Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,202   Posts: 1,531,594   Online: 1179
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 46
  1. #21
    ParkerSmithPhoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    797
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by ToddB View Post
    If I can get a little returm from investment , I'll be happy. It's not like I need it to cover my mortgage.
    You may not feed your family on your photography, but some of us do. I don't know how good your work is or isn't, but undercharging for it is a sure way to contribute to the decline of professional photographers. Digital has been far less detrimental to the trade than the mindset of talented photographers who are willing to work for peanuts.

    Sorry, don't mean to be rude, but if you're going to work your butt off for someone and hand print beautiful portraits of their family, why the hell wouldn't you charge good money for that? Stick it in the college fund, or buy a new boat if you don't need it to pay the mortgage.

    The other problem is that when you don't feel properly compensated, you begin to resent your clients. You're spending hours and hours of your life working for someone. Everybody else in the world gets paid when they do that. Why is it photographers have so little faith in themselves?

    Simple exercise: keep a work sheet, and write down every single minute you are working for someone, every mile you drive and every expense you incur (film, paper, chemistry). At the end of the job, do the math and figure out your rate per hour. There are plenty of photographers who are making less than they could make at McDonald's, but hey, they are artists, and you know, artists are supposed to starve...
    Parker Smith Photography, Inc.
    Atlanta, GA

    Commercial & Fine Art Photography
    Portrait Photography

  2. #22
    Kevin Kehler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Regina Canada (sounds more fun than it is)
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    605
    I think a lot depends on what you are shooting and for who - if I hired a photographer to shoot a supermodel at $10k a day (plus expenses) for a campaign in a magazine, you can believe I would attend the shoot and make sure they got a shot I could use. This would necessitate the use of a digital camera for instant feedback and to prevent a second day of shooting. If, on the other hand, I needed to make copies of an artist's painting which is available as required and the primary concern was reproducibility and colour accuracy to the original artwork, I would probably want a 4x5 or 8x10 transparency. The bigger problem is demand - as in, most clients want the photos this afternoon or at the latest tomorrow which would be impossible for most film photographers, even with a good lab.

    Fundamentally, the client needs to trust the photographer to produce the images they want for the price they agree on. I want my clients to understand that they are going to get less images and it is going to take more time than other photographers but the quality of those images is going to be better. Not because they are from film but because the medium I am most comfortable getting the better results from is film. If they want someone quicker or cheaper, there are other people than me - but I don't make my living from photographs, so it is easier for me to say this.
    Once a photographer is convinced that the camera can lie and that, strictly speaking, the vast majority of photographs are "camera lies," inasmuch as they tell only part of a story or tell it in a distorted form, half the battle is won. Once he has conceded that photography is not a "naturalistic" medium of rendition and that striving for "naturalism" in a photograph is futile, he can turn his attention to using a camera to make more effective pictures.

    Andreas Feininger

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    721
    but if you're going to work your butt off for someone and hand print beautiful portraits of their family, why the hell wouldn't you charge good money for that?

    I learned along time ago to never under sell my photos. So this won't happen. I'll make it worth my time.

    Todd

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    The highest state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,885
    Quote Originally Posted by JBrunner View Post
    IMO the market segment is a big factor. For instance, when working with agency art directors there is an ongoing relationship, and usually a more sophisticated understanding of how something "looks" and how that can be arrived at. I think dealing with a more competitive market with less sophisticated clients would be more difficult.

    Quote Originally Posted by ToddB View Post
    If I can get a little returm from investment , I'll be happy. It's not like I need it to cover my mortgage. I figured there so many un- experiance digital shoots shooters out there with fancy brand new digital cameras,and semister of Photoshop elements from the local community college why not pitch an idea for something different.
    Mmm, you might want to re-read what Jason wrote above. I am not so sure how much of a market you are going to find given this statement...

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    721
    This is true. We are dealing again with "A Good Enough" society. Lets see what happens. Like anything with providing a service. Word of mouth is the best business card. It will either dye a in flaming glory or take off like a wild fire.

    Todd

  6. #26
    LJH
    LJH is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    542
    I think that the segment is a key factor in this arena.

    I know of many landscape professionals still using film. In particular, the Panorama shooters using 120 film for 6x17cm images. Nothing (including the Seitz digital) comes close to the quality and enlargement possibilities of a well exposed piece of Velvia in this segment.

    Also, large printed B&W landscapes, IMO, are still best shot on LF (or ULF) film. Is there anyone out in the digital world producing the quality of, say, Clive Butcher? I think not...

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    NY USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2
    Still do some food and product on film and will be doing some wedding work in May. I don't really shoot weddings anymore but I'm helping out a fellow shooter. The bulk of the wedding will be shot digital but the couple has requested some specifics on film mainly because of the wedding venue which is a period mansion.

    The work is out there in some segments but you have to really work to find it. It doesn't come easy but it is out there.

  8. #28
    cjbecker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    IN
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    734
    Images
    19
    When I was running my small business I was shooting all film. All medium format and becuase I did not want to undercut anybody, and there was just not the clientel that I was looking for; it dissolved. I still do little things here and there, all still on film thought.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    79
    I agree with the sentiment, Henry. I'm fortunate to be heavily involved in the swing-dancing community, so there are always a lot of dapper folk who care about how they look for me to shoot.

  10. #30
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,211
    Images
    225

    Pro photgrapher's still use film?

    I agree HEAVILY with the statements about not undercutting the market as it really hurts us professionals, ALSO the standard is to charge for the work PLUS MATERIALS which means the client will be paying for all your film rolls. Most clients won't really like this as it would be a "new concept" to them since its not done that way any longer.

    Also I think we tend to forget that the average person views film as crappy and low quality, most people if ANY exposure to film is by means of shitty labs with bad scans returned on disk that are pixelated and covered with dust and blurred, not crisp or brilliant looking. So the public often views film as low quality vs digital. So it will be hard to convince people that film will give them nice images.

    Just some food for thought.

    Perhaps just not telling them it's film at all would help haha


    ~Stone

    Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin