Digital Prophet wrote:jgbeam wrote:
Every project of any significant size, and most small ones as well, include contractual requirements for progress photographs, usually on some minimum schedule.
Oh I totally disagree.
- Digital Prophet -
I'm talking about owners and/or funding sources requiring the general contractor (remember them?) or construction manager to provide progress photos, not the engineering firm. It's common practice on most projects I've been involved with during the past 40 years. The cost is included in the General Conditions along with trailer rental, security fences, portable toilets and every other little expense associated with running a project. Sometimes the requirements are very specific, e.g. 10 - 8x10 b&w glossies every month by a professional photographer showing overall progress, and sometimes not specific at all. Lately, the CM's have been taking their own digital photos.
I take my own shots every time I visit the site and often include a couple in my inspection reports, especially if there is a discrepancy to report.
This is foundation work for a $20 million school project.
| MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script |
There are pros who specialize in or include construction photography in their scope of services, but I doubt that their fees bear any relation to the cost of the project other than large projects may require more shots. On a typical, non-complex project, the structural engineer's fee will be between .5% and 1% of the cost of the project and he not only designs the structure, prepares the contract documents and oversees construction, he is also liable for all structural aspects of the project. There is no way a photographer is going to get more than a few hundred bucks for a $2 million project. If I could get even a small fraction of the engineer's fee just for taking pictures and being able to sleep at night without worrying if I screwed up a structural detail I'd be a professional photog tomorrow.
Just a few thoughts.
Jim