Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
Thread started 29 Mar 2015 (Sunday) 19:20
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Conversation overheard during photography Meetup

 
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
12,754 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 409
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
Mar 30, 2015 15:31 |  #31

dkizzle wrote in post #17498275 (external link)
You are assuming that this amateur photographer had a studio which is not impression that I had after directly speaking to him about photography for a long period of time as the group walked around taking snapshots.

If you're talking about my reference to price, no, I'm not talking about having a studio. The worth of a good family portrait is in the hundreds of dollars. It would annoy me for a photographer to offer another photographer any less.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
sapearl
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
15,570 posts
Gallery: 63 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 259
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Mar 30, 2015 15:51 |  #32

RDKirk wrote in post #17498336 (external link)
If you're talking about my reference to price, no, I'm not talking about having a studio. The worth of a good family portrait is in the hundreds of dollars. It would annoy me for a photographer to offer another photographer any less.

I totally agree with this. A truly well executed portrait goes far beyond just being a mere photo or snapshot.

It is all about feeling and the emotion it draws from the viewer who considers it. It is the photographer's ability to relax the subject in a way that makes them look natural, relaxed and flattering. The session creates a truly memorable and iconic image that stays with you, is highly valued by the family, and lives on in their memories. And these are only the social skills that the pro must exhibit. I haven't even touched upon the technical aspects ;-)a


GEAR LIST
MY WEBSITE (external link)- MY GALLERIES (external link)- MY BLOG (external link)
Artists Archives of the Western Reserve (external link) - Board

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheInfamousGreedo
Goldmember
1,629 posts
Likes: 4030
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Summit County, Colorado
     
Mar 30, 2015 16:05 |  #33

benji25 wrote in post #17498080 (external link)
So if I buy the same shoes as LeBron I am somehow more justified in charging people money for my basketball skills? By the same token, if LeBron was wearing sneakers would they pay him half as much because he is not using pro shoes?

I think it's fairly asinine to compare a basketball shoe to camera equipment. There's a major technological gap between a shoe and a camera.

Can someone take good photos with a kit camera and lens? Probably. Will the quality be compromised compared to that of a better camera/lens combo? Probably.

I think it's an irrelevant argument to say, "well when you print them this size, no one will know the difference." As the photographer, you should recognize the difference.

That's where I get annoyed with people calling themselves a photographer and, to me, abusing the term. Just because you have a camera does not make you a photographer. You need to care about the product you are delivering and someone charging for photos with a kit setup does not take the same level of pride and interest as someone with a better setup. That's not to discard those who are just getting started, but there needs to be a line between taking someone's money and doing it as a hobby and I think that line should be drawn somewhat based on the equipment you have.

I know I personally wouldn't give a dime of my money to someone that didn't have a higher end camera and glass, more the glass than the body. It shows the person takes an interest in photography and strives to improve their skill. Any person with an ounce of dignity knows you can't get a quality photo with a kit lens; those kit lenses are crap and have poor optics, which is why they are as cheap as they are.


TJ Simon (external link)
flickr (external link)
Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dkizzle
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,184 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Mar 2012
     
Mar 30, 2015 16:26 as a reply to  @ post 17498287 |  #34

I went to B&H & looked up what a Rebel body & kit lens costs and a t5 with 18-55mm is $399. This is the top of the line Rebel and used can probably be had for $300. It is very possible that he had an earlier model t4 or t3 which is worth even less. When the job costs more than equipment used you cannot expect miracles.

Service is everything but in this case I feel the photographer was stumped when someone blurted how much she is willing to pay. If he was seasoned shooter with great portfolio & customer service he would mention this when people at the Meetup were asking what kind of photography people were into and what they did for a living. I gave a postcard flyer with my print information & website url to a few people in the beginning and photographer in question was one of them. As we walked in a small group of 3-4 people I was talking about traveling to Iceland, Yukon & Alaska last year in pursuit of Northern Lights and this photographer shared his non photography travel stories. Not even once during direct conversation (he was walking right next to me) did he mention he was a portrait photographer and never reciprocated with a business card of his own. I also showed couple pictures from my portfolio on my smartphone and this other photographer never chimed in with his website or examples of his work on his smartphone.

A lot of you guys are taking this out of context and making unreasonable assumptions. As I saw it was two novice DSLR users and their conversation did not end with him giving her his business card or mention his website. I can speculate that what I missed from their conversation was something like this:

Man: I shoot portraits
Woman: Wow, I wanted to get a portrait of me done


I want to guest blog on your Landscape / Travel photography blog, PM for details

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
benji25
Senior Member
Avatar
973 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 67
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Twin Cities
Post edited over 3 years ago by benji25. (2 edits in all)
     
Mar 30, 2015 16:28 |  #35

TheInfamousGreedo wrote in post #17498390 (external link)
I think it's an irrelevant argument to say, "well when you print them this size, no one will know the difference." As the photographer, you should recognize the difference.

You may notice as a photographer but your clients don't notice or care for it. If they do then they have to pay for it and would end up at the high priced photographer anyway. In comparison, if I get custom cabinets installed I may think they look wonderful. To every carpenter a hinge might be a quarter of an inch too high or the finish may be slightly off but only master craftsmen can tell. I as the customer am happy and am not going to take out rulers to make sure everything balances to the millimeter (much the same as pixel peeping).

You need to care about the product you are delivering and someone charging for photos with a kit setup does not take the same level of pride and interest as someone with a better setup.

Any person with an ounce of dignity knows you can't get a quality photo with a kit lens; those kit lenses are crap and have poor optics, which is why they are as cheap as they are.

I guarantee you most hobbyists have more pride in their work than professionals. As professionals they do it for the paycheck. The hobbyist spends money on gear and time out shooting for the love of shooting. How many pros say "I never have time to do personal projects"? That isn't passion. That is a job.

Also "dignity" has nothing to do with knowing what it takes to make photos. Not in this context at least. And I bet I could pick 100 photos - 50 with an L lens and 50 with a decent kit lens (some are better than others) and hardly anyone here could pick the L lens from the kit lens more than 50/50 guessing.

Also there is not a difference between a shoe and a camera. Both are tools used by people. Put a good tool in the hands of an idiot and you get nothing. Put the inferior tool in the hands of a master and you get quality work. The same goes for a hammer, paint brush, oven or race car.


Website (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
banquetbear
Goldmember
Avatar
1,586 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 135
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Mar 30, 2015 16:31 |  #36

TheInfamousGreedo wrote in post #17498390 (external link)
I know I personally wouldn't give a dime of my money to someone that didn't have a higher end camera and glass, more the glass than the body. It shows the person takes an interest in photography and strives to improve their skill. Any person with an ounce of dignity knows you can't get a quality photo with a kit lens; those kit lenses are crap and have poor optics, which is why they are as cheap as they are.

...I have dignity. And I've taken many quality photos with my old kit lens. in fact back when I used to use it I even sold a few. What you say is absolute tosh. As we've been saying all thread: its a free market, and if you don't want to give a dime of your money to someone that doesn't have higher end camera and glass then that is your prerogative. But $200.00 for a portrait is not outlandish, not even close. And I'm pretty sure practically everyone on these business forums could produce a portrait with a kit lens and a Rebel that would easily be worth that amount of money to someone who is willing to pay.


www.bigmark.co.nzexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
banquetbear
Goldmember
Avatar
1,586 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 135
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Mar 30, 2015 16:38 |  #37

dkizzle wrote in post #17498419 (external link)
A lot of you guys are taking this out of context and making unreasonable assumptions. As I saw it was two novice DSLR users and their conversation did not end with him giving her his business card or mention his website. I can speculate that what I missed from their conversation was something like this:

Man: I shoot portraits
Woman: Wow, I wanted to get a portrait of me done

...I think you've got it backward: we aren't the ones taking things out of context and making unreasonable assumptions. Seriously: have you reread your OP? You said this conversation shocked you. (Your paraphrased version of the conversation):

"Man: I shoot portraits
Woman: Wow, I wanted to get a portrait of me done"

is not shocking at all, unless of course you are easily shocked. (In which case, I would recommend staying away from horror movies.) Especially when it was a conversation overheard during coffee.

$200 for a portrait is not outlandish. No one, including you, have seen any of this guys images. I asked you before so I'll ask you again: if $200.00 is overcharging, what is the correct price of a portrait?


www.bigmark.co.nzexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
12,754 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 409
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
Mar 30, 2015 17:01 |  #38

A modern Rebel with the kit lens can produce 16x20 prints every bit as technically satisfactorily as I produced with the original 12mp 5D years ago (maybe more so)...and charged a close to a thousand dollars for them back then.

The issue isn't technical quality. As I said, you shoot families at f/8, and all the modern Canon lenses are just as good at f/8. You shoot families in decent lighting, so low-light noise is not an issue. The pace of shooting families is slow enough that even the more clumsy handling of the Rebel isn't a major impediment. The only issue is maximum enlargeability--that being over 16x20 inches. The difference won't be reliably apparent to anyone until you have to start interpolating the pixels.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dkizzle
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,184 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Mar 2012
     
Mar 30, 2015 18:07 as a reply to  @ banquetbear's post |  #39

Few hundred is not two hundred and therefore $300.

$300 is a fair price to experienced photographer with a studio and good optics. Seasoned portrait photographer would be able to get 1 needed shot in no time and it would need very light post processing.

$300 is a lot for someone to use a lens that sells for under $75 used on Flhttp://www.ebay.com …ain_0&hash=item​4d2fc7dd15 (external link)eabay and who will take snapshots in public place without any lighting control and being a amateur user of DSLR.

According to your logic any photographer with any DSLR who can take snapshots is worthy of getting $300. Any photographer with any camera can spend 10 minutes taking portraits of one person and get many pictures that the subject will like. There are millions of people worldwide with DSLR, point & shoot and mirrorless cameras that take acceptable portrait images of their loved ones. Should all of them take $300 from uneducated clients who just dont know any better.

I think the sheep are getting to you ;)


I want to guest blog on your Landscape / Travel photography blog, PM for details

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pekka
El General Moderator
Avatar
17,564 posts
Gallery: 35 photos
Best ofs: 7
Likes: 1330
Joined Mar 2001
Location: Hellsinki, Finland
Post edited over 3 years ago by Pekka.
     
Mar 30, 2015 18:24 |  #40

dkizzle wrote in post #17498532 (external link)
Few hundred is not two hundred and therefore $300.

$300 is a fair price to experienced photographer with a studio and good optics. Seasoned portrait photographer would be able to get 1 needed shot in no time and it would need very light post processing.

Why would a studio be needed to justify £300? A great shot needs nothing but a camera and a great photographer.

If you asked $10,000 for a portrait session and mention you'll going to shoot it outdoor in rain with a Lomo, then it is up to the client to make the decision, based on your reputation and portfolio, if that is a good deal or not. Other photographers will get irritated if the deal is done, but so what :)


The Forum Boss, El General Moderator
AMASS 2.1 Changelog (installed here now)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
benji25
Senior Member
Avatar
973 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 67
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Twin Cities
Post edited over 3 years ago by benji25. (2 edits in all)
     
Mar 30, 2015 18:37 |  #41

dkizzle wrote in post #17498532 (external link)
Few hundred is not two hundred and therefore $300.

$300 is a fair price to experienced photographer with a studio and good optics. Seasoned portrait photographer would be able to get 1 needed shot in no time and it would need very light post processing.

$300 is a lot for someone to use a lens that sells for under $75 used on Flhttp://www.ebay.com …ain_0&hash=item​4d2fc7dd15 (external link)eabay and who will take snapshots in public place without any lighting control and being a amateur user of DSLR.

According to your logic any photographer with any DSLR who can take snapshots is worthy of getting $300. Any photographer with any camera can spend 10 minutes taking portraits of one person and get many pictures that the subject will like. There are millions of people worldwide with DSLR, point & shoot and mirrorless cameras that take acceptable portrait images of their loved ones. Should all of them take $300 from uneducated clients who just dont know any better.

I think the sheep are getting to you ;)

To continue my comparison. Because Lebron on pays a couple hundred for all of his equipment should he play for only $2,000 per year? No. He gets paid based on his skill, not his gear. That is the EXACT same logic you are using.

Any photographer with any camera can spend 10 minutes taking portraits of one person and get many pictures that the subject will like.

If your subjects like them and you are OK with whatever they pay you why does it even matter? Hell, iPhones take decent headshots. You could put a subject in front of 10,000 people with almost any camera made in the last 15 years on auto and get a very usable image. It doesn't take much skill. When you want some creativity and good vision for portraits that are more environmental and take more to compose that is where you get in to more expensive stuff that actually takes skill.


Website (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
banquetbear
Goldmember
Avatar
1,586 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 135
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Mar 30, 2015 18:38 |  #42

dkizzle wrote in post #17498532 (external link)
Few hundred is not two hundred and therefore $300.

$300 is a fair price to experienced photographer with a studio and good optics. Seasoned portrait photographer would be able to get 1 needed shot in no time and it would need very light post processing.

$300 is a lot for someone to use a lens that sells for under $75 used on Flhttp://www.ebay.com …ain_0&hash=item​4d2fc7dd15 (external link)eabay and who will take snapshots in public place without any lighting control and being a amateur user of DSLR.

According to your logic any photographer with any DSLR who can take snapshots is worthy of getting $300. Any photographer with any camera can spend 10 minutes taking portraits of one person and get many pictures that the subject will like. There are millions of people worldwide with DSLR, point & shoot and mirrorless cameras that take acceptable portrait images of their loved ones. Should all of them take $300 from uneducated clients who just dont know any better.

I think the sheep are getting to you ;)

...what metric are you using to determine what a "fair price" is? What metric are you using to determine that "$300 is a lot?" What exactly does "worthy of getting $300.00" mean?

How did you determine the client here was "uneducated"? If a client talks to me, likes me and decides to book me for a job that I know I am capable of doing, how do I determine whether or not I am worthy of their money?


www.bigmark.co.nzexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DutchinCLE
Goldmember
1,927 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Likes: 689
Joined Jun 2012
     
Mar 30, 2015 21:21 |  #43

dkizzle wrote in post #17498532 (external link)
$300 is a lot for someone to use a lens that sells for under $75 used on Flhttp://www.ebay.com …ain_0&hash=item​4d2fc7dd15 (external link)eabay and who will take snapshots in public place without any lighting control and being a amateur user of DSLR.

You keep getting back to the equpment he is using. I am sure Annie Leibovitz canmake better portraits with a Canon T3i and a nifty fifty then 99% of us "photographers" can with a 5Diii and a EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM..


Bas
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tabi_24
Member
147 posts
Gallery: 30 photos
Likes: 133
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Leesburg, FL
     
Mar 30, 2015 21:47 |  #44

Just food for thought, the 7D and T2i share the same sensor. The 7D has been used as a professional camera for years and has just recently been replaced by the 7dii. Although the 7D has nicer handling and is faster, the same photos can be taken with a T2i. The equipment doesn't define the photographer.


http://www.foreverafte​rphotography.net
http://www.tabithaspho​tography.webs.com
Cameras: Canon 5D Mark ii, Canon 7D, Canon EOS Rebel T2i
Lenses: Canon 10-22mm, 50mm f1.4, 70-200mm f 2.8L IS, 24-105 L f4, Venus Optics Laowa 15mm f4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
moose10101
registered smartass
1,579 posts
Likes: 90
Joined May 2010
Location: Maryland, USA
     
Mar 31, 2015 06:48 |  #45

TheInfamousGreedo wrote in post #17498390 (external link)
Any person with an ounce of dignity knows you can't get a quality photo with a kit lens; those kit lenses are crap and have poor optics, which is why they are as cheap as they are.

Arrogant and ignorant at the same time; kudos to you.

No, kit lenses aren't L glass, but one of the reasons for their price is the fact that lots of them are made, reducing the unit cost. You remember Econ 101, right? If you can't produce a good photo with Rebel/kit glass, your creds as a "professional" are in doubt.

God knows what you'd think of the 50-year old lenses I used on my Rebel to produce photos that people bought to display in their homes.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

9,646 views & 3 likes for this thread
Conversation overheard during photography Meetup
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is DSalazar
739 guests, 379 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.