Decent shooters giving it away...

[Vigants]

Not at walmart. They announced they would be using the US prices from here on out. Finally. Of course, you still get screwed on everything else...especially automobiles.

Heard on the radio that the same thing is happening with some independant book stores as well. About time. I was visiting a years ago around the time I was getting ready to buy a new Honda van. In Houston US$24K. In Canada C$45K. Wow! Of course about 10% of the difference was taxes, and at the time there was a 15% premium to US funds. But that is still 40% more in Canada!

[Vigants]

ah, but if I fall down and break my leg, they'll fix it for free. You win some; you lose some.

When I first moved to the US (almost 15 years ago) whenever somebody asked me about the Canadian medical system I would defend it passionately. But over the years, talking to family and observing the system during trips home (grandma passed away after a long battle with multiple stokes, so I spent lots of time flying in and staying with her at Centenary hospital in Scarborough) plus one 12 month period living in Toronto again (2000/20001) I am not so sure anymore. The hospitals there seem over-crowded and not so clean anymore. Waits for procedures are often long now as well. So, although free, I am not sure that this represents good value given the income tax rates that support that system.

In the US the problem is a bit different. If you have good insurance the system is fantastic. If you don't it sucks. My daughter suffered a minor soccer injury. Wait for appointment at clinic: 15 minutes. Wait for x-ray: 30 minutes. Wait for orthopedist: 1 day. Wait for MRI: same day. In Canada the wait list for an MRI of an ankle would be long enough that it would have healed already . . .

Both systems have problems. I think that if you have money/insurance the US system is better, if you don't then Canada is. That's just my opinion - I could be wrong. :)

[Vigants]

I went about things all wrong when I started my business. I didn't write a plan, because I didn't plan to apply for loans and didn't feel it necessary. I also didn't research usage fees, copyright, releases and other legalities prior to starting up.

I bought an SLR, the cheapest I could get (a Rebel T2) and tried to remember how to use it. I took about a year shooting with it before I sold my car to purchase my first DSLR- then I had to learn AGAIN lol! Then all of the sudden it clicked, and I started to get business, and lo and behold I am not prepared for ANYTHING.

My prices are all bad, I am completely redoing it from scratch. I am starting with a completely blank slate- and trying to come up with a good system. I am avoiding doing so (also avoiding pulling new business!) because it is so hard to set prices for me- because I never planned everything from the get go.

Now, I sit here looking at thousands I have put in to my meager equipment and realize I need to upgrade everything- which is going to be another 3k off the top (for a 40D and 70/200 2.8 IS).

I also just got off the phone with my cousin who works at OIP&T which is the ONLY school in Ohio with a full on practical photography program that I know of and guess how much that program is? 42,000! And I am considering it just to be able to learn the business end of this- I can't find anything that really tells one how to run a PHOTOGRAPHY business (books, prices, etc...)

Oh, how I feel ill! I think my bare minimum wedding will be 1500.00 but just looking at the above paragraph I think it needs to be higher to offset my own cost.

Anyway my point is, I am finally taking this ALL in to consideration. There were a couple of posts here on this forum that opened my eyes a GREAT deal to the big picture. This is a very involved business and I think it is easily taken for granted- that's where those 250.00 weddings come from. I agree too that they will never last- but I think they are setting a standard.

I only paid 1000.00 for my wedding photos by the way- before I knew anything about anything. And every one of my digitals is blown out beyond repair.

To be perfectly frank, you seem completely overwhelmed by the whole thing and if you forge ahead on the route you are on I do not predict a good outcome. I strongly agree with the other recent posts that suggest you start part time and find a second income source so that you can ease into things a bit. Finding someone to mentor you sounds like the best idea of all. Another red flag that goes up (for me) is that you are already planning equipment upgrades (40D and 70-200L 2.8 IS lens) which the business cannot afford at this point. It actually makes my earlier point quite well - until you have some idea about cash flow you shouldn't be shopping. If the business analysis results in a budget of $1K and not $3K, you'll need to look at a used body (maybe a 20D) and a non-IS used 70-200 (or non-OEM brand). If you spend money first and then try and figure out how to make enough to cover it, your business is almost certain to fail.

[notapro]

When I first moved to the US (almost 15 years ago) whenever somebody asked me about the Canadian medical system I would defend it passionately. But over the years, talking to family and observing the system during trips home (grandma passed away after a long battle with multiple stokes, so I spent lots of time flying in and staying with her at Centenary hospital in Scarborough) plus one 12 month period living in Toronto again (2000/20001) I am not so sure anymore. The hospitals there seem over-crowded and not so clean anymore. Waits for procedures are often long now as well. So, although free, I am not sure that this represents good value given the income tax rates that support that system.

In the US the problem is a bit different. If you have good insurance the system is fantastic. If you don't it sucks. My daughter suffered a minor soccer injury. Wait for appointment at clinic: 15 minutes. Wait for x-ray: 30 minutes. Wait for orthopedist: 1 day. Wait for MRI: same day. In Canada the wait list for an MRI of an ankle would be long enough that it would have healed already . . .

Both systems have problems. I think that if you have money/insurance the US system is better, if you don't then Canada is. That's just my opinion - I could be wrong. :)

true, but the liberal in me says that any system that favours the wealthy is the wrong system. I can't imagine having a sick child and not being able to get them help. Anybody ever seen John Q? I can't believe that doesn't happen more often. Nothing would be worse than knowing help is available and literally not being able to afford it.

I don't have money. Actually at the moment I have no insurance because I can't afford the plan offered by my employer, which I just found out today comes in at $196 a month. In the US, my family would be screwed. Here, we're far better off to pay out of pocket for dental, optical, and prescription costs. We'll probably get life insurance through CAA or something.

It's so easy to see the merits of the US system when you don't have to worry about not being able to use it, but too many people do have that worry for me to think it is okay, personally.

[Vigants]

true, but the liberal in me says that any system that favours the wealthy is the wrong system. I can't imagine having a sick child and not being able to get them help. Anybody ever seen John Q? I can't believe that doesn't happen more often. Nothing would be worse than knowing help is available and literally not being able to afford it.

I don't have money. Actually at the moment I have no insurance because I can't afford the plan offered by my employer, which I just found out today comes in at $196 a month. In the US, my family would be screwed. Here, we're far better off to pay out of pocket for dental, optical, and prescription costs. We'll probably get life insurance through CAA or something.

It's so easy to see the merits of the US system when you don't have to worry about not being able to use it, but too many people do have that worry for me to think it is okay, personally.

I have no arguement to what you say. Somewhere in the middle would be a perfect world in which costs were contained, access was universal, abuse of the system contained, and so on. I think that Canada could get there more easily than the US by simply invoking small copays (so that moms didn't bring in kids for every sniffle and lonely old people didn't go to the doctor just for company) and if new immigrants were restricted from bringing in their extended families (i.e. mom and dad & grandma and grandpa) who put large loads on the system without contributing to the tax base.

While we're at it, though, lets stop letting east coast fishermen make good money all summer then collect UI all winter. Put work for welfare programs in place instead of letting generation after generation live off the public fat. Lots of things that could be done, but unfortunately, democracies have a flaw - not only do the dumb and the lasy get to vote, there are more of them than there are intelligent and industrious people. Since politicians pander to that, we end up with rules that are not in the best interest of society in the long run, but in the best interests of the most vocal special interest groups in the short run. Of course, this also works at the other end of the spectrum - big business buys enough influence that they also get their way. It is the middle income taxpayer in the middle that foots the bill for both.

There is a saying here, "If you are under 35 and you vote republican you have no heart and if you are over 35 and you vote democrat you have no brain".

But this forum is about photography, not politics, so I'll stop there. :)

[transcend]

When I first moved to the US (almost 15 years ago) whenever somebody asked me about the Canadian medical system I would defend it passionately. But over the years, talking to family and observing the system during trips home (grandma passed away after a long battle with multiple stokes, so I spent lots of time flying in and staying with her at Centenary hospital in Scarborough) plus one 12 month period living in Toronto again (2000/20001) I am not so sure anymore. The hospitals there seem over-crowded and not so clean anymore. Waits for procedures are often long now as well. So, although free, I am not sure that this represents good value given the income tax rates that support that system.

In the US the problem is a bit different. If you have good insurance the system is fantastic. If you don't it sucks. My daughter suffered a minor soccer injury. Wait for appointment at clinic: 15 minutes. Wait for x-ray: 30 minutes. Wait for orthopedist: 1 day. Wait for MRI: same day. In Canada the wait list for an MRI of an ankle would be long enough that it would have healed already . . .

Both systems have problems. I think that if you have money/insurance the US system is better, if you don't then Canada is. That's just my opinion - I could be wrong. :)

According to the WHO, Canada's broken system sits in 30th place overall in terms of quality of care. The US is 38th, Cuba is 39th. (France is #1). The US however spends the most, BY FAR, on it's system. So although Canada's system may be slightly broken, it is still better than it's neighbor to the south, despite spending less, and everyone can get healthcare when they need it.

[Vigants]

According to the WHO, Canada's broken system sits in 30th place overall in terms of quality of care. The US is 38th, Cuba is 39th. (France is #1). The US however spends the most, BY FAR, on it's system. So although Canada's system may be slightly broken, it is still better than it's neighbor to the south, despite spending less, and everyone can get healthcare when they need it.

I'll take that with a grain of salt - during the year I lived in France (1998 we had occasion to take our 3 year old daughter to the doctor and then the hospital (Tonsillitis). On the plus side: house calls can still be arranged there, and access to a GP was not difficult. On the down side was that the hospital was dirty and some of the doctors smoked cigarettes while doing rounds (I am not making that up!)

Seriously though, for the WHO stats to be meaningful on an individual basis rather than a societal basis you would need to re-normalize them (for the US especially) based on affluence (I'm not making a social commentary here, just stating a fact). The overall 'effectiveness' of the US system is dragged down by the horrible care (or complete lack thereof) received by the unisured. If you were only to look at the insured in America I think that the quality of care received would rank very near the top. Again, I am not saying it is morally right, just that that is how it is.

[sfaust]

I've found that most of these schools will teach you photography, but not the business of photography, which is where you are concerned the most. You will learn a lot technically, but you won't learn how to run a business. And without the business skills, you will be a highly competent photographer with a failing business.

I do see lots of assistants come through my studio that have been through some of the well known New England schools. There are technically competent, but know nothing about the business end of the industry, how to price their work, figure their cost of doing business, etc. Good photographers with no clue on how to use that and build a business.

Here is what I would suggest. Take the $42K you would have invested, and cut that down to $20K With that $20K, allocate it for the following;

Over the next couple years use some of that money to pay for courses at a local college that focus on running a small business, marketing and advertising, and business administration. Be picky and find ones that seem like a good fit for the visual arts industry.

Some of that should also be used for workshops and seminars which will teach you the technical aspects of photography and post production. There are tours that go around the country teaching various aspects of the business. Lighting, techniques, portfolios, studio, etc. Pick and choose those that apply to the areas you want to work in, and those being offered by working professionals in the field. There are so many to choose from.

Use what you need to upgrade your equipment, but don't go over board. Its real easy to go equipment crazy and over buy, only to find you use 3 main lenses for 90% of your work, and the other 4 sit on the shelf. Better to only buy the three key lenses, and wait or rent the others.

Set aside money for start up costs. Marketing, advertising, printing your portfolio, web site design, business cards, and so on. Depending on the market you want to enter, it could be as little as $3k-$4k, or as high at $10k or more.

Also find work as an assistant to photographers that own a studio. This will get you in the studio environment where business is the key to keeping the doors open. Most studios have the business background needed, or they wouldn't be around long. The only reason I suggest a studio, vs a location photographer, is that there is more exposure to the business aspects since the operation is usually larger, and you are more likely to be involved in the business end in the studio, rather than at a location photographers home office. One good part of assisting is that you are making income while learning. Add any you don't need to live on to your startup savings account.

Join a local photography club. You will get involved in shooting assignments which helps you think creatively. They usually have outings where you have a chance to mingle with photographers that are better than you, and can pick up new techniques and skills. When you reach the skill level of the top people in the club, move on to another one, or a professional organization with higher skilled photographers. You want to associate yourself with those shooting at a higher level than you to keep learning. If you stay too long you stagnate and don't progress.

I would find a mentor to help you progress technically. Someone in a field that uses the same skills that you would need to run your business. They don't have to be local, and could even be half way across the world. Its easy to communicate worldwide these days.

Subscribe to PDN, a magazine dedicated to photographers in the industry. Not many amateurs read it since it really dedicates itself to working pros and general industry news. It has more business and industry related articles, and very little technical 'how to' articles. Its an excellent resource for the working pro.

Join one of the organizations (APA, EP, ASMP, PPA, etc.) that cater to your chosen industry. Keep in tune with the business trends in that industry, and attend any local gatherings, seminars, etc, they may host in your area. Its a great way to network and cull business info. They will also help keep you abreast of industry trends regarding policies, agreements, copyright, sales techniques, marketing, and so on. Very helpful!

Before you launch your business, do a good business plan. Even if you aren't borrowing money. The plan is for you, not anyone else. It forces you to understand your market, the cost of doing business, set realistic goals, and a way to measure how you are doing and adjust as necessary. It doesn't have to be elaborate at all. Mine is only about 4-5 pages, mostly an outline in form. But it does allow me to track where I want to be, how I will get there, and where I sit today.

Set up a meeting with an accountant to help you setup your record keeping, advise you of how you need to deal with taxes, hiring assistants, and any financial issues before they get tangled.

All this will cost you less than the $42K just to learn the techniques, and in the end you will be a much more capable and well rounded photographer. Its possible to do this in a year if you dedicate the same amount of time you would have if you were in their program.

[Vigants]

I've found that most of these schools will teach you photography, but not the business of photography, which is where you are concerned the most. You will learn a lot technically, but you won't learn how to run a business. And without the business skills, you will be a highly competent photographer with a failing business.

I do see lots of assistants come through my studio that have been through some of the well known New England schools. There are technically competent, but know nothing about the business end of the industry, how to price their work, figure their cost of doing business, etc. Good photographers with no clue on how to use that and build a business.

Here is what I would suggest. Take the $42K you would have invested, and cut that down to $20K With that $20K, allocate it for the following;

Over the next couple years use some of that money to pay for courses at a local college that focus on running a small business, marketing and advertising, and business administration. Be picky and find ones that seem like a good fit for the visual arts industry.

Some of that should also be used for workshops and seminars which will teach you the technical aspects of photography and post production. There are tours that go around the country teaching various aspects of the business. Lighting, techniques, portfolios, studio, etc. Pick and choose those that apply to the areas you want to work in, and those being offered by working professionals in the field. There are so many to choose from.

Use what you need to upgrade your equipment, but don't go over board. Its real easy to go equipment crazy and over buy, only to find you use 3 main lenses for 90% of your work, and the other 4 sit on the shelf. Better to only buy the three key lenses, and wait or rent the others.

Set aside money for start up costs. Marketing, advertising, printing your portfolio, web site design, business cards, and so on. Depending on the market you want to enter, it could be as little as $3k-$4k, or as high at $10k or more.

Also find work as an assistant to photographers that own a studio. This will get you in the studio environment where business is the key to keeping the doors open. Most studios have the business background needed, or they wouldn't be around long. The only reason I suggest a studio, vs a location photographer, is that there is more exposure to the business aspects since the operation is usually larger, and you are more likely to be involved in the business end in the studio, rather than at a location photographers home office. One good part of assisting is that you are making income while learning. Add any you don't need to live on to your startup savings account.

Join a local photography club. You will get involved in shooting assignments which helps you think creatively. They usually have outings where you have a chance to mingle with photographers that are better than you, and can pick up new techniques and skills. When you reach the skill level of the top people in the club, move on to another one, or a professional organization with higher skilled photographers. You want to associate yourself with those shooting at a higher level than you to keep learning. If you stay too long you stagnate and don't progress.

I would find a mentor to help you progress technically. Someone in a field that uses the same skills that you would need to run your business. They don't have to be local, and could even be half way across the world. Its easy to communicate worldwide these days.

Subscribe to PDN, a magazine dedicated to photographers in the industry. Not many amateurs read it since it really dedicates itself to working pros and general industry news. It has more business and industry related articles, and very little technical 'how to' articles. Its an excellent resource for the working pro.

Join one of the organizations (APA, EP, ASMP, PPA, etc.) that cater to your chosen industry. Keep in tune with the business trends in that industry, and attend any local gatherings, seminars, etc, they may host in your area. Its a great way to network and cull business info. They will also help keep you abreast of industry trends regarding policies, agreements, copyright, sales techniques, marketing, and so on. Very helpful!

Before you launch your business, do a good business plan. Even if you aren't borrowing money. The plan is for you, not anyone else. It forces you to understand your market, the cost of doing business, set realistic goals, and a way to measure how you are doing and adjust as necessary. It doesn't have to be elaborate at all. Mine is only about 4-5 pages, mostly an outline in form. But it does allow me to track where I want to be, how I will get there, and where I sit today.

Set up a meeting with an accountant to help you setup your record keeping, advise you of how you need to deal with taxes, hiring assistants, and any financial issues before they get tangled.

All this will cost you less than the $42K just to learn the techniques, and in the end you will be a much more capable and well rounded photographer. Its possible to do this in a year if you dedicate the same amount of time you would have if you were in their program.

Excellent, comprehensive advice, IMO.

[notapro]

According to the WHO, Canada's broken system sits in 30th place overall in terms of quality of care. The US is 38th, Cuba is 39th. (France is #1). The US however spends the most, BY FAR, on it's system. So although Canada's system may be slightly broken, it is still better than it's neighbor to the south, despite spending less, and everyone can get healthcare when they need it.

I believe that. Just like it is easy for those who can afford it to think the US system is all good, it is easy for those of us who actually have a GP to think the Canadian system is okay.

I know that in the town where I live, the only new patients any of the doctors are taking are babies born to current patients. We do have a family health network, so the doctors share patients when necessary, which can help if you need to get in fast, but you still have to already be the patient of one of the docs.

Of course there are still plenty of walk-in clinics, but it is much better if you can keep all of your care in one place.

[transcend]

I believe that. Just like it is easy for those who can afford it to think the US system is all good, it is easy for those of us who actually have a GP to think the Canadian system is okay.

I know that in the town where I live, the only new patients any of the doctors are taking are babies born to current patients. We do have a family health network, so the doctors share patients when necessary, which can help if you need to get in fast, but you still have to already be the patient of one of the docs.

Of course there are still plenty of walk-in clinics, but it is much better if you can keep all of your care in one place.

In the small town I live in (on the outskirts of one of Canada's big 3 cities) there is one GP. He is taking NO new patients. He has been here for about 30 years, and simply cannot handle any new business. I am about a 20 minute drive from the closest clinic, fortunately it is usually fairly quick, has good service (including xrays etc) and takes no appointments.

[Vigants]

In the small town I live in (on the outskirts of one of Canada's big 3 cities) there is one GP. He is taking NO new patients. He has been here for about 30 years, and simply cannot handle any new business. I am about a 20 minute drive from the closest clinic, fortunately it is usually fairly quick, has good service (including xrays etc) and takes no appointments.

True capitalism is tough - there are very rich people and very poor people. Socialist societies are far more fair (everyone is poor). :lol:

[notapro]

True capitalism is tough - there are very rich people and very poor people. Socialist societies are far more fair (everyone is poor). :lol:

well if I'm poor, everyone else should have to be too.... :p