Calculate your hourly rate

[Longshots]

Couldn't disagree more with that statement. Just because you receive reward whether it be money or otherwise does not mean you are in business. Gee we're about to sell our baby gear, doesn't mean I'm in business!


On the issue of hobbyists taking business from pro's. That is the world we live in. I am very much a hobbyist but I will charge for my work. Photography is no different to any other service. People will pay according to their requirements or expectations. I might pay the kid down the road a few bucks to mow my grass, you might pay Jims mowing more for a professional job. The issue of a hobbyist marketing themselves to shoot weddings for example comes down to the customer. As with anything it is buyer beware!

You're welcome to disagree.

And although I wouldnt disagree with your baby gear analogy, if you were doing it on an ongoing basis, and marketing it as a business with a proper business name and website, then I think you would be in a business. If you have a website offering services and offering them for sale on an ongoing basis, then you will generally find, that you would be presenting yourself as "in business". But back to the actual topic, I was of course specifically referring to the statement that I made made earlier, and before it is quoted out of context again, it was originally posted in response to Kiwi's first reply to this topic, that he was just a hobbyist and none of this applied to him, and I would suggest you read it all before quoting out of context, and yes I am in particular taking him as an example, and referring to his website, a company name, and yes an ABN number - not really representing a hobbyist - surely ?

http://www.peakactionimages.com/

Its nothing personal btw as I know Darren reasonably well. But I cant agree with his comments, where he would appear to be suggesting that he's just a hobbyist, when I read his website and note that he's the official photographer for Qld Corporate Games, that he has a price list listed, that he has a very respectable hourly rate, etc, etc, etc, etc. I have no problem with it, in fact bloody good luck to him; I just dont think thats a hobbyist - just my opinion. This is not what I would expect someone to have when suggesting that a hobbyist, does not require to follow any suggested calculations on working out their hourly rates, and that any reference to declaring income is deemed unnecessary.

Perhaps its easier to dispense with numerous additional analogies and stick to the original topic though ?

And FWIW I've not said that hobbyists are taking work from pros. In fact I dont believe anyone has said that. What I probably did say is that its fairly easy to do things at a knock down price if you're not having to put it into a proper economic business situation. Which is how I started as well. The post offered by Rick is meant to be of some help. Which is what I'm supporting

[Longshots]

The thing is everything has a cost and regardless of whether you are a pro or a hobbyist or whatever, every time you pick up your camera and walk out the door you are incuring a cost to yourself.

So if you get a chance to recover those costs then why not do it in a professional maner and take into considerations all the costs that it cost you to take that picture. Costs include, time, fuel, where and tear of your motr vehicle, entrance fees, food etc.

At the end of the day a hobbyist will sell the phot at whatever price he/she wants but then they have made a concious decision to make a loss.

I have had three articles and photos published in a national magazine and I was paid $50 per article. I estimates that it took me over ten hours of work to produce each article so I was paid at $5 per hour. But I did it because of the type of magazine (it's a free industry based one) and it gives me exposure and experience for when I get to the next level and get published in a glossy mag.

Once I get to that level - even as a hobbyist - I wont be working for $5 an hour and I will ensure that my costs are covered.

Karl

Plus I think this comment is the most nail on the head of the topic - which is how to calculate your costs

[etherial]

And to be utterly honest its this type of attitude that is killing off the profession of photography, and a dam silly one at that ! Sure you may be lucky or talented enough to have a full time job that allows you to earn enough to then also shoot and gain work normally taken by professionals that you then can then choose to shoot and seriously undercut those depending on that as a living. And let me second guess you here, but before you say that you are just a hobbyist, you actively market towards covering sporting events to an "international level" ? Not really just a hobby ! So perhaps even if you think you're right here, perhaps you should take a little more consideration of those photographers who do have to consider all costs before working out there charges as opposed to simply saying that you dont care about these things?

I took it from this quote that you have a real problem with hobbyists taking work from pro's. Did I read it wrong?

I agree with most of your statements in your last post. But at the end of the day, the point I was trying to make is that there will be a range of people of different skill levels offering their services. Whether you say they are 'in business' or 'hobbyists' is irrelevent. I support the original post as some people at many levels might get some value out of it.

At the end of the day it is the customer and their needs that dicates the market.

[Longshots]

I took it from this quote that you have a real problem with hobbyists taking work from pro's. Did I read it wrong?

I agree with most of your statements in your last post. But at the end of the day, the point I was trying to make is that there will be a range of people of different skill levels offering their services. Whether you say they are 'in business' or 'hobbyists' is irrelevent. I support the original post as some people at many levels might get some value out of it.

At the end of the day it is the customer and their needs that dicates the market.

To answer your first question - Did you read it wrong ? Yes you did.

I completely agree with you on different levels, and I agree, (as I should as having remained in business in photography for over a few decades ) that customers dictate the market.

But thats not the topic and nor is that a point of debate. The point of debate is that even a sensible person should understand what their costs would be in selling something even part time, on an ongoing basis. That's just common sense. Which is why I supported Ricks post.

As I said to Rick, I started part time. I found I could easily sell my photography. Why ? Two reasons, I entered a very specialised field, of ballet photography, because that's what I was trained as (a professional ballet dancer, with a 17 year career in a top European Ballet company that toured the world). So shooting dance, was something I already understood. Selling it was dead easy, because I was virtually giving it away. Until I realised that I could not afford to subsidise my photography with my income (not very well paid btw) as a dancer. So, in my mind, and in my financial dealings, I seperated the two incomes and charged a rate for my photography which would at least cover my costs, include the additional costs that the photography business required, and that enabled me to reinvest all of my photography income into further photographic investments. It was a business, because I charged for it. It was not a hobby. That was and is my point. And as far as the ATO and UK Tax people are concerned, all income is declarable - simple.

So I was, and am still demonstrating that IMHO working out your costs is relevant. I was fortunate enough to found a niche in the photographic market, and although this was all well before digital, there was plenty of hobbyists and professionals interested in the same field of dance photography. I would often be commissioned to shoot a production - (final dress rehearsal would be the night before) and find myself competing with photographers who were there just for the fun (hobbyists if you like ?) and I would have to often process 40 rolls of film per production, produce proof sheets, and produce 100's of 10 x 8 prints (all traditional process - wet darkroom), and have them back to the company in time for the opening night the next day. Plenty of people were trying to beat me at the game, without the commissioning fee, and happy to produce their prints for free. I met the market by simply doing it better and quicker.

So I have nothing against the hobbyist, as thats how I started. I do think that its important for people to realise though, that in the business world, or as a "hobbyist" that sells their work, that its important to understand the value of what you're providing.

BTW For the record, I completely agree with you that the difference between in business and hobbyist is irrelevant, and if you'd been following this topic from the beginning and read everything I said, I didnt make the difference between being in business or being a hobbyist; that was Kiwi. I have said al along, that if you are charging for your photography, that understanding what you should be charging and what should be included is totally relevant, irrespective of level of interest.

[etherial]

I'm glad we got that sorted out! Good robust discussion peeps!

[farmer_rob]

... I do think that its important for people to realise though, that in the business world, or as a "hobbyist" that sells their work, that its important to understand the value of what you're providing....

I know it is verging slightly off topic, but value and cost are related but not the same. I'd argue that value is measured by the utility that the purchaser gets from the product, whereas cost is what you need to exceed in you billing if you are going to make money.

[Longshots]

Value was probably not a good choice of words. And I'd agree completely with your comments. So "costs" is what I should have said.


Because that (your value) is definitely the next step, and ultimately impossible to determine (purely referring to the subjective and creative role of photography and its huge extent).

[dowden photography]

At uni a few weeks ago we had in a working photographer who shoots pretty much for the big magazines. She started to talk about houly rates and what a photographer should charge and what you should give up.

Firstly she said there is a guide out there. Now I can't remember the book she got this out of but its an artiest guide and talked about what you should charge for each service.

Now if you are working for yourself you must take into account your costs, giving up your time for your service, your PP, your work and that you've got to do your own bookkeeping (the only triple double letter).
The guide said that $846 for a days work is the base rate. Thats 7 hours of work plus an extra hour free.
That comes to $120.85 an hour.
It also said to charge in 2 hour, half day, full day rates.
Remember if a news paper calls you to get "that photo" for that story you must think about getting there, setting up, waiting in some cases and then sending the files off. It's not just 5 minutes worth of work. So charge for 2 hours.

She also said beware of under cutters.
Back a few years ago when it was film or dslr's cost $1000's for the based one no one undercut anyone. Now anyone with a camera thinks they're a photographer and they will undercut you. You might have had a job shooting a gig for 3 years but a hobby photographer comes along and says they'll do i for $50 cheaper you will lose out.
I've seen it in local football in Victoria.

Luckly most major news outlets will only take you on as a paid photographer if you've had formal training, more studio's and companies are doing the same. I know of wedding planers in Melbourne that will only recomend the same. So the johnny come lately's will find it harder to get work.

I think if you start around $120.85 an hour you won't step on any toes by undercutting and your costs will be well covered.

[kiwi]

I think of you look I actually fail ato's definition of a business on a number of points

This definition if business is only ato's

Does not mean that I try to run peak action images as a business with professional standards

None the less, I will talk to my tax accountant again this week and get some more data from the ato


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Longshots]

I think of you look I actually fail ato's definition of a business on a number of points

This definition if business is only ato's

Does not mean that I try to run peak action images as a business with professional standards

None the less, I will talk to my tax accountant again this week and get some more data from the ato


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Darren you do make me smile. If you think you fail ato's definition etc, then why do you quote an ABN (Australian Business Number) on your Peak Action website ?

And check the ATO site, its fairly clear on the declarable income situation

[kiwi]

Im glad Im diverting gour attention away from your sore foot

I'll refer to this

http://www.ato.gov.au/youth/content....tent/66884.htm

My accountant considers me a hobby. What more can I say.

Re the ABN, it has nothing to do with business/tax - you can get trade discounts etc

[Longshots]

sorry posted twice

[Longshots]

yes it is diverting my attention away

You have to speak to your accountant then because no matter how you want to describe it an ABN number Darren is a business number, which you are displaying in relation to your photography. And to repeat, that all income is declarable, with the exceptions listed on the ATO site, where there is no mention whatsoever of income derived from a hobby as being exempt.

And one reason I'm persevering the advice Darren is that I went through exactly the same process.

And yes I read that link from the ATO ? Did you - if you did, you wouldnt be thinking that you're not.

[farmer_rob]

Quoting from the ATO site (here):

If your activity constitutes a hobby or recreation:

* any money you earn from this activity is generally not assessable income
* you are not entitled to claim tax deductions for any expenses you incur in carrying out this activity, and
* if your activity results in a loss, you are not entitled to offset this loss against other income or carry the loss forward.

and here

If you’re in business:

* money earned from the activity is generally assessable income
* you are generally entitled to deduct expenses incurred in earning this income, and
* if the activity results in a loss, you may be entitled to offset the loss against other income or carry it forward to offset against future income.

If your activities are classified as a hobby or recreational activity then the above points do not apply.

It is pretty clear to me that hobby returns are not assessable income, which is a contradiction (depending on the semantics of income vs assessable income vs declarable income) of

...And to repeat, that all income is declarable, with the exceptions listed on the ATO site, where there is no mention whatsoever of income derived from a hobby as being exempt...

It seems to me that the view "consult an accountant, because your individual circumstances may vary" applies in spades here. Just because you (longshots) have an accountant that advises you to treat your photography as a business and someone else (kiwi) has an accountant that advises the opposite is not contradictory: individual circumstances vary, and to expect other's circumstances to be the same as yours is misguided.

The ABN on the surface is a slightly different matter, but still not contradicted by the above - individual circumstances vary, and advice received for your circumstances only apply to your circumstances, not kiwi's - and vice versa.

So, can everyone stop trying to a) suggest that all money received must be declared to the ATO, as the ATO's site - as linked above - suggests otherwise, b) recognise that what applies to one person's photography billings does not always apply to another's and c) recognise that individual advice is just that - advice to individuals.

I'd say go and take photo's but it's dark.

[kiwi]

...besides...I have already taken 971 photos today

[peterking]

Rick.
Thanks for the link. It's interesting and whilst I won't use it now, as it is not appropriate to me as I'm not selling any images, it is something I will keep in mind.
Kiwi.
Well! What a lot of WHATS WITH THE ATTITUDE????
The link was offered as a point to consider and as a tool for use.
View it in that light.

[kiwi]

Yeah, I know, I posted it awhile ago recall.

[Longshots]

My accountant considers me a hobby. What more can I say.

Re the ABN, it has nothing to do with business/tax - you can get trade discounts etc

Robs advice is great. Definitely a case of individual assesment. I would be interested in what you're advised, and will out of sheer curiosity check with my own - again.

However, quoting a an ABN, and then saying it has nothing to do with business, but you can get "trade discounts", is simply a bizarre statement. Its an Australian Business Number ! If you're not in business, then why do you quote it ?

[kiwi]

I am in business, but not according to the ato's definition. I similarly dont see why that's so hard to understand

I'm not a professional by Nikon's definition either

I say we desist as my circumstances are mine, and I'll take my own accountant's advice on this. He's the professional after all.

[Longshots]

Doesn't apply if you are a hobbyist

Well to take it back to why I responded, this was all about hourly rates, and you said it didnt apply to you because you were a hobbyist, and then you have confused me further by saying that you're not in business, and now that you are in business Clearly there is plenty of confusion.

The original post about how to calculate your hourly rates is, (which was my point when supporting Ricks post/link), is relevant to all, contrary to your view.

And the information is for everyone and not intended to single you or anyone else out.