|
Forums >
General Industry >
Value
From time to time I'll paruse through the photographers on MM and check out their work. Some are good. A few are VERY good or STELLAR. Most are okay and growing. . .just like I am. When I run into a photographer's work that I like very much, I'll shoot them an email complimenting them and because I'm nosy. . .I'll ask them their model rates. On one occasion, I emailed a photographer that has quite a few images that I particularly enjoyed. I inquired about his rates and he admitted they were pretty high (my brain interpreted this as "let me tell her this so she won't ask to work with me"). He said that he charges a lot because it has to be "worth his time to shoot since model photography is not his primary job" (he said commercial photography was his primary job. Indeed his rate was expensive. He also said that the session included 3 hours of studio time, 3 looks and a CD of 5 retouched images that he feels were the best of the lot. Now, my brain automatically takes the total number of images received (per him. . .5) and divides his rate by that number of images. I emailed him back and agreed with him that his rates were kind of high for $__/picture, thanked him for his time and wished him well. He responded that it really didn't boil down to $___/picture but also thanked me for asking. So after this long tale, I ask you. . .what's a good value??? Jun 04 06 05:45 pm Link Quality over quantity. The only set rule is that if you don't agree the work warrants the price then move on. Jun 04 06 05:50 pm Link I think it all comes down to how much his work is worth to you. You're buying art, it's impossible to have some set price that is considered reasonable across the board in my opinion. Jun 04 06 05:52 pm Link i want to know what he charges for only 5 pics... then again if I were a model and wanted someone with awesome work to shoot me and I know those 5-10 images will enhance my port then I would pay what they were asking but thats just me... Jun 04 06 05:54 pm Link That is a tricky question in a free market. I have paid 150.00 for 20 images/ no mua I have paid 250.00 for 30 images/ with mua About those images they were ony a few looks so even though I got a number of images I can only use one per look in any portfolio. BUT!!!!!! If just one of those images gets me 400.00 in work by the end of the year I have recouped my investment. I did a tfp a while back and due to the quality of those images and a referal I got from that photogapher to other photographers I made up my initial inversment of travel many times over since then......So the initial value was very low I lost money on that particular trip but over all I made money in that month that I would not have made if I had not gone on the trip in the first place..... See what I mean.... In photography I have an image I shot a model for tfp and I had to buy certain supplies for so yes I lost money, but I have somone who wants to buy the image soooooo I know if it is a super great image and I can re shoot it a bit cleaner I will have to buy more of that supply to re shoot the image but I will be able to sell that image for a good price to many customers in the future. so the inital value is low but it goes up over time. I know a phtographer who have images that have continued to sell prints for over 20 years. and other prints that were part of a catilouge in the 80's but I said I needed a certain type of image to sell on notecards he dug them up and is now selling this (new) images almost 20 years later. I have a photographer who has paid me specificly because he knew I could do a great job inftont of the camera and he is newer and wants to put togeather a great portfolio to do more photography. He wants to be able to get models TFP he paid me and invested in me because ke knows that what I would be able to produce would make him more money and tfp in the future. soo think about how much money and the type and the quality of jobs this image will get you for your market, if it is higher than the cost of these 5 images in the long run GO FOR IT!!!! Jun 04 06 07:00 pm Link okay, this is where we, as photographers, really need to educate our clients or models. value of our work. people aren't paying us for photographs. they are not paying us to give them back paper with an image on it for x amount of dollars. what are we being paid for, then? we are being paid for our ability to do what we do. and what we do is a combination of a number of things in order to arrive to that final photograph. we are being paid not only for what we do, but HOW we do it. i would even venture to say we are being paid for doing it differently than the other photographer, or HOW we do it uniquely. what are some of these elements? our time, sure. more importantly perhaps is our personal artistic vision. i would even say our ability to put together a team that is tailored for the specific assignment, and our ability to direct that team and the model in order to arrive at the final image. we are being paid for our ability to produce the best imagery we can. so no, you are not paying us for a 9x12 print. or a CD of 20 files. those things are not our work, but a result of our work. so jayne, he was correct in his response. it's not $/print.  Jun 04 06 07:39 pm Link That was the perfect answer, Sean. Jun 04 06 07:50 pm Link If you treat modeling as a business then a photograph is a good value if it brings you more earnings than it cost you. Likewise when I hire a model to pose for me, the model is a good value if I later earn more from sales of the pictures than I spent on the shoot (including overhead costs). This is a concept that seems obvious to me, but it somehow eludes some models. Sometimes a model will quote me a rate that is more than I can hope to recover. I have to write her back, saying, "I'm sorry, but I cannot offer you that rate of pay at this time." What I am tactfully telling her is that, cute as she may be, I don't foresee anyone paying me hundreds of dollars for pictures of her. Of course I have to guess about that. For models, things are a little easier: You ask the photographer for references from other models, and then you ask those models, "Have his pictures helped you get well-paying jobs?" If some of them answer yes, then the photographer is probably worth the money. Jun 05 06 10:06 am Link Sean Armenta wrote: Sean, I don't really disagree with what you said, but I think Iona was more on point. To the degree that we are discussing the business of modeling, a photographer is being paid for his ability to deliver pictures which will enhance the marketability of the model. Jun 05 06 10:36 am Link Iona Lynn wrote: Jun 05 06 10:39 am Link In recent years 4 Picassos sold for a total of over $300 million. $300 million/4 = $75 million Cost for a Picasso: over $75 million Good value for a Picasso: $74 million http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3682127.stm Jun 05 06 10:49 am Link I think he really answered your question when he said he worked more commercially than with models. Today, that's where the $ is  Jun 05 06 10:58 am Link Ok. Going by what the majority is saying. . .it boils down to weather or not the images he produces will help me or hurt me in the long run. As I travel along the "learning" path, right now the images may help me get more photographers to shoot me. Right now paid work is not an option because I'm a new model with no experience. . .I've read enough threads from angry photographers to know not to even consider asking for payment yet. So. . .considering as I continue to shoot. . .those images may become obsolete. The same can be said if I begin getting paid work. . .images may still become obsolete. So really it boils down to willingness to invest based on the propensity (sp?) for better shoots and paid assignments. With that said. . .I'm still not sure. Maybe this is why a lot of models aim strickly for TFP/CD??? Jun 05 06 02:18 pm Link Eric Tragedy wrote: Apples to oranges. On steroids. You're not going to find Picassos here. Jun 05 06 03:10 pm Link For a model starting out, a simple sitting fee with a portrait photographer can seem like a small fortune. Say around $50-$150 for a sitting, then prints ($8-$50 for 8x10). An average commercial photographer may charge you $150-$1200 for a portfolio. This can be no better than a portrait photographer's work or it could be a really good commercial print portfolio. A top advertising photographer can go way up in price from there. But the vaule of the print and the quality differs greatly. So it should, otherwise you're not getting value from the $1,200 session. It's a reflection of what the photographer thinks he's worth and if you want that perceived or real difference. I once had a watercolorist trade me a 24X36 painting for a 8X10 portrait. I knew his price for the painting and commented on the difference in rates. He said, "I know how much time it took me to paint it and I know how much time you worked on the print". The price people paid for his painting was their perception of its worth and he vauled my portrait as much. I can understand your feelings about his prices. But it's no different than if you quoted me $150 an hour to model. Why shouldn't I just hire a $25-$35 per hour starting model? There are overpriced photographers and models - and there are those that give you great vaule for the price. An Austin Martin costs $250,000. Bitching about the price isn't going to change it. But if you don't see the difference between it and a $8,000 Kia, just go buy the Kia. But buying a $15,000 Saturn may save your life or get you hired for a great paying job. Like Iona said, you can think about the money or what the spending the money can do for you. Sometimes though, you can find great deals... Jun 05 06 07:13 pm Link I saw a movie, I believe it was "Mona Lisa's Smile". I only watched it because my wife wanted to see it of course and I am always there for her. Anyway, Julia Roberts holds up a picture of what I seem to remember was a senior picture. She asked the worth of the shot and the class debated back and forth. She then asked what the worth of it was if it were shot by Ansel Adams. Two things apply in my mind here. 1. What is the shot worth to you due to the artistic quality of the photographer and, 2. What is the value of the shot to you as a model? Only you can answer both these questions. Jun 05 06 07:24 pm Link Arghhh! Maybe I'm not reading it right. I agree with Iona on how the model views the value of the photographers work but I read it more as how the photographer values his or her work/time... while reading the post, I thought about the fact that he said commercial is his primary business. If he shot models at a rate that most models could afford, he'd be working at a deep discount. So, in order to make sure that he's not working for less than he could elsewhere, he charges models a high fee, knowing good, how, and when that he will likely not get it, but it doesn't matter because he can always book a commercial job. It's like saying "I'm going to designate this date to you, even though you are only paying $300, when I could be working for XYZ company, who pays $3000. The value of the photographer is not only in the picture they produce, but the TIME they have invested in that block of time and the jobs they may have had to turn down as a result. Maybe Janye wanted to look at how models value the services they receive from photographers, but based on what the photographer said, I looked at how he/she values their services and sets prices accordingly. Jun 05 06 10:11 pm Link Part of what you pay for with a photographer is his/her ability to shoot what you're looking for, as well as the things you AREN'T looking for. You're paying for a complete product that will take care of your special needs. The investments they've made in order to get the images that you know them to be able to produce can't all be put in numbers. There are a lot of intangibles that go into being a good photographer, and until you've worked with one vs. another, you really won't be able to see it. Jun 05 06 11:21 pm Link |
