth. You cannot possibly know what experience I have and from what experience that free advice came. I'm going to stick to my reasonable opinion that what you said showed bad form. You asked for free advice, I gave it, you called my experience "pessimism." Now you inexplicably add on and call me super-sensitive. With that bedside manner, I do sincerely hope you succeed in photography and never decide to become a doctor. Champion away. Re-invent the wheel, and cast all of those little pearls before the swine. I no longer choose that to be "the hill I die on" as it were. I prefer instead to do excellent work and let the people who WANT that product come to me. Good luck with your endeavor to champion the cause of quality professional photography to the people out there that don't care. I'm sorry you didn't get the miracle marketing idea you wanted for free in an online forum. Perhaps you should come up with your brilliant and innovative idea on your own?

Ack - tone never comes across in email. Thank you William for having my back, but I was not upset. I should have put a wink emoji next to "maybe I'm just a terrible salesperson" because I'm not, and Macintosh's response calling me pessimistic was just funny to me. I could sell a red wine Popsicle to a woman in a white wedding dress at a hot summer beach wedding. He is asking for advice, then lecturing established full time professionals who have experience in exactly what he is asking for help with. In the end, perhaps I should have simply written "Coming onto a forum and asking for free advice, then criticizing the advice you are given and even labeling someone as a pessimist because they are not giving you ice cream with rainbow sprinkles on top as an answer, is not good form." Macintosh - you should do whatever works. If there was an easy answer, we'd all be doing it. Marketing is the most time-consuming and frustrating aspect of this business, sort of like auditioning for 100 different theatre companies just to get one role. It's just reality. Unless you have established relationships with the people who make the decisions in those corporate offices, you are cold-calling and mailing in order to get on their radar. You and everyone else. So, you'd best figure out what makes you so special and so much better than everyone else out there with a camera, and figure out a way to get that message across in elevator conversation time and within the confines of a postcard. Good luck to you, and I hope you will re-think how you respond to people offering you advice in the future.

Buying a CD by your favorite band doesn't give you rights to profit from broadcast or re-sale of that music. It's a very appropriate simile, as intellectual property laws apply to both cases. Unless the actual rights were part of a contracted sale agreement, the copyright owner still retains ownership of the intellectual property. The OP described that the buyer was given rights to use the images, with proper photo credit. That would seem to me a clear case of usage rights.

Well, Macintosh, thank you for "educating me" on salesmanship when you came here asking for free help. I guess my problem must be I'm a terrible sales person. Or maybe, just maybe, I'm speaking from the frustrating experience of wasting several years casting pearls before swine.

Certainly do not give them digital negative files (even if they ask for them). If you promised them both, give both. For the full size, I recommend 240dpi and the regular dimensions of the images saved from the digital negative files. Do a script in PhotoShop to re-create and save the full sized ones as a certain file size, with a new folder directory structure. This will save you much time. The web-friendly set should include the addition of your watermark as well. These can be saved at a quality level of 9 or 10 and a max dimension of 900 tall or 900 wide. That certainly qualifies as web and email friendly.

Unfortunately there isn't really an answer you're going to be fond of here. Educating corporate entities on the value of consistent corporate photographs of their team members is a tough task. There is enough turnover that they don't frequently want to invest in a one-time "everybody on deck" day shoot. I've tried the postcards, I've tried cold calls. I've gone to corporate web sites where the photographs are God-awful, and all that told me in the end was that they couldn't care less about quality photographs. It's a long term relationship building process, and there simply is no easy way "in" to the market.

If any of you have wedding clients who purchased a dress through Alfred Angelo, they suddenly closed shop late last week. If you have a way to reach out to your future clients easily, it might be worth sending word out. They Paid For Wedding Dresses, Then The Company Went Out Of Business

Gonna disagree with Karim on Mac as the best/only good option, as I have been very happy with PC for many years. You want a very good graphics card with plenty of processing power, perhaps even one designed for intensive gaming use. 8GB of RAM might sort of suffice but that's another area where you can boost things up a bit, as batch RAW photo editing of large files will use large amounts of memory. If you're only doing one or two images at a time 8GB is probably adequate but I recommend more RAM if you're doing more than one or two files at a time. This is your 21st century dark room. Don't cheap out on the computer if you're using this for any sort of business use.

Of course I'd be happy to meet with you. My site is chadwick.photography (with http:// in front of it - I didn't want the site to automatically convert it) You do have a listing on The Knot, albeit a non-developed one. At least, the name of the studio and the phone number was the same. They sometimes do this so that couples can find a photographer in order to give them a review. It costs you nothing to at least claim it and put some basic information in there. A sales rep from The Knot might contact you if you do, but that's not a bad thing. They can talk to you more about what they can offer. My particular rep is Tara, and she is very good. Thousand Word Photography

As a southern NJ advertiser in both, let me give you my take. This is only my experience, obviously the experience of others will differ. 1) I get a lot of business from The Knot. I pay a lot to be in the first six listings, and have done so for the past several years. Does it pay for the cost of the ad and then some? Absolutely. 2) I get very little from Wedding Wire. I do not pay for a top spot, but rather just a "featured" listing (which barely puts me on page one). I have a friend shooting over in Philly who swears by Wedding Wire, so his experience is different. Wedding Wire claims that people are finding me in both places and that I shouldn't think less of their service since both places are being "hit". But, when I ask people where they found me (and I do give them multiple options), between The Knot and WW, The Knot wins out nearly every single time. So, why would I pay for both? I'm not likely to continue with a paid listing in Wedding Wire unless some drastic number of weddings come through to me from them between now and the end of my contract. The challenge is, will your listing pay for itself based on what qualified leads you get and how many of those you actually land? The investment is worth it if you have the means to pay for it as the growth happens. Getting some reviews helps, but ultimately you want to get at the top of the listings in one or the other. Currently I don't find you until page 12 of 14 in the "graveyard" of photographers, so there's no point in staying there if you want business. These are not the only ways to get business. I would be happy to tell you more, but there is a LOT to talk about. I'm just up the road in Medford. If you want to get together and chat over coffee sometime, I do this full time and have a pretty flexible schedule.

Do a batch rename on one folder first, then import the other and batch rename the whole set once it *completely loads* the thumbnails and sorts by capture date. For future reference, many cameras now allow you to customize the file name in camera. So, you could start your file names with sn_ (for snapple, or you know, whatever) and then you'll never run into that problem with your second shooters.

I actually wrote a book on the business of wedding photography and this is one of the things I discuss in detail. A much shorter response than the book would be to say that while it's good to encourage couples to get printed materials for the sake of longevity, most people don't want to pay for that because they haven't been educated. The choice then becomes, do you focus your profit on the actual shooting and post-processing and consider any print product an unexpected perk? Or do you work to educate your clients on the importance of having prints? For myself, I choose to build my packages around the assumption that I won't sell a single print. I make what I need to make for my business expenses, personal pay, and business development. I will then send out an automated email to my clients about two months before their first anniversary reminding them that the first anniversary is the "paper" anniversary. I give them a special coupon code to get a discounted album or showcase print product. It works pretty well.

Why are there different models of motor vehicles such as sedans, pick-up trucks, tractor trailers, motorcycles, etc.? Different uses. Further, different end user types as well (amateur, prosumer, professional, etc.) To pick one, figure out your need. Then look at what characteristics (specs) are most desirable for your particular need. Then, look for the camera with the specs that will fulfill your present and potentially your future need.

First, make sure the camera clocks were in sync. If you didn't sync them at the start, find a common moment to compare before you combine them into one folder. If the time is off significantly, it's going to be difficult to get an accurate sort. Make sure also that the file names won't overwrite if you combine them into a single folder (or at least be VERY careful when it asks you if you want to overwrite, to keep BOTH files). Assuming the clocks are in sync, put them into Adobe Bridge. Adobe Bridge will sort by capture time. If you don't have access to Adobe Bridge, you might have to process them separately and then sort the .jpgs later in Lightroom or another program.