gabemc wrote:
i think the term "high end" in terms of a dollar amount is largely based on your geographic location
Truth.
What's "high end" in one market could be "low end" in another. Take the $5000 shooter to another market and he could be working at 1500 for the exact same product and level of service.
But.......that shooter wouldn't be shooting in that different market because he has chosen to be where he is. Anyone can move. If one doesn't like where they are at, then move to a better market. And if you do, then I applaud you for having the tenacity to do that to improve your business. But I doubt that a higher end shooter is going to intentionally move to a lower end market just to prove a point.
marti.g3 wrote:
I can't command higher pricing. My top package is 3900.00. My work is good, not great, but more than that, I don't have the branding or connections with cooridnators or higher end venues.
This is easily changed, IMHO. I don't have "connections" with high end planners or venues, either.
Inku Yo wrote:
This is easily changed, IMHO. I don't have "connections" with high end planners or venues, either.
Yeah, but you have "it"......that intangible quality. In every profession there are always those who just have the natural ability, whether it be personality, skill, knowledge or saavy to move to a higher plateau. I had that in my other career. Not in this one.
gabemc wrote:
i think the term "high end" in terms of a dollar amount is largely based on your geographic location. as i am sure the average wedding photographer price here where i am is higher then many averages across the USA. so does that make all the "average end" photographers now high end?
Whats the exchange rate? Isn't each Canadian dollar worth $.25 American?
marti.g3 wrote:
But.......that shooter wouldn't be shooting in that different market because he has chosen to be where he is. Anyone can move. If one doesn't like where they are at, then move to a better market. And if you do, then I applaud you for having the tenacity to do that to improve your business. But I doubt that a higher end shooter is going to intentionally move to a lower end market just to prove a point.
It's technically true that anyone can move, but then again, anyone can technically make a living from shooting $500 weddings (100 weddings per year = 50k, which is significantly more than the median household income).
However, just as very few folks would want to shoot 100 cheap weddings per year, very few folks are in a position to uproot themselves completely for the sake of a tenuous career in wedding photography, particularly folks who aren't a.) single, b.) childless, or c.) both.
marti.g3 wrote:
A very telling sign was recently when a bride stated "Oh, from your work, I thought you would be much younger"
That sounds encouraging actually.
Is your appearance "old" looking? I mean absolutely no offense. But part of making the right impression is how one appears. There are men who have big white mustaches and hairs growing out of their ears, hair needing a cut, who wear ill fitting out of style clothes, whose body shapes have shifted to resemble human eggplants... and there are men of the same age who stay relatively fit, groom themselves and dress with tailored clothes and with style. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about attempting to look "young." I'm talking about looking fit, healthy and vibrant really at any age. We're wired to be more attracted to the latter. It's just the way it is.
Is your appearance "old" looking? I mean absolutely no offense. But part of making the right impression is how one appears. There are men who have big white mustaches and hairs growing out of their ears, hair needing a cut, who wear ill fitting out of style clothes, whose body shapes have shifted to resemble human eggplants... and there are men of the same age who stay relatively fit, groom themselves and dress with tailored clothes and with style. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about attempting to look "young." I'm talking about looking fit, healthy and vibrant really at any age. We're wired to be more attracted to the latter. It's just the way it is. ...Show more →
Im an eggplant. Sitting all day in front of the PC, not exercising, having bad knees and heels from years and years of running and playing basketball have taken its toll. Im very clean cut.......but hey, im 56......I always dress well with clients......shaggy when im off the clock.......
tobicus wrote:
It's technically true that anyone can move, but then again, anyone can technically make a living from shooting $500 weddings (100 weddings per year = 50k, which is significantly more than the median household income).
However, just as very few folks would want to shoot 100 cheap weddings per year, very few folks are in a position to uproot themselves completely for the sake of a tenuous career in wedding photography, particularly folks who aren't a.) single, b.) childless, or c.) both.
One's ego takes a big hit when you were used to shooting really nice weddings for most of your career, then you start having to take those crappy ghetto worship hall weddings because you need the money. Dealing with hagglers, scammers and people who want to treat you like you're the Walmart return window. You just say F it........it ain't worth
it anymore.
The current exchange rate is almost 1:1. If you're looking for precise, then it's currently $1 = $.9925. You can also thank big government spending, unions and special interests groups.
tobicus wrote:
^ Hah. The Canadian dollar's been stronger than the US for a while. Our corporation-worshipping is driving us into the ground...
cineski wrote:
The current exchange rate is almost 1:1. If you're looking for precise, then it's currently $1 = $.9925. You can also thank big government spending, unions and special interests groups.
It's almost one to one, but the Canadian dollar is still the stronger one. And I'm pretty sure the US dollar was much stronger than the Canadian dollar back when union membership was higher in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s. Membership is at a near-all time low right now, which suggests the association, if one exists, goes the other way. That doesn't even go into how Canadian union membership is significantly higher than US union membership, and continues to rise (again suggesting a relationship between higher union membership and economic strength).
I don't know what to tell you but it's not really just you. The California market, and many industries in CA, are in horrible shape. There are a very few select CA photographers that are rocking it right now and it's just plain dumb luck. But often times, those who appear to be super busy give off the illusion of being busy. You know, the art of the buzz. But the lucky ones got in with the hipsters and blogsters with money at the perfect time. Is their work better than others? Not that I can see. Some do some fantastic work, but then it's beaten to death by the thousands of people trying to emulate instead of innovate. But I'm pretty well connected to the LA industry and I'll be the first to tell you photographers and videographers and coordinators across the board in CA are worried. You're not alone. Heck, people are leaving CA because it's so bad. Industry and business aside, I personally know 3 photographers that have already left and 2 more have just announced they're leaving (with one way tickets in hand). Constant rumblings by people here and there that think making money and being happy is more important than living in a corruptly governed, albeit beautiful state with wonderful weather. The number of photographers actually leaving may be a small number in the grand scheme of things, but they're not leaving by choice, they're leaving because there's no money in CA, and it's the first time I've seen lots of people leaving due to the same reason of lack of money flying around in the market. Looking at other industries, just go take a walk down any major shopping district in LA. There's vacancies left and right. Even Rodeo has vacancies! The last time I went down Melrose a few months ago my mouth was gaping wide open because at least 1/3 of the buildings along the entire strip had for rent signs on it. It's scary but the state is dying. It's going to get worse when CARB takes effect and our gov't is trying to skyrocket income and sales tax. Okay, a bit of a rant....
So, either adapt or die. You said a bride recently was surprised that you were old (gasp, didn't she know you're not old until you're 80?) but based the assumption of your age on your work. This is about the nicest compliment you can get from a bride in my opinion. She thought your work was young, hip and happening. Well you know what? Take that and move in on it. Focus on what makes your work cool and hip and do more of it. The biggest photographers and videographers I know are all in their 40's and early 50's. Now, a midwestern mother would look at them and probably say they're having a mid-life crisis by the way they dress, but they're going after the hipper crowd so they have to dress the part.
I don't have a crystal ball, but I have a strong hunch that 1st quarter of 2013 is going to be rocking with the economy but that's going to take smart voting in order for that to happen. Will it be rocking in CA? Or will we continue to be an island in America? That's up in the air.
marti.g3 wrote:
One's ego takes a big hit when you were used to shooting really nice weddings for most of your career, then you start having to take those crappy ghetto worship hall weddings because you need the money. Dealing with hagglers, scammers and people who want to treat you like you're the Walmart return window. You just say F it........it ain't worth
it anymore.
They must have a vastly different union rules in Canada than they do in America if this is true. The unions are absolutely abolishing the state of CA. I know, I'm here. Lots of other reasons adding to this as well but the unions and gov't are singing choruses about how wonderful they are for us. But hey, totally different topic .
tobicus wrote:
It's almost one to one, but the Canadian dollar is still the stronger one. And I'm pretty sure the US dollar was much stronger than the Canadian dollar back when union membership was higher in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s. Membership is at a near-all time low right now, which suggests the association, if one exists, goes the other way. That doesn't even go into how Canadian union membership is significantly higher than US union membership, and continues to rise (again suggesting a relationship between higher union membership and economic strength).
marti.g3 wrote:
Yeah, but you have "it"......that intangible quality. In every profession there are always those who just have the natural ability, whether it be personality, skill, knowledge or saavy to move to a higher plateau. I had that in my other career. Not in this one.
Hmm... I totally understand what you mean about some people having "it." Personally, I don't think I have "it" but I know I want "it." I work hard at achieving "it" so I hope someday my hard work pays off.
In basketball, you cannot teach height. In football, you cannot teach size. In photography, I 100% believe you can teach someone to see differently. But, you have to be willing to take everything you are doing right now and throw it out the window.
I took Foundation Workshop and something that Huy says often - "That's a boring angle." I repeat it to myself every time I release the shutter while shooting a wedding. That simple mantra has made me lay down on the ground, crawl underneath chair legs, stand on top of dressers, hail Mary a few shots, etc...
There is no such thing as "it" or "luck" - you can always logically break down why something works. Don't fool yourself into thinking that some people are just born with it and others are doomed - anyone can be successful if they apply the right tactics for themselves and align their business with client interests.
I think it's way more about business skill and know how than about photography. There are many spectacular photogrhers who are struggling and many mediocre ones at are doing very well. As photographers we assume we need to be better at photography to make more money but more often than not its business changes that make the difference (this is coming from someone who has negligible business skills, but is working on it quite a bit).
It's also about attitude. And it seems that you are resigned to a certain level of success. Pessimists very often call themselves realists, but oftentimes it's just a self fulfilling prophecy.
TRReichman wrote:
There is no such thing as "it" or "luck" - you can always logically break down why something works. Don't fool yourself into thinking that some people are just born with it and others are doomed - anyone can be successful if they apply the right tactics for themselves and align their business with client interests.
- trr
i fully more than 100% disagree -- just because you can reconstruct something backwards doesn't mean that you can build it from scratch. if you aint got it you aint got it -- the theory is brilliant.
The "it" means a style, a talent, a skill that some people inherently have. It's like when I was in high school and college. I had this inherent natural talent for being a really good basketball player. I had the instinct that others didn't have. I didn't practice, study it or develop it. I had the quickness, balance and natural ability that set me apart from others.
Same in photography. IF a person has that natural ability to "see" something that others don't, to vision something that other's don't, that is "it". And I challenge anyone to try and duplicate that natural ability. I see it here on this forum. There are some photographers who are head and shoulders above the others in that they have "it"........and I stand firm on my conviction.
We do art. Some artists are just better than others. Why weren't there two Andy Warhols ? Two Niemans, two Picassos. I know that's extreme but you get my point. As artists, our vision can't be copied no matter how much other's try. They may copy us, but they can't replicate what's in our head.
