Portrait practices in the industry
Mxsmanic
(usually in their homes, or in other outside-the-studio settings)? I'm
talking about rights, types of prints or scans provided, etc., and not
necessarily just prices per se. I take portraits occasionally, but since I
consider it unethical to call other photographers and pretend to be a
customer just to find out their terms and conditions, I'm not really sure
how closely mine match the "industry standard." Can someone here offer some
insight into the "typical" portrait deal? What does a typical portrait
customer normally get for his money?
Keith Wiebe
competitor-be nice and I bet they will send you their price list.
Keith Wiebe
Mxsmanic <mxsm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:xla_8.231941$Im2.11...@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
Leen Koper
"Mxsmanic" <mxsm...@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:xla_8.231941$Im2.11...@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
a photographer, how many customers are in your market area and how much
competition do you have to deal with and, most important of all, what is
your quality as a sales person.
The problem with selling photography is that you can hardly compare portrait
prices, because your not selling an object but a service.
Moreover, portrait prices very much depend on the local market. One of our
dutch top photographers has asked me several times to join him in his studio
to cover a larger part of the market together with our completely different
styles of portraiture. His marketing is aimed at the big spending top end of
the market and his pricing is accordingly. Within 30 miles from his studio
3.000.000 people are living. I'm living on a former island with only 32.000
inhabitants and over 7 portrait studios. My prices have to be about 1/3 of
his prices, because the top of my market is about only 1% of his market.
When he is able to produce 700 high priced portraits each year, this way I
might do only 7 or 8 yearly and that's not enough to stay alive.
That's why I constantly have to improve my skills to attract more customers
from further away.
Leen Koper ABIPP ARPS
www.fotografieleenkoper.nl
Michael Quack
Mxsmanic says...
As suggested by someone else you might play fair and call
telling them who you are and what your intention is.
Others might be interested in not too cheap competitors
as well.
But then.... what's typical? Helmut Newton used to offer a
portrait session including 2 fine prints for a flat fee of
10.000 USD plus travelling/accomodation/food expenses - to
anyone willing to pay.
I make my prices depending on the customer. There are people
that will get away with just an hour of my time charged, there
are others that cannot book me for less than half a day.
Depending on intended use I will even charge a full day rate
if the client and intended use are "fat" enough.
On the other hand, I'm not a portrait guy with a window front
place who does the regular portrait and wedding stuff.
I'm more the advertising and commercial type of shooter, so
my terms of service are certainly not representative for
regular portrait people.
Just recently I shot a complete company crew. Something like
150 people, all digital, with the client receiving CDs with
16 bit tiff files. 2 days for a full day rate each. No
reordering hassle, no dealing with the lab, the framing,
yadda, yadda.... and no need for archiving more than maybe
2 years just in case the customers ruins his stuff.
I hand out all files to the customer with full rights, so I
never will have to bother again. Yes, I have no reorders.
No, I don't have to leaf through the archives for a 5 dollar
reprint after years that might cost me 4.99 myself. The trick
is to set your day rate intelligent to make up for the
loss in reorders (that in reality are often just theory)
and put some of it in the bank "for later".
Clean and easy job, nice money. However, this is the
commercial photographers approach to the business.
It also involves the possibility of preproduction for
websites, prepress activities to ensure nicely printed
results if necessary and all that bologna a client might
need for integration into a PR workflow.
--
Michael Quack <mic...@photoquack.de>
Mxsmanic
news:
g;-)blank-21070...@pool-151-196-172-70.balt.east.verizon.net...
> Enviromental interior headsots are where the
> money is but you have to have much more in
> terms of skill.
What do you mean by "environmental"?
> Clue- most people want multiple images to choose
> from, and will want additional sizes other than "previews"
> which will vary you'll have to offer differant
> sizes at affordable prices,....factor in some profit.
Does everyone want finished prints? What about scans? I'd expect the
latter to be more practical for many applications (such as printing of large
numbers of prints via offset or even chemically). And what about leaving
prints up to them? Since I simply pay a pro lab to prepare prints, they
could save money by doing the same themselves--if I do it, I have to charge
extra. Or do most clients want everything done for them?
Michael Quack
Mxsmanic says...
> > Enviromental interior headshots
> What do you mean by "environmental"?
Shots that show the people in their natural environment,
be it their office, studio, apartement, workplace...
This is usually done for editorial shots or PR purposes,
business reports and so on. Pictures that tell a story,
like these for example:
http://www.photoquack.de/portrait/09.htm
http://www.photoquack.de/portrait/11.htm
http://www.photoquack.de/portrait/18.htm
http://members.aol.com/newspics/feature1.htm
http://members.aol.com/newspics/feature2.htm
http://members.aol.com/newspics/feature10.htm
http://members.aol.com/newspics/feature15.htm
> Does everyone want finished prints?
Everybody wants prints to go along whatever main purpose
the pictures need to serve.
> What about scans?
For two years now I am fully digital, so the source
files are available if wanted and feasible.
> And what about leaving prints up to them?
No problem if you do it digital, because a Fuji frontier
will render excellent colors and ideal exposure (if that
is in your files). No need to worry about the lab printing
substandard colors or being ffoled by brighter or darker
objects. Cheap lab prints from your images can't ruin your
reputation that way.
> Since I simply pay a pro lab to prepare prints, they
> could save money by doing the same themselves--
If they do it from negatives or slides, they are likely to
choose Walmart as their "lab", ending up with crappy prints
that bear your name. Contract that they are only allowed to
use pro grade labs (with a fine stated if violated) or make
it fully digital and be sans soucis.
> Or do most clients want everything done for them?
Most of them, yes. Except for the uncle Scrooges among them.
Which end up in either bad prints or paying more than doing
it right in first place.
--
Michael Quack <mic...@photoquack.de>
Leen Koper
screen or small preview prints you will hardly be able to sell big prints.
And that's when a social photographer starts earning.
I 'm studio based and after the shooting I ask my clients to come to the
studio and show them the images on a large tv-screen. The larger the screen,
the larger prints they will order.
Soon I will buy a digital projector to show the images on a large projection
screen. From seeing an image at 2x2 meters it 's just only a small step to
have them order at 0.5x0.5 meter or larger.
That 's why you have to hang large images on the walls. Seeing big is
ordering big.
Leen Koper
www.fotografieleenkoper.nl
Mxsmanic
MPG.17a5e5e9e...@news.cis.dfn.de...
> Pictures that tell a story, like these for
> example:
Nice shots. Those are the kind of portraits I like.
> No problem if you do it digital, because a Fuji
> frontier will render excellent colors and ideal
> exposure (if that is in your files).
That's what I've been wondering about. So your experience is that, if the
digital file is good, the prints usually come out fine? My digital files
look fine, as long as you recognize the color space (Adobe RGB 1998); if
digital printers recognize this, I presume they'll produce good results as
well ... right?
> Contract that they are only allowed to
> use pro grade labs (with a fine stated if violated)
> or make it fully digital and be sans soucis.
The digital route sounds best to me. I don't like the negatives or slides
to leave my possession.
Mxsmanic
3d3bca79$0$8975$fb62...@news1.zeelandnet.nl...
> That 's why you have to hang large images on
> the walls. Seeing big is ordering big.
That makes sense, but the capital investment required is scary.
Michael Quack
Mxsmanic says...
> > No problem if you do it digital, because a Fuji
> > frontier will render excellent colors and ideal
> > exposure (if that is in your files).
>
> That's what I've been wondering about. So your
> experience is that, if the digital file is good,
> the prints usually come out fine?
Not just fine, perfect.
Fashion Shots for a lookbook, green, red, blue, white
black coats against a slightly off-white background.
The conventional way you'd either use a pro lab or be
prepared that any el cheapo printer like Walmart changes
the background in color and brightness opposite to that
of the main garment in the picture.
Printed directly out of the D60 to a Fuji Frontier,
I receive absolutely consistent backgrounds, absolutely
true cloth colors. At least the quality of a pro lab,
most likely a lot better.
> My digital files look fine, as long as you recognize
> the color space (Adobe RGB 1998);
I'd suggest switching to sRGB.
> The digital route sounds best to me. I don't like the
> negatives or slides to leave my possession.
Digitally it is a 100% copy. Print a nice label and
it is more....
--
Michael Quack <mic...@photoquack.de>
Das ist zwar entschieden [OT] aber eine Website die keine Zeile HTML
und ausschließlich Flash verwendet finde ich pervers. Das ist kein
Sitedesign, das ist unnötige Animationsmasturbation. (Th. Hofmann)
Mxsmanic
> I'd suggest switching to sRGB.
sRGB is dramatically limited and optimized for television screens and NTSC
colors, as I recall. I hope digital printers can do better than that! I
especially don't want to archive anything in sRGB because it restricts gamut
so severely.
Michael Quack
Mxsmanic says...
> > I'd suggest switching to sRGB.
>
> sRGB is dramatically limited and optimized for television
> screens and NTSC colors, as I recall.
No, it is more optimized for todays output devices.
Which pretty much include offset printing, inkjet
printers and the like.
> especially don't want to archive anything in sRGB
> because it restricts gamut so severely.
Assigning a profile changes the display, but not the
file data itself.
Leen Koper
But imagine that your average extra turnover per portrait session is $ 50.-.
That's quite normal.
If you produce just only 300 portraits a year it will bring you an extra
turnover of $ 15000.-, so at least a profit of $ 7.500.-
That's an extremely fast return on your investment.
Leen Koper
www.fotografieleenkoper.nl
Mxsmanic
they it becomes cost-effective.
"Leen Koper" <leen...@zeelandnet.nl> a écrit dans le message de news:
3d3e528e$0$8969$fb62...@news1.zeelandnet.nl...
Mxsmanic
> Assigning a profile changes the display, but
> not the file data itself.
Then why does Photoshop require 30 seconds to convert from one color space
to another?
Anyway, sRGB is one of the most restricted color spaces around. It "pops"
on monitors and other restricted-gamut devices because they cannot display
the greater range of better color spaces. But if you ever do display an
sRGB image on a device with a really good gamut, it may be
disappointing--and it will certainly look worse than something with a
greater gamut.
John
Most photo finishers have sales on enlargements after the
first of the year for this reason. Also you have your previous
years negs to select from.
Regards
John S. Douglas, Photographer
http://www.darkroompro.com
John
<leen...@zeelandnet.nl> wrote:
>That 's why you have to hang large images on the walls. Seeing big is
>ordering big.
Reminds me of the time one of my friends showed me a print
projector that he uses to project proofs onto the wall. The
customer selects the prints they are most interested in and then
he uses a frame to show what the image will approximately look
like when done. I asked him about presenting 8x10's and as the
image is enlarged with a rather long focal length lens, he showed
me how he grabbed the table (with a good deal of impatience) and
zoomed it up to within a few feet of the wall. Of course the
customer was seated about 15 feet away and could barely see the
image much less make out details.
Patrick L.
Mxsmanic <mxsm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:xla_8.231941$Im2.11...@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
of people
> (usually in their homes, or in other outside-the-studio settings)?
I'm
> talking about rights, types of prints or scans provided, etc., and
not
> necessarily just prices per se. I take portraits occasionally, but
since I
> consider it unethical to call other photographers and pretend to be
a
> customer just to find out their terms and conditions,
I wouldn't think that it is particularly unethical, not enough to lose
any sleep over, if you only take a couple of minutes of time. Anyway,
why pretend? I call photographers all the time informing them that I
am new and trying to learn the business. I send emails garnered from
web sites with queries of one kind or another, and many respond with
helpful comments. Can't always rely on usenet, that is certain.
Patrick L.
Patrick L.
I'm researching this issue, myself, and what I'm finding out is that
no one on Usenet can give you any realistic idea of what to charge,
since that is a skill level plus supply and demand equation you can
only learn from the demographics of your area, as well as the kind of
market you are aiming for. But regarding the various "products" one
can offer, I am finding out that anything you can imagine, is probably
being done by one type of photographer or another.
But if I were doing portraits, I would want a predictable result,
using the lab of my choice, and offer various formats they offer.
Personally, I would never allow the client to use the lab of their
choice since they might be using Rite-aid, or one of the non-pro
cheapies, unless, of course, they were a type of client that is
knowledgeable about such things, and has a pro lab already in mind.
Patrick L.
Leen Koper
As soon as the Fuji FV-10 was available I bought it to replace contact
sheets. I still had a small tv set and almost all sales were 8x12. Before
this switch I usually sold larger sizes, so after a few month I bought the
largest second hand tv set I could find. Sizes were up almost immedeately
and the standard size is 16x20 now.
That's the reason, after reconstructing my studio, I 'm planning to switch
to digital projection now.
Leen Koper
www.fotografieleenkoper.nl
"Mxsmanic" <mxsm...@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:ZOu%8.255833$Bt1.13...@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
Michael Quack
Patrick L. says...
> Personally, I would never allow the client to use the lab of their
> choice since they might be using Rite-aid, or one of the non-pro
> cheapies, unless, of course, they were a type of client that is
> knowledgeable about such things, and has a pro lab already in mind.
That's less important with digital, because the color profile and
absolute color definitions in the file make it easy to control
what you are doing. Any lab with a Fuji Frontier can deliver
what the next with the same machine will deliver.
And it will in 99% of the cases be indistinguishable from
pro lab work. There isn't the great variations in
quality that you experience in conventional photography.
--
Michael Quack <mic...@photoquack.de>
Michael Quack
Mxsmanic says...
> > Assigning a profile changes the display, but
> > not the file data itself.
>
> Then why does Photoshop require 30 seconds to convert
> from one color space to another?
For creating a lookup and conversion table.
> Anyway, sRGB is one of the most restricted color spaces around.
But the one that makes no problems in printing, and
the one ideal for proof setups in image processing
and prepress.
> It "pops" on monitors and other restricted-gamut devices
> because they cannot display the greater range of better
> color spaces.
Vice versa, monitors can display much more than you can print.
sRGB is an attempt to match the monitor preview with the printed
output, be it inkjet, laser output or offset printing.