I had the very same thing happen on a print I'd paid $225 for. When I contacted the photographer (several states away) to buy a new print he wouldn't even let me pay postage to get the new print to me.
I've bought one more print from him since, and I check his website more often than before.
I'm not saying you should do the same, but this guy picked up a sale anyway.
I'm not a Rotarian, but I'd probably do what Bill Barber would do--discuss it and offer a replacement print at a reduced cost, and work on developing the relationship.
Not sure that I'd go with that 100% in these circumstances, as there is no fault whatsover on the part of the OP in this case. If the print had, say, faded from poor technique or processing, that would be e very different situation.
Originally Posted by coops
Having built up a business myself in the past, I would argue that there is often room for goodwill gestures, but this always needs to be balanced with not undervaluing your own service or products.
Last edited by railwayman3; 11-18-2009 at 11:59 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Bethe, I've had this happen a few times and if it can't be repaired I usually replace the print for the cost of a replacement, not the original print. Most times I don't even charge that. It is better to have a happy collector that will come back to you in the future. Considering I am alive and fully capable of printing another, it really isn't that big a deal. If it is an edition print, I ask for either the damaged print back or proof of it's destruction, usually a cut corner of the print including the signature.
if he's well connected socially, replace it for material cost and in a hushed tone beg him not to share that detail with his friends. reverse psychology. he will sell your skills to many many other people, highly recommending you.
just an idea. i think this sort of thing works in the long run.
I love the wilderness and I love my trail cameras, all Fuji's! :) GA645, GW690 III, and the X100 which I think is the best trail camera ever invented (to date).
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I was only a Rotarian in Greensburg, PA, your neighborhood, for a couple of years, but I made a sales career on the concept that a transaction is only a good one if both parties feel it was so. I would talk to him, get all involved in what happened and how. Often in relating the story the person admits that it was his stupid fault. Give him something, but make him give you something back. The “somethings” can vary widely. He may be able to direct you to several sales. He may only want you to listen to his tale. Just your gesture will be a long step toward a positive solution. Be sure you have a good idea of what is reasonable to you. Make sure he does the same.
It has worked well for me. The safety catch is “beneficial to both parties”. A reasonable person will want to be treated that way. An unreasonable person knows he is trying to rip you off and will not be surprised if you don't let him.
Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera
Originally Posted by railwayman3
I really don’t understand the reasoning here. So let me present these 2 quotes and see if someone can explain it to me…..
If one of my limited-edition numbered prints was returned to me damaged, I would destroy that print and make another identical one, and give it the same number. I don’t want to discuss any fee at this time, because that would depend upon the individual circumstances.
So my questions are…..
1) Why would I mark it as a “replacement”? (if I’m reading TheFlyingCamera’s post correctly).
2) Why would issuing an exact replacement print impact any other buyer? (as railwayman3’s friend suggests).
As I understand it, my friend is advertising that there are only 20 or 40 of a particular image which are or will be ever issued, and the neg or files used will be destroyed. In one sense the buyer is happy or feels good he is getting something "unique"...in another sense the cynical might say that it is just a marketing ploy. A matter of opinion or perceived value.
A photograph can be replaced or reprinted relatively easily, but if you consider a different "limited-edition" item, say a vase produced by one of the prestige ceramic makers like Wedgwood or Meissen, you wouldn't be able to get that replaced if it were broken.
Just curious, how did this get off on the "limited addition" tangent? The original post never mentioned it and, as a matter of fact, implied otherwise. Like I said, just curious.
It can be a difficult circumstance to grapple with. As I read it, he bought it. It's paid for. He dropped it or somehow otherwise damaged it. Well? Just because you are a member of the same Club as he (in his position of President, and potentially influence) does not ameliorate upon you to redress the situation on special "friend" terms — and if it did go that way, you are setting a precedent for yourself: others will undoubtedly follow. Looked at in professional practice, cosy customer relations must be balanced at all times with cost. Whoever I deal with, they know it is not my responsibility to replace or repatriate a (framed) print damaged after sale under any special terms; if they request another, the usual production charges would be leveraged, or I would investigate repair — at cost. Sensibly, you could offer to produce another print, mat and frame it with a small discount, but definitely not do it free of charge just because you are friends. You do have to set emotions aside and look at this from a professional perspective to ensure a balanced and fair outcome for both parties.
.::Gary Rowan Higgins
A comfort zone is a wonderful place. But nothing ever grows there.