CD Sales: I guess I have no reason to argue

sapearl wrote in post #5453785
Even though I come from a "traditional" wedding background, I won't disagree that there has been a shift toward wedding CD & DVD's in recent years. This is not THE factor, but it is one of the factors that has contributed to a lowering in the cost of wedding photography packages.

Many more digital shooters are now out there offering bargain basement burn-to-disk weddings, at discount prices, and many brides are taking the unrealistic position that the rest of us should "fall into line" and offer 1000+ hi rez images on disk, with all rights, at WalMart prices. This can't happen and should not happen.

Some photographers don't have printing expertise, the time to spend ordering prints, or the inclination to invest time in print production or album design/assembly. For them the disk is key to their business plan. For those that price the disk properly, this is not a criticism but simply their business model. They know if it works or not.

The potential problem with CD only packages is the quality level. Yes, there are a number of folks out there with top notch PP skills who will load gorgeous hi rez images on disk. But there are even more don't have basic PP skills and can barely spell photoshop. The unwary shopper can have a daunting search if he/she doesn't know the right questions to ask. With a print portfolio or display albums, at least they can see first hand what the finished work will look like.

I do not normally include a high rez disk in my packages. I am a traditional album builder. But if somebody inquires about a disk, I will include it as premium. This will typically be another $500 on top of an average album cost of $2K.

I've always admired your site Stuart and can say you are one of the people that I look at for inspiration.
You've been doing this for a while and no doubt you know the business aspects probably better than I do.

There are two distinct business models that I've seen emerging:
1) The low budget burn to disk photg.
2) The Pro photog that does CD/DVD only weddings which are processed and they top shelf pics.

My observations deal mainly with the Pro that is just doing top quality CD only weddings and no prints. The one thing that I see is that people that do this have stopped designing albums, they figure the BG can have the option to do that if they. They get their $2K upfront and provide nicely edited pics. One advantage I see with this is that you get your money upfront and you don't have to spend time designing the album.

The drawback of course is potentially less income.

I don't know what would be more profitable if you broke it down by the hours then album+print package or the $2K CD only package.
I figured it depends on the market demand.

I sense that high res images on a CD is quite popular.
It indicates to me that because the demand for this is quite high even though you may not make the same amount as a print+alubm pacakge you can do more CD only pacakges.
More CD only gigs at $2k translates in potentially more money when you factor in the lower amount of hours you spend on it since you don't have to design the albums.

I think that there will aways be bargain basement people out there.
Nothing we can do about that.
I would not really let the fact that you are selling the same product (CD only) create the illusion that you cannot charge a higher price.
In the end there are bargain basement people that prints as well yet the Pros can charge for similar packages for significantly more $$$
They can do that because of the higher quality of their work.

A CD is just a medium of delivery IMO.
The one thing that should always dictate the price is the quality of the work.
If the work is top shelf I see no reason to charge a top shelf price.
After all a quality picture is a quality picture if it is on a CD or if it is printed as and 8x10.
The medium does not affect it's quality and it should not affect it's price.

The photogs that I've seen using this $2k CD only weddings are people that spend considerable amount in PS editing. Their pics are worked on just as hard as if they were part of a print based business model.

I think ultimately there is no right or wrong system.
The best system is whatever works in your area.

At the same time I feel that there is an opportunity for a Pro to command $2k+ for a CD only wedding (if the market demand is there).
No overhead with album creation.
In the end less work (album design can take a bit) and you can still get money upfront.

I'm not sure how photogs feel about the idea of a $2K CD only wedding.
I can tell you that the first time I saw this in action the only thing I can think of was "This should not be possible!!!"
After all I've been watching just like everyone else and before that day I always saw CD only weddings that were just bargain basement jobs.

I'm wondering if the doubts I had are shared by other people.
I'm wondering if Pros would be reluctant to offer a $2K CD only package because they fell the BG would say "Well this person from CL can do it for $500".

Then again if this happened the Pro would probably explain to the clients that his CD only package pics are professionally edited (and the Pro experience, portfolio, backups, etc.) unlike the CL offer which probably is not.
In the end if the potential client said "We will go with the CL $500 package" then their were bargain shoppers anyways. In this case I doubt the Pro could gotten them signed up even if he did offer prints and albums (which incidentally would probably cost more than $2k so they would've been even less inclined to go with the Pro).


All I know is that there is a good option to sell CD only at $2K if you have quality products.


I'm simply stating some changes that I've observed that had me shocked.
Things that I did not think would work and did ($2k CD only weddings).

There are always going be people that are going to treasure high quality albums.

This is a great thread, I just wanted to add that I think the reason for the top shelf premium for a CD with high res images is because it would be the same as offering negatives in the film world. That provides for unlimited high res reproductions and that could lead to lost profits from prints sales, a one time medium... In this day and age though, prints will become a thing of the past...the quality of home printers rivals that of any professional print so why pay a premium price when I can run it off at home?

Alexajlex wrote in post #5455274
They get their $2K upfront and provide nicely edited pics. One advantage I see with this is that you get your money upfront and you don't have to spend time designing the album.

I sense that high res images on a CD is quite popular.
It indicates to me that because the demand for this is quite high even though you may not make the same amount as a print+alubm pacakge you can do more CD only pacakges.

More CD only gigs at $2k translates in potentially more money when you factor in the lower amount of hours you spend on it since you don't have to design the albums

It's possible and likely to have have more time invested if you're giving the client EVERY image on disk. If you're a perfectionist who has to individually touch every image, for albums and prints you spend time finalizing the images that are used in the album or purchased...which might be about 50-100 or so for the album depending on the style and layout. For the CD you have to finalize every single image. That can be in the neighborhood of thousands.

That's why I set it to be a realistic maximum of 200 images ready for print, but without heavy pixel pushing such as blemish removal & sculpting and such. They choose those images via the proofing system, to ensure that they get the images they want and not the ones I think they want.

Handing over a CD isn't a big deal to me anymore, but to provide quality results without bogging yourself down you do have to set limits.

cory1848 wrote in post #5455572
In this day and age though, prints will become a thing of the past...the quality of home printers rivals that of any professional print so why pay a premium price when I can run it off at home?

Not everyone has this mindset though. People still look at me questioningly or have an uneasy tone in their voice when I tell them I can run prints off on my professional printer here if they're in a time crunch. "But I want quality prints." is usually the initial response.

cdifoto wrote in post #5455996
Not everyone has this mindset though. People still look at me questioningly or have an uneasy tone in their voice when I tell them I can run prints off on my professional printer here if they're in a time crunch. "But I want quality prints." is usually the initial response.

If they want them done "professionally" by all means do it that way... From my experience you could run off a print on your "home" printer and hand that to them and if you told them it was a pro print, they wouldnt know the difference. Not that I would ever do that... If I were to request quality prints, I would expect them to be not printed but enlarged in the traditional sense of burning to photo paper at a lab. I can tell the difference but anyone outside the photo world or the arts field would rarely see the difference.

I just assume that if they want a CD only wedding, then they want to print the photos themselves and not at a pro lab.

cdifoto wrote in post #5455978
It's possible and likely to have have more time invested if you're giving the client EVERY image on disk. If you're a perfectionist who has to individually touch every image, for albums and prints you spend time finalizing the images that are used in the album or purchased...which might be about 50-100 or so for the album depending on the style and layout. For the CD you have to finalize every single image. That can be in the neighborhood of thousands.

That's why I set it to be a realistic maximum of 200 images ready for print, but without heavy pixel pushing such as blemish removal & sculpting and such. They choose those images via the proofing system, to ensure that they get the images they want and not the ones I think they want.

Handing over a CD isn't a big deal to me anymore, but to provide quality results without bogging yourself down you do have to set limits.

You have a good point that many will need to address. When this thread started, it was talking about selling cd's at a sports event - I'm assuming a youth something (basketball, soccer, whatever). For youth sports, where the average sale is much smaller and the pp is minimal most of the time, cd's sound like a dream come true. Larger profits for the photog and more treasured memories for the parents - everyone wins.

But processing thousands of wedding pictures just sounds crazy at any price.

HotShots wrote in post #5456246
You have a good point that many will need to address. When this thread started, it was talking about selling cd's at a sports event - I'm assuming a youth something (basketball, soccer, whatever). For youth sports, where the average sale is much smaller and the pp is minimal most of the time, cd's sound like a dream come true. Larger profits for the photog and more treasured memories for the parents - everyone wins.

But processing thousands of wedding pictures just sounds crazy at any price.

Yea, I'd like to point this out. Though I don't think anyone really derailed this thread since what you are discussing is important, I'll just say that I would never apply my pricing or business practices to a wedding and really, I can't even say if the two have anything at all in common because I'm not a wedding photographer.

So at this point in the discussion, I'll say that CD products work in the context of my particular business and whether or not they apply to weddings, portraits, or anything else is up to you. If it works, great. If it doesn't, find another way to do it.

Anywho, I'm tired.

cdifoto wrote in post #5455978
It's possible and likely to have have more time invested if you're giving the client EVERY image on disk. If you're a perfectionist who has to individually touch every image, for albums and prints you spend time finalizing the images that are used in the album or purchased...which might be about 50-100 or so for the album depending on the style and layout. For the CD you have to finalize every single image. That can be in the neighborhood of thousands.

That's why I set it to be a realistic maximum of 200 images ready for print, but without heavy pixel pushing such as blemish removal & sculpting and such. They choose those images via the proofing system, to ensure that they get the images they want and not the ones I think they want.

Handing over a CD isn't a big deal to me anymore, but to provide quality results without bogging yourself down you do have to set limits.

Well I think normally even if you do take 1200 pics per wedding you cut that down to 500-600 pics.
Removing the duplicates, only showing the best from each situation, etc.

In essence with the CD you'd have 500 pics to work with.
There are some that would require a bit less editing than others (formal group shots, processional maybe). For those a horizon fix, white balance, sharpening, color work, some removal of blemishes is pretty much all that is needed. Then you have the 200 pics that are your top of the line edit.
Not sure how much time people spend on editing.
Yervant spends 10 minutes per pic according to his blog.


Of course every individual photog can decide how much time to spend.
Some will spend considerably more time.
Setting some concrete deadlines in this case would help.

I'm a firm believer of cutting down the pics to remove duplicates and only keeping the top shelf stuff.
I believe that is one of the key elements of improving quality.

Just like when cutting a diamond they remove most of it and trash it in order to reveal it's true brilliance and beauty.

Hi Alex - thank you for the kind words, I appreciate it. You've written some very interesting material and it provides considerable food for thought.

Had somebody promoted these concepts to me a couple of years ago Alex prior to my "arrival" at POTN, I would have simply dismissed the perpetrator as well as his viewpoints. But now I have to somewhat reverse myself, shut my mouth and open my ears more. I see what is changing around us. And to a degree, much of what you say is already happening, and it is enjoying a certain amount of success in some areas of our industry.

You've made some interesting statements here, and I want to take the time to give them the thoughtful response they deserve. This will probably be the first of a couple of responses.

For this sort of thing to work with my model, I would have to effect some serious changes in my workflow, but I can certainly see how it more easily lends itself to a "sports-event-workflow".

For weddings I will usually furnish the B/G with 450-500 images, which have been culled from a larger batch. These originally were shot RAW, and then back home I make all the global adjustments of WB, highlight, shadow, exposure, etc. There is NO cosmetic retouching at this point: the usual traditional PS touchup like blemish removal, eyeglass reflections, etc. All of these will go into an online gallery, as well as into proof books. The B/G will select 24 for the main book, as well as extra pages and loose prints. On each of these I will spend 10-30 minutes of PS work. And that's not counting the RAW adjustment time.

And here is where I would encounter the "time" difficulty. There's no way I would want to spend that much time on 500 shots for disk, or even 200. But I certainly see how this would work, and could be done for sports work, if only JPG's are shot, and minimal PP work is performed.

Alexajlex wrote in post #5455274
I've always admired your site Stuart and can say you are one of the people that I look at for inspiration.
You've been doing this for a while and no doubt you know the business aspects probably better than I do.

There are two distinct business models that I've seen emerging:
1) The low budget burn to disk photg.
2) The Pro photog that does CD/DVD only weddings which are processed and they top shelf pics.

My observations deal mainly with the Pro that is just doing top quality CD only weddings and no prints. The one thing that I see is that people that do this have stopped designing albums, they figure the BG can have the option to do that if they. They get their $2K upfront and provide nicely edited pics. One advantage I see with this is that you get your money upfront and you don't have to spend time designing the album.

The drawback of course is potentially less income.

I don't know what would be more profitable if you broke it down by the hours then album+print package or the $2K CD only package.
I figured it depends on the market demand.

I sense that high res images on a CD is quite popular.
It indicates to me that because the demand for this is quite high even though you may not make the same amount as a print+alubm pacakge you can do more CD only pacakges.
More CD only gigs at $2k translates in potentially more money when you factor in the lower amount of hours you spend on it since you don't have to design the albums.....lbums.

This is a very interesting thread....but I also have mixed feelings on the situation. You cant be responsible for how your photos will print outside of controlled printing. If a client gets a cd and prints photos at walmart or wallgreens etc... and they turn out dark or strange hue you cant be responsible for how they look. Is this what you all are telling your clients when you supply them a CD only? Obviously the prints that you will make will be much higher quality. I guess having printed samples will give the client an idea of what to expect.

On a side note, when your adding photos to a CD to deliver to the client what size are you willing to give to the client? Fill sized images? cropped 3:2 ratio photos? Interested in what you actually deliver on the CD.

Let me get this right, you shoot an event, do a basic edit (levels, color, and sharpen) of web size or even small print and burn a CD? You hand out business cards and people call you with their competitor number and send you a check? That sounds like a good deal if they sign a model release stating that they will only use the images for personal use and not for Commercial Usage. The only problem is if the parent complains about the lack of coverage of their child.

tcphoto1 wrote in post #5465008
Let me get this right, you shoot an event, do a basic edit (levels, color, and sharpen) of web size or even small print and burn a CD? You hand out business cards and people call you with their competitor number and send you a check? That sounds like a good deal if they sign a model release stating that they will only use the images for personal use and not for Commercial Usage. The only problem is if the parent complains about the lack of coverage of their child.

You've pretty much nailed it for what I'm looking at doing. And, keep in mind, I'm looking at the sports side - weddings are a different monster.

On the licensing, I found this post https://photography-on-the.net …php?p=3820265#p​ost3820265 and am planning on doing something similar.

The number of pictures is tougher to deal with, I believe. Ultimately, I think it is my responsiblity to make sure I get good shots of everyone - and that is part of what should set me apart from Suzy's dad who might "give you some pictures if I get some". I have considered posting a gaurentee. Something like: We gaurentee 10 (or 12, or 15????) shots of your athlete or your money back. If they just get the 10 shots, then that's all I promised. If they get 20, 50 or 100 shots, they should be thrilled.

I'm not totally sold on this idea but I don't have anything better just yet. Anyone have a better idea?

tcphoto1 wrote in post #5465008
Let me get this right, you shoot an event, do a basic edit (levels, color, and sharpen) of web size or even small print and burn a CD? You hand out business cards and people call you with their competitor number and send you a check? That sounds like a good deal if they sign a model release stating that they will only use the images for personal use and not for Commercial Usage. The only problem is if the parent complains about the lack of coverage of their child.

I like the statement as a whole but have some questions:

I'm not really quite following this since: 1)I assume that if you priced the CDs you already budgeted to get money upfront ($50 or whatever the price is).

Normally it works the other way around (i.e. the photog needs to permission from the model (the athlete you are taking pics of) for commercial use.

At the same time looking at it from the other end if they ran the pic commercially (and it was worth your wile) just invoice them.
Since you transfer copyright only in writing as far as I know if they ran it commercially it should be an easy win.

So both parties need the others consent to go commercial with it

I guess putting some sort of statement as far as what kind of license you are granting would be OK if both you and the parent signed it.

I'm not a lawyer so don't take this as pro advice (it is just my opinion and I could be wrong...wouldn't be the first time )

No, you are not granting Commercial Use to the athlete. You need a release so you can sell images in Stock. The parents can only use the images for personal use like email, personal web gallery and prints. I would make sure to have a sentence like, "license is non transferable, additional licensing will require additional fee."

tcphoto1 wrote in post #5466204
No, you are not granting Commercial Use to the athlete. You need a release so you can sell images in Stock. The parents can only use the images for personal use like email, personal web gallery and prints. I would make sure to have a sentence like, "license is non transferable, additional licensing will require additional fee."

What I'm saying is that the photog can't sell the pics for commercial purpose without a model release (location release if identifiable, etc.).

The athlete can't really run these commercially since the photog has not granted rights in writing (for commercial usage).

In the end both parties need each other.

Of course someone can run something without permission but if it is commercial the photog can always invoice (big $$$) the magazine newspaper. I don't think the editors would be so careless to not check ask for a photog license release, but anything is possible.


I under the impression that these pics were just for the parents as a private use.

It seems to me that there is new info being brought forward (selling to stock agencies).

I did not that it was implied that there would some selling of the pics to stock agencies (a bit of double dipping I guess).

I don't know how this works but I would be upfront with the athlete if you were also planing on selling his pics to a stock agency.

I guess you would have to in order to get the release.