Pricing a digital download

Ok, I've read through some threads about pricing a digital download. Brice said that 5x print cost is about average. What are others pricing digital downloads? Here's the story: I was asked to shoot the youth football "Super Bowl." I was the exclusive photographer, which was great, btw. I've had quite a few print orders, but someone wants a "non-commercial, non-promotional use" image. Now, the fact that he used that language tells me he knows something about something. I don't want to charge too much to price myself out of people downloading them.

Like the Gingerbread man...Run as fast as you can!

Ok that may be overstating it, But I would want to know more details before i priced it out. Just how exactly do they want to use it? And since this involves a kid...Why this kid?

Sales are good, but you also owe your subject some protection...especiall​y considering the age and future shoots. Be responsible...

neumanns wrote in post #11329356
Like the Gingerbread man...Run as fast as you can!

Ok that may be overstating it, But I would want to know more details before i priced it out. Just how exactly do they want to use it? And since this involves a kid...Why this kid?

Sales are good, but you also owe your subject some protection...especiall​y considering the age and future shoots. Be responsible...

He does say it is his son. Sorry for leaving that part out. I really don't have an issue with allowing downloads, I'm just trying to price it fairly for everyone.

I used to offer several options on digital downloads...

640x480; 800x600; etc etc.... basically, I priced the digital downloads as much as the next sized up print... so, if you could logically print a 4x6 with the digital download, the price on it was as much as my 5x7 print....

keep in mind, digital photos can easily distribute to anywhere and print for free.. so keep the resolution low for failprint.

imo, i would charge it more than print, to make sense into people to buying the print instead.

nonameowns wrote in post #11330868
keep in mind, digital photos can easily distribute to anywhere and print for free.. so keep the resolution low for failprint.

imo, i would charge it more than print, to make sense into people to buying the print instead.

I will definitely price the download much higher than the actual print itself. Just how much higher is the question.

I hate digital files, you lose all control over it. However, just like the music industry and the decline of CD sales so goes the photography industry where they want digital. So, I use the MaxPreps pricing.

$40 for a "full file" (2166x1600)
$15 for a "large" (1024x768 )
$10 for a "small" (800x600)

It says personal use only, they have to agree to that contract - and YES it has been violated where I may have to sue a newspaper that I told ahead of time they could not use the image without compensation, they ran it anyways given to them by the parent...then another company bought the images offline even thought it says for parents only then displayed it on their site. There is definitely downfalls! However, it's not much difference than them getting the print and scanning it nowadays as the printers are very good. People like to fight digital files, but it's a losing battle in the long run.

BTW though, my print sales are FAR better than digital sales, and I mean FAR better!!

Some people sell full files for $5-10 and that's just plain out stupid IMHO!

just price it 10 times more than print lol

MJPhotos24 wrote in post #11330900
I hate digital files, you lose all control over it. However, just like the music industry and the decline of CD sales so goes the photography industry where they want digital. So, I use the MaxPreps pricing.

$40 for a "full file" (2166x1600)
$15 for a "large" (1024x768 )
$10 for a "small" (800x600)

It says personal use only, they have to agree to that contract - and YES it has been violated where I may have to sue a newspaper that I told ahead of time they could not use the image without compensation, they ran it anyways given to them by the parent...then another company bought the images offline even thought it says for parents only then displayed it on their site. There is definitely downfalls! However, it's not much difference than them getting the print and scanning it nowadays as the printers are very good. People like to fight digital files, but it's a losing battle in the long run.

BTW though, my print sales are FAR better than digital sales, and I mean FAR better!!

Some people sell full files for $5-10 and that's just plain out stupid IMHO!

Just the guy I was looking for. I figured you would chime in and you didn't disappoint. I agree there are downfalls. Thanks for the info. I thought MaxPreps had a digital download scale, but have been praying to the porcelain god all day and hadn't really had the energy to look. Now I can pull this IV out of my arm (thanks to my wife) and get the responses out that I need. Thanks, Mike.

I've browsed through a few threads like this one, where the OP seems surprised, if not afraid, when asked by a client for a digital copy rather than a print.

Replies from fellow photographers on this forum tend to generally advise to "run away" or tell the client "my way or the highway".

Why are you guys that afraid?? It's only natural for people to ask for a digital copy of photos, simply because that's how most people consume them nowadays. They want to post the photo on their FaceBook wall, mail it to aunt Betty, set it up as wallpaper on they computer, carry their photo album with them anywhere they go with their iPhone/iPad. People use digital photo frames as well.

The guy stating he wants a picture for non-commercial, non-promotional use, is merely saying he just wants a picture of his son for himself, not to make profit on it or undercut the photographer by selling it around. He just want a fair price that's all.

When I've done my wedding photo shoot, I insisted to get a copy of all the pictures that were also printed in the albums. I paid for that, and got full resolution pictures. I didn't make a single print of these. But I sent them by email to friends and family leaving far away, posted some on my website, used others as wallpaper, etc. So relax guys, your income isn't under treat because your client would like digital copies.

cedm wrote in post #11331015
So relax guys, your income isn't under treat because your client would like digital copies.

It is if neither the photographer nor the client really know how to treat the digital medium.

It is if the photographers business model is based entirely on profits from print sales. Weddings are a different animal from sports.

It is if the client thinks "hey it's just digital and didn't cost you anything to make" and balks at the idea of paying for it at all, let alone a decent sum.

cdifoto wrote in post #11333248
It is if the client thinks "hey it's just digital and didn't cost you anything to make" and balks at the idea of paying for it at all, let alone a decent sum.

That is how the client thinks these days. They fail to understand the other costs of creating a file.

I was asked to do a shoot at a upcoming race and pointed out my costs just to be there for the weekend averages well over $300 per event, not including any wear and tear on cameras and car.

Yet people think it costs me nothing to create that shot of their child racing.

Its OK by me they think that way, as I can just as easily stay home and work on some other projects and spend time with my family.

Bosscat wrote in post #11333531
That is how the client thinks these days. They fail to understand the other costs of creating a file.

That's because no one took the time to explain it to them.

The truth is, photography is not that expensive. It simply isn't. What's expensive is running a proper business - and those costs have little direct relation to what the business actually does. They're pretty much the same as every other business of equal size and reach.

I say think and act like a building contractor. It doesn't cost much to hammer a nail into a board (everybody knows the hammer is cheap, the nail is cheap, the board is cheap, and swinging the hammer costs nothing but grunt)...but it does cost a lot to get to the point where you can hammer that nail into that board. I say stop putting a price on each photograph and start putting it on the service. Push the service and not the photo itself. The contractor doesn't say "this house will cost you $X"...he says "I will need $Y if you want me to do this and $Z if you want me to do that."

cdifoto wrote in post #11333568
That's because no one took the time to explain it to them.

I have taken the time to explain the costs of doing biz, but many see a photo as whatever the cost of a certain sized print is going for at Wal Mart, and then figure if I mark it up to make a profit, I am somehow screwing them.

Many fail to see the minor differences that many on these forums that take this seriously see. Some do and will gratefully pay the costs of quality, but many just shop by price.

asysin2leads wrote in post #11329582
He does say it is his son. Sorry for leaving that part out. I really don't have an issue with allowing downloads, I'm just trying to price it fairly for everyone.

Take a look at my site for digital download pricing i use. I only use 4 sizes. Much like mike, my print sales far outweigh the digital sales.