How can this guy make any money? [Archive] - Canon Digital Photography Forums

Croasdail

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 09:09

If printing is done somewhere like Wallmart or even Mpix.... their cost really is not that much more then your offering on your site. Figure 200 prints at 10c each.... $20 dollars cost. The other prints done at Wallmart or home printer is a max of $50 cost. So his hard cost are really only $70 more then yours. I am sure the way they figure it, they still made $400 because they had the camera anyway, so why not. And they will find those who can only afford. The thing is generally people paying $500 vs $5000 are not any less a pain in the butt to work with. You just have to work with a whole heck of a lot more of them.

Gary_Evans

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 09:38

"How can this guy make any money?" At the risk of being harsh - whats it to you? Its his business and he can run it how he likes.

By all means be aware of what others charge, but that doesnt mean you have to copy them. There will always be bottom feeders in photography and you can choose to join them or ignore them. Both ways have pro's and con's of which I'm sure you are already aware.

rhys

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 11:23

primoz

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 12:24

Now it's my turn to quote someone from some other thread ;)
As my wife would say "put your big girl panties on and get over it" or my favourite: "would you like some cheese with that whine".
I guess you just have to adapt.
PS: Sorry for being like that, but I just had to do this. :twisted:

New Hobby

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 12:42

$250 for a wedding? My gut says you get what you pay for.

Croasdail

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 12:53

Now it's my turn to quote someone from some other thread ;)

I guess you just have to adapt.
PS: Sorry for being like that, but I just had to do this. :twisted:

Primoz, you crack me up. Sorry rhys, you had to kinda see that one coming.

But honestly, it really is only going to get worse for a while as everyone and their dog gets a DSLR and thinks they can make some extra change from it. It's going to be a bumpy ride for those without talent.

whatgoesaround

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 12:56

Me not knowing anything at all about wedding photography I would say that this guy has seen all you big girls panties wedding photographers getting a free ride and has adapted to make a profit.
Good for him.
I could care less if people like him take over the whole wedding photography industry and show up the rest of you overpriced freeloaders for what a bunch of ludites you are. Good luck to him. With a bit of luck he`ll put loads of local wedding photographers out of business. Hope it spreads. Maybe he could have exclusive deals with churches and ban all the other photographers.

00silvergt

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 13:25

Well, someone fell off the wrong side of the bed this morning! I think you have to consider regional/territory aspect of the business as well. I'm in the Bay Area, CA. Nothing here cost $500 and be any good! LOL ;) I wouldn't worry too much about this guys, he is in South Carolina, I'm sure he's not going to fly to other parts for $500 to encroach on your territory. Even if he does, then he won't be in business too long. If you are in SC, then I say, don't worry about as well. People know you get what you pay for. I shot video for weddings and I know that the negotiations happen before the contract get signed.

elTwitcho

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 13:40

Gary_Evans

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 13:51

Its his first post. Except I guess that it probably isnt, just someone stirring trouble.

whatgoesaround

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 13:53

I was being ironic!
The reply was aimed at the author of the thread, like a couple of other replies above.
Apparantly its good form to offer opinions on things you know nothing about.
We sports photographers find this quite amusing.
And honestly, we could care less. But if you adapt you`ll be ok especially if you have a plan!! eh rhys!

00silvergt

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 13:57

Now it's my turn to quote someone from some other thread ;)

I guess you just have to adapt.
PS: Sorry for being like that, but I just had to do this. :twisted:

Me not knowing anything at all about wedding photography I would say that this guy has seen all you big girls panties wedding photographers getting a free ride and has adapted to make a profit.
Good for him.
I could care less if people like him take over the whole wedding photography industry and show up the rest of you overpriced freeloaders for what a bunch of ludites you are. Good luck to him. With a bit of luck he`ll put loads of local wedding photographers out of business. Hope it spreads. Maybe he could have exclusive deals with churches and ban all the other photographers.

I was being ironic!
The reply was aimed at the author of the thread, like a couple of other replies above.
Apparantly its good form to offer opinions on things you know nothing about.
We sports photographers find this quite amusing.
And honestly, we could care less. But if you adapt you`ll be ok especially if you have a plan!! eh rhys!

Hmm, interesting...very interesting. ;)

primoz

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 14:06

00silvergt

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 14:11

Just messing with you, Primoz. Please don't be offended. Just pointing out the obvious...lol.;)

workingtog

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 14:21

Me not knowing anything at all about wedding photography I would say that this guy has seen all you big girls panties wedding photographers getting a free ride and has adapted to make a profit.

Good for him.

I could care less if people like him take over the whole wedding photography industry and show up the rest of you overpriced freeloaders for what a bunch of ludites you are. Good luck to him. With a bit of luck he`ll put loads of local wedding photographers out of business. Hope it spreads. Maybe he could have exclusive deals with churches and ban all the other photographers

00silvergt

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 14:33

Huh?

rhys

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 14:37

Somebody's having fun setting up multiple identities, I think!

Consider the source of the advert I saw - craigslist!

I just thought it was an interesting thing to throw in the pot.

00silvergt

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 14:43

I don't get the whole Wedding Photogs vs Sports Photogs thing. Two different venues, two different styles, what's the deal? After reading Primoz link it looks like a comment from a sports photography forum brought this wave on. I don't get it? Yes, I am one of those who are having fun their big fancy cameras, so maybe that's why I don't get the issue. Maybe because their lively hoods are at stake? Adapting is easy to say, but very few get to figure it out in time to give Suzy and the kids food on the table, clothes to wear the the GI JOE with the kung-fu grip for Christmas. So I sort of see where the sports guys are coming from, but for them to transcend the fight in another forum is not so good neither. Weird.

elTwitcho

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 14:45

As some of you didn't get it, his reply, just as mine too, is mainly aimed to Rhys' replies in this thread: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=369701
After reading that, our replies might look a bit different ;)

Iiiinteresting.

There's some real hostility going on around the forums these days towards other photogs. I wonder what that's about...

00silvergt

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 14:50

Iiiinteresting.

There's some real hostility going on around the forums these days towards other photogs. I wonder what that's about...

From my understanding it is simple: OP of this thread made a comment that the Sports photog's in another forum are being whiners. They waited until the OP posted about something in this forum that remotely sounded like a whine and suddenly, they pounced to point out his inequities, something like, "It doesn't feel so good and say people are whining when the event is happening in your house." sort of deal. I think that's what is going on from my understanding of it. But I think the whole identity thing and the carrying this here is a bit far and childish. They could have PM'd each other and settled it.;) Come on guys, we are all here to learn, right? Wedding guys put away the flashes and Sports guys your telephoto lens, and let's just play nice?

rhys

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 14:55

From my understanding it is simple: OP of this thread made a comment that the Sports photog's in another forum are being whiners. They waited until the OP posted about something in this forum that remotely sounded like a whine and suddenly, they pounced to point out his inequities, something like, "It doesn't feel so good and say people are whining when the event is happening in your house." sort of deal. I think that's what is going on from my understanding of it. But I think the whole identity thing and the carrying this here is a bit far and childish. They could have PM'd each other and settled it.;) Come on guys, we are all here to learn, right? Wedding guys put away the flashes and Sports guys your telephoto lens, and let's just play nice?

Lol. Yes. Somebody whined about bristol rovers employing its own photographer and banning all other photographers. I see nothing wrong with that and I said so. In fact the whining really narked me.

I just posted a "coo - look at how little this guy is charging" and wondered how he made money considering weddings are maybe once a month. Then all he childish bashing started. It is, as you say, very juvenille.

00silvergt

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 15:03

Rhys, you seem to be more of the voice of reason in this mess. (Sort of disappointing since one of the participants was Sports Photog of the year, not detaching from his skill and talent, but disappointed by the professionalism) Why don't you take the high road and end this mess. I think those of us who understand will know? Just a suggestion?

delhi

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 15:20

Late in the game. But I have no problem whatever this fella is charging. $500 maybe the mean price limit in that area of town. Who knows. Maybe he uses a G3 P&S painted in black which is already paid off. Maybe he doesn't do any PP at all. Maybe he just shows up for 2-3 hrs of work. That's not bad. Who knows what is being delivered other than the 6x4 and DVD.

primoz

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 15:32

I don't know who has split personality or who made another account for forum, but I know it wasn't me, and that's enough for me. I have one account here and that's this one. Let's face it... if I was going to "hide" myself, why would I post first comment under this name?
Second... I actually agree with this, that (too) low prices are bad for all of us... wedding or sport shooters. All I wanted to point out was, that it might not be such good thing anymore, once such things come to your field. I couldn't care less about wedding prices, just as I couldn't care less for Bristol Rovers (sorry I still have no idea where that place is). But whole point is not, that if it doesn't bother me directly, everything is fine, and someone else will deal with it. It's not fine, and sooner or later you will get it back. And that was whole point of my writing, even in Bristol Rovers thread.
And if this guy's prices really doesn't bother Rhys, what's the point of taking this thing out? Other then complaining how bad this is for business, which is exactly same thing as you had against our "complaining". I know for 100 of people (probably many more, including half of members here who "work for credit only") who has low prices, or even work for free, and I didn't start not even one single thread saying "look how low prices he has". Why? Because I actually did went over this. It still bothers me, but I know I won't change anything in this. There will always be enough people willing to work for free.. errr sorry credit... if I like it or not.

Croasdail

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 15:45

---- and honestly, outing another photographer, whether they belong to this forum or not, just isn't very professional. You can discuss what you have seen or read without outing someone. The web post don't go away, and all this chap has to do is a search of his own web site name to find this thread in a couple of days. He may actually not care himself, probably is a nice chap just like anyone here. But any customers that are doing a background search on him will find this, and it will likely look more poorly on those who posted here rather then the photographer himself.

If he had come here and asked if his prices were appropriate, then any and most comments should be welcomed. But to go trolling the web, and drag people here to show how poor business people they are, that is what I consider not very professional. Just my opinion. This is no different then me post a link to the OPs site and saying I can't believe what this chap is doing ( Not going to do that.. would be right)... it is legal, possibly morally ok in todays new brave blagisphere, but not very professional. Just my opinion.... feel free to disagree. I put it here of my own free will.

I found 'whatgoesarounds' comments wrong - no matter what he felt rhys wrote earlier. In fact, if this person had an issue with that post, he should have addressed it there.... not wait until later to ambush another thread. No where near professional behavior in anyones book.

blackshadow

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 17:03

Rhys - pull your head in and stop being such a hypocrite. Croasdail is right it is rather unprofessional/unethical outing someone publicly the way you did.

I have a feeling it will be a waste of time trying to explain professionalism or ethics to you rhys based on your previous form when you have posted seeking advice. You come across as knowing everything.

You post seeking advice then when people offer their advice you find all sorts of ways to disagree with the advice of professionals who know what they are talking about.

How is the guy you mentioned in your original post any different to your "no frills" wedding service where you shoot and hand over your images on a CD with no post processing, no printing, no quality control?

Big thumbs up to whatgoesaround! I had a rather large laugh to myself when I read your posts!

00silvergt

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 17:24

There we go, let's make two wrongs right. Guys come on, let's not attack the poster. Are we joining in on the ridiculousness to make sure everyone feels like crap? What possible good can we do by bashing on another person, personally? I think we all need to take a breather and stop posting messages that strikes back at anyone. I think we all owe each other an apology. I'll start, sorry for any comments I made that can/may be considered as offensive to someone here, personally. We don't know each other enough to attack at that level. We can criticize an opinion, but we are not these guys' parents, so let's chill out on nastiness and do something more productive for all.

rhys

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 19:52

I was just chatting to a chap who sells guns in Sportsman's Warehouse. Apparently he's a wedding photographer in his spare time and does weddings for $700. He does albums too.

So... Looks like it's $400-$700 locally for a wedding.

liza

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 20:04

00silvergt

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 20:07

Exactly, but read on and the plot thickens Liza. You will see this is actually a retaliation for something the OP posted at a Sports thread.

liza

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 20:11

Oh. Whatever.

00silvergt

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 20:15

Oh. Whatever.

Yes, whatever. But "whatever" doesn't seem to keep some members from bashing on each other. ;):p

Croasdail

10th of September 2007 (Mon), 20:22

rhys... look at these peoples work and then decide if that is the market you want to compete in. There is a lot of need for economical weddings. I live in one of those towns that are have's and have-nots. There are a good number of people where 500 would be a stretch for them. So in a way, these bargain shooters fill a niche. But the reality of these people is that they are producing snap shots at best, sometimes not even that good. Looking at their work, $500 really doesn't look like a bargain.

Where I have issue with all this though is I think people deserve a quality product regardless. It obviously makes sense that not everyone can have a Rolls-Royce wedding... but just because you are buying a Ford, you still should be able to expect a quality product.... just not as fancy. Perhaps they can't have the 11x14 on canvas print framed, they have a nicely done MPIX printed 8x10.. or they don't get a coffee table quality bound album, they end up with a professional looking box with their prints in it. But to me, the photography still needs to be well done, well above what they could get from uncle Harry and his new d40 nikon.

Many of these $400-700 people are just snappers.... they wouldn't know a good shot if someone set it up for them. I doubt they know what Rembrandt lighting is, less alone the rule of thirds. Your in a unique position that you are really trying. If I were in your shoes, I would offer less product, but better quality. Let uncle Harry do the reception... who cares about those shots anyway. Do the high value shots for them. Do less, but offer a better product where it would matter. I would hope your not trying to compete with your gun shop dude on his terms... that is sinking way too low. (he may be a spectacular photographer... so if he is.... I apologize.) Don't sacrifice quality of work to compete... this should be part of your "evolution and adapting". If you do the same they are, who the heck cares if you are even around.

The worst way to compete is through imitation. Raise the standard.. don't meet it. And the comments I made about not outing other photographers... I meant that in all sincerity. Never blast or put the other guys down... not put them in a bad light. The web has made the world really really small. A lot of times the messenger is shot with the message, even if it is very true. Also, spend some real time on your web sight, it doesn't really separate you from the crowd.... kinda looks like it was put together in a text editor. That is your first impression. I am sure you can do better then that. Cheers.

primoz

11th of September 2007 (Tue), 01:43

I don't think it's a plot, nor attacking. But at least from my side, I admit, my post with Rhys quote was definitely meant as "everything comes back". All this didn't come from "some sports thread" but from Bristol Rovers - Photography Ban (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=369701) thread in this same forum (The Business of Photography).
If someone feels offended now, they can imagine those of us shooting sport, feel at least a bit offended with his comments about our "free rides". I don't really consider my shooting in hours of snow and cold as "free ride", but as perfectly fine hard work. Same as shooting wedding is probably not free ride either.
So if someone tells us, we are just bunch of whiners, when we complain about some club changing normal policy to something ridiculous, I guess he can sooner or later expect that same thing to turn back to him, when he will be complaining about problems in his field. I perfectly understand he doesn't care about someone elses problem. I don't either. But then at least don't call everyone else bunch of whiners getting free ride, when you have no idea what it's all about anyway.

snapzz

11th of September 2007 (Tue), 03:23

Now it's my turn to quote someone from some other thread ;)

I guess you just have to adapt.
PS: Sorry for being like that, but I just had to do this. :twisted:

:D:D:D

snapzz

11th of September 2007 (Tue), 03:50

As someone who shoots sport & weddings I think I have some knowledge and interest in both threads. As a public forum topics are meant to be discussed... hopefully in a sensible manner. When someone continually posts rubbish (based on ignorance and no interest) and then posts a similar topic he will get similar comments.

As primoz stated sports togs work very hard and often in extreme conditions. Sometimes for a commission and sometimes on a sales only basis. Weddings can also be under bad conditions and it does nark some people to find people charging low rates. Both posts showed concern for the relevent photographers potential earnings but as it did not affect Rhys he just continued to rubbish the Bristol Rovers post. Comments such as "I'm not interested" "big girls pants" and "get over it" was posted several times. If hes not interested then he shouldn't have replied as it did annoy those who would/maybe or had an interest in the topic.

As a result it was no surprise to find "what goes around" replies just to let him know what other none wedding photographers feel about his side of the business. For someone who has only been running a photographic business for a short while and is actively still seeking help and advice perhaps they should restrict their comments to what they know and show some sensitivity to others. Perhaps then they will get a more posative response when they post.

00silvergt

11th of September 2007 (Tue), 12:07

Funny thing was while watching the 49ers and the Cardinals play Pop Warner football yesterday, all I noticed was all the white lenses shooting the game. Thanks to this thread, I had sports togs on my mind I guess. Weird, thing was I thought the 1200mm f5.6 was a lens of exclusivity and rarity, but it looked ubiquitous on the sidelines. Learned something new last night! LOL BTW, I can tell because it was as big as a fricken bazooka that dwarfed the 1DMKIII they had.! LOL

primoz

11th of September 2007 (Tue), 13:55

Jon, The Elder

11th of September 2007 (Tue), 14:02

How can this guy make any money?

Who really cares...except him?

00silvergt

11th of September 2007 (Tue), 14:07

I somehow doubt it was 1200/5.6. Especially if they were all over the place. If my memory serves me right, there was much less then 100 such lenses ever made. From that what I heard (just rumors and nothing else), there are suppose to be less then 10 of them in USA, so if any of this is true, I hardly doubt you would see many of them on sidelines :) But some 600/4 or 400/2.8 looks pretty big too. 300/2.8 looks like dwarf compared to 400/2.8. And it sure does feel like feather compared to 400/2.8, when you need to carry it around skiing track for 2 or 3 hours :)

Well it is the NFL, they have more money than the gods, so I wouldn't surprised. LOL BTW, these are not the guys watching the games, these are the official NFL togs. But, I could have been wrong, these lenses were extraorinarily huge, only thing came to mind was the 1200mm f/5.6 Bigger than that "cannon" (pun intended) you have on your avatar.

New Hobby

11th of September 2007 (Tue), 14:52

Well it is the NFL, they have more money than the gods, so I wouldn't surprised. LOL BTW, these are not the guys watching the games, these are the official NFL togs. But, I could have been wrong, these lenses were extraorinarily huge, only thing came to mind was the 1200mm f/5.6 Bigger than that "cannon" (pun intended) you have on your avatar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_1200mm_lens

Looks like SI has 2 of them.

tcphoto1

11th of September 2007 (Tue), 18:36

You cannot worry about what someone else is doing. I hope that you have higher expectations and produce a high quality of images. Do you want to be a low baller or sell your image for below market value? My advice is to move on and let others deal with craiglist caliber of Clients.

Steve Parr

12th of September 2007 (Wed), 09:00

Who really cares...except him?

For me, that's the crux of the issue.

I earn a handsome salary at my day job. I don't need income from my camera. So, if someone wants to throw me a few hundred bucks to shoot something, what the Hell?

I got paid $600.00 to shoot a wedding once, and I was lambasted by "pro" wedding photographers. The only problem is that $600.00 is all the couple could spend, and no "pro" wedding photographer would've touched the job for that.

But they still saw fit to take issue with me for doing it.

I never worry about what someone else charges. There are just better ways to spend my time...

dahis

12th of September 2007 (Wed), 10:51

00silvergt

12th of September 2007 (Wed), 12:00

May I ask what your handsome salary day job is?

Perhaps on my days off shooting sports I* could come and offer your boss to do your job at half the salary he pays you. Then eventually your boss will stop paying you the going rate and offer you the cheap rate I was doing it for.

Now how would you appreciate that?

*(well not me, but a working professiponal photographer in your area)

That makes a lot of sense, but think about it this way, if someone can come in and offer to do any job, my job at half the price, then you have to ask what's the catch.

It is all about the market. This type of crap happens all the time, ask the 50-something that's been in the office for 18 years and is suddenly getting laid off and replaced by two 20-somethings at 1/4 of the salary each. Or ask the Detroit autoworkers, what the foreign labor is doing to their salaries. Then there are the tailors, the toy manufacturers, electronics, etc. We are all victims of our respective individual success. Greed is fueling the drive to spend less and make more. But I think corporations are noticing the price that comes with the cheap labor.

There is a certain value to what we all do, if someone wants to under value their worth, it is their prerogative. Unfortunate as it may be, but that's the market. Ask the IT guys who was well into the mid six figures and had to take a job at Radio Shack after the Dot Com bust. It sucks, unfortunately it is part of the free market system. But it is also the very system that will allow you to charge $5000 for a wedding, $100,000 for a picture, etc. The cost of your services will be whatever the market will bear, I guarantee you that, or you will not be working much longer. In the poster who took $600 to shoot a wedding, as he explained, that's what the market would bear. The clients would only offer $600, then it can only be done for $600. I'm sure if the poster didn't do it, some other guy/gal would have.

Last thing to note, why are we blaming the cutthroat per se? I apologize for the cliche' but, it takes two to tango. I understand that the cutthroat is probably more responsible, but it is also the clients who demand the best prices for the best work.

primoz

12th of September 2007 (Wed), 12:16

I don't know what to say about this. I actually understand both sides. But problem is, that most of people see only one side. As Dahis wrote. Until everything is out of your business, everything is fine. It's perfectly fine to have free market, as long as I'm the one having fun doing someone else's job for half of price (or even for free), because I have day job and I can actually afford to do this thing for free. And I don't mean photography here, but every possible job. From repairing cars, to painting walls, playing piano (more about this later on) or being photographer. But when things move to my day job, free market is not so great thing anymore. It's fine as long as someone else suffer, they should just adapt better, right? But when it's about my day job, well then things change. This sh**y free market is trouble for my existence, and that's definitely not cool. So people should consider other people too, when talking about free market and everyone's right to be photographer, car mechanic or piano player.
Now to piano player :) While noone has problems to hire "photographer" who doesn't have any idea about shooting (sorry someone will be offended now, but just look at number of posts here on POTN in style "I accepted job and I have no idea what to do, please help me URGENTLY!"), I don't think anyone gets idea to hire me as piano player or brain surgeon. I'm probably just as qualified for this kind of job, as someone, who just bought his first camera, is qualified for shooting some wedding or sports game. But in first case, everyone would laugh and think it's ridiculous, while second case is perfectly normal. And as someone wrote, I think it was even here on POTN, if I buy violin I own violin, if I buy camera, I'm photographer. :confused:

Croasdail

12th of September 2007 (Wed), 19:00

Primoz, the issue is the new cameras have taken much of the mystery of taking good (not great) shots. The technical side which used to take some skill and experience to gain has largely been taken care of. Not in all conditions, but a lot. So what you end up with is a ton of technically perfect snap shots. And the ugly truth, there are tons of people who could care less, the same that hire a DJ rather then real musicians. The photographers that are really being hurt are those that really never were that good to start with. The gap between what these pros are producing and what the new guy with a digital just isn't that big and doesn't matter to a ton of people. It's ugly, and unfortunate, but just the way it is. It's either become better, or get out for some of these people.

ilvwhtgrls

12th of September 2007 (Wed), 20:13

Good work ain't cheap and cheap work ain't good.

Bakari

12th of September 2007 (Wed), 22:24

I'm pretty new to this board, but I can tell you, if that guy is doing any type of serious, quality, business, he's not making any money at those prices. He may be gaining some experience. Unless he's getting those prints done for free and is not post-production of his photos, he can't be making that much profit. But hey, to each his own.

whatgoesaround

13th of September 2007 (Thu), 08:43

----
I found 'whatgoesarounds' comments wrong - no matter what he felt rhys wrote earlier. In fact, if this person had an issue with that post, he should have addressed it there.... not wait until later to ambush another thread. No where near professional behavior in anyones book.

No. You`re wrong on that count.
I kept quiet about Rhys`s earlier ranting on the other thread because I saw him for what he is, someone who has no knowledge whatsoever of what he is talking about. And for certain absolutely no practical experience of what professional sports photographers do.
But then to read him yet again spouting on about another photographer denigrating him behind his back on a public forum, I thought to reply.
Ambush? Dont be ridiculous. Whats the difference between this thread and the Bristol Rovers thread? Same forum, same uninformed rubbish from the same person.
What? Its ok for Rhys to flit from thread to thread writing nonsense without anyone raising objections? So he can waltz into the Bristol Rovers thread on a topic which has nothing to do with him per se, spew his idiotic views around then trot off to another thread doing the same thing. And you`re saying its not my place to reply on this particular thread?
The only unprofessional behaviour here is that of Rhys. No one else.
And noting how Rhys is critical of other photographers work behind their back, and having looked at his site, the words stones, house and glass seem appropriate.

Gary_Evans

13th of September 2007 (Thu), 09:21

No. You`re wrong on that count.
I kept quiet about Rhys`s earlier ranting on the other thread because I saw him for what he is, someone who has no knowledge whatsoever of what he is talking about. And for certain absolutely no practical experience of what professional sports photographers do.
But then to read him yet again spouting on about another photographer denigrating him behind his back on a public forum, I thought to reply.
Ambush? Dont be ridiculous. Whats the difference between this thread and the Bristol Rovers thread? Same forum, same uninformed rubbish from the same person.
What? Its ok for Rhys to flit from thread to thread writing nonsense without anyone raising objections? So he can waltz into the Bristol Rovers thread on a topic which has nothing to do with him per se, spew his idiotic views around then trot off to another thread doing the same thing. And you`re saying its not my place to reply on this particular thread?
The only unprofessional behaviour here is that of Rhys. No one else.
And noting how Rhys is critical of other photographers work behind their back, and having looked at his site, the words stones, house and glass seem appropriate.

You should say what you feel, and stop beating about the bush :lol::lol::lol:

Croasdail

13th of September 2007 (Thu), 09:34

No. You`re wrong on that count.
I kept quiet about Rhys`s earlier ranting on the other thread because I saw him for what he is, someone who has no knowledge whatsoever of what he is talking about. And for certain absolutely no practical experience of what professional sports photographers do.
But then to read him yet again spouting on about another photographer denigrating him behind his back on a public forum, I thought to reply.
Ambush? Dont be ridiculous. Whats the difference between this thread and the Bristol Rovers thread? Same forum, same uninformed rubbish from the same person.
What? Its ok for Rhys to flit from thread to thread writing nonsense without anyone raising objections? So he can waltz into the Bristol Rovers thread on a topic which has nothing to do with him per se, spew his idiotic views around then trot off to another thread doing the same thing. And you`re saying its not my place to reply on this particular thread?
The only unprofessional behaviour here is that of Rhys. No one else.
And noting how Rhys is critical of other photographers work behind their back, and having looked at his site, the words stones, house and glass seem appropriate.

No.... I think you should have waltzed right into that thread, and left a little of the emotion behind. He had no clue what he was referring to, and didn't want to listen or learn anything other then flinging the silly panties phrase around. It was dang frustrating. My point is you should have responded there.... and here too if you like. That's all.

figmented

13th of September 2007 (Thu), 13:44

All I'm gonna say is you guys WHINE TOO MUCH.

Vista print sells business cards for 10$/1000.. WTF HOW CAN THEY MAKE MONEY OMGZ..

They obviously are, and I sell the same exact set of business cards for $200..

I just know how to sell better.

Learn your market, know your role.

00silvergt

13th of September 2007 (Thu), 15:23

LOL Thanks for the Info figmented. Just ordered a rubber stamp and 250 business cards...where they get you is shipping, not bad for ~$20, though...LOL ;)

nrowensby

2nd of November 2007 (Fri), 14:24

Sorry to bring this back from the dead, but I thought this story was relevant...

My step-brother (not very close) asked for my price on shooting his wedding, I told him $500 and I would provide a DVD for them to get whatever prints they wanted. He turned me down because he had a friend of her family going to do it for $250, inlcuding prints and CD's. When I showed up at the wedding I saw the photography running around with a offbrand P&S 35mm camera and her assistant with a couple disposables...

The old saying holds true, "You get what you pay for"

rhys

2nd of November 2007 (Fri), 16:51

transcend

2nd of November 2007 (Fri), 17:44

Primoz, you crack me up. Sorry rhys, you had to kinda see that one coming.

But honestly, it really is only going to get worse for a while as everyone and their dog gets a DSLR and thinks they can make some extra change from it. It's going to be a bumpy ride for those without talent.

In the end I think it will be a good thing. It will get rid of all of the people who know the only way they can sell photos is to undercut the next guy. (ie: The absolute hacks who post on forums like this one with quality posts such as " OMG I HAVE A PAYING JOB NEED HELP URGENT!!!!!!").

Sooner or later they will undercut themselves out of business, and those of us who had normal pricing all along, and actual know the value of good work will continue to work for stable, regular clients. My market has tons of hacks in it trying to sell full page ad photos for $50 or some free product. I have no issue getting work, being paid well for it, and have some fantastic clients I work with on a monthly basis. I'm guessing the $50 guys...not so much return work.

Hogloff

2nd of November 2007 (Fri), 19:14

In the end I think it will be a good thing. It will get rid of all of the people who know the only way they can sell photos is to undercut the next guy. (ie: The absolute hacks who post on forums like this one with quality posts such as " OMG I HAVE A PAYING JOB NEED HELP URGENT!!!!!!").

Sooner or later they will undercut themselves out of business, and those of us who had normal pricing all along, and actual know the value of good work will continue to work for stable, regular clients. My market has tons of hacks in it trying to sell full page ad photos for $50 or some free product. I have no issue getting work, being paid well for it, and have some fantastic clients I work with on a monthly basis. I'm guessing the $50 guys...not so much return work.

I think the guy doing the add for $50 or the wedding for $500 does not rely on this income to survive. They have other jobs...so the only way these low ballers will disappear is if their clients disappear, which they won't given the growing popularity of cheap fast food and Walmart mentality.

transcend

2nd of November 2007 (Fri), 19:29

I think the guy doing the add for $50 or the wedding for $500 does not rely on this income to survive. They have other jobs...so the only way these low ballers will disappear is if their clients disappear, which they won't given the growing popularity of cheap fast food and Walmart mentality.

True, but even the biggest of lowballers still wants to "sell photos" and "get jobs". Hard for even them to warrant shooting something when the prices they have set for themselves make spending an afternoon at some stranger's wedding pointless.

Steve Parr

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 12:43

May I ask what your handsome salary day job is?

I'm a Regional Sales Manager for a guitar company...

Perhaps on my days off shooting sports I* could come and offer your boss to do your job at half the salary he pays you.

Need the address?

Then eventually your boss will stop paying you the going rate and offer you the cheap rate I was doing it for.

Doubtful. Given a chance, I could sell condoms to the Pope.

However, I'd be happy to refer you to some companies who pay people less to do the same job I do. Sounds like what you're after.

But, in the end, I know I can successfully take excellent photogrpahs. Do you know that you can sell guitars?

Now how would you appreciate that?

Accelerated retirement?

Break my heart.

You seem to have taken issue with my wedding shoot. What should I have done; not taken the gig? The end result would be that I wouldn't have had $600.00, and they wouldn't have had wedding pictures. Instead, everyone walked away happy. Why do you want people to be unhappy?

And, for what it's worth, it's not like I market myself around town as a wedding photographer.

Like I said, I don't worry about what other people charge. Ergo, they should not worry about what I charge. It's unlikely I would be compelled to charge a client more because another photographer is unhappy with my fees...

transcend

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 12:54

Like I said, I don't worry about what other people charge. Ergo, they should not worry about what I charge. It's unlikely I would be compelled to charge a client more because another photographer is unhappy with my fees...

People are worrying about what you charge, as you are contributing to the dilution of the market that THEY pay their rent with. I don;t know what to say if you can't grasp that fact.

If your boss could find someone to do your job almost as well, for 1/2 the price, you would be gone in 10 minutes.

However, what it comes down to is quality of work. If people are afraid their work doesn't shine above the rest, they devalue themselves. If you do good work, you don't have to try and undercut the next guy to get work.

Steve Parr

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 13:06

People are worrying about what you charge, as you are contributing to the dilution of the market that THEY pay their rent with. I don;t know what to say if you can't grasp that fact.

Perhaps you missed the part where I said I don't market myself around town as a wedding photographer.

Here, let me say it again: I don't market myself around town as a wedding photographer.

The one wedding I shot was for some friends. If I hadn't shot it for the amount I did, thy wouldn't have hired someone else for more money. It's that simple. I put no one out of a job, because no one else would've been hired for the job.

I don't know what to say if you can't grasp that fact...

If your boss could find someone to do your job almost as well, for 1/2 the price, you would be gone in 10 minutes.

Doubtful. True, others can do my job. Not too many people can do it better. There are, however, people who would do it for far less. Given that, why do I still have a job?

The fact that there are those who would do it for less doesn't threaten me. They do their thing, and I do mine...

However, what it comes down to is quality of work. If people are afraid their work doesn't shine above the rest, they devalue themselves. If you do good work, you don't have to try and undercut the next guy to get work.

The bride and groom were ecstatic with the results. That's all that matters to me. I care about that, not about some other photographer, who wasn't never going to get hired by this couple anway, thinks about what I charged.

If you're threatened by people who provide the same service as you, but who provide it for less, you'd better bump up your game. Any wedding photographer who feels threatened because I charged six bills for a wedding probably isn't much of a wedding photographer to begin with...

transcend

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 13:21

Perhaps you missed the part where I said I don't market myself around town as a wedding photographer.

Here, let me say it again: I don't market myself around town as a wedding photographer.

I really fail to see why you keep bringing this up? No one really cares what you market yourself as. The fact is, you are still de-valuing the entire market, whether you like it and are willing to admit it or not. The fact that you keep denying it however, is pretty telling.

Oh and for the record, I don't shoot weddings, never will shoot weddings and don't half to worry about the hacks in the market I work in due to having clients who value quality over a few hundred dollars.

Steve Parr

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 13:29

I really fail to see why you keep bringing this up? No one really cares what you market yourself as. The fact is, you are still de-valuing the entire market, whether you like it and are willing to admit it or not. The fact that you keep denying it however, is pretty telling.

I keep bringing it up because of people like you: You insist I'm devaluing the market when, in fact, I'm not in the market.

So, lemme' get this straight:

I shoot one wedding in 35 years of shooting pictures.

The couple who hired me would have hired no one else.

Nobody lost a job because I took the gig.

Nobody will lose a gig in the future because I took the gig.

I never want to shoot a wedding again.

And, yet, I'm devaluing the entire market?

If that is, in fact, true, then "the market" is in pretty bad shape, and probably has more to worry about than the fact that I shot a wedding for $600.00.

Oh, and the quality of my shots were very good, and the couple was very happy...

rhys

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 13:37

estisdal

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 13:38

People are worrying about what you charge, as you are contributing to the dilution of the market that THEY pay their rent with. I don;t know what to say if you can't grasp that fact.

If I as a Systems Administrator decide to start taking on paying clients as a Photographer to make some money on the side, I have every right to charge what the market will bear. This fact might anger some of the professional local photographers as they use their photography income to put food on their tables and a roof over their heads. But they always have the option of doing what I've done, i.e. evolve.

If I can make more money doing two things, so can they. When the market changes, you change with it if you want to survive.

transcend

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 13:54

I keep bringing it up because of people like you: You insist I'm devaluing the market when, in fact, I'm not in the market.

So, lemme' get this straight:

I shoot one wedding in 35 years of shooting pictures.

The couple who hired me would have hired no one else.

Nobody lost a job because I took the gig.

Nobody will lose a gig in the future because I took the gig.

I never want to shoot a wedding again.

And, yet, I'm devaluing the entire market?

If that is, in fact, true, then "the market" is in pretty bad shape, and probably has more to worry about than the fact that I shot a wedding for $600.00.

Oh, and the quality of my shots were very good, and the couple was very happy...

The fact is you did it. You may not market YOURSELF as a cheap wedding photographer. Others do. No one is saying you stole a job from anyone, not in the least.

However, now your friends tell their engaged friends, "oh we got our wedding photographer for $600! You should keep looking". Friends do keep looking, and find some hack doing weddings full time for $600.

So yes, you do, in fact, affect the market. You seem like a smart guy. I'm not sure why you don't get that market forces are in effect, no matter what you market yourself as, and no matter how many times you do something.

And yes, we agree, the market is in bad shape. There is no question there.

Steve Parr

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 13:57

I shot a wedding free. The B&G could not afford a photographer. Most people chipped in with food and decorations, tables, plates etc for the reception. I don't believe the minister charged them for the service nor for the use of the church hall. I gave them a DVD of full-sized high-quality JPEG images of their wedding and they were super happy.

Did anybody lose work over that? No! Did I devalue the market? No! Can I write it off against tax? Probably!

My God.

You put a photographer out of work. Those who "chipped in" in with food and decorations put a caterer out of work. The preacher-man who donated the church will surely be excommunicated.

Oh... the carnage...

transcend

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 13:58

If I as a Systems Administrator decide to start taking on paying clients as a Photographer to make some money on the side, I have every right to charge what the market will bear. This fact might anger some of the professional local photographers as they use their photography income to put food on their tables and a roof over their heads. But they always have the option of doing what I've done, i.e. evolve.

If I can make more money doing two things, so can they. When the market changes, you change with it if you want to survive.

Sure, like all of the IT guys I hear whining that Indian and russian programmers are taking their work at 1/4 of the price. I used to work in the IT domain, I know exactly how it goes.

This isn't about the market changing, it's about people who don't see any value in their own work, and can't see it when people point it out. If you had an ounce of gold and it had a market value of $800/ounce, why sell it for $350?

Steve Parr

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 14:05

However, now your friends tell their engaged friends, "oh we got our wedding photographer for $600! You should keep looking".

Actually, they wouldn't.

When they first asked me to shoot their wedding, I declined. I didn't want to do it. I thought it was far too imprtant an event in their lives to entrust to a "hack" like me. Then they said "Well, we'll have photos from the disposable cameras we'll put on the tables".

Given that, I said "Okay, I'll do it". See, it was also far too an event in their lives to remember with only photos from disposable cameras.

They know I'm not a wedding photographer; I made that clear to them when they first asked me. There is, quite literally, zero chance of them saying "oh we got our wedding photographer for $600! You should keep looking".

It won't happen...

So yes, you do, in fact, affect the market.

No, I don't...

You seem like a smart guy.

Indeed, I am...

I'm not sure why you don't get that market forces are in effect, no matter what you market yourself as, and no matter how many times you do something.

Market forces are not in effect where I'm concerned, because I'm not in that market...

And yes, we agree, the market is in bad shape. There is no question there.

I would suggest that the market is in the state it's in not because of "hacks" like me, but because of the absolutely ridiculous prices some photographer's charge. People don't want to pay those prices, hire someone for less, and the high-priced guys whine about "the market".

"The market" works both ways...

bieber

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 14:05

Blegh, it's irritating how people refuse to let markets do their thing. If there's truly a market for $8000 weddings (and believe me, there is), then it shouldn't matter that there are also people out there doing it for $800. If there isn't, then it's time to move on to something else to make a living, not to yell at the clients who won't pay more than they have to, or the competition that won't charge as much as you want them to. If two people make an agreeable transaction, what say should anyone else have in it? As long as the two involved are happy, that's how trade is supposed to go.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go feed my horses. Wouldn't want to devalue the buggy-whip trade, after all. I suggest some of those complaining take this break to reread the chapter on basic supply and demand...

transcend

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 14:10

I would suggest that the market is in the state it's in not because of "hacks" like me, but because of the absolutely ridiculous prices some photographer's charge. People don't want to pay those prices, hire someone for less, and the high-priced guys whine about "the market".

"The market" works both ways...

You're right, some guys charge too much. But when someone owns $15 000 (or more) in the gear necessary to do a job, and works for maybe, 4-8 hours combined (after the wedding, reception, travel, processing etc), they need to charge a certain amount to cover costs.

It's simply a bad business decision for someone who does this as a living. $600 for ~8 hours work with that much investment, isn't a good business decision.

Steve Parr

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 14:10

If you had an ounce of gold and it had a market value of $800/ounce, why sell it for $350?

That's hardly a parallel.

If gold's trading at $800.00, nobody's going to pay more to get it, and it's ridiculously unlikely that anyone will sell it for less. You can't "shop it around".

That's not the case with wedding photographers...

Steve Parr

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 14:14

You're right, some guys charge too much. But when someone owns $20 000 in gear necessary to do a job, and works for maybe, 4-8 hours combined (after the wedding, reception, travel, processing etc), they need to charge a certain amount to cover costs.

Well, now you're helping to make my point.

I don't have $20,000.00 worth of gear. I have about $6,000.00 worth of gear.

If your logic says that someone with a lot of money invested in gear needs to charge a lot, then someone who has less invested in gear can, by the extension of that logic, charge less.

And I know plenty of "pro" wedding photographers who have less wrapped up in gear than I do, yet they charge thousands. Surely, they're skewing "the market".

It's simply a bad business decision for someone who does this as a living.

I don't believe I've come close to even suggesting that someone who does it for a living should do it for $600.00 a pop...

Steve Parr

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 14:18

You're right, some guys charge too much. But when someone owns $15 000 (or more) in the gear

Just lemme' know when you're done changin' your story...

:lol:

transcend

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 14:21

Well, now you're helping to make my point.

I don't have $20,000.00 worth of gear. I have about $6,000.00 worth of gear.

If your logic says that someone with a lot of money invested in gear needs to charge a lot, then someone who has less invested in gear can, by the extension of that logic, charge less.

And I know plenty of "pro" wedding photographers who have less wrapped up in gear than I do, yet they charge thousands. Surely, they're skewing "the market"...

Which proves exactly why people charging less are hurting the market, and making it near impossible for many pros to make a living.

As for the "pro" wedding photographers with little in gear, I'd go as far as to say the quotes are probably appropriate. Like I said, I don't shoot weddings, but I know many who do. They all have 2-3 bodies, multiple flashes, quantum packs etc and quickly break the $10 - 15 000 mark for equipment. Their work and professionalism however, speaks for itself.

All I know is that in hiring a photographer, I wouldn't be hiring someone for something as important as my wedding if he didn't have a vast portfolio, and enough backup equipment to guarantee that a failure wouldn't mean I am out some important shots.

transcend

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 14:21

Just lemme' know when you're done changin' your story...

:lol:

I think you have been huffing too much guitar varnish lately.

Steve Parr

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 14:28

I think you have been huffing too much guitar varnish lately.

Are you honestly suggesting you didn't change the dollar amount in your post?

Steve Parr

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 14:31

All I know is that in hiring a photographer, I wouldn't be hiring someone for something as important as my wedding if he didn't have a vast portfolio, and enough backup equipment to guarantee that a failure wouldn't mean I am out some important shots.

If you didn't have the thousands required to pay a "pro", but you had a friend who you knew was a good photographer, and if you were absolutely confident he would do a good job, would you hire him for a few hundred bucks, or would you simply tell your bride-to-be that she'd have no photos to remember her wedding by?

bieber

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 15:01

As for the "pro" wedding photographers with little in gear, I'd go as far as to say the quotes are probably appropriate. Like I said, I don't shoot weddings, but I know many who do. They all have 2-3 bodies, multiple flashes, quantum packs etc and quickly break the $10 - 15 000 mark for equipment. Their work and professionalism however, speaks for itself.

That's nice. My work and professionalism speaks for itself too, but I can do a lot better with ~$2000 worth of gear + a couple hundred in rental equipment than an awful lot of self-proclaimed "professionals" do with heaps of expensive equipment. Why should the market be paying them the exorbitant rates associated with all that equipment when I can do it with (by your standard) about a fifth as much cash investment?

DocFrankenstein

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 15:36

There is no catch rhys.

How much do you think a photographer should get paid? His work is not extraordinary - it may be his first season for all we know.

Let's say it takes him a day to shoot and another full day to process the pictures and meet up with the client. As said above - 2-3 grand in equipment is more than enough to CYA for wedding work.

He makes about 200 bucks a day in the end.

Better than flipping burgers at McDonalds - don't you think?

Steve Parr

4th of November 2007 (Sun), 15:39

That's nice. My work and professionalism speaks for itself too, but I can do a lot better with ~$2000 worth of gear + a couple hundred in rental equipment than an awful lot of self-proclaimed "professionals" do with heaps of expensive equipment.

Clearly, you don't understand the concept of "I have more gear, so I need to be paid more than you"...

Why should the market be paying them the exorbitant rates associated with all that equipment when I can do it with (by your standard) about a fifth as much cash investment?

Because the market should... well... see, it has to be... um...

Well, they spent a lot of money on equipment.

The bottom line is this: Any "pro" wedding photographer who feels as though his livelihood is threatened, because I shot one wedding (over a year ago) for $600.00, probably isn't too good a wedding photographer...