Professional Portrait Photography = Blackmail

Actually, it mostly does OOB. It gives an “in” to a range of excellent (and less excellent) photographers without a massive initial investment to scare off clients.

Yeah, in spite of my ranting I’m beginning to appreciate it does get people in. It’s all very well for me to say that I would be far happier paying up-front for all the output, but the reality is we wouldn’t even done the session if we hadn’t been given it as a present and felt obliged to go. (But that’s a big source of my annoyance: Someone has basically ‘given’ us 25pc of a £200 present and we’re left to pay the rest. We’ve received a gift of “minus £150”.)

At least I know what to give to people I hate in future. 😀

Outofbreath

I think professional photographers are obliged to keep the orginals for 25 years. So you can have a cooling off period before you buy them

This is an example of a family portrait done by someone I know. You may like the style, you may not, but I don’t think many “amateurs” would have been able to make such an image.

Did a group one with the wifes family. All agrees to chip in. Her brothers kid was a funny looking lad, and when we got the photos her brother decided he didn’t want any (of his own family!) leaving the rest of us to make up the shortfall.
Been roped into a family holiday with them too. It’s near Afan. Needless to say, I’m taking the bike.

I don’t think many “amateurs” would have been able to make such an image.

They can now!

Maybe not – but I could produce a few shots I’ve taken which are decently exposed, focused and framed which a professional photographer wouldn’t have been able to take because they weren’t there. I know which I prefer having – but then I’m with molgrips on the issue of studio photos, so may not be the best person to judge. I suppose it depends what the reason for having photos is – I was struck by this comment on the previous page:

I’m more interested in having memories than worrying about how arty the photo is.

Having said that I do “admire” that particular pic – I think I’ve got the right word there, I don’t particularly like it, but I get the idea behind it. Oh, and I’m also betting that most “studio” photos aren’t of that sort of quality.

Though clodhopper may have converted me with his examples – those truly are rubbish, even I can appreciate that, and if that’s what you’re dissing then I agree with you.

You’re forgetting about Photoshop. Any Tom, Dick or Harriette can take a photo on their megapixel camera, throw the RAW file through Photoshop and bosh! They’ve got a photo that’s comparable to a pro.

Most Tom, Dick or Harriettes won’t own (rent) photoshop as it’s an industry standard platform with the price to match. And if they do get a good pic out of it I would say it’s more luck then judgement in most cases.

Good tools help an artist, they don’t make an artist.

There are some crap pros too. And actually a good pro’s strength will be working with people as much as technical skills. We work regularly alongside (with video) some decent photographers (and I mean signed to big brands) – their overwhelming skill is getting the best from their subjects and clients. That’s where your amateur comes undone.

High street portraiture is hardly the benchmark really.

“their overwhelming skill is getting the best from their subjects and clients”

This.

I really think that people in this thread have a pretty poor understanding of what skills pros bring to the table. It’s not technical, it’s ideas and getting the subjects enthused.

Of course, an amateur doesn’t have to bother with either of those since he’s not confined to a studio and getting shots of people doing something interesting that they love covers both those bases in spades.

There are some crap pros too. And actually a good pro’s strength will be working with people as much as technical skills. We work regularly alongside (with video) some decent photographers (and I mean signed to big brands) – their overwhelming skill is getting the best from their subjects and clients. That’s where your amateur comes undone.

Well that’s knackered the landscape and sport photographer in one fell swoop.

You’re forgetting about Photoshop. Any Tom, Dick or Harriette can take a photo on their megapixel camera, throw the RAW file through Photoshop and bosh! They’ve got a photo that’s comparable to a pro.

That’s just rubbish.

That’s just rubbish.

I know. Except for the comparable bit, I never said it was positive or close. 😉

Yeah, well all they need is the right kit and technical capability.

OP, as someone who’s trying to set up their own photography business, I would never adopt the model of your photographer. Mine would be/is: 1-2hrs at £40-60, and I’ll deliver around 4-8 full-res digital images to you. If you want them printed, that can be arranged for additional (£10 a pop). Something like that anyway.

And if you want to see what an amateur can do with a DSLR and Lightroom, try me at: http://kitcarruthersphotography.com/

Well that’s knackered the landscape and sport photographer in one fell swoop

.

I thought we were discussing taking pictures of people?

Besides subjects can be landscapes, clearly.

With modern printing technology it isn’t that hard to print your own photos from jpegs.

I printed out our own wedding photos. I used a Canon Pro-100 printer and quality papers, cost me about £50 of ink and £70 paper and £30 for a photo album rather than £650 that the professional printers wanted, so saved me about £500. The final quality was really very good I just needed to load in the paper colour profiles and do a couple of test prints to dial the settings in just right.

It is virtually impossible to replicate good studio shots without a studio, the lighting setup is more important than the camera or the lens.

I also tend to think that studio type photographers generally seem to go towards a high price/low hit rate business model where they might be better with a moderate price/good hit rate business model. Yes there is some effort in post processing too, but when correctly set-up and practised in the art it doesn’t take long, again hardware/software advances have sped things up.

As a slight aside and with reference to the recent ’11 things that annoy events organisers’ article I think it is the same for sports photographers, I think they might make more money and have happier customers if they lowered the prices quite a bit and get a higher hit rate. I also think the photos tend to be a bit boring, I’d prefer riskier tracking shots which might be technically soft but make the subject look more athletically impressive.

e.g. my 1st attempt at sports photography

my 2nd attempt

Guess which one was running faster 😉

If I did a third attempt then I want to try the angle of the first one with the technique of the 2nd one.

With all due respect, those are 2 good arguments for paying pro sports photographers 🙂

For event photography in the UK bike scene I think a lot of the change and pricing has come from the work Seb did on Roots and Rain
https://www.rootsandrain.com/
It swaps a lot of the work out and means that the photo’s get delivered to you rather than trawling for them and a higher throughput/lower price works out as well for the photographers. 4-6 quid for a pic sounds resonable to me.

I printed out our own wedding photos. I used a Canon Pro-100 printer and quality papers, cost me about £50 of ink and £70 paper and £30 for a photo album rather than £650 that the professional printers wanted, so saved me about £500. The final quality was really very good I just needed to load in the paper colour profiles and do a couple of test prints to dial the settings in just right.

and here comes the whole point, component pricing means the market changes. If the photographer is banking on selling the book/album to you after they may put the rate down for taking the pics – ie one subsidides the other. Having seen the time it takes to put together a book/album etc. it does cost time (which people seem to think comes free)
If all you want are the jpegs then expect to pay more in future and expect some photographers to refuse as they don’t want somebody messing up thier work which is their reputation.

On sports… one of thise images is from the STW feature on Ramage


https://flic.kr/p/z1VRSE
(I think I might have been sat very close at that point 🙂 )
The pro one is just better, part of that is using the right lens and knowing a lot more about light etc. On top of that I reckon his will look much better as a full page than mine ever could.

I reckon when I tried my hand at DH Stuff I was getting about 1 in 10-15 descent shots that could be classed as a maybe buy if that was the only one, where as the pro’s are shooting a much better ratio.

As photography is art, (yes, even journalists consider themselves artists) and art is purely subjective. A discussion regarding what is good and what is not, is completely pointless. Unless you think you’re going to change someone’s mind? Personally, why bother. I know what art is and don’t care if the rest of you disagree. 😉

OP, as someone who’s trying to set up their own photography business, I would never adopt the model of your photographer. Mine would be/is: 1-2hrs at £40-60, and I’ll deliver around 4-8 full-res digital images to you. If you want them printed, that can be arranged for additional (£10 a pop). Something like that anyway.

Hope that goes well for you. If you’re interested in making cash out of photography there might be a few good tips here:

Episode #186 – The Need To Diversify

art is purely subjective. A discussion regarding what is good and what is not, is completely pointless.

Maybe, but to say that the “sports” photos above are as “good” as, say, these:
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2016/oct/03/bodybuilding-championship-in-nepal-in-pictures
makes no sense.

(sorry to pick on you twisty)

Maybe, but to say that the “sports” photos above are as “good” as, say, these:
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2016/oct/03/bodybuilding-championship-in-nepal-in-pictures
makes no sense.

I’d say 3 maybe 4 of those are quality pics, the rest are a bit pah! And I hope the Grauniad didn’t pay too much for them.

Since the debate has morphed into Pro Verses amateur I think we need to have a definition of ‘Pro’.

Does it mean full time pro? Does it mean ‘qualified’? Does it mean currently working?

I’ve sold three images, I’m deffo not a pro. I have a friend who did fine art photography at Uni and has taken some outstanding shots yet has never sold an image, is he an Amateur?

It’s quite hard to pin down.

“I’d say 3 maybe 4 of those are quality pics, the rest are a bit pah! And I hope the Grauniad didn’t pay too much for them.”

…and we have no idea if they were taken by a pro or not.

I’d say 3 maybe 4 of those are quality pics, the rest are a bit pah! And I hope the Grauniad didn’t pay too much for them.

They tell a story and convey the mood of the event very well, in addition to being a decent mixture of technical proficiency and abstract. At least they did to me.

Since the debate has morphed into Pro Verses amateur I think we need to have a definition of ‘Pro’.

Does it mean full time pro? Does it mean ‘qualified’? Does it mean currently working?

It’s someone who earns their living through being a photographer, which could be someone who’s got 20 years of experience or someone who decides he’s going to buy a DSLR and some lighting and wing it. I can’t help feeling there’s over-saturation. Three of our road club are professional photographers, plus I know another 4 friends / friends of friends who are pro’s. That’s a lot of photograhers. The quality of their output varies greatly.

As an ex wedding photographer I have been following this thread for the last couple of days.
Its full of the same old arguments, give a decent camera to an armature and they will eventually capture a decent image. Send them to a wedding and you will have a very unhappy bride. Where the “pro” comes in is that they are able to capture consistently good images in ever changing conditions during a one off event. There are no second chances, you cannot ask the happy couple to redo their vows because you missed the “Kiss” shot.

As for cost, a typical wedding could be an 8 – 10 hour shoot, at least the same amount of post processing time, plus additional work on albums. Add to that three meetings, travel costs, equipment costs and insurance and it all adds up to a lot of money. Its almost impossible to make a living out of wedding photography alone. You need to be booked for 52 weekends a year just to make ends meat.

Must be nice to have your weekends back 🙄

You need to be booked for 52 weekends a year just to make ends meat.

Considered a career change as a sausage maker?

This sounds like the arguments I have when people send me files for a 36 page booklet – all done in Word, and at US Letter size – then moan when I have to tell them it all needs re-setting! 😀

For a wedding most people will need somebody who can deliver what people have come to expect. Certain standard groups and poses, all well lit and exposed despite the white dress, dark suit problems etc. A lot of money has been invested and there is no chance of a rerun, at least not with the same cast.

Family photos are a different matter. They are not expected – most people these days don’t go to a professional to get photos of the wife and kids and the norm is for snapshots of whatever quality and aesthetics to grace the family “album”.

But what is getting the OP’s goat is the way a photographer sells a “session” without any photos – or maybe a small set is included – and then uses the “sweets at the checkout” technique to get the gift recipient to cough up more. Hence the “blackmail”.

“The problem there is that someone’s business model is based on selling things to customers who aren’t prepared to pay enough to keep the photographer in business.”

The problem is that the customer doesn’t understand why the photographer needs to charge so much. Because of attitudes like yours, ‘oh I’m not into that kind of thing so I don’t value it’, and the OP’s ‘anyone with a camera can do it’. IE, it’s a profession that has been devalued by increased accessibility.

Some years ago, I was talking to a guy who was a professional graphic artist, who specialised in producing those amazing cutaway images, such as this:

Such images required tremendous skill and talent, and a master of art media. They were all done with pen and paint etc! Then along came computer software which enabled artists to do exactly the same, yet have far greater flexibility and scope, yet still required the same skill and talent, not to mention mastery of the software and technology. The guy had remortgaged his house, in order to pay for a very expensive computer system to enable him to do so, and even so, was looking at at least 2 or 3 years learning the new craft, to be able to continue doing his job. I have no idea how he got on, I do hope he succeeded.

Point I’m trying to make, is that there’s a hell of a lot more to a craft trade, than simply operating equipment.

give a decent camera to an armature and they will eventually capture a decent image. generate electricity

🙂

There are no second chances, you cannot ask the happy couple to redo their vows because you missed the “Kiss” shot.

Apparently it’s not unheard of to go back and re-stage some of the shots….

OK, how about this.

You pay several £xxx`s upfront for a shoot which includes a set of digital or printed files.
You go to the shoot, pay your money, and when the shots come back you dont like them/they are poor quality.

OR

You pay a minimal amount for a shoot, and then pay for the shots you want after you have seen them.

As long as the costs are agreed upfront i would rather go with option two.

The problem is that the customer doesn’t understand why the photographer needs to charge so much. Because of attitudes like yours, ‘oh I’m not into that kind of thing so I don’t value it’, and the OP’s ‘anyone with a camera can do it’. IE, it’s a profession that has been devalued by increased accessibility.

I’m not saying there’s no skill in it. I’ve acknowledged that. The issue is that it costs too much for the outcome, for most people, as we’ve discussed.

You can’t make people think it’s worth it. Well, you can, it’s called advertising, but you have to do better than simply berating them 🙂

If a customer doens’t want what you’re selling, it’s not THEIR fault, it’s yours.

“But what is getting the OP’s goat is the way a photographer sells a “session” without any photos – or maybe a small set is included – and then uses the “sweets at the checkout” technique to get the gift recipient to cough up more. Hence the “blackmail”.”

In a nutshell.

“Hence the “blackmail”

But it’s not ‘blackmail’ at all, this is the bit several people on this thread find quite insulting. It’s the ignorance of how the photographer works.

If you get a tradesman round to do some work at you house, and they need to do some investigative work in order to assess what needs to be done, then you’d expect to pay them for that time. When they then quote you for the ‘actual’ work, you wouldn’t consider it ‘blackmail’, would you? They’ve already come round to your house, and spent time they couldn’t have elsewhere. Same with the photographer having people in the studio and taking the pictures. That might only take an hour or so, but it’s an hour they can’t spend doing something else to make money. So £50 for that isn’t a great deal. And neither is the extra £150 for the prints. Because that’s extra time spent in post production, printing etc. Then there’s all the overheads of running a studio. And I doubt the average high st studio has every hour of the day booked up solid, all week long. Especially when less and less people value such work. So they have to make money when they can; it’s possible they only get one or two photoshoot jobs a day. £400 a day before any expenses isn’t much at all.

“OP, as someone who’s trying to set up their own photography business, I would never adopt the model of your photographer. Mine would be/is: 1-2hrs at £40-60, and I’ll deliver around 4-8 full-res digital images to you. If you want them printed, that can be arranged for additional (£10 a pop). Something like that anyway.”

So, you don’t need to make a living then?

“But it’s not ‘blackmail’ at all”

I now understand the reasons for this pricing strategy and I can see it’s a necessary evil. Maybe blackmail is too emotive a word and someone can suggest a better one. Nico summed it up IMHO.

outofbreath

“But what is getting the OP’s goat is the way a photographer sells a “session” without any photos – or maybe a small set is included – and then uses the “sweets at the checkout” technique to get the gift recipient to cough up more. Hence the “blackmail”.”

In a nutshell. [/quote]

He wants to haggle with the photographer, before anything is done

I think what’s required is up front negotiation before the emotive pics even exist

but this is obviously something the photographer wants to avoid. Imagine the mental drain and the waste of time, haggling over something that doesn’t exist yet with someone who can’t evisage what it is they are haggling over.

There are countless service industries where the provider will try to “add value” or upsell to the customer, or run a loss leader. The photographer is just doing the same.

Oh, you want your car washed? Ok. How about a quick wax and polish too while your here?

If a customer doens’t want what you’re selling, it’s not THEIR fault, it’s yours.

I don’t think anyone is saying it’s the customer’s fault for not wanting what is offered for sale at the price quoted. That’s obviously the customer’s prerogative. My reading (could be wrong) is that the customer is nevertheless unreasonable to say that the work SHOULD be cheaper, because … umm … because.

“He wants to haggle with the photographer, before anything is done”

I didn’t want anything done at all.

In the unlikely event that I did want studio Photos then that is exactly the approach I’d want – the same as if I was dealing with a commercial photographer.

The end result would be the photographer would make a bit more cash and offset the risk of none of the pics being good ‘cos I’m so ugly and I’d leave happy.

I now fully understand the flaw in that model from the Photographer’s POV.

I’m not really sure what there is to discuss now, I think we all understand what’s happening.