Forum menu
Well, mibbe it's just me an I'm new to the whole idea of being a "competitor" at any sort of event, but I'm tempted to be some of those photos which are taken are various cycle events. However, the cost of them seems disproportionate. I can't help feeling that more would be sold if the costs were lower.
Does anyone else bother with these? Have you ever managed to negotiate a better deal with the photographers? After all, once they've taken your photo who else is gonna buy it? Aren't they better to get [i]something[/i] for it even if it's less than their advertised rate?
Add up the cost of the camera equipment-bodies tend to die after two years, dye sub printers, van/trailer/awning, insurance, fuel, software, media for printer & time & they really aren't that expensive. Most will do a deal if you buy more than one picture though.
Totally agree. They do seem a little expensive, I'd have maybe bought one or two of the pics from Ten Under for a few quid, but ten quid a pop is waaaay too much.
annoys me too .. photogs want 10 quid for a wee print and 15 for a "medium" digi file at a recent event i did ...
**** THAT
Sleepmonsters photog isnt bad he did me a Medium file for 6 quid with a small but un obtrusive watermark in the bottom corner (which i dont mind and havnt edited out)
another photog did a photo of me high res for a 5er at 10UTB ....
Cheaper = sells more honestly dont know who buys them , no one i know buys them at the price they ask - and they have the cheek to say at the end of the year they are not coming back next year due to lack of sales :s
I bought this one from 10UTB, but only because I look awesome-ish in it.
Not cheap mind...
What event do you have in mind?
Sportcam - £38 to be able to download a couple of images - i.e. no postal/media costs.
Northsport - £10 for an image on a CD.
[img] 
[/img]
from the no fuss photog on flickr , search no fuss in people and it comes up , some nice photos in there
does everyone sign a model release form when signing on to these races? as technically if you haven't the image belongs to the subject doesn't it?
people have to earn a living.
if you dont want a pic at the prices invited then you dont have to buy.
try taking one of yourself at the next race.....
rocketdog: no, you don't own the light that bounces off you!
of course if we all bought photos from our races they would be cheaper, non? Overheads are mostly about getting there, taking, sorting/tagging/naming, uploading and hosting a zillion photos, which happens regardless of if anyone buys them or not.
Mrs Julian bought one as an actual print from joolze dymond recently btw. Nice quality and came very quickly in the post.
thing with joolz photos is they are better than any other event photographers ive seen ..... she did one of me at the student champs and its much more in focus/crisp and sharp than any other photo ive had taken of me EVER . whether its her equipment , her skill or just her good editing ! i dont know but id buy her photos again ! ]
The guys at most events just seem to shoot quantity on the hope that someone wants all the photos of them selfs ...
ive yet to see a good one of my self from northcolour , there is no composition at all to his shots he just seems to point and shoot.
Some ofthe best shots ive got of my self are often from people just taking photos for the fun and giving them away . I dont know if this is because they are there for pashion rather than for profit !
Agree with trail_rat, there's a lot of poor photographers out there who will just pick a spot at a race and bang off the photos. Same with Sportive photos - pick a spot on a hill climb and snap snap. Last thing I want is a photo of me on what looks like a flat road (camera flattening the angles) struggling up it in granny gear!
Or you can look on here after an event and you might get one for free or a small donation- couple of quid, from one of the many people who take photos for the love of it?
julianwilson - Memberof course if we all bought photos from our races they would be cheaper, non?
I guess that's my point. The Sportcam guys were at the Etape Caledonia - c 3,000 riders. How much could they charge and make a profit?
the image belongs to the subject doesn't it?
No the image belongs to the Photog.
The price is what it is as its costs £KKK to buy the kit(Inc the pc equip and software), then there is the day rate and travel expenses to add in. Then the bit most people don't get is it takes another day or so to develop and upload the images.
Surely the price is the cost (plus a bit of profit) divided by the expected number of purchases?
Surely the price is the cost (plus a bit of profit) divided by the expected number of purchases?
I think one's first lesson in economics is that you charge as much as you can get away with, and it need bear no relation whatever to actual costs...
If they sold 1000 pics at £1 they would make more than selling 50 at £10
I think that is Druidhs point
If they sold 1000 pics at £1 they would make more than selling 50 at £10
I doubt you could justify the effort required for less than £10 ea.
Simon - thinking of just selling the images - another £ or two for printing. Teh marginal cost of each one is low - its the same overhaad.
50 at £10 is £500, 1000 at 1£ is £1000
All the pica of me have always been bad, cos I look bad, or Its not a very good shot. If they happened to get me looking Ok i'd probably pay a bit.
Call me tight, but paying more than a quid or so for a Jpeg so you can print it yourself is taking the monkey.
Same story with running events.
you are forgetting the crux of the matter, think of the extra TIME AND ADMIN for 1000 prints.
margin will be better on the 50 prolly. its all about the margin. not the turnover.
And the point about the paying for the Jpeg is that they upload them anyway so you can see if you want them. Its based on the fact that most of the photo's aren't great, or people are tight. Whenever I go through event photo's some people have 5 or so shots of them, I only ever have 1 or 2, yet always ridden as a pair.
Maybe they know I'm tight, and ugly.
...but paying more than a quid or so for a Jpeg so you can print it yourself is taking the monkey.
If I were a commercial digital photographer, taking "event" photos, my thinking might be:
No-one will make proper use of thumbnails or watermarked lo-res pics so they are safe in the public domain.
Ideally I want customers to buy more than one copy of an actual paper print, perhaps one for themselves and others for family/friends (my family/friends would be distinctly unimpressed with a photo of me on a bike, but that's neither here nor there...). Prints have production overheads, so you can justifiably charge more.
High-res JPEGs have lower overheads - a bit of post-processing, RAW->JPEG, cropping, colour balance etc, but no postage or printing/paper/ink needed. However, no-one will buy multiple copies of a JPEG - once it's released to the customer, the photographer has no control over further distribution. Customer is free to email it to doting Aunties, print it themselves many times, what have you. There may be CD&P Act issues but who could be arsed chasing that up? I reckon you'd have to be pragmatic by charging "market value" ie as much as you can get away with and let the customer do what they want.