OT is OK with me. I know other people are annoyed by it, but it is easy enough to ignore if someone isn't interested. Are we to just cut off a productive conversation...?
Without stating our actual prices, I will say that we charge a hell of a lot more than $500 for the average wedding. I've researched enough to know that we are priced right around the middle of the market. I've also researched enough to know that the quality of our work is much closer to the high end of the market. IMO, that's just offering good value. So no, we certainly cannot be lumped in with the C-L Hacks, and yes, I do see them as a real issue. (For the record, I didn't really let myself think you guys were trying to lump me into that group; I was speaking hypothetically).
A very successful, rich friend of mine once tried to explain to me that we would likely get more business if we charged more. He went on about the psychology of the buyer, about perceived value, and other things. I understood what he was saying, but that didn't change the fact that none of our clients could have afforded what he was suggesting we charge. The business mind's answer to that is "too effing bad for them, you're in this for the money." It's just not that simple to me. It just isn't. And yes, that means I drive a Ford Focus Wagon while my friend drives a Benz; that I had to sell an expensive lens to help fund new windows for my home. I'm OK with that. Ultimately, I don't want to work for the people who can afford to pay ridiculous amounts of money for their photos. Anyone who questions that choice would probably not like my answer. We're a boutique shop for the down-to-earth crowd. No turtlenecks and expensive Macintoshes. No browbeating discussions about "rights." Just friendly, mutually selective, value-oriented photography.
While I do have altruistic tendencies, am I concerned that the handful of mid-priced weddings that we shoot is taking money out of some pro's pocket, because he misses the opportunity to charge much more? No. Not really. None of my clients would have paid his prices anyway.
PhotoMaximum wrote:
Reading that any work done for customers in Canada is automatically considered "work for hire" with the customer having the rights to the images is just stunning to me. I could not work that way.
The bottom line: wether you make $50 or $5000 for taking a photograph it is in YOUR interest to care about your rights as the creator of the image. Doing so will make you more professional and indicate to your client that you value your work and take things seriously.
....snip
End of lecture...
Sounds more about the quest for more money than anything else.... and there's nothing wrong with that
cogitech wrote:
I understood what he was saying, but that didn't change the fact that none of our clients could have afforded what he was suggesting we charge. The business mind's answer to that is "too effing bad for them, you're in this for the money." It's just not that simple to me. It just isn't.
While I do have altruistic tendencies, am I concerned that the handful of mid-priced weddings that I shoot is taking money out of some pro's pocket, because he misses the opportunity to charge much more? No. Not really. None of my clients would have paid his prices anyway....Show more →
Well said!! Everyone has their price. Not everyone can afford the most expensive and it isn't a matter of just finding more money - Sometimes it comes down to getting what you can afford or simply doing without. Your less expensive services are not taking jobs from the more expensive photographers - the more expensive photographers are simply loosing jobs because people cannot afford them and must look for other options or do without.....
The other thing to keep in mind is that most of the "Craigslist Special" category of photography work produced has little chance of attracting commercial value. Odds are that the folks who shoot weddings for $500 are not going to have great skills. They are also not going to spend much time editing and perfecting the files that their digital wonder camera is recording.
But there are folks who have skills who produce some sideline work that reaches a very high level of quality. Quality work can get noticed, appreciated and asked for. In short there is value there. Paul, I put your work in this category.
All of your clients might be great, wonderful people who would never take advantage of you. But as time marches on the likelihood of someone saying "hey I paid this guy $1500 for MY wedding pictures. Why not recoup that money by seeing if I cant sell copies to the other wedding businesses?" This person then goes on a fishing mission showing your images to the limo company, dressmaker, florist, caterer, etc, etc. She/he might do a quick sale or two without your ever knowing the details. These businesses might never know who took the images or deliberately avoid the whole question. Good businesses will of course care and ask these questions to avoid any grant of rights hassles. Its all about being professional. Unfortunately the word is full of those who are not professional.
This is why its good practice to include a contract. Let the bride/groom know what the rules and boundaries are. Its also a good idea to add your name, web address and copy right info to EVERY digital file you deliver. Any business worth its salt will inspect the images info data before paying money for photographs that are being offered to them.
You cant avoid such issues completely of course, but do what you can to avoid them.
The other thing to avoid are the "friendly" requests to share your work. I get this all the time while shooting events. Someone will come up to you and test you with "Hi there, say could you email me that photo?" Your response should ALWAYS be a polite request for who this person is and what they want to do with your photo(s). Ask for a card and say you will get back to them. This could be a real business opportunity so do not give your stuff away. In these days of email, fast digital, file sharing its easy to fall into the trap of blindly saying yes to "say can you email me that photo..."
PhotoMaximum, I'm taking all this advice very seriously. Maybe I'll forward you my existing contract template and you can let me know if you think it covers all the bases. I'd fully understand if you decline to comment, though. We all have our own lives to live.
I am no legal expert and I had to force myself into this arena myself.
But taking the wedding photo biz as an example: I would try get your hands on samples of contracts that working pros use in your area. Maybe you can locate some brides who used such services and see if you cant read the contract?
Most will be similar. I would avoid using contracts that are too wordy, too full of legal mumbjumbo, or too threatening sounding. You do not want to lose a client by brandishing a threatening contract in their face.
You can edit the wording down to a simpler, more friendly level. The contract should help protect you against some of the pitfalls I have already mentioned. I believe the contract should also offer the client something of value as well. Both parties will feel better if the contract serves both interests. You can include some language stating what you could or could not do with the images. I always say I reserve the right to use the images for my own promotion. But If I intend on selling images commercially then I inform the subject in the images first. This is a positive courtesy and helps reinforce that you a good professional.
You must expect that prospective clients will view contracts with suspicion. Your contract wording and personal "sales pitch" needs to convince them that the contract helps support the healthy working collaboration the client and photographer are entering into. Its a bit of a balance but its worth perfecting.
Usually the big item with a contract is the security the bride gets by pinning you down for the big day. That is the big attraction with brides and her father etc. You both sign the contract, you set the date and you receive a down deposit to secure the arrangement. Brides feel more secure as a result. You then discuss the various grant of rights issues within the contract and how such language is beneficial to both parties. If you conduct yourself in a confident, professional manner you will have little problem getting your clients to sign on the dotted line...
To be honest, this sounds very familiar. Without being specific, I can say that I pretty much do as you have said above.
None of the wording in the contract contradicts the fact that I freely hand them a CD with all the high-res JPEGs, or even RAWs if they want them, once they have paid the second half of the fee.
Somehow a communication breakdown has occurred here. The fact that I release the images to the clients seems to have suggested that I have no contract at all. That's not the case. I simply do not hold back the high-res images in an effort to profit off the prints.
After all this discussion, I will be revisiting the contract to ensure that clients know that they do not have the right to re-sell the images, that they are for their personal use only. I do agree that it is important to make that clear. The contract already states that I reserve the right to use the images for promotional purposes.
Thanks to all who participated in this discussion, and sorry if I didn't explain myself well enough to begin with. All the serious discussion had me convinced that I wasn't doing enough to protect the "copyright" of my images, and I felt like it was all too complicated for me. Now it sounds like a simple contract is all that was being suggested, which is something I already do.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
^You are selling your intellectual property outright, not just selling the rights to use your images for a specific purpose, time, etc. - as is custom- but rather giving them a complete rights buyout.
I wrote:
Yes. I am. Our contract states that we reserve the right to use the images for promotional purposes. Otherwise, I couldn't care less what a B&G does with their wedding photos, or what a shop owner does with their photos of shoes or coffee beans, or whatever...
I was wrong. I am not selling the images outright. Tariq's concern was on the mark and Tim's subsequent response was right in line with my thinking. What I am selling is unlimited personal use of the files. It was in that sense that I stated I don't care what they do with the photos. I should have been clearer.
PhotoMaximum wrote:
But there are folks who have skills who produce some sideline work that reaches a very high level of quality. Quality work can get noticed, appreciated and asked for. In short there is value there. Paul, I put your work in this category.
Just for the record, I completely agree and put your work, Paul, in this category.
cogitech wrote:
It's not hard to imagine why people feel justified in charging way more than we do for photography. They think great photos require $20,000-$50,000 worth of gear. Just like they think they require a $50,000 vehicle to get from point A to point B.
I simply don't accept any of that, and my customers get a good deal because of it. I'm convinced that nothing should cost even close to what it does, and that most people have no idea what the true cost (or value) of anything really is.
I have no doubt that we could charge double for our services. I also have no doubt that many of our customers would have opted not to have photos if they had not found an affordable service. And, finally, I know that the customers who would have taken their place wouldn't have been nearly as nice to work with....Show more →
Wise words, but be careful not to become judgemental nor a snob in your own right...
rhorta wrote:
Wise words, but be careful not to become judgemental nor a snob in your own right...
Too late for that, I'm afraid. Judgmental might as well be my middle name. We all have our flaws, and that's (one of) mine. I do make an effort to control it, but my intuition about peoples' character and motives is as strong as my sense of direction; both have rarely lead me astray.
cogitech wrote:
Too late for that, I'm afraid. Judgmental might as well be my middle name. We all have our flaws, and that's (one of) mine. I do make an effort to control it, but my intuition about peoples' character and motives is as strong as my sense of direction; both have rarely lead me astray.
Hell, we are all judgmental. Some just admit it and some do not. That is why we have wives or girlfriends...to point that stuff out right!
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Hell, we are all judgmental. Some just admit it and some do not. That is why we have wives or girlfriends...to point that stuff out right!
Indeed. Trouble is, I am 10x as critical of myself as I am of others. I think I need to be medicated.
cogitech wrote:
Indeed. Trouble is, I am 10x as critical of myself as I am of others. I think I need to be medicated.
No, you don't need medicine. That's completely normal.
