Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Rent versus Buy.  (Read 9280 times)

mcfoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 940
    • http://montalbetticampbell.com
Rent versus Buy.
« Reply #20 on: April 01, 2008, 04:47:13 am »

Hi
At the moment we are going to shoot more with the 1DsMKIII now. We still have our Mamiya kit & will continue to use the ZD camera & rent the Aptus 22 or 75s if they are available for the Mamiya mount. Down here in Australia the agents are: Sinar/Hy6/Leaf, Phase One/Mamiya & Hasselblad. With the recent news that Mamiya & Phase I can really understand why photographers using Mamiya go with Phase. In the US with the MAC group it is different as they market Leaf/AFi & Mamiya. I will still rent the Aptus but would love to have a 75s for my Mamiya. The new Canon is a fantastic camera & we still enjoy using MFD.
Denis
Logged
Denis Montalbetti
Montalbetti+Campbell [

paul_jones

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 574
    • http://www.paulrossjones.com
Rent versus Buy.
« Reply #21 on: April 01, 2008, 05:14:50 am »

Quote
i spent the last few months in testing and contemplating whether to buy a back. i didn't and went for a 1dsmk3 instead. i know that buying a smaller MFB wouldn't have costed me much more. i love to own my own equipment, but whenever a client needs MF files, the production is usually so big that i need to rent additional equipment. so i talk to the rental place anyway.

my rental here in Munich is fabulous, (haedler) the best i have ever worked with, here and abroad. their stuff is perfectly kept and always the most recent stuff. the back is cleaned and seald in a plastic wrap, all batteries are charged and whenever something brakes, a replacement is send by courier immediately. as i rent there a lot, i get good prices.

although i accept that MF makes better files, shooting with it is such a hassle, that i only do it when the client asks for it.

i am very happy with this arrangement.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186031\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


i find shooting with phase (and c1) far less hassle than with canon, especially now that i have to use crap canon software to tether- bloody slow, crashing and hitting buffer every few seconds.


paul
Logged
check my new website
[url=http://www.pau

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2356
    • sammorganmoore.com
Rent versus Buy.
« Reply #22 on: April 01, 2008, 05:44:24 am »

Quote
I am pretty sure I lost more on DSLR's
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186023\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yeah ! anyone want to buy 2 D1s, 2D100s, D70, D80 and Kodak SLRn

I think that money is 100% gone -these items are of no value

rent DSLR and own MFDB
Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Rent versus Buy.
« Reply #23 on: April 01, 2008, 05:47:07 am »

I've had one really good experience with rental: In Venice, I got a big load of blacked foam core boards from a rental house. I guess it came by gondola. It was a buy-and-junk of course. Seems to me that rental is a nice way to get light shapers etc on location, anything else isn't worth it. I guess if you're a real working pro over here it's different, you make the client (over)pay for the rental on the big jobs and you get free loaners of anything you need for your own work and the cheap jobs. My impression is that rental-house management and model-agency management are the two key skills most successful guys here have, and of course client-management. All three seem to require similar techniques, which I don't have  - strangely enough, makeup and clothes-styling help and accessories are easier to find and much more straightforward to deal with.

Edmund
« Last Edit: April 01, 2008, 05:59:57 am by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

Streetwise

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 125
    • DavidAnderson.tv
Rent versus Buy.
« Reply #24 on: April 01, 2008, 07:59:51 am »

For short-term, I would say rent the gear. That gives you a chance to try out the different equipment as well. Longer-term though, definitely buy it. It's much more convenient for sure. Make sure you've got the work though!

Dave
Logged

Morgan_Moore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2356
    • sammorganmoore.com
Rent versus Buy.
« Reply #25 on: April 01, 2008, 10:16:31 am »

A further thought.

As well as day rental there is lease purchase (which is what I did)

Effectively borrowing the money

In the UK this has tax advantages and means you dont have to come up with the whole sum

What I woudnt do is buy cheap because you dont have the lump sum available

S
Logged
Sam Morgan Moore Bristol UK

James R Russell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
    • http://www.russellrutherford.com/
Rent versus Buy.
« Reply #26 on: April 01, 2008, 11:49:57 am »

Quote
A further thought.

As well as day rental there is lease purchase (which is what I did)

Effectively borrowing the money

In the UK this has tax advantages and means you dont have to come up with the whole sum

What I woudnt do is buy cheap because you dont have the lump sum available

S
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186108\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Every project has a bottom line.  You may not be privledged to it, or you may not think of it that way, but regardless, when you client walks into thier client, rarely if ever do they say, well photography fees are $4, camera rentals are $6, models and $3, studio rental is $2 so the total is $15.  They just say, it's $15 bucks for the day.  (I'm quoting editorial rates here  )

Obviously the industry, especially on the coasts has moved into the rent as you go system.  In manhattan just a 10x10 storage space is $487 a month, so factor in a real studio of even 1,500 sq. ft. and you'll have some idea of where the numbers are going.  (This also holds true for London, Paris, LA and to some extent Miami).

It really depends on your business model and how you want to invest in your business.

I own all of my equipment and keep mostly duplicates in two cities, (soon to be 3) and the only thing I move around from studo to studio is cameras (a lot of cameras) and a few laptops.

What this allows me is to work the numbers if I must, (see my bottom line description), because if you are renting the only numbers you can move are  your own creative fees and the costs of production and if production costs are fixed and the project get's tight, the photographer is going to take the hit a lot faster than the rental studio or company.

There is also a matter of investment.  You may think your client doesn't notice or care who owns or maintains their own equipment or studios but they damn well notice when it stops working or they are uncomfortable, or the estimate goes up by 45% because you were hit with overtime charges.

I notice when renting a 12x rag for 4 days costs me more than buying two of them, or that the pro 7's I rented came in at $5,000 and I spent all of the time bleeding heads with the power on low, when I could buy and own acutes for virtually the same weekly rental as the 7s.

I work in a lot of markets and do a wide variety of work and I can promise you, to a client, a genre, a city, everybody talks money and wants to know how they can get as much as possible for the budget they're handed.

In regards to medium format, everyone talks costs and renting  medium format back, cameras, lenses, computers and backups in just about any city in the world adds another $2,000 a day to the estimate.

Running off that $2,000 a day number, it doesn't take long for me to recoup a $50 to $60k investment in cameras and computers.

As far as digital techs there are some very good ones that can make your life easier but on the other hand if you own your own cameras, backs and computers, you can almost run the day tech free.   If you look at that video I posted most of the digital tech work in C-1 was done before hand, by setting up shoot folders the day before, so once the day starts, other than make some checks for look and focus (which I have to do anyway), the computer and camera virtually run themselves, (including backups).

There is something to be said about actually knowing your own equipment front to back.

We all talk and sometimes bemoan the fact that this stuff changes every few years and the investment that requires and though I may be a throwback on using Contax and backs like a P21 and and P30, my investment is lightweight in comparision to going to the newest and the largest cameras and backs .

I've never had a client complain there is not enough detail or resolution, or the fact that my Contax are not made anymore,  in fact the few comments I get about the digital process is that it went smooth in comparision to their previous project.  

I'm not different than anyone else and making a large purchase puts a lump in my throat, then again I've rarely made a large purchase that didn't pay off in the end.

JR
Logged

TMARK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1841
Rent versus Buy.
« Reply #27 on: April 01, 2008, 01:57:32 pm »

Quote
Every project has a bottom line.  . . . photography fees are $4, camera rentals are $6, models and $3, studio rental is $2 so the total is $15.  They just say, it's $15 bucks for the day.  (I'm quoting editorial rates here  )

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186130\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think your editorial rates are inflated.  The last few non-fashion editorials I shot only paid a page rate, no expenses.  (roll eyes, soft sobbing).  
Logged

snickgrr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 270
    • http://
Rent versus Buy.
« Reply #28 on: April 01, 2008, 02:24:21 pm »

I know most of the group of thirteen photographers that formed this org and remember the times back then pretty well.  Not doing any editorial work myself is this organization still out fighting the good fight?
http://www.editorialphoto.com/resources/whatisep.asp

Quote
I think your editorial rates are inflated.  The last few non-fashion editorials I shot only paid a page rate, no expenses.  (roll eyes, soft sobbing). 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=186172\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

TMARK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1841
Rent versus Buy.
« Reply #29 on: April 01, 2008, 03:35:20 pm »

Snickgrr,

Those guys are still around but they lost, mainly due to an oversupply of photogs in LA and NYC going it alone.  

Editorial cannot serve as a profit center.  Perhaps things can change when people get sick of stock and SVA stops pumping out mini-Jurgen Tellers/Katherine Opies/Alec Soths who'll pay to shoot an editorial for Vibe.  I won't hold my breath.

I look at editorial as marketing.  I long ago gave up on it as any sort of profit center.  Conde Nasty pays $350 a day + expenses, but they pay on the 120 day schedule. Fashion/beauty editorials generally pay on a page rate basis at $500 a page + expenses, which you can mark up/rent to yourself/eat well/shoot at Splashlight/rent a Briese Focus etc.  I can make a small profit of $2k on a fashion spread, but really, its about 6 days worth of work.  The stuff I've been working on lately is NO MONEY at all.  That's right, none.  Nada.  Zilch.  Its like shooting personal work, but with better clothes, better locations, and the end product gets printed in a mag on good paper.  The key to remember is that editorial gets you the catalogue and ad gigs which sends the daughters to private school.

T
« Last Edit: April 01, 2008, 03:36:48 pm by TMARK »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up