PDA

View Full Version : What process do you use to make a sale in the studio?


waple
27th of April 2009 (Mon), 21:36
When a client comes into my studio to view their photos I load them up in Lightroom and we step through them, rank and get to the final picks. They then tell me "an 8x10 and a 5x7 of #5, a 16x20 of #9, etc" and I write it down on a piece of paper. Or they send me an email with their list. I then open up QuickBooks and create an invoice based on that. After all the edits are made, I go back into Lightroom and print out the photos.

Is there a better way to do this? I've seen some apps out there that seem to combine LR and QB but seeing as I own and use both, I'd like to not buy another suite that does the same thing.

dreamcatcher23
28th of April 2009 (Tue), 07:38
seems like a simple way of doing things to me, and I'm all for simplicity. Both applications do their job well, is it worth buying an application that does neither job well?

Pyromaniac
28th of April 2009 (Tue), 10:37
That seems like a pretty straight forward process to me. I don't think I would invest any money into changing it. I mean how much easier could you really make it.

tlc
28th of April 2009 (Tue), 14:10
you should be sending your prints to a pro lab. your cheating your customers if you arent. sorry to be so blunt, but you know i'm right.

dreamcatcher23
28th of April 2009 (Tue), 15:55
why, exactly? Many inkjet prints have longer life expectancy, better colour rendition and better resolution than optical prints. Granted you have to take care of the printer and make sure it's calibrated properly, but if you do I see no reason why the prints aren't saleable. Many achival gallery prints are produced in this way...

Joshua14321
28th of April 2009 (Tue), 16:54
you should be sending your prints to a pro lab. your cheating your customers if you arent. sorry to be so blunt, but you know i'm right.

How do you know he dosent have a print lab quality printer?

And they guy above was right, many printers these days are sometimes better then the lab ones they use,

Plus he probably takes more care of the images then they would at the lab,

Printing there is time consuming and sometimes inconvenient,

If you have a photo printer then why not print your own?

Joshh

waple
28th of April 2009 (Tue), 20:26
FYI: Canon iPF8100.

tlc
2nd of May 2009 (Sat), 03:37
How do you know he dosent have a print lab quality printer?

And they guy above was right, many printers these days are sometimes better then the lab ones they use,

Plus he probably takes more care of the images then they would at the lab,

Printing there is time consuming and sometimes inconvenient,

If you have a photo printer then why not print your own?

Joshh

give me a break. you obviously have never compared the differences. i have a printer i paid $1800 for, its quality surpasses that of most consumer printers, yet i would never dream of selling my clients prints from this printer - they deserve much better quality.

i highly doubt his printer produces anywhere near what pro labs produce. i'll bet my printer on it.

i even use my prints off my printer to compare to the quality of WHCC and its hands down better - their luster prints, metallic and gloss are outstanding and dont even compare.

i'm sure your prints are nice, but in ten years will they still be nice? i doubt it.

if you dont care about quality, then your really not a professional.

cdifoto
2nd of May 2009 (Sat), 03:44
you should be sending your prints to a pro lab. your cheating your customers if you arent. sorry to be so blunt, but you know i'm right.

give me a break. you obviously have never compared the differences. i have a printer i paid $1800 for, its quality surpasses that of most consumer printers, yet i would never dream of selling my clients prints from this printer - they deserve much better quality.

i highly doubt his printer produces anywhere near what pro labs produce. i'll bet my printer on it.

i even use my prints off my printer to compare to the quality of WHCC and its hands down better - their luster prints, metallic and gloss are outstanding and dont even compare.

i'm sure your prints are nice, but in ten years will they still be nice? i doubt it.

if you dont care about quality, then your really not a professional.


My Epson prints meet or exceed the quality of my print lab. The only reason I don't use the printer all the time is cost. Well that and pain in the butt factor. And yeah they'll be beautiful in 10 years. Heck they'll even be beautiful in 100 years - if the client takes care of them. Same caveats apply to pro labs.

Price isn't everything though. Just because it was $1800 doesn't mean it's great. I'm sure it is though. If your pro lab results are amazingly better than your printer's results, you're doing something horribly wrong. Either that or you paid too much for that printer.

bobinatcat
2nd of May 2009 (Sat), 03:54
flame war?

Karl Johnston
2nd of May 2009 (Sat), 04:21
flame war?

Pissing war. OP is using an iPF8100...that's more than enough to compete with a pro lab if the OP knows what he's doing. Actually now that I look that thing up in detail I wouldn't be surprised if WHCC was using one of those to print on.

What's the cost of ink for the iPF8100? Thing looks like it'd kick the ass off the 11880 epson..and for half the price
I take it back...4 grand for a set of 700 mL tanks...crikey.

cdifoto
2nd of May 2009 (Sat), 04:53
Pissing war. OP is using an iPF8100...that's more than enough to compete with a pro lab if the OP knows what he's doing. Actually now that I look that thing up in detail I wouldn't be surprised if WHCC was using one of those to print on.

What's the cost of ink for the iPF8100? Thing looks like it'd kick the ass off the 11880 epson..and for half the price
I take it back...4 grand for a set of 700 mL tanks...crikey.
I just googled the IPF8100 a few minutes ago. That sucker makes my Epson feel impotent. :shock:

Karl Johnston
2nd of May 2009 (Sat), 05:04
I just realized...

12 inks not 8 or 9.

Hell that's economical when you think about it...333$ for a 700 mL cartridge? I'm going to seriously have to look into this..If I sell my 3800 I can afford one of these !

edit: but i would've wasted thousands in paper and ink that I have in stock...D'oh. Maybe in a few years i'll switch to canon...

The Moose
2nd of May 2009 (Sat), 07:20
give me a break. you obviously have never compared the differences. i have a printer i paid $1800 for, its quality surpasses that of most consumer printers, yet i would never dream of selling my clients prints from this printer - they deserve much better quality.

i highly doubt his printer produces anywhere near what pro labs produce. i'll bet my printer on it.

i even use my prints off my printer to compare to the quality of WHCC and its hands down better - their luster prints, metallic and gloss are outstanding and dont even compare.

i'm sure your prints are nice, but in ten years will they still be nice? i doubt it.

if you dont care about quality, then your really not a professional.

He's 14 with no camera equipment so has had no experience with printing for clients or anything similar. Don't get too angry :p

Joshua14321
2nd of May 2009 (Sat), 07:23
I Am Learning fast though :D

Haha your probably right, the lab quality is much better and if you want customers to return you should use a lab to print,

Joshh ;)

Milamu'g
2nd of May 2009 (Sat), 19:15
Back on topic:
i would just color code them inside lightroom according to size instead of writing it down on a piece of paper. Pen and paper is soooo old school. :P

jhcanon
3rd of May 2009 (Sun), 17:57
tlc sounds like one of these so called "pros" whose head is so far up their own they shouldn't be on a forum frequented by "real" people trying to make a living or improve themselves.
People look for constructive inout and often get nothing but opinionated c**p.

dreamcatcher23
3rd of May 2009 (Sun), 18:25
Just another FYI to throw in there about the printers... check out dye-sub printers. Their gamut is awful, the resolution is very good but they don't even compare to inkjets or lab prints in terms of longevity or color depth.. why then do many pros who print their photos within minutes of the pictures being taken (ie. horse shows, live events etc.) use them? Because they're really really really great for one thing - speed. Dry, waterproof 9x6 prints in 11 seconds? yes please, though gallery grade prints they are not.

Different printers for different things - labs are great for high quality large volumes where you don't want to (or don't have time, or dont have money to, or are incapable of) micro-manage the print task... inkjets are great when you need excellent results that have stunning detail and longevity and wish to allocate the time and resources to providing that service.

Horses for courses :-)