Most photographers will not like this.

Today I introduced a limited offer that I am going to test out to see if it gets any interest.

http://www.joeyallenph​oto.com/Special.html

My reasons for creating this offer are as follows:

1. I focus more on careful photography, and I spend FAR less time doing editing (think 5-8 hours of editing vs 20-30 hours).

2. At the lowest price DVD package ($50 travel plus $100 for 25 photos), beats the best-known budget wedding photographer in price while giving me much less work to do. Also beats the cost of digital images provided by the companies that handle resort chapel photography by somewhere between a 5:1 and 10:1 ratio.

3. At $1000 for a maximum 250 photos on DVD disc, it is slightly less expensive for a bride than my 8-hour full package...and MUCH faster for me to process. Also allows me to provide them on just 1 DVD disc instead of 2-3 discs.

4. This is my idea of a method to transition to taking fewer photos and allowing a paying scenario where I get to really think more carefully about the significance of all the photos I take. More thought and planning and consideration should lead to some amount of self-improvement.

5. Those brides who are running to family members and family friends to give them mediocre quality photos may consider this service as a viable middle-road alternative. This allows them to have access to better quality photos of their wedding than most of the family/friends could provide. It also theoretically reduces the number of "Hi new photog here just got a dSLR and my friend asked me to shoot her wedding she couldn't afford a professional photog for" posts on here...

I don't know why anyone else would care. You're getting the budget brides, who are usually the most demanding. I think you should price things so you make slightly more money if they get the full set, rather than less, as you're taking the risk. You might get couples that don't order a thing, given the really really low initial outlay.

Hope it works out well for you.

I might get couples who don't order anything. However...what I get is practice. Practice in being careful. Practice in planning shots. Practice in working with clients and experimenting more like when I started doing photography on a more serious level.

And the comparatively minimal amount of post-work is extremely appealing to me because it means I don't have to devote much time to the part I don't prefer.

At the very least, I get $50. As a side note, it's also much less expensive for wear and tear on equipment if I only take 1/8th the number of photos that I normally do (or less).

My only thoughts are regarding this line in the ad "I get to focus on quality over quantity"... which kind of suggests that normally the quality would be less important to you. Which may cause higher end clients not interested in the offer being put off.

Personally I wouldn't be "selling" how it benefits you at all... you should be selling the benefits to the client.

Considered, thanks. I might remove that for now.

Worst case scenario - approx 20hrs work - $50 - $2.50/hr
Best case scenario - approx 20hrs work - $1050 - $52.50/hr

I figured 20 hrs by taking 8 hrs coverage + 8 hrs editing + time for meeting/travel/DVD/pho​ne calls etc..

Like Tim said.. Since they're 'budget brides'.. I wouldn't expect most to spend more than $200 for 50 photos. Most brides would do with 50 of their favorite photos anyways. They' can easily make an album with 50. If that was your average sale you would be at $12.50/hr... I hope it works out better than that. Good luck

I would be interested in hearing what your turn out is in terms of brides that book with this special package. Also, would be interested in hearing how the dvd sales go and what your average wedding ends up being in the end. I wish you the best of luck with this endeavor. As was stated earlier, I don't see why anyone else would be upset about what you are doing as a business plan.

I think if you wanted to work more creatively, you could just second shoot for someone and tell them your plan. Then, you have MUCH less editing to do and can really focus on what you want to do. Have them pay you a few bucks and let you use the images and you are set. This way you dont hurt your other clients, you dont get the cheapest brides (which sometimes show in the wedding decor) and you get stellar stuff. Makes sense to me.

Drozz119 wrote in post #14205374
Worst case scenario - approx 20hrs work - $50 - $2.50/hr
Best case scenario - approx 20hrs work - $1050 - $52.50/hr

I figured 20 hrs by taking 8 hrs coverage + 8 hrs editing + time for meeting/travel/DVD/pho​ne calls etc..

Like Tim said.. Since they're 'budget brides'.. I wouldn't expect most to spend more than $200 for 50 photos. Most brides would do with 50 of their favorite photos anyways. They' can easily make an album with 50. If that was your average sale you would be at $12.50/hr... I hope it works out better than that. Good luck

There are a few considerations about your evaluation:

For me to put 250 photos through fairly careful lightroom paces, it will probably take about 5 hours. Photoshop editing for a select few photos will take anywhere from 1-3 hours. 8 hours is a full estimate of max time. If a bride books me for 2 hours and I edit 50 photos, then cut all time by 80%.

Although $50 is the minimum and 20 hours is about the maximum amount of time involved, it is extremely unlikely that a bride will not want ANY photos at all. if they buy $100 on DVD disc, then that $2.50/hr you mention goes up to $7.50/hr. If $200 in photos, then $12.50/hr.

Third...interaction beforehand will be more limited. Many of my clients don't even see/meet me before their wedding day on account of them not being local.

And lastly, my personal interest in this plan is as a learning and practice tool for me that also acts as a transitional package. It is designed to help me gear my photography in the direction I would prefer to go in the long term - which is focusing more on photography and delivering a smaller number of more refined images.

Red Tie Photography wrote in post #14205502
I think if you wanted to work more creatively, you could just second shoot for someone and tell them your plan. Then, you have MUCH less editing to do and can really focus on what you want to do. Have them pay you a few bucks and let you use the images and you are set. This way you dont hurt your other clients, you dont get the cheapest brides (which sometimes show in the wedding decor) and you get stellar stuff. Makes sense to me.

Although I would like to do this, there are a few challenges:

First, finding a photographer who wants me to second shoot. I take paying second shooter jobs whenever I can get them (I have one this week), but they are RARE. I don't take non-paying second shooter jobs for the reason below. I have periodically contacted a vast number of wedding photographers throughout the area offering second shooter services, and on rare occasion it lands me a single job and a lead for future consideration. However, even with that, paying second shooter jobs are rare.

Second, there are photographers who more often want to hire a second shooter nonspecifically, BUT these photographers don't pay their second shooters (the second-shooter jobs are being offered for people just trying to get practice at wedding photography). This means that I have essentially NO chance of any economic benefit from this time investment, and that is infinitely less appealing to me than having a job with even a prospect of making a little money.

I wouldn't get out of bed for $12.5 an hour. Is it really that bad out there?

form wrote in post #14205586
There are a few considerations about your evaluation:

For me to put 250 photos through fairly careful lightroom paces, it will probably take about 5 hours. Photoshop editing for a select few photos will take anywhere from 1-3 hours. 8 hours is a full estimate of max time. If a bride books me for 2 hours and I edit 50 photos, then cut all time by 80%.

Although $50 is the minimum and 20 hours is about the maximum amount of time involved, it is extremely unlikely that a bride will not want ANY photos at all. if they buy $100 on DVD disc, then that $2.50/hr you mention goes up to $7.50/hr. If $200 in photos, then $12.50/hr.

Third...interaction beforehand will be more limited. Many of my clients don't even see/meet me before their wedding day on account of them not being local.

And lastly, my personal interest in this plan is as a learning and practice tool for me that also acts as a transitional package. It is designed to help me gear my photography in the direction I would prefer to go in the long term - which is focusing more on photography and delivering a smaller number of more refined images.

I understand where your coming from as far as the refined images go. I'm in a similar situation with the wedding cinematography. Our first couple weddings..we came back with 250gb of footage and only used about 10%. It was a waste of effort, time and hard drive space. It's our goal to be more efficient in 2012.

Your work is good! I think you're worth more than what you'll be paid through this offer...that's why I responded. If you were a hack.. I would've passed by. I might have misread your offer.. But why would any bride book you for 2 hours instead of 8 if she's not paying any more? Plus she'll have more images to choose from.

What if you incorporated some kind of hourly rate instead of the travel cost (eg: $20/hr). Just to guarantee yourself more than $50 as a minimum. That way you would at least make $160. Then process the pics AFTER the choices. If they pick 50.. You only process 50.

If a bride wants me for 2 hours and picks 50 photos on DVD disc, then it's $250. 50 photos edited by me takes 1-2 hours typically with a little photoshop added into the LR workflow. At 4 hours investment, it's $62.50/hour. As a second shooter, I typically get $50/hour or however much the photographer's day rate is for a second (usually $250-$300).

Now..my standard service package...

At 8 hours, $1075, this includes 8 hours of shooting time plus about 20-32 hours of processing time. At the maximum estimate of 40 hours total, I'm getting about $26.88/hr. At the minimum estimate of 28 hours total, it is about $38.39/hr.

If I do 6 hours for $875, estimate 15-24 hours of processing: 30 total hours is about $29.17/hr, or 21 total hours at about $41.67/hr.

At my 4-hours minimum at $650, 10-16 hours processing: 20 hours total = $32.50/hr, or 14 hours total = $46.43/hr.

If you care to look at it from that perspective, the minimum-maximum range of hourly remuneration for this new optional service is $2.50/hr to $62.50/hr. The average depends on what people select, but overall this plan doesn't offer significantly more or less potential value for my time than my standard services. It also scales a little better than my standard service in that the maximum rate at 10 hours of shooting plus 250 photos on DVD (20 hours) is still $52.50/hr.

The primary disadvantage is that it is a "gamble." A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, as they say...and this approach is two in the bush.

Drozz119 wrote in post #14205743
But why would any bride book you for 2 hours instead of 8 if she's not paying any more? Plus she'll have more images to choose from.

What if you incorporated some kind of hourly rate instead of the travel cost (eg: $20/hr). Just to guarantee yourself more than $50 as a minimum. That way you would at least make $160. Then process the pics AFTER the choices. If they pick 50.. You only process 50.

The conflict between charging hourly and not doing so is as follows:

On the beneficial side for me, it tempers the desire to just get a full 8-10 hours of photography out of me at only $50 cost. This may be my primary reason to alter the pricing structure in the very near future. On the downside, tagging on an hourly rate causes two unwanted things: First, clients begin to "expect" something tangible if they pay hourly because of a psychological association. Second, an hourly rate differs distinctly from having a family friend/etc. do everything for free and puts me in another category - again, psychologically.

I might try that approach and see what happens, but what I think I would do is charge a base $50 for travel and $10/hour instead of $20/hour. It's less intimidating but still gives a little restriction on the freedom-to-get-10-hours approach brides consider.

**update** I have included a $10/hour rate to discourage free-max-time misuse.

I've thought about doing something similar, only charging much, much more! Base would be $400 base for 4 hours and then $50/hour after that, up to 8 hours.

The other difference in my plan is the editing. Rather than editing 250 images well, I'll just pick the best 250 or whatever and just do basic color correction. Nothing fancy. More shoot and burn style. It would be more of a cost over quality and quantity (you get what you pay for, but at least you're getting someone who knows what they are doing). I can do basic edits on 250 images in about two hours (30 seconds per image, 2 images in 1 minute) so my PP time would be 3 hours max.

So at minimum I'm getting $400 for 7 hours of work upfront = $57/hour
Worst case would be $600 for 10 hours of work upfront = $55/hour

And I would only offer this during the slow season. No summer weddings, no popular dates like 10/11/12 or whatever the big one is going to be in the future.

Personally, anything less and you're basically losing money. I know it seems like you're making at least $6/hour or whatever, but that's not the case. After you pay taxes, insurance, transportation, and licensing you'd have to shoot 10 of these to break even.