So I had a family photo shoot on sunday. 9 people. 3 kids, grandpa and grandma and 2 sets of couples. They all live in different corners of the US and don't get to spend time together much, especially since one couple is moving to thailand.. this might be the last time they see each other for awhile.
So, I took the job. I was very lenient on everything. I shot for an hour and a half, and had over 1000 pics in the memory card. I narrowed it down to 64 and gave them 3 copies of pictures (1 to grandparents and 1 to each set of couples)
The brother called me today and left a voicemail. He said they loved the pics and was wondering if they could have the other ones that didn't make the cut.
Now what do I do? I know most photographers would have gave them a lot less then 60 pictures, and I only did it for $140. Do I charge them for the extra pics and if so what is a reasonable price? I'm going to have to mail them 3 more CDs so I know I need to cover that at least, and time finding, organizing, editing if needed and burning.
What were you going to do with the other pix anyway?
Do they need editing/organizing? Why?
As I see it now, you gave them pics for a bit over $2 each. No worries about that, I sell mine in bulk for less than that - but I give them all the pix - all unedited.
My point is that you have 900+ pix that were never meant to see the outside of a computer (for some reason). They obviously don't make the $2 cut, so what are they worth? 10c each? So $9 + $3 for CDs + Shipping.
I don't plan on giving the whole bulk of pictures, from the 1000 I had it to 140. From there, I had it to 64.. So theres an extra ... let me do the math hmmm... 76 that I sorted out of the keep list. I'd be giving them that.
I would explain to him that the extra photos would take time to organize and edit and burn just like you explained to us and come up with a cost for your time. Dont be afraid to charge what your time is worth.
Definitely dont let any photos out that are not your best work. Potential clients could see these images that are not up to par and judge you on those. Sometimes good intentions come back to bite you. I know, I've had it happen.
gheller wrote:
this, to me, is a HUGE mistake. my pix look WORLDS better after editing. i would never release unedited pictures.
But to me, I don't take a shot that I don't plan on being able to sell straight out of the camera. That is how we did it back in the film days - get it right IN the camera.
Sure, today's digital darkroom can make pix look better with all the effects and such, but it depends on your market. I don't do weddings much, but youth sports where I move literally HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of photos that get delivered to customers just minutes after they compete.
Again, we shoot to sell, not just shoot everything that moves and motor drive it in RAW with the expectation to have to edit all of them later - but tight, ready to print images... without the necessity to edit.
In your niche - glamour and weddings, there is alot of artistic technique that can differentiate your work from the standard crowd.
Hammy wrote:
... youth sports where I move literally HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of photos that get delivered to customers just minutes after they compete.
Apples and oranges. You can't compare the youth sports market where as it looked in the camera is what the client expects to portraits where clients expect the artistic look and touch up work. That was true even in the film days.
What I would do is first get rid of the ones that are clearly not sellable (out of focus, people blinking, etc) and then of the rest, upload web versions to a website like Smugmug and ask the client to choose the ones he likes. Then charge per pic for however many pics they want from the batch and then you'll edit them for him (I use Lightroom for most of my editing and I find that I can just paste custom processing settings on a batch of photos and they all come out looking roughly fine).
Since technically the job is over and paid for, this work is more or less on spec. So I would double the rate ($4 per pic, plus the shipping cost).
Since you've already culled them down, and they are already "good to go" sooc (confirmed via the culling) ... it would seem that you consider them to be your "good" work, not your "best" work.
Establish a pricing that you think is appropriate for your "good" work to considered as either "bulk pricing" or "scrap pricing" ... the former being more appropriate, imo.
If your "best work" work was "bargain priced" to be around $2.19 per ... then your "good" work might go for around (pick a number) for $1 per or $1.50 per. I think that you should not "deep discount" your "good" images as if they are only leftover scrap as part of the process ... people have a way of going, "Hmmmm ... well if THESE pics are ONLY .01/free ... how come the others cost XYZ ... he didn't DO any more to make these than he did the others. And there isn't THAT MUCH difference between the "good" ones and the "best" ones (in their eyes)" It's a slippery slope.
At $1 / $1.50 / $.75 (pick a number), people see the reduction in per image, but they can understand it based on A) quality reduction from "best" to "really good" and B) volume/repeat customer discount. Assigning a reduced, yet still value oriented price to the additional products neither "diminishes the value of your work", nor messes with the consumer's established sense of value and fairness in business, and lets them feel like they've gotten a "bargain" as being appreciated for their "repeat/volume" business.
If we were only talking about 5 extra images, etc. then "give them the pickle" as freebies ... but when they are asking for a dozen pickles, 1/2 dozen tomatoes, three heads of lettuce and a gallon of salad dressing (even though they are NOT asking for the BEEF) ... you just might want to not give away that much for "free" as they (and others, including YOU) begin to EXPECT that you should be able to get EVERYTHING other than the BEEF for nothing.
That would be fine ... if you were operating on a LARGE margin strategy, but you obviously did NOT operate on a large margin with this client. Large margin renders much freebie ... small margin renders little freebie. The concern here is that you have begun operating on a small margin scenario ... and now are considering which strategy to predicate your "other" products (i.e. not top shelf, but still good products). Since you started at low margin (i.e. not top shelf margin strategy), that's okay, but if you're first products were sold from the middle shelf, that leaves room for your other products to be sold from the bottom shelf ... not necessarily swept up off the floor and tossed.
IMO, if you started with low margin, stay with the principles of low margin (i.e. few/no freebies) and charge appropriately for the extra images (albeit different shelf pricing structure). Likewise, if you had started on high margin, then stay with the principles of high margin (much freebie) and give the extras as freebies. Just don't don't "mix & match" between the two strategies, it doesn't bode well for the long haul.
In the end you don't want to have 'regrets' @ the transaction, nor do you want your customer to have 'regrets' @ the transaction. We hear much about "win-win" ... "no regret-no regret" is a variation for consideration as well.
HTH ... GL
$2.19/per x 60% (40% discount) = $1.31/per
$1.31/per x 76 = $99.56
Rounded to nearest $.25 increment
$1.25/per x 76 = $95.00
$140 = 64 Best
$ 95 = 76 Good
$235 for a lifetime of memories ... Bargain of the Day.
(no regrets)
CTYankee wrote:
Apples and oranges. You can't compare the youth sports market where as it looked in the camera is what the client expects to portraits where clients expect the artistic look and touch up work. That was true even in the film days.
Agreed - They are two different markets, but I think we as photographers put higher demands on our photos than clients do (not a bad thing). If we market with processed images with a specific look, then yes, a client will expect it. Otherwise, capturing the precious moments is the main concern of most clients.
The last wedding I did, images were put on a slideshow at the reception, straight from the camera - every jaw (full of cake) was staring at the plasma screen. To say that images can't look great out of the camera is a myth.
Back to the OP, he's already peaked his good images at $2 per image, how much time does one spend editing the leftovers that has to go at a lower price? (to expect higher cost is ridiculous - that would imply the rest are better than the first cut - and weren't even offered to the client... sounds like bait and switch)
So to cut losses, they should be able to be delivered to the client without edit - to minimize time commitment that doesn't seem to be making any more money at this point.
Hammy wrote:
(to expect higher cost is ridiculous - that would imply the rest are better than the first cut - and weren't even offered to the client... sounds like bait and switch)
So to cut losses, they should be able to be delivered to the client without edit - to minimize time commitment that doesn't seem to be making any more money at this point.
I'll speak to this because it appears to have been directed at least to me. I don't see it as objectionable to raise prices on the next batch. The first batch was done with the expectation that the photos would be part of a "package". More or less bulk pricing.
If the photographer delivered the number of best photographs he promised, then it's kind of the opposite of a bait and switch, as the photographer never baited the client into buying more. This second batch is now a special request, not a follow-up to complete the job. He's going out of his way to look through and edit more images for the client all while juggling the other projects he is working on now.
If every client came back after the fact to ask for more photos outside of the contract, then the photographer would be wasting his time and money filling all those special requests at the same rate as the original contract. Just my 2 cents.
So, if I'm reading you correctly, you're suggesting:
Discounted Package Deal - Round 1
Regular A La Carte Pricing - Round 2
Interesting that there can be as many different "pricing model" strategies as there are "Beans in Boston" ... but I think the significant point is that the OP (et al) should think through and understand the rationale between his structure's approach.
I'm of the belief that the more you understand the rationale of your approach (which ever you choose), the greater your conviction and confidence is in adhering to it and knowing how & why you are being fair to both your customer and yourself.
The peril of asking for "what would you do" is that when you begin mixing and matching 'ad hoc' portions of one strategy in with 'ad hoc' portions of another strategy, it can become a recipe for failure, rather than a model for success.
It isn't as much that one particular pricing model strategy (with its multiple issues/considerations) is the "way it should be done", but understanding that putting together a hodge-podge of mixed pricing model principles is much like building a car with a Toyota transmission mated to a Chevy engine on a GMC frame, with a Mercedes interior and wondering why doesn't seem to ride as smoothly as a Buick.
What was your original agreement? How do you describe your deliverables? You might want to visit this so that you control customer expectations.
In this situation, you could point out that you strive to provide a good representation, not a specific number of images. To that end, you take numerous photos of each setup to assure that the expressions of everyone are good in at least one image. I would then point out that every image that was delivered was properly corrected for maximum quality. I would say that you do not release any uncorrected images and that the price they paid does not cover editing of all images captured.
Before any of that, I might inquire to why he wants all the images. Have him explain the need. The problem nowadays is every family has at least one "photo enthusiast". They think they know more than they do and would love to take your images and dork around with them in Photoshop Elements.
Wedding photographers get this a lot (the other favourite is asking for RAW files) my answer is no and that is everything and often that is enough to stop them asking, the more persistent ones I say that everything substandard is deleted as I go. As soon as they think you are holding pictures hostage or making excuses like "oh the others are blinks and out of focus" they will say they want them anyway, if you say they are deleted it stops this.
Your contract should also say that what they receive is a selection of images taken.
dmacmillan wrote:
Before any of that, I might inquire to why he wants all the images. Have him explain the need. The problem nowadays is every family has at least one "photo enthusiast". They think they know more than they do and would love to take your images and dork around with them in Photoshop Elements.
Definitely do this, finding out the real underlying reason is important. Possible real reasons people ask:
1) there *might* be a shot they wanted (some combination of people) that you missed so they are just asking for 'all' instead of it specifically
2) they are unhappy with the results and are hoping asking for more may mean there are some more that they like better
3) they are one of those people that thinks more pictures for my £x = better deal and don't realise that part of what they pay us for is editing and picking out the best so they don't have 1000 pictures to cope with and probably do nothing with in the end because they are overwhelmed.
9 times out of 10 it's 3) especially if they are low paying clients and brother said they liked them so it's not 2).
You were able to blast off 1000 pics in 90 minutes? That's a pic every 5 seconds non-stop!! For a family session?? I know it’s a challenge to get everyone looking, smiling, etc., but that sure seems like a lot of snaps to cull down to 64 keepers.
Take better and fewer pictures and then you'll feel better about charging for the additional pictures if they want more delivered. As it is, you probably have 800 snapshots that you're a little embarrassed showing, hence your dilemma. They don't have any value, but at the same time you don't want to give them out.
RustyBug wrote:
@ mdude ... oic your point (I think).
So, if I'm reading you correctly, you're suggesting:
Discounted Package Deal - Round 1
Regular A La Carte Pricing - Round 2
I wouldn't really call it discounting because that indicates that you're lowering from your normal price. Perhaps you are and perhaps you aren't. Maybe $2 per photo is your normal price, in which case 64 photos for $140 is not a discount.
I don't think the "bulk vs. a la carte" is as important as the fact that the client paid a set price for a session of photos and 1 deliverable (presumably). As I see it, anything above and beyond that is a special request and should be charged a premium. If the client wanted you to do some non-contractual touch-up work, you'd charge a premium for that. If the client wanted you to make a bound album, you'd charge a premium for that. And so forth... this is not really much different from those examples so long as what's being asked for wasn't in the contract to begin with.
But I agree with the others, I'd be inclined to say no. If your photos are not good enough to submit in the deliverable then you probably don't want them floating around online, at parties, in frames, and the like, with your name associated with them.
Mark_L wrote:
1) there *might* be a shot they wanted (some combination of people) that you missed so they are just asking for 'all' instead of it specifically
2) they are unhappy with the results and are hoping asking for more may mean there are some more that they like better
3) they are one of those people that thinks more pictures for my £x = better deal and don't realise that part of what they pay us for is editing and picking out the best so they don't have 1000 pictures to cope with and probably do nothing with in the end because they are overwhelmed.
9 times out of 10 it's 3) especially if they are low paying clients and brother said they liked them so it's not 2)....Show more →
Yeah, this one def. sounds like #3. I in fact know it is, it was their last time together for awhile so they wanted a lot of pictures.
jdben622 wrote:
You were able to blast off 1000 pics in 90 minutes? That's a pic every 5 seconds non-stop!! For a family session?? I know it’s a challenge to get everyone looking, smiling, etc., but that sure seems like a lot of snaps to cull down to 64 keepers.
Take better and fewer pictures and then you'll feel better about charging for the additional pictures if they want more delivered. As it is, you probably have 800 snapshots that you're a little embarrassed showing, hence your dilemma. They don't have any value, but at the same time you don't want to give them out. ...Show more →
Yes I was amazed with this myself. At times I'd be snapping so fast my memory card had to catch up. It's a 16mb class 6.
Kids were tough to get to look at the same time, it always be one or the other. I did manage to get them good pictures though, in the voicemail he said they all loved them.
