Need some input...

This thread is related to my thread about shooting on railroad tracks...

I'm the Newsletter Editor and Chief Photographer at the Pacific Southwest Railway Museum in Campo (San Diego County) California. We are in the process of developing a fee structure for portrait, senior and family photographers to shoot on our property. Shooting at a museum is a much safer alternative to using active tracks and might even allow the subject be posed on or in a restored railcar or locomotive.

I would appreciate some input on what you feel a reasonable fee would be for shooting on our museum's property and what kind of services you would want for that fee.

You can respond either by posting here or by a PM.

Thanks.

I think you would need to decide what that fee provides to the photographer. If you are wanting people to shoot on safe tracks rather than live ones a fee might be counterproductive. If you are going to add the ability to shoot in, on, and around the rolling stock then thats a different matter. Off the top of my head I would say $10 is about my limit as I dont build in a huge margin for such things. But in SD you consider what it costs to shoot on the beach or the permit costs for a public park and adjust accordingly.

Is there much demand to shoot there? Do you already charge admission? How will you separate the happy snap P&S from the portrait artist, length of lens? off camera flash? perceived quality of finished product? Will you offer a private roped off area free from lookie-loos?

Two responses in a week? I guess I'm wasting my time polling photographers...

It's fantastic that you can provide a safe and legal backdrop of train tracks, as well as the possibility for locomotives.

For me, as a photographer, there's only so much money we're going to be receiving from our clients to shoot simple portraits (high school seniors, etc). If we have to deduct any location expenses, you can bet it won't be half of what we're getting.

My guess (though possibly incorrect) would be that your location doesn't incur extra costs if someone shoots there... meaning any fee you collect from a working photog would be all profit. I'd say keep it low and keep the people coming because of it. I probably wouldn't consider shooting there if I had to pay over $20 (if it's cool & picturesque... $10 if not so much) - and for that, I'd expect a pretty reasonable "shoot anywhere you'd like within this specific area... you have one hour" kind of policy.

Hope that helps. Sorry more people haven't chimed in.

I posted about this (with an additional reply to your comment) in the other thread.