Photo Pirates

[Ben Nevis]

As a wedding/portrait photographer the problem I am having at the moment is clients scanning photographs and printing them themselves. For instance if I photograph a group of say 10 people, I perhaps get an order for 1 and the rest of them scan the print and print it out at home. I now get my wedding proofs printed at 6x4, cut off the corners and have defined a brush with the copyright sign and my name using Photoshop and placed through the middle of the photo. I also write the print number on the photo with a thick black marker pen. Drastic measures I know but I am now getting more orders from wedding guests. Does anyone know if there is a product on the market that you can use on prints that prevents them from being scanned?
I would be interested to know how other pros deal with this ever increasing problem.

[chtgrubbs]

Sounds like you are doing about all you can. Have any of your clients complained? I have read threads in other forums about this and many photographers are changeing their business procedures to help compensate. They are increasing their shooting fees to make up for the lost revenue in prints and giving the clients digital files they can print.

[MCB]

I've heard of paper that can be used that prevents scanning. You basically get a set of wavy lines instead of the picture when you scan.

I have restored a lot of old photos and made collages for family and friends. These used pictures of great grandparents, grandparents, and other old studio portraits. If this technology to prevent copying had existed 100 years ago, most of those images would be lost forever. (1 picture, 5 kids, 20 grandkids.. who gets the print? do they treat it well? do they care about family history?)

You have every right to expect to be paid for reproductions of your work. It's hard enough to make a living without pirates copying your pictures. My only fear is that 50 years from now there will be a lot of families that no longer have access to their own history. No more copies to pass along to grandkids. You never know which picture will turn out to be that special heirloom that everyone wants, and which will be forgotten.

And it's always possible to take a picture of a picture. So any special paper you use won't stop someone that's really dedicated to the idea of getting something for nothing.

You might be better off charging more up front for the sitting fee. Make it clear to clients that this higher fee allows them to own the copyright and allows them to make unlimited copies from scans. Of course, for a small fee, you can provide higher quality reproductions from the original image file or negative. If they're the type that are going to want hundreds of copies, they'll be happy to pay the extra fee up front. That's especially true if the competition doesn't provide that option and uses this special paper to prevent copies. Maybe you can set yourself apart from the competition and provide options they don't.

[CyberPet]

I've seen countless of posts on wedding forums where the brides has bragged about how smart they are to dodge the re-print sales, by scanning the images themselves and print on their own printer. It makes me sick to the stomach each time. I can just imagine the quality of those prints. Smart, Sherlock NOT!

Oh well... I'm not sure if there's away to get around it but to up the price on the whole wedding and offer them digital originals to print themselves (and pray that they don't use a cheapo place, to save some bucks).

[Big_B]

I completed a masters last year and my degree certificate is printed on normal looking paper. However if I try to photocopy/scan it, there is some kind of 'watermark' that appears in huge letters saying 'copy only' or something like that.

So the technology is definately out there, however I don't have a clue how expensive it is. Good luck with your search.

[Phil V]

It's been said, but I'll add to the argument:
Don't try to run your business on reprint sales
Sell the package, make your money, and if they come back for reprints, it's a bonus. We have to adapt our business to fit the market, not try to make the market fit our business.

[tim]

I think the photographers business model has to change with the advent of digital cameras, cheap prints, printing at home, etc. You should charge enough for your time that you make money there, and don't rely on reprints to make a living. The downside to that is you might price yourself out of the market, as others might price themselves lower and deal with the lack of reprints later.

I plan to give the CD of images to the B&G once they've ordered a set of prints, or else charge a reasonable fee for it and a small fee for additional copies. I want to make sure they have a great album for themselves, as the album quality affects my reputation and referrals, but after that I don't mind if they print photos for relatives themselves.

Edit - just like Phil said.

[CappuccinoDavid]

That is why I going into a different type of photography business, I just deal with models and not have to worry about the public. I will make my money up front and not worry about the rest. Like how can you compete with WalMart do port sets for under $10.00. ???

[tim]

Absolutely. Couldn't agree more. The problem is that the post-package sale is still the photographer's right.

If i were to re enter the wedding arena, I'd give them a disk and say buh-bye. I

It's their right? Maybe i'd say traditionally it's the photographers right, but i'm not sure if it applies today. I'd think today the photographers rights are spelled out in a contract, and there are so many photographers that if the B&G don't like the contract they go elsewhere.

I'm with you on the "hand them a disk and say goodbye" thing, mostly, i'd like to make sure they get good prints so i'd charge a reasonably markup (ie not triple cost) to get them good quality prints.

[Mernya]

I'm not a pro photographer, so let me try an offering from a similar/alternate line of business.

Consider your business model as a service. As a photographer, your job is to create the actual captures. That is what you get paid for, that is what you negotiate for, that is what you deliver. Make sure you charge competitively and in such a manner as to make a living. In essence, charge an hourly rate or by time or exposures or a model that makes sense. After that, it is all about Value-Added-Services.

Then, you have other services that you have.
1. Post Production - charge hourly or by photo or by level of post-production required. This should be to fix -their- problems (pimples, poor decorations, make up, evil relative in the shot), not your problems (exposure).
2. Quality Reproductions - Sure, they can go to Wal-Mart and get a bunch of reprints from a scan or the digital files; If it has affected the camera/film manufactures, it will surely affect you. But there are definitely some ways of getting higher quality prints on special papers that only a professional knows about. Leverage your knowledge!
3. Education sessions - Not sure how to explain this one. There are plenty of sites out there that can do some really cool things with digital files. Some can make posters, others can make books, and calendars. Perhaps you have another sit down with the client to discuss their options on what to do with their files? Perhaps you act as the liaison to do it yourself, once you talk to them. Maybe this is a separate charged service, maybe it is a value added service to your shoot. Regardless, it is your chance to open their eyes.

[PhotosGuy]

Wow. I just tried to scan my degrees. A similar watermark appeared, only it said SOCIAL PROMOTION. :D:D:D Somewhere in my transcripts it says " SOCIAL PRO(bation). :D Seems that there was this beer cap found in my room! ;)

[rich_yau]

That is why I going into a different type of photography business, I just deal with models and not have to worry about the public. I will make my money up front and not worry about the rest. Like how can you compete with WalMart do port sets for under $10.00. ???

You don't i guess. I've been contemplating using walmart or costco to make album prints. Thats the only way to keep my package affordable. It really is a bad cycle. Lost a gig yesterday because my package didnt inclde an album, and the package was rediculosly cheap already because i just do it for fun.

[PhotosGuy]

A beer bottle cap? YOU TOO!? Well, the bottle wasn't attached to mine! :D:D Different times!

"hand them a disk and say goodbye" I agree. Get paid for the shoot, point them toward WallMart, & forget the time consuming BS. OTOH, if they need PSing done, then charge for that, too.

EDIT: After checking the local drug stores, Ritz, & other sources, I've changed my mind 100%. I will still give a CD of Costco profiled "to print" images to paying clients who belong to Costco, but not to anyone else.
Why?
Because if they take the CD to the local drugstore & get crappy prints, they are YOUR crappy prints that they will be showing people? Better to put the prints online & let them order good, but cheap, prints that you would like people to see of your work?

OTOH, I've had a guy tell me that he printed at home a 56KB 700X500 image from my site & he got a GREAT 8X10 from it? I strongly suggerted that he please tell anyone he shows it to that I didn't make the print for him.

[blue_max]

The public will decide. Those that provide for the need, will stay in business. Those that don't, won't.

Flexibility is the key.

Graham

[Ben Nevis]

Thanks for all the replies.
There are some interesting views amongst them.
I suppose I am lucky that I don't have to rely on my Photo business to make a living as I only do it part-time as a paying hobby. Most of the money I make goes on new equiptment (next up is a 2 head Bowens Esprit Gemini kit). I have occasionally used my local Tesco supermarket for quick 7x5 reprints and at 20 pence each and reasonably good quality there is a fairly high profit to be made. To be honest most wedding reprints are from guests wishing a photo of the B&G and one of themselves in their new finery or with a new Boy/Girlfriend and as long as the photo is sharp and well exposed they are quite an easily pleased bunch.

[Southswede]

Wow. I just tried to scan my degrees. A similar watermark appeared, only it said SOCIAL PROMOTION.


LMAO! That's great!

[Kadath]

Makes so much more sense when Bloo Dog says stuff like this than what I tried to convey in the 'For your consideration' thread. Really, its just the flip side to the same coin.

Sam

[rdenney]

Know what I say? Shoot it digitally, do your post processing clean-up, and then give them the files and say ADIOS.

Yup. Cut, frame, hang on the wall. Words to live by.

It's time commercial photographers started charging for what they know how to do, and not giving that away so they can charge for what Wal-Mart (or anyone with a scanner and printer) can do.

Why do we charge for our ability to press a button on the printer, or drop a negative by the lab? Or for our ablity to maintain files of negatives or image CD's ad infinitum, which any file clerk could do?

We know how to get the shot reliably, such that the lighting is good, the explosure is good, and the subject is in the picture looking as good as possible. That's the expertise of experienced commercial photographers (I'm excepting the print masters whose prints are part of the presentation--but those aren't the sorts of things getting commonly ripped off).

So, I like the idea of charging a flat rate to show up, make pictures, process them, make one set of proofs, and then turn it all over to the client. Let them fight the hassle of getting the color right at Wal-Mart. If they want an album, then fine, but the album gets delivered with the negatives or CD's and then that's that.

Rick "who thinks people want pictures but actually use them so rarely as to never really need enlargements" Denney