Getting Serious And Charging Appropriately

[MonElite]

Why would you see great value in something that you feel you can do yourself?

This is how many people feel. And its not only about photography.

I guess I might belong to the crowd that could cheapen the industry...... now come to think of it.

I took this photo on weekend.

I dont own expensive equipment, Im a super duper amateur and I would never ever charge anything for taking a photo.

The owner of the dog loves it, she happens to have the same camera I do and loves taking pics herself too!

Considering that this photo had absolutly no work done to it, I think Ive done well. I like taking pics and I will give soft copies to those that want them, if someone mentiones that I took the pic its just a nice touch.

Now at the event there could have been an official photographer, last year there was a pro there and their photos are million times better then mine will ever be.

it would be up to the owner of the dog to decide if she wants to pay for a better pic from the pro.

From a personal perspective and past experience - I wanted photos of myself taken about 6-7 years ago. I could have asked some friends with pretty damn good gear to take them but I chose to go to a pro and paid a lot for them. And I still like the pics and have them in my house. But now that I know a pretty good photographers I will go to them if I want something on my wall.

The photo I took will never be on someone wall, I would never put it up, its just not good enough to be on a wall, but makes a great profile pic on Facebook

[MonElite]

Not sure what that has to do with anything, but no that is not my site.

& yes I am a professional photographer, operating under Linda Kitson Pawtraits

I just wanted to know if you are pro, I know most of the people in this thread, if they are pro or not, thats all.

I guess pros v's non pros have different views on the subject.

[kja]

Not everyone needs backup gear,

If you are shooting for a client I would say you absolutely need backup gear.

If you are shooting freelance and the cost of going back for a reshoot - assuming you can - is less than the cost of minimal backup gear then maybe not.

[Guest Tess32]

I would agree that's part of the problem - but the general public's idea of 'good' photography is *sometimes* a little....interesting.

The reason being that they are only really looking at the content. Eg "oh I look so nice there, what a great photo" even if it's technically crap. Or "my dog looks so cute and you've captured that expression".

It's not just the public, some people think they are much better than they are too. I saw someone on FB recently who got photos done by a 'pro' and I thought they were AWFUL, but they loved them.

[Guest Tess32]

Not everyone needs backup gear,

If you are shooting for a client I would say you absolutely need backup gear.

If you are shooting freelance and the cost of going back for a reshoot - assuming you can - is less than the cost of minimal backup gear then maybe not.

Depends. I couldn't afford two cameras when I was doing some pet photography shoots. If on the low chance the camera had died, I'd be more worried about that then having to reschedule.

Again, all depends on how serious you want the business to be. If you aren't trying to make a living out of it, you don't stress as much as others who do.

[MonElite]

I thought they were AWFUL, but they loved them

And they would be prepared to pay for them. Im guessing.

So unless someone takes shots for exhibition/judging its irrelevant as to if I like they or you like them or next door neighboor hates them.

It is up to the buyer to decide, isnt it?

[Guest Tess32]

It's always up to the buyer....some buyers are blind

[MonElite]

So its the blind buyers that cheapen the industry, not the amateur photographers, right?

[kja]

Not everyone needs backup gear,

If you are shooting for a client I would say you absolutely need backup gear.

If you are shooting freelance and the cost of going back for a reshoot - assuming you can - is less than the cost of minimal backup gear then maybe not.

Depends. I couldn't afford two cameras when I was doing some pet photography shoots. If on the low chance the camera had died, I'd be more worried about that then having to reschedule.

Again, all depends on how serious you want the business to be. If you aren't trying to make a living out of it, you don't stress as much as others who do.

Great point and this is one thing that separates a pro from a non-pro, imho.

A pro serves the client, not her/himself. Not being able to complete a shoot because your gear fails and you don't have backup gear? Pro fail.

During a shoot when gear fails a pro's thought should not be about the gear, but how to complete the assignment with the least possible impact on the client.

You can charge and have clients and still not be a pro and this is a prime example of a scenario that fits the description.

[MonElite]

Ditto to what kja said.

BTW kja - I love your pics, always have, especially the underwater ones!

[Guest Tess32]

So its the blind buyers that cheapen the industry, not the amateur photographers, right?

They both do. Buyers and photographers who couldn't tell a good photo from a bad one.

[Guest Tess32]

Not everyone needs backup gear,

If you are shooting for a client I would say you absolutely need backup gear.

If you are shooting freelance and the cost of going back for a reshoot - assuming you can - is less than the cost of minimal backup gear then maybe not.

Depends. I couldn't afford two cameras when I was doing some pet photography shoots. If on the low chance the camera had died, I'd be more worried about that then having to reschedule.

Again, all depends on how serious you want the business to be. If you aren't trying to make a living out of it, you don't stress as much as others who do.

Great point and this is one thing that separates a pro from a non-pro, imho.

A pro serves the client, not her/himself. Not being able to complete a shoot because your gear fails and you don't have backup gear? Pro fail.

During a shoot when gear fails a pro's thought should not be about the gear, but how to complete the assignment with the least possible impact on the client.

You can charge and have clients and still not be a pro and this is a prime example of a scenario that fits the description.

Yeah I agree. To me a professional photographer means making a hefty amount, if not all, of your living out of it.

But on here and in 'real life' I'm not sure what people think it means. I have charged, have had clients, and won awards, but I am still an 'amateur'.

[kja]

Yeah I agree. To me a professional photographer means making a hefty amount, if not all, of your living out of it.

And to me, although making some of your income is a criteria for a being a pro, making a "hefty amount, if not all" isn't in the top ten.

I consider myself a professional. Others may not consider me one - I don't enter competitions, I don't submit to AIPP for awards etc, I don't make 100% of my income from shooting.

(Although, I have a friend who is most definitely a pro and I don't think he's been paid for a shoot in 100 years - all his work is pro bono. Nice to be able to live that way, but not on the cards for 99.9% of us, I'd guess! And OT, too)

[Ashanali]

I think people are going around in circles and getting the wrong end of the stick.

What I took from the OP is some very timely and well thought advice that people should evaluate where they are at and work out what they are worth.

Like all industries, there are people who are going to be at many and varied levels of skill and working professionalism. This is normal and to be expected, however the concern within the photographic industry (and I'm sure it's happening in a few other industries also) is the people who are doing good quality work and charging a pittance thinking that they can maintain that pace and not burn out.

All I have seen in this thread is some advice to people that says, "stop and evaluate" - then examples of what to consider when evaluating where to place yourself in the market.

The people who have come in here and thrown up their hands are consumers who all seem to be upset that photographers actually try to make money out of their careers?? (not sure if this is the case, but it's what it looks like.)

Again, I personally don't worry about the people who come and go on the scene. I know that they will either burn out fast or they will realise that the way they work is only sustainable for a short time. However just as Linda said, there are people here who are trying to HELP those who are trying to give photography a go and having people come in and say, "you don't have to change what you're doing" doesn't help them - in fact, I can tell you from experience that you're helping their business to fail.

And one more time just for fun - It is perfectly fine for people to use cheap photographers, it's perfectly fine for people to be cheap photographers; there is always a market there!

[kja]

+1 what ash said

[MonElite]

Group hug

Rocco if what Ash said is true - you are trying to HELP some people I have some quiet advice to give you.

If you are in the photography business dont help your potential competition, they will take your business away.

Work in partnership with someone - different story, but help competition, a bit silly.

JMO based on being burned by helping someone that I thought was be a partner (turn competitor)

Edited October 14, 2010 by MonElite

[Ashanali]

Group hug

Rocco if what Ash said is true - you are trying to HELP some people I have some quiet advice to give you.

If you are in the photography business dont help your potential competition, they will take your business away.

Work in partnership with someone - different story, but help competition, a bit silly.

JMO based on being burned by helping someone that I thought was be a partner (turn competitor)

I know I'm not Rocco but I thought I'd respond to this

It depends on the help you give.

I have been asked to speak to a group of photographers at a large event coming up in February - some people give workshops and show the way they shoot but they don't talk business, some people talk business but don't talk about the way they shoot. I'll be one of those. I have been asked to talk on a specific subject and I'll give enough information that people will learn something useful and integral but they won't be able to go out and replicate what I do exactly (even though I will be up the front of the room giving a live demo.)

There are many workshops and professional development seminars all around the country happening all the time. Business and practical photography stuff. You can't tell me that these photographers and business people are being put out of business by the people that attend their workshops. More to the point, starting this Sunday and going through to Wednesday is a huge photography conference on the sunshine coast with photographers from all different areas coming together to discuss both business and practical. http://www. aipptheevent.com.au/ (take out the space) I think every single person on the speakers list would scoff at the thought that someone who attends their session is in any way a threat to their business.

You can educate and help people without having your business suffer in the process.

as an aside, this thread became very useful today. There was an informal meeting this morning that was open to AIPP members to talk about the direction the industry is heading and I was able to quote a couple of the non-photographers who posted in this thread to give a view on how the 'outside' world view photographers. It became a point of discussion and education of the general public is back on the agenda for the next AGM. So thanks to the DOLers who have put their thoughts into this thread and haven't gotten carried away with hysterics in the process .

[rubiton]

Yeah I agree. To me a professional photographer means making a hefty amount, if not all, of your living out of it.

And to me, although making some of your income is a criteria for a being a pro, making a "hefty amount, if not all" isn't in the top ten.

I consider myself a professional. Others may not consider me one - I don't enter competitions, I don't submit to AIPP for awards etc, I don't make 100% of my income from shooting.

(Although, I have a friend who is most definitely a pro and I don't think he's been paid for a shoot in 100 years - all his work is pro bono. Nice to be able to live that way, but not on the cards for 99.9% of us, I'd guess! And OT, too)

Exactly kja - I dont giveaway my copyright/ownership and therefore dont enter competitions, I have a 'real job' to pay the normal bills however I am a professional photographer and have a registered business name, etc. Perhaps the definition should not be making a 'hefty' income perhaps it should be deriving a 'regular' income from the photography. I may not make millions but there is usually a steady flow when its the busier times of year (obviously less events in Christmas/summer and july in winter means downturn in photography income). I also go out there in the stinking heat (42 degrees for photos is not fun) and freezing cold and rain (again not ideal for me or the camera gear) when those who do it for a hobby have the option to just stay home. I spent a week at the recent Royal show and perhaps two days were not cold and overcast and dark - one was thunderstorms, rain, wind, lightning and the next day was probably worse with the mega strong wind gotta be mad to go out in that if you were not doing it for a reason (in this case coverage of the event for a pictorial report for my site).

[Ashanali]

Yeah I agree. To me a professional photographer means making a hefty amount, if not all, of your living out of it.

And to me, although making some of your income is a criteria for a being a pro, making a "hefty amount, if not all" isn't in the top ten.

I consider myself a professional. Others may not consider me one - I don't enter competitions, I don't submit to AIPP for awards etc, I don't make 100% of my income from shooting.

(Although, I have a friend who is most definitely a pro and I don't think he's been paid for a shoot in 100 years - all his work is pro bono. Nice to be able to live that way, but not on the cards for 99.9% of us, I'd guess! And OT, too)

Exactly kja - I dont giveaway my copyright/ownership and therefore dont enter competitions,

Ummm... the AIPP have been instrumental in getting the rules of many competitions changed so that the copyright of entries remains with the photographer. Giving away copyright to images is a HUGE no-no for anyone and something that professionals as an industry are working hard to have recognised. If you find competitions that state that by entering the business running the competition retains copyright, please let me know so I can alert the person who deals with this issue.

btw - there are something like 2500 photographers who are members of the AIPP, last year 698 entered the awards. Being a professional doesn't mean you HAVE to enter awards. I don't know where people are getting that idea from.

[blacklabrador]

I have two comments to make here.

1) I am sick to death of seeing photographers with great frontage/pretty advertising/snappy logos charging large prices for mediocre photography.

2) Rocco you aren't going to be one of them so you charge appropriately. You have talent, people should be paying properly for what they get from you.

I have a friend who is a photographer who told me that she'd reached "the top of her game". I nearly choked. She's been doing it a long time, has a niche market in a particular area and continues to take photos at a slightly better than hobby photographer level. I just suggested that she add Alicia and Alex to her Facebook page.