Pros: When clients ask . . .

where you get your prints done, do you tell them? For example, if you use MPix and they get a disc with all their prints on them, won't they just go and develop them at MPix themselves? (Rather than pay what you charge for prints?) I am just curious because people have been asking me that. Thanks!

I tell them I use 3 different professional labs and no one has ever questioned the specifics. I usually give them a local lab if they ask where to get things printed that they have.

YankeeMom wrote in post #11157418
where you get your prints done, do you tell them? For example, if you use MPix and they get a disc with all their prints on them, won't they just go and develop them at MPix themselves? (Rather than pay what you charge for prints?) I am just curious because people have been asking me that. Thanks!

Well, you already made your money off the client by providing them a disc with images on them. Why not give them the best place to get them printed? I don't see what the issue is here?

I don't do anything because I am not a pro (yet), but if you give them the disc AND the developer, why would they ever buy high-quality prints from the pro? It seems they make a good amount of their money on prints, but maybe not anymore. Just wondering.

I've always said, "We use the best professional lab in the country" (which I believe to be the case) and then tell them the state it's in. That has always settled it.

We live in a world today that needs/wants/demands the negative and right to print. I've never allowed this in 19 years of shooting, and don't ever plan to, except in commercial situations where they're buying the right to the image. However, I'm sure you'll find plenty on this board and others that would tell you I'm behind the times, etc. I look at it as providing the absolute best for your clients. Period. If money isn't the issue (and this will come to light in other situations as well), and you do genuinely care about the quality of the product, then clients will buy into that and buy into you.

Now, I'm not naive enough to believe that I've never had clients illegally steal my work. Of course I have. But I believe it to be a small percentage AND I'm ok with it. I'm still making money...

I tell them I use MPix or Bay photo...and if they want to save money, and my time, they can use them too. If they want me to process these, I tell them I have a mark up to include my time for doing it! Simple...there time..or pay for mine!

YankeeMom wrote in post #11158058
I don't do anything because I am not a pro (yet), but if you give them the disc AND the developer, why would they ever buy high-quality prints from the pro? It seems they make a good amount of their money on prints, but maybe not anymore. Just wondering.

They aren't developers. They just print. YOU are the developer now.

The whole print sales business model issue has been haunting former film shooters for years now. There's all kinds of debate about it everywhere.

Personally, I'll sell the client whatever they want to buy. I've shifted from selling a product to selling a service. All of my packages include a crapload of prints. The big limiter is on the number of hours I shoot, and the number of hours I spend retouching. The bigger your package, the longer we shoot and the more images you get to choose from to be retouched for the allotted number of prints. Prints are cheap to have done, even by pro labs. I don't pretend that that's where my big cost is.

collierportraits wrote in post #11158117
I've always said, "We use the best professional lab in the country" (which I believe to be the case)

This. There has never been a follow-up question.

jcpoulin wrote in post #11158524
I tell them I use MPix or Bay photo...and if they want to save money, and my time, they can use them too. If they want me to process these, I tell them I have a mark up to include my time for doing it! Simple...there time..or pay for mine!

Well, uploading your digital prints to develop is pretty standard for everyone, but I guess there are those who are just too lazy or busy to do even that and might just pay extra for it.

cdifoto wrote in post #11159020
They aren't developers. They just print. YOU are the developer now.

The whole print sales business model issue has been haunting former film shooters for years now. There's all kinds of debate about it everywhere.

Personally, I'll sell the client whatever they want to buy. I've shifted from selling a product to selling a service. All of my packages include a crapload of prints. The big limiter is on the number of hours I shoot, and the number of hours I spend retouching. The bigger your package, the longer we shoot and the more images you get to choose from to be retouched for the allotted number of prints. Prints are cheap to have done, even by pro labs. I don't pretend that that's where my big cost is.

I see that more and more people are selling the images on disk, too. I also realize that photographers charge a good amount of money for prints and, if you can get the disk AND the same printer (MPix, for example), why pay?? I just wondered if some just didn't tell their clients where they printed for that reason.

Peacefield wrote in post #11160172
This. There has never been a follow-up question.

Well, personal friends and family certainly ask ME (though I wouldn't expect other clients, too.)

I get people who will order $40-50 worth of prints over what I charge for a high resoluciton CD of all their images. Most of the time they either don't want to spend the time to wait for the CD then wait to get them printed somewhere.

YankeeMom wrote in post #11160431
I see that more and more people are selling the images on disk, too. I also realize that photographers charge a good amount of money for prints and, if you can get the disk AND the same printer (MPix, for example), why pay?? I just wondered if some just didn't tell their clients where they printed for that reason.



Well, personal friends and family certainly ask ME (though I wouldn't expect other clients, too.)

I don't sell images on disk since it's too time consuming to prepare them all properly, and I tell the client this up front. Do I lose some? Sure...but usually it's the ones who want quantity instead of quality. They're a better fit for a low end photographer anyway.

Having said that, most labs can do a fine job - yes even Wal-Mart. The reason for buying them through me is the guarantee. I can't guarantee the results from a lab I didn't choose, and I can't send them back to have them redone if they're not right if I didn't order them in the first place.

I've had customers say they want to start using my lab for their family snapshots and I tell them the lab only works with professionals. They respect that and it seems to add even more value to what I charge.

Hogloff wrote in post #11158050
Well, you already made your money off the client by providing them a disc with images on them. Why not give them the best place to get them printed? I don't see what the issue is here?

In many shoots there is more money to be made in print sales than there is in the shooting fee. If someone wants printable images from me they will pay dearly and at that point I will give them a list of recommended labs of which the one I use is in there. I have never been asked, it is something that the customer doesn't seem concerned with. I would think it would be a safe bet that they moment they have your CD they are off to the Walmarts and Costco's of the image processing. It is easy, they are local and they are fast, everything that the normal consumer wants.

I'm with hogloff. I get my money of a disk of images and recommend a printer that the customers can work with. Most folks I work with do not have any need for prints immediately and so waiting on it will hurt my cashflow. Getting a standard rate for the shooting and images makes it easier logistics for me.