Commissioned photographers

Hey guys!

To further expand my studio's business, I decided to add on some commissioned photographers. In the past, I got the short end of the stick in many shooting situations so I want this to be fair. With that in mind, I'd like some feedback to see if this business model is viable!

What I was thinking about doing was, my studio will pay for marketing, liability, gear insurance (I need to figure out how to add my shooter's gear onto the studio's coverage) and of course, provide the photographers with referrals to shoots. The photographers would have full access to the studio and equipment.

As for commission, the studio would retain 50% and say 100% of print sales up to say $100-$200 and the rest would go towards the photographer after servicing/printing fees.

The photographer would also retain a higher percentage if they bring in their own work. Say around 60-75%?

I already have 2 photographers signed up and one of which who is moving away from her own business to work with mine. I have a store front studio on a main historical part of my town which is surrounded by great shoot locations. I'm planning on having the photographers sign a non compete clause once everything is set in stone. I'll also offer them an hourly rate when I use them as assistants.

How does this business model sound? Is it fair? I also plan on holding workshops to train the photographers everything I know since it is my business' name they'll be carrying on their shoulders.

It sounds like "if you can't compete with them, join them." Once they have enough photos for their portfolio, they'll leave you to establish their own business.

While the non compete clause is legal and may instill a bit of fear in them violating it, they are generally non enforceable. Especially at the lower income levels. It just ends up costing you money to go after them if they violate it.

MTV wrote in post #12558769
It sounds like "if you can't compete with them, join them." Once they have enough photos for their portfolio, they'll leave you to establish their own business.

I had figured this would be an option for them. I suppose I could instill a contract that stipulates any photo taken under the company's name would prohibit outside use. I know signing over copyrights can be a touchy subject but honestly, the photographers who want to work with me are completely loyal and aren't confident in running their own business. If they end up working on their own, at least they know the standards on what to charge instead of lowering the market value for professional photographers. I welcome competition as my studio doesn't only do photography.

rob0225 wrote in post #12560043
While the non compete clause is legal and may instill a bit of fear in them violating it, they are generally non enforceable. Especially at the lower income levels. It just ends up costing you money to go after them if they violate it.

Not if the contract specifies that the other party shall pay for all legal fees . I'd prefer not to instill fear but to make it worth while in other aspects. But in your opinion, does this business model look viable to you or would you rather accept being paid a salary or hourly wage?

I wouldn't worry about former team mates becoming the competition. A generic agreement on non-compete (don't steal clients, any new business should be more than 1/2 mile away, or something) would be helpful, but you will never be able to prevent competition from developing around you. Better to put your efforts into working well together to keep them from leaving, and when some do (which they will inevitably) focus on keeping a professional peer relationship with them beyond that point. Better to receive referrals (and give them) that to allow an adversary to flourish.

What I would do is make it very beneficial to stay as a team member rather than as a competitor. For example, if your studio is well equipped and always updated (cost shared across users), then it would not make sense to leave and have to duplicate a studio elsewhere. If your studio were large enough to accommodate two or three photographers at the same time in different areas, then you would minimize schedule conflicts.

^^ couldn't have said it better

golfecho wrote in post #12571096
I wouldn't worry about former team mates becoming the competition. A generic agreement on non-compete (don't steal clients, any new business should be more than 1/2 mile away, or something) would be helpful, but you will never be able to prevent competition from developing around you. Better to put your efforts into working well together to keep them from leaving, and when some do (which they will inevitably) focus on keeping a professional peer relationship with them beyond that point. Better to receive referrals (and give them) that to allow an adversary to flourish.

What I would do is make it very beneficial to stay as a team member rather than as a competitor. For example, if your studio is well equipped and always updated (cost shared across users), then it would not make sense to leave and have to duplicate a studio elsewhere. If your studio were large enough to accommodate two or three photographers at the same time in different areas, then you would minimize schedule conflicts.

Thanks for the info, kind Sir! I was thinking the same. As long as I keep my photographers happy and make this worth while, they shouldn't have the excuse of doing things on their own. Shoot, all they'll be doing is the creative while the studio takes care of the books and administration. That alone would keep me around...

Hmm quote fonts are a pertier...

For several decades, Boulevard Photographic in Detroit operated successfully under that business model. They had several reps who brought business to about a dozen photographers. When the owners retired, some of the photographers carried on under the Acme Photo Works business name. So it can be done if the client base exists in your area.

PhotosGuy wrote in post #12579539
For several decades, Boulevard Photographic in Detroit operated successfully under that business model. They had several reps who brought business to about a dozen photographers. When the owners retired, some of the photographers carried on under the Acme Photo Works business name. So it can be done if the client base exists in your area.

I wonder why it took me this long to respond! I totally overlooked having a salesman/PR do the referring. That's a great idea.

I keep coming back to the concept of commissioned shooting. It's quite difficult to make it completely fair for both ends, especially when one of my photographers is already bringing in residual leads through her website and passing them off to our company due to loyalty. How would I go about this? It's like my company isn't doing much towards those leads besides delegating them back to the original photographer and in return, they only gain a commission instead of full sale.

Here's a revision to the business model:
1. Say a photographer generates their own lead = 75% commission and 25% pays for the company's overhead...etc.
2. Photographer is required to achieve at least 2-3 commissioned shoots per month and any other shoot afterwards will grant them 100% commission.
3. Any bookings/referrals generated by my studio will grant the photographer 50% commission

How does this sound?