Reading mode: Light Dark

Digital Business Issues

Go to last post
L

Les Schofer

Member
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
Chip Feise said:
Again I ask the simple question....Why are people only worried about
"technical issues" with the pro-digital cameras. What about some
discussions about the business end of working with digital gear. For
example How are you charging for digital capture...the same as for
film??? Also are your clients balking at your use of a pro digital
camera??? Listen folks I have posted some of these questions before but
nobody seems interested in them...so this leads me to believe that very
few if any "WORKING PROS" are actually posting on this fourm. Or are all
of you just giving your digital work away??? Newspaper staffers are
excluded from my last comments.
Click to expand...
Chip!!!

Great question to ask in another thread. I decided to start new one to get some dixcussion going on how we professionals are going to continue to earn a living with these new tools. When I take a digital image and deliver a file to a client for a brochure I am solving his visual communication problem with a $28k camera instead of consumables (film, lab fees). I let him(her) preview the shot on a $3500 laptop instead of a $3.00 Polaroid. I hand him a digital file that means he doesn't have to pay $35+ for a drum scan. I print it out on the desktop to my $8k dye sub printer and avoid a $12 custom print fee. I am providing services in a different way than before, and amm providing services that someone else used to provide. There are new profit centers here that the technological swing has dumped into the photographer's lap at a reasonable price. I believe that this is the start of a new business era for photographers, but if we give away services that have real worth and should be charged for, we'll all be in a world of hurt.

I encourage some cyberdiscussion here on ways to structure our businesses and take advantage of what this new technnology has made possible.

Les Schofer
Schofer Digital
 
Perhaps all those items need factoring in... maybe you need to decide what amount of money you need to take home in a month... then average out all the fixed costs, equipment depreciation/upkeep, etc, etc, and charge accordingly.
 
This is an interesting subject to me....I am thinking of going into photography full time (Currently I am a Software Engineer for a Fortune 100 company, and I think it may be time soon to cash out some options and head off on my own)

If you look at successful modern businesses, they don't give things away anymore just because they used to. Restaurants charge for refills, Auto Repair shops charge you to recyle your used oil and tires, plus a 10% charge for shop supplies, software companies charge for support, nikon Charges $500 for capture software, etc. All these things are things that we used to get absorbed by the business in some way, but someone figured out that they really didn't need to absorb these costs any more, and the customer should pay.

You can't, probably, charge a client to proof a shot on a $3500 laptop. But you certainly can amortize the cost of that laptop into the cost of final products, and maybe sell some added value, like remote digital proofing (over the web) which you could charge for, that saves both photographer and customer time and money. Web sites aren't free either, by the way.

Seems to me the best model is to charge for things you can charge for like proofs, prints, digital files, and try to recoup the rest of your equipment cost out of sitting/studio/hourly fees, which probably should be higher for digital because you are also taking on many things which you used to outsource to the lab.

I'll be interested to see what people who are already working pros are doing.

Ivan
Les Schofer said:
Chip Feise wrote:
I believe that this is the start of a new business era
for photographers, but if we give away services that have real worth and
should be charged for, we'll all be in a world of hurt.
Click to expand...
 
This is an interesting subject for me because I like many hope to leave my present job and (in my case) move into the creation of sophisticated spherical panoramas. I guess a realistic model must be the sort of return you'd expect to make for investing the money required to buy your equipment and also include the price you expect to be paid for your time. It is something I'm still struggling with and although my present helpline job pays sub $18000 I still have to wrest with the fact that I am potentially trading a financially insecure postion for one which has hitherto always been secure. I use the word potentially because it is my intention to take on-board work with VR panos whilst staying with the present job.

Any ideas, advice would be welcome thanks Michael
pete biro said:
Perhaps all those items need factoring in... maybe you need to decide
what amount of money you need to take home in a month... then average out
all the fixed costs, equipment depreciation/upkeep, etc, etc, and charge
accordingly.
Click to expand...
 
On digital weddings, I charge an amount for my digital wedding photo package that will net me a thousand dollars clear after expenses for filling the order. I never have charged what I know I could get, even with film....because I like doing weddings and use the price advantage being able to custom hand print my own prints at cost gave me and pass that on to the customer in lower prices. But I make it up in that I do about 70 weddings per year, with the help of another photographer who shoots weddings for me.

After the big initial outlay for equipment, about $14K, everything else to fill the order gets a lot cheaper! No film to buy, no processing fees, no proofs to purchase.....only the prints for the album to pay for at cost...and the cost of the album itself. I figure going digital will pay for itself in about 4 or 5 years, just from the saving on film, processing and proofing.

And people are lining up to have me do their wedding with them mighty D1! Of course, have one of the top wedding photo webpages doesn't hurt a bit either. Those who would like, can check it out at http://www.ProWeddingPhotos.com or http://www.ProfessionalWeddingPhotographers.com or
http://www.ProfessionalWeddingPhotography.com

Bill
pete biro said:
Perhaps all those items need factoring in... maybe you need to decide
what amount of money you need to take home in a month... then average out
all the fixed costs, equipment depreciation/upkeep, etc, etc, and charge
accordingly.
Click to expand...
 
Great thread Les.

In my two years of digital capture I have found two models for assignment photographers - camera rental and capture (scan) fee. The camera rental model is the one I'm currently using. In this scenario, the photographer charges what it would cost to rent the digital equipment and expenses this in addition to creative fees.

The other model charges a capture fee for each image delivered. This is intended to cover archive, transmittal, and preparation. I was using this for the first year.

One or the other helps offset the expense of digital and the lost income from expense markup. I have been using a "rental" type fee of $400/day. This has allowed me to pay off my initial investment in about a year and a half (DCS460, G3, and Kodak 8650), and upgrade/supplement some in the next half year (Pictro3000 and DCS330).

What's everyone else doing?
 
Bill Collins Photography said:
On digital weddings, I charge an amount for my digital wedding photo
package that will net me a thousand dollars clear after expenses for
filling the order. I never have charged what I know I could get, even
with film....because I like doing weddings and use the price advantage
being able to custom hand print my own prints at cost gave me and pass
that on to the customer in lower prices. But I make it up in that I do
about 70 weddings per year, with the help of another photographer who
shoots weddings for me.
Click to expand...
Bill,

I would suggest you plan on making up the cost in closer to two years. Within that amount of time you'll be looking to upgrade/replace. I hope you don't need to, but with the image quality and price improvements in the last two years, I wouldn't be surprised if you'll want to. Of course I believe that once the image quality is good enough for professional work today it'll be good enough tomorrow and you won't HAVE to upgrade. However it's not a bad idea to make up your business plan a little conservative so that when you WANT to upgrade you won't be stuck with two year old technology. Of course if you decide to stick it out another year or two, you'll be making all that much more money.
gene said:
After the big initial outlay for equipment, about $14K, everything else
to fill the order gets a lot cheaper! No film to buy, no processing
fees, no proofs to purchase.....only the prints for the album to pay for
at cost...and the cost of the album itself. I figure going digital will
pay for itself in about 4 or 5 years, just from the saving on film,
processing and proofing.

And people are lining up to have me do their wedding with them mighty D1!
Of course, have one of the top wedding photo webpages doesn't hurt a bit
either. Those who would like, can check it out at
http://www.ProWeddingPhotos.com or
http://www.ProfessionalWeddingPhotographers.com or
http://www.ProfessionalWeddingPhotography.com

Bill
pete biro said:
Perhaps all those items need factoring in... maybe you need to decide
what amount of money you need to take home in a month... then average out
all the fixed costs, equipment depreciation/upkeep, etc, etc, and charge
accordingly.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Joe ....here in Washington DC I know serveral of the advertising photogs who have been using the capture fee/image model for the past several years (mostly for still life shoots). I wonder if clients would understand using both a rental fee & a capture fee as the former covers the cost of the equipment and the later covers the cost of you going in and editing the raw image files (time cost).

Im curious...has anybody in this group recieved a "negative" reaction from any client about using a digital camera to shoot their job assuming it will do the correct job as intended?????

chip
Joe Smithberger said:
Great thread Les.

In my two years of digital capture I have found two models for assignment
photographers - camera rental and capture (scan) fee. The camera rental
model is the one I'm currently using. In this scenario, the photographer
charges what it would cost to rent the digital equipment and expenses
this in addition to creative fees.

The other model charges a capture fee for each image delivered. This is
intended to cover archive, transmittal, and preparation. I was using this
for the first year.

One or the other helps offset the expense of digital and the lost income
from expense markup. I have been using a "rental" type fee of $400/day.
This has allowed me to pay off my initial investment in about a year and
a half (DCS460, G3, and Kodak 8650), and upgrade/supplement some in the
next half year (Pictro3000 and DCS330).

What's everyone else doing?
Click to expand...
 
Bill...some questions about your digital wedding service (after visiting your website) that may interest others here.........

Are you adjusting every file out of the D1 in PhotoShop before burning them onto the CD Roms??? I would assume yes???

Since you are delievering about 5 CD Rom disks to the client I have to assume you are burning TIFF files to the disk???

Do you have a staff working on the image files as adjusting 300 to 400 image files is alot of work???

Finally because you are not paying for film/processing and are shooting more images per wedding do you find yourself being as selective or more selective or less selective in subject matter than when you shot in film????

It sounds like going digital has given you more shooting freedom since the film/processing meter is not running anymore.

chip
Bill Collins Photography said:
After the big initial outlay for equipment, about $14K, everything else
to fill the order gets a lot cheaper! No film to buy, no processing
fees, no proofs to purchase.....only the prints for the album to pay for
at cost...and the cost of the album itself. I figure going digital will
pay for itself in about 4 or 5 years, just from the saving on film,
processing and proofing.

And people are lining up to have me do their wedding with them mighty D1!
Of course, have one of the top wedding photo webpages doesn't hurt a bit
either. Those who would like, can check it out at
http://www.ProWeddingPhotos.com or
http://www.ProfessionalWeddingPhotographers.com or
http://www.ProfessionalWeddingPhotography.com

Bill
pete biro said:
Perhaps all those items need factoring in... maybe you need to decide
what amount of money you need to take home in a month... then average out
all the fixed costs, equipment depreciation/upkeep, etc, etc, and charge
accordingly.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Hi Les,

The question for me was how much can I save going to digital and how much more value will the customer assume he's receiving . . . The vast majority of my work is used under 5" by 7" as I design photograph and produce corporate image brochures. My lab bill has been running a minimum of $22,000 to a top of $35,000 for film, processing, proofs and enlargements for scanning, not to mention another $6 - $8k for polaroids. Given the smaller size we need to use 98% of the time the D1 should fill the bill (just bought mine). The 5K for the D1 will be repaid in 4 to 5 months . . .

Another issue is that I can turn around photography to a customer in a matter of minutes to hours for a layout which they go nuts for. Keep in mind I have not worked for agencys for over 5 years but work directly with CEO's who are usually computer iliterate and are wowed by a totally digital output. Also I've learned over the years that co. presidents will moan to me over the big bucks I charge then brag to their friends and employees about how much money they've spent.

For this reason, I'll never low ball a job or "sharpen my pencil" when asked except if they're willing to sacrifice quality, i.e. paper stock, varnish, bleeds, less photography etc., which they are never willing to do, ever . . . The more they pay, the more respect I and the finished product get.

Also is the factor that I will have the image in the "can" when I'm finished shooting and won't loose sleep wondering if nonreshootable shots are going to come from the lab ok . . . Many industrial shots have thousands of dollars in the companies prep time alone and often I shoot just before a large machine is loaded on a truck for a destination that will not allow a photographer in to reshoot.

The bottom line for me was time savings which means I'll make more money for the same contract (layout and design, photography, printing and delivery)

As we've been going digital over the last 4 years (all output on disk) I've been raising prices because of the learning curves and better and faster value added service to my customers. Why would I lower prices if I can offer the latest, best, new and improved only studio in my area that offers full production from concept to print delivery? Of course, there is always a limit to what anyone can charge in a given area but as a 100% commission salesman I always sell my product as an investment, never as an advertising cost. Boy do they like their customers to think they're on the cutting edge with corporate CD's, one of my fastest growing new products.

Another thing is I'm finding now that many industrial customers that have had crappy web sites are now paying big bucks to have a graphically superior site redesigned even if they have to buy out an existing contract of 24 to 36 months from their original designers.

You can see what my work includes at http://www.hsmcfarland.com

Mac
Les Schofer said:
Chip Feise wrote:
Click to expand...
 
Chip,

On the CD's I give the families as part of the package, I give them the unaltered high-res jpg's right out of the camera....what they do with them is their business. I've made the money I want to make on the price of the package for this package and don't expect many reorders.

The only prints I alter are the ones they select for me to print up for their album or that others have ordered for reprints. Resizing resolution is totally automatic with photoshop's automate palate by creating scripts to do your work for you.

With digital, I feel a lot freer to shoot more at weddings, as there is no cost involved in taking the photos. When I shoot the Hasselblads, I figure I've spend a dollar every time I snap the shutter...with film, processing and 5x5 proof, so you don't just snap away like crazy with the film rig.

Thanks,
Bill
Chip Feise said:
Are you adjusting every file out of the D1 in PhotoShop before burning
them onto the CD Roms??? I would assume yes???
Since you are delievering about 5 CD Rom disks to the client I have to
assume you are burning TIFF files to the disk???
Do you have a staff working on the image files as adjusting 300 to 400
image files is alot of work???

Finally because you are not paying for film/processing and are shooting
more images per wedding do you find yourself being as selective or more
selective or less selective in subject matter than when you shot in
film????
It sounds like going digital has given you more shooting freedom since
the film/processing meter is not running anymore.

chip
Bill Collins Photography said:
After the big initial outlay for equipment, about $14K, everything else
to fill the order gets a lot cheaper! No film to buy, no processing
fees, no proofs to purchase.....only the prints for the album to pay for
at cost...and the cost of the album itself. I figure going digital will
pay for itself in about 4 or 5 years, just from the saving on film,
processing and proofing.

And people are lining up to have me do their wedding with them mighty D1!
Of course, have one of the top wedding photo webpages doesn't hurt a bit
either. Those who would like, can check it out at
http://www.ProWeddingPhotos.com or
http://www.ProfessionalWeddingPhotographers.com or
http://www.ProfessionalWeddingPhotography.com

Bill
pete biro said:
Perhaps all those items need factoring in... maybe you need to decide
what amount of money you need to take home in a month... then average out
all the fixed costs, equipment depreciation/upkeep, etc, etc, and charge
accordingly.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
TIME seems to be the key ingredient missing from this thread.

As a part-time pro, I find that many jobs in digital take more of my time than they did on film. And in other discussion groups, this comes up as a big issue among full-time, full-service studios.

Shooting film, all I have to do, no matter how much I shoot, is drop by the lab a couple of times a week. (and of course pay the bills.)

With digital, I save money, but I'm chained to the computer for hours at a time. If I'm charging $100/hour for shooting time, then turn around and spend an hour on the computer doing something that used to cost $10 for film and $20 for lab work, I'm losing money.

Any thoughts on these issues?

JR
Chip Feise said:
Bill
Click to expand...
...
Member said:
Are you adjusting every file out of the D1 in PhotoShop before burning
them onto the CD Roms??? I would assume yes???
Since you are delievering about 5 CD Rom disks to the client I have to
assume you are burning TIFF files to the disk???
Do you have a staff working on the image files as adjusting 300 to 400
image files is alot of work???
Click to expand...
 
Joe,

I live a simple lifestyle, have a wonderful supportive wife and few personal needs, and I'm totally out of debt. The studio is paid for (and produces income from an upstairs apartment rental),so is the car and the home. I don't have many needs and usually end up taking about half of my pay for the year in upgraded equipment. (I keep telling myself that someday I might reach the point that I might be able to take it all as pay, but I don't mind doing it a bit.

I think I might be just about there....I've got a lot of Hasselblads and Bronicas and a wet lab to sell after going digital and I'll probably retire in another 10-15 years...I turn 55 this month. Life is great even if I am just making a living and not getting rich! ;)

Thanks,
Bill

As long as I have as good a lifestyle as I did when I had my high paying factory job...what I did before going full time pro in '88, I'm satisfied and enjoying life.
Joe Smithberger said:
Bill Collins Photography said:
On digital weddings, I charge an amount for my digital wedding photo
package that will net me a thousand dollars clear after expenses for
filling the order. I never have charged what I know I could get, even
with film....because I like doing weddings and use the price advantage
being able to custom hand print my own prints at cost gave me and pass
that on to the customer in lower prices. But I make it up in that I do
about 70 weddings per year, with the help of another photographer who
shoots weddings for me.
Click to expand...
Bill,

I would suggest you plan on making up the cost in closer to two years.
Within that amount of time you'll be looking to upgrade/replace. I hope
you don't need to, but with the image quality and price improvements in
the last two years, I wouldn't be surprised if you'll want to. Of course
I believe that once the image quality is good enough for professional
work today it'll be good enough tomorrow and you won't HAVE to upgrade.
However it's not a bad idea to make up your business plan a little
conservative so that when you WANT to upgrade you won't be stuck with two
year old technology. Of course if you decide to stick it out another year
or two, you'll be making all that much more money.
Member said:
After the big initial outlay for equipment, about $14K, everything else
to fill the order gets a lot cheaper! No film to buy, no processing
fees, no proofs to purchase.....only the prints for the album to pay for
at cost...and the cost of the album itself. I figure going digital will
pay for itself in about 4 or 5 years, just from the saving on film,
processing and proofing.

And people are lining up to have me do their wedding with them mighty D1!
Of course, have one of the top wedding photo webpages doesn't hurt a bit
either. Those who would like, can check it out at
http://www.ProWeddingPhotos.com or
http://www.ProfessionalWeddingPhotographers.com or
http://www.ProfessionalWeddingPhotography.com

Bill
pete biro said:
Perhaps all those items need factoring in... maybe you need to decide
what amount of money you need to take home in a month... then average out
all the fixed costs, equipment depreciation/upkeep, etc, etc, and charge
accordingly.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Michael,

The unknown always looms big and change is scary. In my case I could see that my factory where I worked was going down the tubes and was going to leave town, so I left it before it left me...and it did fold a couple of years later. I was able to leave on my terms, though, instead of theirs. It worked out for me....but another factory worker who thought he was a hot-shot photographer...and who express the opinion that he was a better photographer than I was... opened his own studio after the factory folded, but he apparently wasn't much of business person. (I've heard stories of how he'd get mad and cuss out customers in front of other customers in his studio....well, he did not succeed.)

Boy, the specialty you chosen would be a tough one to find a market for that would produce enough sales and generate enough income to go full time with! (At least in my humble opinion.) I can't imagine selling enough panoramas to be able to earn a living....unless you get about a year's salary out of each one sold.....maybe to industrial or commerical clients.

What I did was ease into going full time for a year or so before quitting my day job, by running the studio with evening hours. I didn't think I was ready, but my wife said, "If you can't make it full time with the business you're going now, you never will. I think you should go for it now....doing both is just too hard on you!" So I did...and she was right!

Hope this helps!

Bill
Michael said:
Any ideas, advice would be welcome thanks Michael
pete biro said:
Perhaps all those items need factoring in... maybe you need to decide
what amount of money you need to take home in a month... then average out
all the fixed costs, equipment depreciation/upkeep, etc, etc, and charge
accordingly.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
JR said:
With digital, I save money, but I'm chained to the computer for hours at
a time. If I'm charging $100/hour for shooting time, then turn around and
spend an hour on the computer doing something that used to cost $10 for
film and $20 for lab work, I'm losing money.
Click to expand...
JR

This is an excellent point, and your shooting regimen and computer approach can meann the difference between 1 hr work and 5 hr work for the same job. If you pay close attention to exposure and lighting you can get decent batch processed files to show your client. I set up PS5.5 to batch aquire and levels/sharpen/quantum filter/save jpg into a folder. My 400mhz laptop will spend 1-2 hours churning through 60-100 images shot with my 6 megapixel camera. I can batch print these to 4, 8, or 15 images per 8x10 sheet through Packagizer or Fotopage. The client can look these over better than a 35mmm film contact sheet. I am adamant about going back and individually processing each image they select from that sheet. I charge an image processing fee for each of these delivered files. If delivered in color corrected CMYK your client won't be paying the printer for drum scan. My image processing fee reflects this charge.

The crux of it is, I am now charging for something the client has always been paying someone else for. I see, and hope all other photographers see this as one new profit center that the technology swing has dropped into our laps, IF we do it competently, make our clients appreciate the worth of it, and charge accordingly for it. That's why I started this thread.

Les Schofer
Schofer Digital
 
I urge everyone on this list to read Mac's post below once every day until his considerations and observations become part of your everyday thinking.

Les Schofer
Mac said:
The question for me was how much can I save going to digital and how much
more value will the customer assume he's receiving . . . The vast
majority of my work is used under 5" by 7" as I design photograph and
produce corporate image brochures. My lab bill has been running a
minimum of $22,000 to a top of $35,000 for film, processing, proofs and
enlargements for scanning, not to mention another $6 - $8k for polaroids.
Given the smaller size we need to use 98% of the time the D1 should fill
the bill (just bought mine). The 5K for the D1 will be repaid in 4 to 5
months . . .

Another issue is that I can turn around photography to a customer in a
matter of minutes to hours for a layout which they go nuts for. Keep in
mind I have not worked for agencys for over 5 years but work directly
with CEO's who are usually computer iliterate and are wowed by a totally
digital output. Also I've learned over the years that co. presidents
will moan to me over the big bucks I charge then brag to their friends
and employees about how much money they've spent.
For this reason, I'll never low ball a job or "sharpen my pencil" when
asked except if they're willing to sacrifice quality, i.e. paper stock,
varnish, bleeds, less photography etc., which they are never willing to
do, ever . . . The more they pay, the more respect I and the finished
product get.

Also is the factor that I will have the image in the "can" when I'm
finished shooting and won't loose sleep wondering if nonreshootable shots
are going to come from the lab ok . . . Many industrial shots have
thousands of dollars in the companies prep time alone and often I shoot
just before a large machine is loaded on a truck for a destination that
will not allow a photographer in to reshoot.

The bottom line for me was time savings which means I'll make more money
for the same contract (layout and design, photography, printing and
delivery)

As we've been going digital over the last 4 years (all output on disk)
I've been raising prices because of the learning curves and better and
faster value added service to my customers. Why would I lower prices if
I can offer the latest, best, new and improved only studio in my area
that offers full production from concept to print delivery? Of course,
there is always a limit to what anyone can charge in a given area but as
a 100% commission salesman I always sell my product as an investment,
never as an advertising cost. Boy do they like their customers to think
they're on the cutting edge with corporate CD's, one of my fastest
growing new products.

Another thing is I'm finding now that many industrial customers that have
had crappy web sites are now paying big bucks to have a graphically
superior site redesigned even if they have to buy out an existing
contract of 24 to 36 months from their original designers.

You can see what my work includes at http://www.hsmcfarland.com

Mac
Les Schofer said:
Chip Feise wrote:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Les Schofer said:
I set up PS5.5 to batch
aquire and levels/sharpen/quantum filter/save jpg into a folder. My
400mhz laptop will spend 1-2 hours churning through 60-100 images shot
with my 6 megapixel camera. I can batch print these to 4, 8, or 15
images per 8x10 sheet through Packagizer or Fotopage. The client can
look these over better than a 35mmm film contact sheet. I am adamant
about going back and individually processing each image they select from
that sheet. I charge an image processing fee for each of these delivered
files. If delivered in color corrected CMYK your client won't be paying
the printer for drum scan.
Click to expand...
Les,

How are you batch aquiring? What software/plugin are you using to do this?
Are you then doing autolevels or are you writing an action for each job?

What are you charging for a "processing fee?" I assume it's billed per delivered final image on top of any creative fees?
 
With existing clients, you need to be careful and sell them into the digital thing. Many times you're

charging more than with film and they need to be educated on the advantages for them.

Any new job that comes in (especially a new client) I present the digital capture as an option and

explain that my creative fee is the same either way, but with digital I charge a capture fee (day rate)

instead of film, processing, polaroid, ...It always comes out a win/win to shoot digital. If I was

shooting more editorial work with preset fees, I would break it down more and charge both.

I figure it takes a half day on the computer for every full day shooting digital (or at least that is what

I tell them). If the client is standing over my shoulder in the studio, most of the retouching and

processing are done on the spot. In essence, they are paying my full day rate + capture day rate

for my processing time. If they aren't there, I use more batch processing and do the computer work
between other things.
 
Bill...

I would be worried about letting clients have the raw files out of the camera. Two years ago I was doing some quickie headshots with the Kodak DC120 camera for a corporate website and made the misteak of letting them have the raw files. They assured me that someone there knew PhotoShop and would adjust each headshot perfectly. Well that was not the case and the shots looked aweful on the website. I offered to deliever excellent images but they declined. This was a disaster as I wanted to use their website as part of my portfolio.

I would worry that Ma & Pa consumer would try to print your raw files, mess it up then tell friends that you are a lousy wedding photog because they didn't know how to use an image editing program. Perhaps I'm just a bit paroniod.

chip
Bill Collins Photography said:
On the CD's I give the families as part of the package, I give them the
unaltered high-res jpg's right out of the camera....what they do with
them is their business. I've made the money I want to make on the price
of the package for this package and don't expect many reorders.

The only prints I alter are the ones they select for me to print up for
their album or that others have ordered for reprints. Resizing
resolution is totally automatic with photoshop's automate palate by
creating scripts to do your work for you.

With digital, I feel a lot freer to shoot more at weddings, as there is
no cost involved in taking the photos. When I shoot the Hasselblads, I
figure I've spend a dollar every time I snap the shutter...with film,
processing and 5x5 proof, so you don't just snap away like crazy with the
film rig.

Thanks,
Bill
Chip Feise said:
Are you adjusting every file out of the D1 in PhotoShop before burning
them onto the CD Roms??? I would assume yes???
Since you are delievering about 5 CD Rom disks to the client I have to
assume you are burning TIFF files to the disk???
Do you have a staff working on the image files as adjusting 300 to 400
image files is alot of work???

Finally because you are not paying for film/processing and are shooting
more images per wedding do you find yourself being as selective or more
selective or less selective in subject matter than when you shot in
film????
It sounds like going digital has given you more shooting freedom since
the film/processing meter is not running anymore.

chip
Bill Collins Photography said:
After the big initial outlay for equipment, about $14K, everything else
to fill the order gets a lot cheaper! No film to buy, no processing
fees, no proofs to purchase.....only the prints for the album to pay for
at cost...and the cost of the album itself. I figure going digital will
pay for itself in about 4 or 5 years, just from the saving on film,
processing and proofing.

And people are lining up to have me do their wedding with them mighty D1!
Of course, have one of the top wedding photo webpages doesn't hurt a bit
either. Those who would like, can check it out at
http://www.ProWeddingPhotos.com or
http://www.ProfessionalWeddingPhotographers.com or
http://www.ProfessionalWeddingPhotography.com

Bill
pete biro said:
Perhaps all those items need factoring in... maybe you need to decide
what amount of money you need to take home in a month... then average out
all the fixed costs, equipment depreciation/upkeep, etc, etc, and charge
accordingly.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Chip,

I explain to the client that the camera images on CD are offer just so that the relatives can view them slide-show style on their computers...I enclose a shareware copy on the cd of Thumbs4 and I make no warranties as to their printability....explaining that if they want them perfectly and perminately printed.....that is were my reprint orders come in.

Bill
Chip Feise said:
chip
Bill Collins Photography said:
On the CD's I give the families as part of the package, I give them the
unaltered high-res jpg's right out of the camera....what they do with
them is their business. I've made the money I want to make on the price
of the package for this package and don't expect many reorders.

The only prints I alter are the ones they select for me to print up for
their album or that others have ordered for reprints. Resizing
resolution is totally automatic with photoshop's automate palate by
creating scripts to do your work for you.

With digital, I feel a lot freer to shoot more at weddings, as there is
no cost involved in taking the photos. When I shoot the Hasselblads, I
figure I've spend a dollar every time I snap the shutter...with film,
processing and 5x5 proof, so you don't just snap away like crazy with the
film rig.

Thanks,
Bill
Chip Feise said:
Are you adjusting every file out of the D1 in PhotoShop before burning
them onto the CD Roms??? I would assume yes???
Since you are delievering about 5 CD Rom disks to the client I have to
assume you are burning TIFF files to the disk???
Do you have a staff working on the image files as adjusting 300 to 400
image files is alot of work???

Finally because you are not paying for film/processing and are shooting
more images per wedding do you find yourself being as selective or more
selective or less selective in subject matter than when you shot in
film????
It sounds like going digital has given you more shooting freedom since
the film/processing meter is not running anymore.

chip
Bill Collins Photography said:
After the big initial outlay for equipment, about $14K, everything else
to fill the order gets a lot cheaper! No film to buy, no processing
fees, no proofs to purchase.....only the prints for the album to pay for
at cost...and the cost of the album itself. I figure going digital will
pay for itself in about 4 or 5 years, just from the saving on film,
processing and proofing.

And people are lining up to have me do their wedding with them mighty D1!
Of course, have one of the top wedding photo webpages doesn't hurt a bit
either. Those who would like, can check it out at
http://www.ProWeddingPhotos.com or
http://www.ProfessionalWeddingPhotographers.com or
http://www.ProfessionalWeddingPhotography.com

Bill
pete biro said:
Perhaps all those items need factoring in... maybe you need to decide
what amount of money you need to take home in a month... then average out
all the fixed costs, equipment depreciation/upkeep, etc, etc, and charge
accordingly.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top