Minimum charges....what do you think?

[zollo]

yeah my pricing is nowhere near as rigid as it sounds. of course a commercial shoot is all quoted and contracted before I even start to shoot.

I totally agree with Longshots about the end result being important & I dont always quote by the hour. the hour rates are there only to give this thread an idea of what i was charging when lump sum was divided by the hours the job took. so try not to read too much into it. cheers

[kiwi]

I agree about not necessarily charging by the hour, but if you know how many hours the job will likely take this can help you price on this basis; then you can add margin for prints and extras

[Longshots]

I acknowledged that in my thread opening Mile....but what I am getting at is surely there is a minimum point which full time pros think is a reasonable place to start. I notice William agrees with your post, but surely if people are going to educate part timers, it wouldn't hurt to suggest ballpark figures for my scenario?
I never suggested for a minute they should be the be all and end all, just a rough place to consider as being feasible.

Lani it makes me sigh to see someone being led to the information, being shown some suggestions as to how to work out costs, and yet still suggesting that pros arent educating you.

Thats what I'm trying to do !

Seriously, there is no set prices - do you not understand that part ? If there was first of all people would be jumping up and down and accusing people of price fixing - which people have in other forums. Ballpark figures have already been offered here. What more do you want ? Those ballpark figures will for one person be utterly ridiculous, and for another person utterly reasonable.

I gave quite a detailed explanation as to how I charge. And at the same time I've also said in another relevant topic that there is no point in saying ballpark figures as many would consider them to be either too high or too low. And an hourly figure (As I've explained) is quite honestly meaningless unless you are working out how many hours a year you intend to charge or can rely on selling.

So perhaps stop suggesting that pros dont want to help, as I'm afraid its a case of you not reading what has been, and is being offered. There is no answer that can be considered acceptable on "how much should I charge ?" , because of the following variables

A) everyone will have different needs, costs and expectations
B) quality will be a factor - spend more time on something and you have a better chance of the end product being better
C) there is no recognised minimum charge in the portrait and wedding industry because of the ACCC not allowing price fixing as such, the other variables I've already listed and the differences in the client's predetermined expectations.

So its a case of you sitting down and working out what you want to charge to ensure that you pay for your costs, and if you wish make a profit - its that simple.

People - informed or not - will always complain about others not charging enough, and I can assure you that its not always directed at part timers, but at many full time pros. To some levels, I've been accused many times of not charging enough, and from the opposite side of the view, on the same potential jobs, there have been others suggesting that I'm charging like a wounded bull. Its a no win situation.

The conclusion is that you should go back and read what I have already posted into this topic in an attempt to help you - then read others own personal views on what you should charge; take all of those factors into consideration and produce a fee structure that suits you and your personal conditions.

In addition you offered in your original pricing a list of your suggested min prices - if you're happy with that then sure they look ok.

But what if your client tells you (as they often try to with me), that such and such will take less than an hour, and what you to charge in increments of an hour, and say they only want a few "decent" shots.

Taking Kiwis example, where his $1200 coverage for a wedding - which suits him and clients who've clearly used him, doesnt fit this scenario because the client's telling you effectively what to charge (as an hourly rate encourages IMHO), then the wedding could be completed in 2 hours both shooting and post - so its only $200. Do you see how it becomes so difficult to suggest what you should personally charge ?

[Longshots]

I agree about not necessarily charging by the hour, but if you know how many hours the job will likely take this can help you price on this basis; then you can add margin for prints and extras

Completely agree. Thats your prerogative as the supplier though.

[Longshots]

I'll come back lani to a figure approximate $100 per shooting hour - looking at all the responses regardless of the package or genre it all will come roughly back to that number, excluding direct costs

Eg wedding, 6 hours shooting and roughly that again in Pre and post production for 1200 or so seems a reasonable minimum

OK I'll turn it around Kiwi - not that I'm arguing with your figures, as they seem quite reasonable, based on what I know that you've personally told me about your personal situation - so it would be helpful if you could explain how you arrived at that per hour figure ?

[kiwi]

ahh good question

Really a few things if youll indulge me

What I think is a fair market rate for photographers of similar experience and skill to myself, based on talking to others and looking at their similar markets and outputs

A rate that I dont think is undercutting my peers, I dont think that's good for business in general

An appropriate family time dividend for my back pocket

Covering costs for me isnt really relevant.

[Longshots]

Excellent answer Kiwi

So do you think the same considerations would apply to someone else ? Or do you think that would be different for everyone (ie they may want a new lens, or working towards a holiday, or paying the last electricity bill - ) ?

[kiwi]

I think the family dividend changes, that's all. I think the other two considerations are still very relevant no matter what your circumstances

In saying this, this is a zero sum game sometimes. If you are struggling/saving, $100 in the back pocket is better than $1000 in an unaccepted quote. This is a personal choice alone I think.

[Longshots]

Thank you.

The "If you are struggling/saving, $100 in the back pocket is better than $1000 in an unaccepted quote." is hitting the nail on the head.

I've lost quotes by being too expensive and too cheap. It comes down to personal choice based on personal circumstances, and while I may seem evasive on the specifics Lani, other than the variables I've highlighted, the additional issues are that one cannot suggest a min charge without ACCC coming down on people in business like a ton of bricks.

[Lani]

Thank you for responding William. I am sorry I made you sigh
Can I firstly say that this was a hypothetical situation...I have done my numbers including insurance, overheads etc.....and am happy with what I am charging, thank you.
...and I have read everything that has been posted recently, some of it quite entertaining, much of it helpful.

My reasoning for this thread is that it has often been mentioned that part time photographers are "charging inappropriately" , hence devaluing the industry. Numbers are rarely discussed....the money thing always seems difficult for people to be open about.

My aim was to have a discussion that bandied around some reasonable starting points for rates so that a reasonably experienced photographer producing consistently good results would know that if they charged $25 hour, they are working too cheaply.
I already acknowledged that this would be dependent on a range of factors, and that it was not meant to be a "you must charge this amount."
I was far from thinking that a forum discussion would lead to an ACCC enquiry re price fixing.

I would think that there are part time photographers who would never dream of being charging $100 an hour, so I imagine Kiwis contribution for example would be very helpful in helping them reassess their current pricing.

[Longshots]

Thank you for responding William. I am sorry I made you sigh
Can I firstly say that this was a hypothetical situation...I have done my numbers including insurance, overheads etc.....and am happy with what I am charging, thank you.
...and I have read everything that has been posted recently, some of it quite entertaining, much of it helpful.

My reasoning for this thread is that it has often been mentioned that part time photographers are "charging inappropriately" , hence devaluing the industry. Numbers are rarely discussed....the money thing always seems difficult for people to be open about.

Thats OK Lani - I sigh a lot !

Yes good to discuss it, and I'm glad that you've done your number based on you own costs.

Trouble is we "the industry" are in a Catch 22. Its not a case of not wanting to be open about it.

The ACCC really frown upon discussions of setting min rates. So its simply not legally allowed.

This is why:
http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.../itemId/322980

ITs IMPORTANT TO READ

Many years ago (over 15), a group of wedding photographers got together at a meeting to discuss how to answer the low costs being offered by some suppliers. One person felt excluded, and the next thing that happened, ACCC was writing to each of the individuals that attended that meeting with a legal letter threatening them with fines or worse, jail. So while the industry can discuss and suggest how much things cost, and how much it costs to run your business, what it (and this would include this forum when I say industry) cannot do is suggest a min rate.

And as I said earlier, the costs, charges is all relative to different individuals; and it doesnt matter who you are, or at what stage in your photography, someone is always going to accuse you of not charging enough

[zollo]

But what if your client tells you (as they often try to with me), that such and such will take less than an hour, and what you to charge in increments of an hour, and say they only want a few "decent" shots.

does happen. one way to counter this situation and one that should be pretty much standard practice in business, is to ask the client what their budget is then. ie the maximum they are willing to spend. this will save time wasting from either party. if i cant do the job i will refer them to someone i think can. (if asked)

[Longshots]

does happen. one way to counter this situation and one that should be pretty much standard practice in business, is to ask the client what their budget is then. ie the maximum they are willing to spend. this will save time wasting from either party. if i cant do the job i will refer them to someone i think can. (if asked)

Oh I know it does

And last time someone asked me that, I actually broke the charges down to something quite ridiculous -

"yes I can charge by the 1/4 hours then, but I can do better - I'll charge per time taken for each shot - so $200 per hour divided by 60 mins = 3.33 pe min. 1 Min is now worth $3.33. Take 1 min divide by 60 seconds = each second is worth 1.6 cents. Take each second and divide it by oh lets see an average shutter speed of say 60th of a second - because really I'm only working when I actually take a photo right ? - and then if I'm shooting at that rate,

well each shot then is costing just 0.02666 of a cent ?

Well unless its brighter, then I'll be using a higher shutter speed, and it will cost you at least half of that"

...............

[bigdazzler]

and those with full time jobs please dont write in and tell me that $200 for a wedding is fine cause you're already earning huge dollars from your ft job, because I really dont care. I'm trying to hopefully help those who are looking to make a living from photography.

still stewing on that mate ...

Back to the question ...

I think $100 per shooting hour is fair for most things.

I also have a deal for port work or portrait sittings;
2 hour studio/location (local only) shoot with 5 fully retouched hi res JPGs on DVD for $250.

I was doing on average two of those per weekend a while back. Not so much lately as weve been busy planning the wedding.

On the odd occasion I do a wedding or event, I work on my $100 per hour rate, and then add 50% for post time. Usually works out ok for everyone.

[bigdazzler]

Oh I know it does

And last time someone asked me that, I actually broke the charges down to something quite ridiculous -

"yes I can charge by the 1/4 hours then, but I can do better - I'll charge per time taken for each shot - so $200 per hour divided by 60 mins = 3.33 pe min. 1 Min is now worth $3.33. Take 1 min divide by 60 seconds = each second is worth 1.6 cents. Take each second and divide it by oh lets see an average shutter speed of say 60th of a second - because really I'm only working when I actually take a photo right ? - and then if I'm shooting at that rate,

well each shot then is costing just 0.02666 of a cent ?

Well unless its brighter, then I'll be using a higher shutter speed, and it will cost you at least half of that"

...............

gold William.

[Longshots]

I would think that there are part time photographers who would never dream of being charging $100 an hour, so I imagine Kiwis contribution for example would be very helpful in helping them reassess their current pricing.

While you may not think that ACCC would be interested, I can assure you that the group meeting I refferred to also thought the same ?

You may recall I asked Kiwi, what he thought was a good question (one to highlight the differences between each individual producing their own pricing structure).

Please not the last line of that response - which I havent edited other then to highlight that last line:

ahh good question

Really a few things if youll indulge me

What I think is a fair market rate for photographers of similar experience and skill to myself, based on talking to others and looking at their similar markets and outputs

A rate that I dont think is undercutting my peers, I dont think that's good for business in general

An appropriate family time dividend for my back pocket

Covering costs for me isnt really relevant.

[hoffy]

OK, instead of starting a new thread, I will continue with this one and ask a similar question to the OP, except I am going to mention the key phrase of the now - Selling high res files.

While its easy to see what people charge in relation to prints, its hard to get a handle on what people charge for high res files, especially for sports shots, where most are interested in a few shots at most, not a DVD full.

In the past, I would have thought that High res command a premium. I have done some research and really have only found one or two who have mentioned how much they charge ($40 for one pic, 3000px X 2000px seemed to be around the money). To me, that seems reasonable, but to an inquiry I received this week, HALF that was too much.

Again, is it know your market? Or is there a way people calculate what they charge?

Cheers

[kiwi]

I sell only high res, but nowhere near as many 8x10 prints I sell, I sell the high res dig file for $20 and 8x10 for $10..... I'm going to try to double the price next season, will see how I go

My reasoning is that my customers don't usually order big prints from me so $20 for a file is way above average for a print sale and it's less work and less cost of sale for me

[hoffy]

I sell only high res, but nowhere near as many 8x10 prints I sell

Exactly. Not that I have sold in the same volume of most, but TBH, I have never had an inquiry about high res until the last event I did. For me, personally, I would prefer to sell prints. This is probably the only bit of control freak in me coming out, but this way, at least I have full control of the product and I find it more quantifiable then a bunch of 0's and 1's.

I sell the high res dig file for $20 and 8x10 for $10..... I'm going to try to double the price next season, will see how I go

My reasoning is that my customers don't usually order big prints from me so $20 for a file is way above average for a print sale and it's less work and less cost of sale for me

I am not sure if I get your response. What price are you going to double?

Cheers

[kiwi]

Both....But I'm really trying a few different business models