Professional Portrait Photography = Blackmail

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

Wrong. If a customer doesn’t want what I’m selling (at the price point I have set), then they’re just not my customer. Simples. There are hundreds of mums-with-a-camera (yes, these are a thing – MWACs) in parks all over the country, every, single weekend, giving away the farm for a tiny fee. Their clients are not my clients.

There are wedding photographers charging eight times what I do – their clients aren’t my clients either. There’s a level for everyone – pick the one you want.

“Wrong. If a customer doesn’t want what I’m selling (at the price point I have set), then they’re just not my customer. Simples”

Except for people who get given cheap “session” vouchers, who don’t want to be a customer, but find themselves morally obliged to be.

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

There isn’t really a ‘flaw’. By your own admission, you didn’t want any pictures done. you went, sat for the photos, then didn’t want to spend any more money. The photographer has their £50, they don’t need to do any more work for you, you don’t need to buy any pictures from them. Everyone’s happy.

“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.”

If you approached the vast majority of photographers and tried to haggle the price, they’d probably tell you to get lost. I would.

“I think we all understand what’s happening.”

I don’t think you do.

outofbreath

I didn’t want anything done at all.

outofbreath

Except for people who get given cheap “session” vouchers, who don’t want to be a customer, but find themselves morally obliged to be.

Morally obliged? That’s quite a voucher when it can force you to do things against your will.

“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?”

As above, I’d say it’s probably someone who earns a significant proportion of their income, from photography.

I’m not a ‘professional’. I am selling more work, and getting an increasing number of commissions, but I’m not a ‘professional’. I’m a passionate ‘amateur’ who earns a few quid now and then. I’ll happily take a commission I find interesting, challenging and personally rewarding. As for the ‘quality’ of my work; I’m pretty sure I could, with a bit of organisation and planning, be a capable pro. I believe I have the talent, skills and ability to work as a professional photographer. I just don’t want to (unless people want to pay me vast sums for my own pictures!).

I do know that there are ‘professionals’ out there, who do earn their living from photography, who aren’t that great imo. That’s by the by though. But generaly, most ‘professionals’ will be far more competent in their craft, than most ‘amateurs’. Take the example of the ‘sports’ photography above; more than acceptable for a first attempt, but wouldn’t cut it at ‘professional’ level. Footflaps’ images are technically ‘better’, but not indicative of the ‘quality’ that international media agencies would demand (not to say that Footflaps couldn’t do the job professionally though). But then, Footflaps was photographing a local hockey match, not a top sports event. So his photos are excellent in that context. More than adequate for small local newspaper etc.

Likewise, the local high st portrait service may well not be on a par with the likes of David Bailey, Irving Penn or Cindy Sherman, but then, the local garage isn’t servicing F1 cars. And you won’t be paying F1 money down at the local garage…

“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 way they do this is by saying they’ll charge one thing then trying to upsell massively. I’ve used good photographers that agree on a price, set up a nice scene and take an appropriate amount of time based on it, and heard from my wife of ones who do very generic shots of women with too much makeup on touched up to within an inch of being lifeless and sell the shoot as a “gift” where the receiver of the gift is pressured into buying more photos by deliberately taking ones that “don’t count” for the original fee – e.g. “oh no you can’t have that one, there’s a finger in it and it’s a head shot that was included in the gift”.

I can’t believe people think that the second type deserves to make a living from it.

Morally obliged? That’s quite a voucher when it can force you to do things against your will.

If the voucher system doesn’t put pressure on people to buy things they didn’t really want it has no purpose. In which case stop selling them, they clearly don’t increase sales, they just p1ss people off!

By your own admission, you didn’t want any pictures done. you went, sat for the photos, then didn’t want to spend any more money. The photographer has their £50, they don’t need to do any more work for you, you don’t need to buy any pictures from them. Everyone’s happy.

Not really because I *do* feel obliged to fork out extra cash. However I won’t be spending four figures on all of the output so even though I’m going to be paying a fortune out I’m still unhappy because there are a load of pics of my family which exist but I’ll never have. It’s utterly unsatisfactory for everyone, but I do accept without this business model I wouldn’t have gone in the door so I guess it is necessary.

“Not really because I *do* feel obliged to fork out extra cash.”

Why? Nobody’s forcing you to buy any pictures.

“I do accept without this business model I wouldn’t have gone in the door so I guess it is necessary.”

So it’s not ‘blackmail’ then?

“I can’t believe people think that the second type deserves to make a living from it.”

You are aware that you are being ripped off for a vast array of things you buy, aren’t you?

Even by STW standards this is a bit bonkers – OP buys something he didn’t want, and it’s “the business model’s fault”.

Why? Nobody’s forcing you to buy any pictures.

If this system doesn’t put pressure on people to buy things they didn’t really want it has no purpose.

Even by STW standards this is a bit bonkers – OP buys something he didn’t want, and it’s “the business model’s fault”.

Yes, if the voucher system doesn’t put pressure on people to buy things they didn’t really want it has no purpose.

I’m still unhappy because there are a load of pics of my family which exist but I’ll never have

You’re going to go ****ing mental when you find out about CCTV

😀

“I’m going to be paying a fortune”

So, tell us what you would think is a reasonable sum of money for a professional to do some family photos, and what you would expect for that sum.

So, tell us what you would think is a reasonable sum of money for a professional to do some family photos, and what you would expect for that sum.

Not really relevant to my point. My issue is not with the total cost.

So what on earth is your issue then? 😕

outofbreath
Not really relevant to my point. My issue is not with the total cost.

What if it was £3.00? Would that be an acceptable to price to relieve this photo hoarding wizard of the images which he had deceptively deprived your family of?

“So what on earth is your issue then?”

Have a read of the thread, it’s been clearly spelled out.

“relieve this photo hoarding wizard of the images which he had deceptively deprived your family of?”

😀

“relieve this photo hoarding wizard of the images which he had deceptively deprived your family of?”

I suggest using a Baseball bat……

…the Police wouldn’t need photofit images to catch me…

“Have a read of the thread, it’s been clearly spelled out.”

It hasn’t, actually. All we’ve gleaned from it, is that you don’t want to pay what the photographer is charging. Fine, you don’t have to. Claiming it’s ‘blackmail’, or a ‘flawed business model’, or anything else, is just rubbish.

The bottom line is, that you probably aren’t the target customer, you didn’t have much of a clue about the ‘value’ of studio photography (hopefully you now have a better idea), and you seem to be seeking sympathy for feeling a bit put out. You’ve then had several people with perhaps a tad more insight than yourself, explain why things are the way they are, yet you appear to still refuse to accept/understand things.

If you genuinely think that £200 for a studio session and some prints/digital files is ‘blackmail’, then I suggest you really don’t want to know what the photographer who took the picture DrJ posted charges.

And you probably really, really don’t want to know what us taxpayers paid for Annie Leibovitz to take this ghastly abomination:

It has.

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

You’ve assumed that it’s my only revenue stream.

“It has.”

Yes, because I’ve just done it for you. 😆

“You’ve assumed that it’s my only revenue stream.”

I hadn’t. I just wondered if you had intended it to be.

Except he’s been forced to be the customer because he got given the session as a present.

I think he has a quite reasonable point

If this system doesn’t put pressure on people to buy things they didn’t really want it has no purpose.
[/quote]

It might be a valid business model and a decent way for a photographer to make money, but it’s a bit of a shit business model which basically relies upon putting pressure on people.

I hadn’t. I just wondered if you had intended it to be.

Then why didn’t you just ask that?

then I suggest you really don’t want to know what the photographer who took the picture DrJ posted charges.

A four pack of Stella and a bag of chips?

I somehow doubt that the transaction for either of those portraits was initiated with a £50 voucher gift from an elderly relative.

You’re going to go ****ing mental when you find out about CCTV

Genuine LOL with a slightly condescending snigger that was sharing in the hard hitting delivery of a truth that would shatter the dreams of the victim. 10/10

as to the professional? Some of the weekend worrier/chancers who call themselves that are like local pub singers compared to recording artists, they just don’t cut it at the sharp end.
Snapping a wedding/sports event/badly dressed family on a white background is like comparing cooks to chefs.
One puts some ingredients together and sets the oven/timer, the other creates amazing tasting food from the same ingredients.

I’m thinking that those who have a business model which relies on getting the punter to fork out the real cost of a session they wouldn’t have done if they hadn’t been given a voucher are probably more towards the cook end.

I’m still unhappy because there are a load of pics of my family which exist but I’ll never have.

This is the crux (and I said this at the outset). There is not a “load of pics” of your family – there is a load of raw, unprocessed image files and a percentage of those will have preview images for you to review.

outofbreath – Member

Yeah, in this case a family member bought us the session as a present for £60

So, this is what the OP said.
He was bought the session as a gift.

It does seem a bit lame to offer a ‘portrait session’ as a gift voucher, but then make the purchasing of the images taken at the session an extra.
I am not saying that £60 is an unreasonable charge for a photo session, but the implication of a ‘portrait session gift voucher’ to me would be at least one or two pictures at the end of it, even if it is only a couple of 5×7″ prints, with an option to then buy more. Otherwise what is the point – the logical output would be an actual photo, or a digital copy (probably at a reduced resolution) otherwise the session is a complete waste of time, apart from the worth to the photographer of getting a bit of practice in…..

If £60 for that is not reasonable/feasible/an insult to the ‘art’, then the price of a voucher should include a couple of images – call it £80 or £100, I don’t know.

All this about ‘processing time etc. shouldn’t come into it for this kind of session.
That can all be done beforehand with correct set-up of camera/lighting etc & perhaps a batch process routine to make the images ‘pop’ a bit or whatever, ala Venture.
I would expect that if I was paying a lot of money for a bespoke service, but for a ‘portrait voucher session’ the defaults would probably be fine.

I’m still unhappy because there are a load of pics of my family which exist but I’ll never have.

Maybe you can use a request under the data protection act to get a copy of the images? Or call the police and tell them you think the photographer took some inappropriate images of your children while your back was turned?
This way you get the pics without paying.

I am not saying that £60 is an unreasonable charge for a photo session, but the implication of a ‘portrait session gift voucher’ to me would be at least one or two pictures at the end of it, even if it is only a couple of 5×7″ prints, with an option to then buy more.

This is more or less the business model of school photos IME. Photographer comes to school, kids bring home a packet of photos and a price list. Parents pay for the ones they want. Despite the sausage factory nature of the operation we’ve had a few cute ones of MissJ over the years, but I’d never do that for something to put on the wall.

I think some people are mistaken in thinking just because something takes a long time, requires some skill and expensive equipment, that is automatically has value.

Just like anything else, its value is what someone is prepared to pay.

Simply what OOB was saying was he felt honor bound to go to the session after auntie Mable asked for the 5th time to see the pictures from the session. Then he gets there and gets the pressure sale of lots of pictures. Art meets the double glazing salesman 🙂

Is my [temporary] monitor colour off or is that pic of the Queen et al green as vom?

I think some people are mistaken in thinking just because something takes a long time, requires some skill and expensive equipment, that is automatically has value.

No – people are saying that because of all that stuff you mention, someone is unlikely to give it away for free, whatever the punter’s opinion.

I think some people are mistaken in thinking just because something takes a long time, requires some skill and expensive equipment, that is automatically has value.
No – people are saying that because of all that stuff you mention, someone is unlikely to give it away for free, whatever the punter’s opinion.

So your saying its not just the posters on here that over value it, Its the photographers as well 🙂

I think some people are mistaken in thinking just because something takes a long time, requires some skill and expensive equipment, that is automatically has value.

Welcome to the world of every self-employed creative