0.3m pixels...the best I can expect from a pro?

[alpha dog]

My daughter recently took part in a local sporting event (equestrian), at which a single pro photographer had access to the indoor show jumping arena. They had a van outside setup as a mobile gallery/sales desk, selling prints/digital images to the competitors and friends/family.

My daughter paid £20 for 5 pictures to be emailed to her.

The images she received were 640 * 425 JPGs of 100kB or less. So 0.3mpx, with quite high compression/low quality factor (a similar image saved from lightroom at 640 wide and 50% quality was considerable over 100kB).

The images are just about good enough for instagram/facebook I guess, but barely adequate for a 6"x 4" print.

Personally I don't think it is good enough, so I am going to complain/ask for bigger images. Do people agree I should?

Worth noting that my daughter and their friends get way better images than this by taking a still grab from an iPhone video. If this is the quality that pro's deliver, and they are just relying on monopoly physical access to justify people paying for their work, then they are not long for this world in my mind! They will soon be replaced by say a automated 360 video cameras, and a minimum wage kid in a booth grabbing prints! Its already happening at major tourist attractions.

Surely pro's must have more self respect than ripping off kids with shoddy product, gives you all a bad name!! Do you pro's have a union or something I could get them struck off from

 

[artistguy]

Seems very odd. I completely agree, perhaps the pro has sent thumbnails by mistake in place of the expected full sized images. It's also possible these are very small crops of much wider images, in which case they're they're really stretching things to the limit.

I send clients smaller 'web' sized images for approval, generally 3000 x 2000 at 72dpi, then they get the full res images they select.

 

[FantasticMrFox]

You should definitely expect something better than 5 images at such a measly resolution. Politely ask for larger images.

 

[BAK]

You write>> Surely pro's must have more self respect than ripping off kids with shoddy product, gives you all a bad name!!

That comment really demonstrates the inability to think.

Anyway...

Call the event organizers and ask what the deal was with the photographer.

That's where the problem lies.

BAK

 

[Colin K. Work]

Not clear whether you were there or not, or have actually seen what was being offered.

It seems, from my experience at such events, $4 per image would be very cheap for a print quality file - for comparison, at a recent graduation event the going rate for a single 7x10 print was £25 (about US$30 - $35 at current exchanges).

Is it possible that what your daughter bought was in fact a set of images suitable for instagram or facebook? Were perhaps higher resolution files on offer as well (at a higher price)?

If these were being sold as hi-res images, I 100% agree with you ... but given the price, I suspect otherwise and this is a case of the purchaser either not reading what was for sale carefully, or not understanding the explanation.

As a seller of images, I have occasionally encountered an issue with customers purchasing the wrong resolution for their requirements, despite my best efforts to make it clear what they would be getting for their money.

 

[alpha dog]

You write>> Surely pro's must have more self respect than ripping off kids with shoddy product, gives you all a bad name!!

That comment really demonstrates the inability to think.

Anyway...

Call the event organizers and ask what the deal was with the photographer.

That's where the problem lies.

BAK

No, I definitely have the ability to think, and I don't have a problem with the event organiser, that is not where the problem lies.

I don't have a problem with the pro photographer being there, and realistically I don't even have a problem with there being only one (it was a small local event). I see this as a service laid on by the organiser, which you can choose to buy or not.

I don't even have a problem with the price, this is not a wedding or a graduation or a national final, so I think speculatively taking the pics, and looking to get £20 from some percentage of the competitors or their family seems like a reasonable business model, and if the quality is adequate, then it sounds like a reasonable deal for the punter too - get 5 'professional' photos - better than the rubbish your family can take with their iphones from the sidelines.

My problem is with the quality of the product. High compression, sub-vga images are like screen grabs from low quality SD video, and it is my personal opinion (you are free to disagree) that someone who calls themself a professional sports photographer should have a little more self respect than to distribute this as their product - so I stand by 'shoddy'. Of course, they can't be held accountable if the 14 year old purchaser crops it square, adds a sepia filter and uploads it as a poor quality JPeG to Instabook, but at least have some pride in selling a decent quality product!

Secondly, unless it is very clearly stated that the photographs being sold are not suitable for printing, I also stand by calling this a rip off.

I guess my wider point, as a keen amateur myself, I believe that all we users of 'proper' photo equipment, with lots of experience and knowledge of photography, ought to be producing better output than the friend/family member who thinks the best solution is a screen grab from an iphone video. And that goes doubly if you are charging for it. If you destroy your quality capture with massive compression of the output then (a) smartphones will win sooner (making proper photo kit more fringe/more expensive), and (b) the value proposition of professional photgraphers will bee undermined even further. Just my own view here

 

[alpha dog]

You should definitely expect something better than 5 images at such a measly resolution. Politely ask for larger images.

 

[alpha dog]

Not clear whether you were there or not, or have actually seen what was being offered.

It seems, from my experience at such events, $4 per image would be very cheap for a print quality file - for comparison, at a recent graduation event the going rate for a single 7x10 print was £25 (about US$30 - $35 at current exchanges).

Is it possible that what your daughter bought was in fact a set of images suitable for instagram or facebook? Were perhaps higher resolution files on offer as well (at a higher price)?

If these were being sold as hi-res images, I 100% agree with you ... but given the price, I suspect otherwise and this is a case of the purchaser either not reading what was for sale carefully, or not understanding the explanation.

As a seller of images, I have occasionally encountered an issue with customers purchasing the wrong resolution for their requirements, despite my best efforts to make it clear what they would be getting for their money.

--
Colin K. Work
www.ckwphoto.com
www.pixstel.com

Thanks Colin

I was at the event - she came to me and asked me for the £20!! But I didn't actually see what specific packages they were selling.

I guess as a pro, he can choose to package his work as he wishes, and as a punter, I can choose to buy it or not. But I guess my view is that as a pro you ought to have some quality threshold, and it should be better than this!

 

[Bobthearch]

Sounds like a scam to me, or maybe a bait-and-switch to get people to buy more expensive high-res photos. Or maybe the photographer makes most of their money selling prints and only does the jpeg sales as a low-budget option?

Maybe the photographer simply made a mistake in the resizing and processing?

I'd call them and ask. And I'd send a message to the event organizer - either get someone decent or not give an exclusive deal.

Just for curiosity sake, I'd be curious to see one of the images.

 

[alpha dog]

Just for curiosity sake, I'd be curious to see one of the images.

--
Personal non-commercial websites with no ads or tracking:
Local photography: www.ratonphotos.com
Travel photography: www.placesandpics.com

 

[Bobthearch]

Sad.

If the photographer was a first-timer who'd never been to that sort of event before and was taking photos for free...

Here's about the best I can do, as a non-professional with consumer-grade gear sitting a hundred feet away in the stands. I offer my photos for free to any of the contestants. So far no one has taken me up on it.

--
Personal non-commercial websites with no ads or tracking:
Local photography: www.ratonphotos.com
Travel photography: www.placesandpics.com

 

[DenWil]

Both Tif and Jpeg. Clients have been receiving them for years now. The sizes you are quoting are embarrassingly small. A pro providing such a feeble product...well, 'nough said.

The venue is likely getting a buyout or a percentage so I would complain to the venue and absolutely stop buying the images. You simply do not need photos memorializing every trip around the ring. Stop buying in to the needy parent scam.

Takes the same amount of time to shoot a 250th or 500th of a second exposure regardless of the camera. Size does matter but then so does integrity. If you are going to have ever other shooter blocked from an event to fill your own coffers your own work should be pretty darn competent

 

[Joe Pa]

I think she bought a package of lowres images for use on social media, especially given the price.

Image packages are typically more costly than print and most photographers aren't going to attempt to e-mail 5 8MB+ high res files.

 

[michael Zero]

My daughter recently took part in a local sporting event (equestrian), at which a single pro photographer had access to the indoor show jumping arena. They had a van outside setup as a mobile gallery/sales desk, selling prints/digital images to the competitors and friends/family.

My daughter paid £20 for 5 pictures to be emailed to her.

The images she received were 640 * 425 JPGs of 100kB or less. So 0.3mpx, with quite high compression/low quality factor (a similar image saved from lightroom at 640 wide and 50% quality was considerable over 100kB).

The images are just about good enough for instagram/facebook I guess, but barely adequate for a 6"x 4" print.

Personally I don't think it is good enough, so I am going to complain/ask for bigger images. Do people agree I should?

Worth noting that my daughter and their friends get way better images than this by taking a still grab from an iPhone video. If this is the quality that pro's deliver, and they are just relying on monopoly physical access to justify people paying for their work, then they are not long for this world in my mind! They will soon be replaced by say a automated 360 video cameras, and a minimum wage kid in a booth grabbing prints! Its already happening at major tourist attractions.

Surely pro's must have more self respect than ripping off kids with shoddy product, gives you all a bad name!! Do you pro's have a union or something I could get them struck off from

I think your talking about several issues issues.

The first is the advertised product which has nothing to do with photography. If someone is selling something then the should deliver what they promised. Misrepresenting is wrong no matter what the product is. What was promised? If there was a misrepresentation going on or a bait and switch and if so complain to the organizer. You paid on cash and did you get a receipt?

2nd a consumer does have a responsibility to know what they are buying so if it was clearly stated that this is what he was selling and this is what was going to be delivered for a specific price (again nothing to do with photography) then it was up to you to determine if it was worth it and it you wanted the product to begin with. We can all say that the quality was not worth the price but since we don't have any other information other than that maybe it was maybe it was not. Its possible that the photographer had to pay a portion of sales to the organized or the owner of the event space to even be there taking photos.

3rd the photographer does deserve to be compensated for their time. I don't photographer these kind of events but I am sure he had thousand of dollars of equipment to even take a pictures in this kind of environment. The photographer is taking picture that might not even sell. So he is using his equipment and time. He needs to be able to justify taking images that he or she will never sell so spreading this cost onto you and the people that do buy images.

Its sound like the photographer did have higher quality images for sale and you could of purchased those but chose not to. It make business sense that a print quality version would be justified and fair . Some might just want the lower quality version and where happy with that and payed a lower price. Again this goes into making the decision that his price was too high for what you thought you should get in exchange for that money.

FYI all types of business rely on special access to charge more for the products the sell. Its a fact of life. Amusement park charge way more for food from major chains that a cheaper outside of the park. This is normal and we all expect this? Why point out? FYI the is small business and not a large mega company. Is this person not allow to make a profit? If anyone could afford not to over charge for their services it would be a major company but no one complains about that.

Also since your daughter competes in horse jumping competitions you clearly have enough income to pay for this which is probably not a cheap sports. I think complaning about such a small sum seem to be a waste of time IMO and not something that needs to be posted on a photography forum.

Also your tone if very negative when you talk about being replace by automation? While you might be right your implying that this photographer has no skill or worth? His time has no value? This can be said for lots of jobs and this issue is not specific to photography. Brilliant observation really?

Sounds like your daughter purchases something without telling you what it was. You later determine it was not worth the price and are now complaining. Sounds like a communication issue between you and your daughter and nothing to do with the photography service. I don't think this was a rip off. This is a time place utility pricing issue and nothing more. If the photographer stated clearly what he was selling and gave her exactly what he said he would. Maybe educating her on why a bottle of water cost 8 dollars at a ball game (when its only worth a dollar) or an amusement park would be a better waste of you time.

Is it fair, probably not but again thats how services are priced... this is why I don't buy 10 beers at the ballgame. I don't need one that bad enough.

 

[alpha dog]

Both Tif and Jpeg. Clients have been receiving them for years now. The sizes you are quoting are embarrassingly small. A pro providing such a feeble product...well, 'nough said.

The venue is likely getting a buyout or a percentage so I would complain to the venue and absolutely stop buying the images. You simply do not need photos memorializing every trip around the ring. Stop buying in to the needy parent scam.

Takes the same amount of time to shoot a 250th or 500th of a second exposure regardless of the camera. Size does matter but then so does integrity. If you are going to have ever other shooter blocked from an event to fill your own coffers your own work should be pretty darn competent

 

[alpha dog]

Yes you are correct. The photog mailed me back saying he wanted £25 per image for JPGs that are good enough to print. He won't be getting another cent. There were only for scrapbooks/instagram etc - but even there they look mediocre becuase of the ludicrously lowres. They definitely look worse than most of her iphone instagram pics.

Interestingly my daughter is a little interested in photography. She actually took her own camera (Olympus Em10 mark 1 with kit lens) to the same venue a week ago to take pics of her friends competing in a different event.

Her pics were all a little blurred (shutter speed too slow on auto), but when I printed these 'professional' (but deliberately downgraded) pics, she said - "mehh, not much better than my attempts, you should tell him that stuff you told me about shutter speed" lol

 

[Joe Pa]

Yes you are correct. The photog mailed me back saying he wanted £25 per image for JPGs that are good enough to print. He won't be getting another cent. There were only for scrapbooks/instagram etc - but even there they look mediocre becuase of the ludicrously lowres. They definitely look worse than most of her iphone instagram pics.

Interestingly my daughter is a little interested in photography. She actually took her own camera (Olympus Em10 mark 1 with kit lens) to the same venue a week ago to take pics of her friends competing in a different event.

Her pics were all a little blurred (shutter speed too slow on auto), but when I printed these 'professional' (but deliberately downgraded) pics, she said - "mehh, not much better than my attempts, you should tell him that stuff you told me about shutter speed" lol

Pricing is a conundrum for professional photographers that work these sorts of events because they have to find a happy medium between where they can make enough money to justify spending the day at the event but also that they don't price themselves out of sales opportunities.

The pictures they took of your daughter have zero value to anyone outside of your family so If you don't purchase any, they are wasted shutter actuations and time. Since they are already selling unprocessed lowres images, I can't imagine why they wouldn't consider offering unprocessed higher res images for $10 - $15 each.

 

[alpha dog]

My daughter recently took part in a local sporting event (equestrian), at which a single pro photographer had access to the indoor show jumping arena. They had a van outside setup as a mobile gallery/sales desk, selling prints/digital images to the competitors and friends/family.

My daughter paid £20 for 5 pictures to be emailed to her.

The images she received were 640 * 425 JPGs of 100kB or less. So 0.3mpx, with quite high compression/low quality factor (a similar image saved from lightroom at 640 wide and 50% quality was considerable over 100kB).

The images are just about good enough for instagram/facebook I guess, but barely adequate for a 6"x 4" print.

Personally I don't think it is good enough, so I am going to complain/ask for bigger images. Do people agree I should?

Worth noting that my daughter and their friends get way better images than this by taking a still grab from an iPhone video. If this is the quality that pro's deliver, and they are just relying on monopoly physical access to justify people paying for their work, then they are not long for this world in my mind! They will soon be replaced by say a automated 360 video cameras, and a minimum wage kid in a booth grabbing prints! Its already happening at major tourist attractions.

Surely pro's must have more self respect than ripping off kids with shoddy product, gives you all a bad name!! Do you pro's have a union or something I could get them struck off from

I think your talking about several issues issues.

The first is the advertised product which has nothing to do with photography. If someone is selling something then the should deliver what they promised. Misrepresenting is wrong no matter what the product is. What was promised? If there was a misrepresentation going on or a bait and switch and if so complain to the organizer. You paid on cash and did you get a receipt?

2nd a consumer does have a responsibility to know what they are buying so if it was clearly stated that this is what he was selling and this is what was going to be delivered for a specific price (again nothing to do with photography) then it was up to you to determine if it was worth it and it you wanted the product to begin with. We can all say that the quality was not worth the price but since we don't have any other information other than that maybe it was maybe it was not. Its possible that the photographer had to pay a portion of sales to the organized or the owner of the event space to even be there taking photos.

3rd the photographer does deserve to be compensated for their time. I don't photographer these kind of events but I am sure he had thousand of dollars of equipment to even take a pictures in this kind of environment. The photographer is taking picture that might not even sell. So he is using his equipment and time. He needs to be able to justify taking images that he or she will never sell so spreading this cost onto you and the people that do buy images.

Its sound like the photographer did have higher quality images for sale and you could of purchased those but chose not to. It make business sense that a print quality version would be justified and fair . Some might just want the lower quality version and where happy with that and payed a lower price. Again this goes into making the decision that his price was too high for what you thought you should get in exchange for that money.

FYI all types of business rely on special access to charge more for the products the sell. Its a fact of life. Amusement park charge way more for food from major chains that a cheaper outside of the park. This is normal and we all expect this? Why point out? FYI the is small business and not a large mega company. Is this person not allow to make a profit? If anyone could afford not to over charge for their services it would be a major company but no one complains about that.

Also since your daughter competes in horse jumping competitions you clearly have enough income to pay for this which is probably not a cheap sports. I think complaning about such a small sum seem to be a waste of time IMO and not something that needs to be posted on a photography forum.

Also your tone if very negative when you talk about being replace by automation? While you might be right your implying that this photographer has no skill or worth? His time has no value? This can be said for lots of jobs and this issue is not specific to photography. Brilliant observation really?

Sounds like your daughter purchases something without telling you what it was. You later determine it was not worth the price and are now complaining. Sounds like a communication issue between you and your daughter and nothing to do with the photography service. I don't think this was a rip off. This is a time place utility pricing issue and nothing more. If the photographer stated clearly what he was selling and gave her exactly what he said he would. Maybe educating her on why a bottle of water cost 8 dollars at a ball game (when its only worth a dollar) or an amusement park would be a better waste of you time.

Is it fair, probably not but again thats how services are priced... this is why I don't buy 10 beers at the ballgame. I don't need one that bad enough.

 

[alpha dog]

Yes you are correct. The photog mailed me back saying he wanted £25 per image for JPGs that are good enough to print. He won't be getting another cent. There were only for scrapbooks/instagram etc - but even there they look mediocre becuase of the ludicrously lowres. They definitely look worse than most of her iphone instagram pics.

Interestingly my daughter is a little interested in photography. She actually took her own camera (Olympus Em10 mark 1 with kit lens) to the same venue a week ago to take pics of her friends competing in a different event.

Her pics were all a little blurred (shutter speed too slow on auto), but when I printed these 'professional' (but deliberately downgraded) pics, she said - "mehh, not much better than my attempts, you should tell him that stuff you told me about shutter speed" lol

Pricing is a conundrum for professional photographers that work these sorts of events because they have to find a happy medium between where they can make enough money to justify spending the day at the event but also that they don't price themselves out of sales opportunities.

The pictures they took of your daughter have zero value to anyone outside of your family so If you don't purchase any, they are wasted shutter actuations and time. Since they are already selling unprocessed lowres images, I can't imagine why they wouldn't consider offering unprocessed higher res images for $10 - $15 each.

Joe - thanks for your insight.

I think you are spot on about the conundrum, a difficult one for a seller. But in this case I can give quite certain answers about what the customer was willing to pay.

First, on overall budget - If my daughter had asked for £25 rather than £20, I probably would have said yes. £30 I would have said no.

I've now found out his charges, £5 per lowres image, or 5 for £20. £25 for a high res JPG.

I would not be willing to pay £25 for one image today, obviously that would be different if if was a graduation/wedding/cup final etc! But for me, on this day that would be too much. These pics will get printed for a scrapbook, posted on social media and forgotten.

If he gave me a choice between say 5x lowres for £20 or 5x higher res for £25, he might have got £5 more, I have no idea if that is worth the extra email bandwidth to him, but what I do know for sure is he was not going to get more than £25 total out of me this morning.

And based on the quality of his product, he will not be getting any repeat business!

So based on the above, assuming I am the typical punter, you might be able to come up with a better strategy for him!

 

[lightandaprayer]

Surely pro's must have more self respect than ripping off kids with shoddy product, gives you all a bad name!! Do you pro's have a union or something I could get them struck off from

Why the gratuitous dig at professional photographers? The conduct of one photographer does not impugn all photographers. This is a run of the mill dispute over what you expected vs. what the photographer delivered. You don't need anyone to validate your side and your invective aimed at pros does not help your argument. Simply take your future business elsewhere if he doesn't resolve the matter to your satisfaction.