Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: JoeKitchen on May 09, 2010, 12:05:10 pm
-
I always operated under the belief that listing your rates on your website could cause your prospects to assume things about how long you have be operating, your experience and quality produced and things such as that. Also, it makes your rates much more solid and could cause prospects to turn away thinking that you would not negotiate with them on things like breaking the payment up if needed. So I decided not list my rates on my website like many photographers.
But just recently I read a report giving modern trends on why people may not do business with a company and one was not listing your rates. Now I do not know how accurate this report was, but it has gotten me thinking should I list my rates (just my basic creative/standard rights fee and my digital capture fee with a line saying additional licensing will be negotiated) on my website? What do you think?
-
Maybe that's something you could do in a "user-password" area?
Or, a link to an agent or department different from the main site.
-
I wouldn't do it. There's no advantage that I can see from listing your rates. Jim
-
if your work is passport portraits or similar it might work, but usually no job is like the other, so an individual quote is a must. I only give a quote on written request, and always in writing, always a pdf and not a inline email. When someone calls me about a job, I discuss the requirements and then ask for a brief email to pin that down. Never, ever do I tell things like creative fees or usage fees orally. If a client is not willing to write a five line email, I doubt they are serious about their enquiry. this strategy saved my arse a couple of times, which is more worth than one or two jobs which I didn't get.
-
if your work is passport portraits or similar it might work, but usually no job is like the other, so an individual quote is a must. I only give a quote on written request, and always in writing, always a pdf and not a inline email. When someone calls me about a job, I discuss the requirements and then ask for a brief email to pin that down. Never, ever do I tell things like creative fees or usage fees orally. If a client is not willing to write a five line email, I doubt they are serious about their enquiry. this strategy saved my arse a couple of times, which is more worth than one or two jobs which I didn't get.
I join these wise points.
I would not do it, but if you have a doubt and want to implement something in your website, maybe with user-password is a safer way. PDF is also better IMO.
Cheers
-
NEVER
Rates can vary depending on job, usage and a million other reasons
-
I think it depends on the business. I do for weddings but I can see why it would be really bad for a commercial shooter. A fine art photographer who doesn't show prices for prints isn't going to sell much.
-
Well, it truly depends on where your money is coming from. If you only deal with commercial clients than you are better off not listing your prices. On the other hand if your business is also open to general public ( and I do not mean here passport photo ) than you absolutely need clear prices posted and easily understood by customers. Most of us hate to walk to any establishment and have to ask for prices. "If you have to ask it means you can not afford it." From years of experience in client oriented business I can absolutely assure you that you are going to loose 90% of potential clients by not disclosing your prices. Most people assume no prices equal high prices or other reason to hide them and opt to stay away. With internet people expect to get all info they need to make a decision without personal contact with merchant. With dozens of merchants fighting for the same costumer people will go with no surprises and clear message.
In the past I heard way to many times from my client who got referred by their friends that they have seen my work many times before but always assumed that my prices would be beyond their ability to pay.
By clearly posting the prices we increased our business 300% in just first year.
http://AndreNapierStudio.com (http://AndreNapierStudio.com)
-
Well, it truly depends on where your money is coming from. If you only deal with commercial clients than you are better off not listing your prices. On the other hand if your business is also open to general public ( and I do not mean here passport photo ) than you absolutely need clear prices posted and easily understood by customers. Most of us hate to walk to any establishment and have to ask for prices. "If you have to ask it means you can not afford it." From years of experience in client oriented business I can absolutely assure you that you are going to loose 90% of potential clients by not disclosing your prices. Most people assume no prices equal high prices or other reason to hide them and opt to stay away. With internet people expect to get all info they need to make a decision without personal contact with merchant. With dozens of merchants fighting for the same costumer people will go with no surprises and clear message.
In the past I heard way to many times from my client who got referred by their friends that they have seen my work many times before but always assumed that my prices would be beyond their ability to pay.
By clearly posting the prices we increased our business 300% in just first year.
http://AndreNapierStudio.com (http://AndreNapierStudio.com)
This is interesting. I'm not sure if this would work for an architectural photographer, but if it has worked for you than similar photographers might want to consider it.
-
I always operated under the belief that listing your rates on your website could cause your prospects to assume things about how long you have be operating, your experience and quality produced and things such as that. Also, it makes your rates much more solid and could cause prospects to turn away thinking that you would not negotiate with them on things like breaking the payment up if needed. So I decided not list my rates on my website like many photographers.
But just recently I read a report giving modern trends on why people may not do business with a company and one was not listing your rates. Now I do not know how accurate this report was, but it has gotten me thinking should I list my rates (just my basic creative/standard rights fee and my digital capture fee with a line saying additional licensing will be negotiated) on my website? What do you think?
In my business (not photography, but still rate-based) I do not list rates on the web but do have some verbiage about providing "the highest quality work at a reasonable cost" and also something about "sensitivity to clients' budgetary restraints." I think this gets across a willingness to discuss rates and not be set in stone. On the other hand, you might want to have a "standard rate sheet" that you can provide on request.
-
A lot to think about. Today I believe that there is a big emphasis on full disclosure and have read in a few places that most expect to see full disclosure when ever they plan on buying something. And with the ease of finding professionals, if you do not have full disclosure, then it would be very easy for a prospect to find someone else in your same speciality. And I have to agree with Andre, if you produce good work and you have no prices listed, I guess people would think that you are expensive and likely to look else where. I have had clients tell me they thought I would be a little more expensive than I am. In terms of trying to make it work for architectural photography, I believe that it would not be that hard. Every architect and designer that I have worked with wanted the same exact licensing rights; I already have a set rate for working with architects and interior designer with set rights. For hospitality professionals it can be a little different. They usually want a little more to a lot more rights then what are given in my standard rights package. I have set "tag on's" in addition to the standard rights with set prices; this does not cover everything but it would not be expected to. If I list them on my website, I could list all of them or just explain that if you wanted additional rights to contact me for more details.
Did I mention that the lead architectural photography in my area has his prices listed and many use his services.
-
I never post rates, because how I charge is a little complex and must fit the particular job. I also charge more to clients who are in major markets, LA, Chicago etc. than I do to local clients. Why? Because I can. They are used to paying higher rates. Clients who compare "Rates" for commercial photograhy are inexperienced consumers, because "rates" are a myth-only the bottom line and usage really matter and that must be specifically quoted for each particular job.
-
I never post rates, because how I charge is a little complex and must fit the particular job. I also charge more to clients who are in major markets, LA, Chicago etc. than I do to local clients. Why? Because I can. They are used to paying higher rates. Clients who compare "Rates" for commercial photograhy are inexperienced consumers, because "rates" are a myth-only the bottom line and usage really matter and that must be specifically quoted for each particular job.
Clients in major markets are used to paying more? Like I said before it is so easy today to find professionals and/or market yourself to any market no matter where you live or operate. Not sure if you could do this much longer without one of your higher paying clients finding out and becoming offended.
I think finding clients in totally different markets will become more so in the future and due to full disclosure, you will be expected to charge the same to all; every one is going to be using the images in the same way to the same extent considering the cost (or lack of cost) in marketing yourself today.
To give you an example I live in Philadelphia, PA and today I had a short conversation with an architect in Rochester, NY, at least 8 hours by car away, on Twitter. Really took no work for me to become introduced to him, happened almost by accident. Another, a client of mine designed a house to be built in South Africa without ever going there; South African citizen commissioned the job without ever living South Africa. By the way, my client has only one person working for her, herself.
-
Clients in major markets are used to paying more? Like I said before it is so easy today to find professionals and/or market yourself to any market no matter where you live or operate. Not sure if you could do this much longer without one of your higher paying clients finding out and becoming offended.
I think finding clients in totally different markets will become more so in the future and due to full disclosure, you will be expected to charge the same to all; every one is going to be using the images in the same way to the same extent considering the cost (or lack of cost) in marketing yourself today.
To give you an example I live in Philadelphia, PA and today I had a short conversation with an architect in Rochester, NY, at least 8 hours by car away, on Twitter. Really took no work for me to become introduced to him, happened almost by accident. Another, a client of mine designed a house to be built in South Africa without ever going there; South African citizen commissioned the job without ever living South Africa. By the way, my client has only one person working for her, herself.
I've been doing it for thirty+ years very successfully. I am not an office supply salesman I am an artist. My local clients have no contact with national clients. It simply doesn't happen. A two tiered pricing policy is very common. All successful AP that I know do it if they live in a small market but do allot of their work in major markets. I didn't invent it. My prices to national clients would scare off the local clients and I know from experience that with the local prices I would not be taken seriously by large clients in a major market. You don't have to believe this, but it has worked and continues to work.
-
I'm with Kirk on this one, and it does depend on how seriously you take yourself, but there are twin dangers: you can find yourself in a shrinking market due to the economy; you can become too used to doing less for more.
This is anecdotal - but it doesn't help when the 'phone stops ringing.
Rob C
-
I'm with Kirk on this one,
Rob C
me too
i charge between 20 to 50% more for international clients, basically anybody off the island
i also charge more for corporate clients or strictly commercial clients
i am also fine to tell all my clients about the different rates and when i do they actually all understand
cheers
m
-
me too
i charge between 20 to 50% more for international clients, basically anybody off the island
i also charge more for corporate clients or strictly commercial clients
i am also fine to tell all my clients about the different rates and when i do they actually all understand
cheers
m
Interesting. I've often pondered about doing a lesser rate for those smaller firms who simply can't afford me but do really good work that I want to shoot. I don't know how I justify that to my larger clients, it's like saying "Well, their work is more interesting than your's so they get a deal..." Not great for client relations.
As for everything else, I pretty much work for the same firms all the time so I can't see any advantage in publishing my rates. I expect that in this market it will just lead to your competition undercutting you. I do estimates really quickly, and pricing almost never varies, it's a basic formula... dayrate/usage + (imaging charge * # images desired) = you pay me this. I could easily make a Web Form that let's people do their own estimates, but the idea of that is a little scary.
I prefer to have people contact me so that there is a more personal interaction. The dialogue often reveals my expertise with the subject matter, how easy I am to work with, my excitement about their project and you can't get any of that off a rate sheet.
-CB
-
I will never do this. Negotiations are done individually.
-
I prefer to have people contact me so that there is a more personal interaction.
Absolutely, If I can talk to them and get a feel for their expectations and budget, I can usually (if I want the job) find a way to get it and make a decent profit. IME there is no way to quote a price without talking to them and knowing exactly what the project is. "Rates" in the abstract are meaningless and a fool's comparison. Any client that is comparing rates in the abstract needs to be educated. A typical example is a hospital shoot for an architect. Same number of shots......but if the hospital is IN operation the shoot is going to take twice as long, I am going to need an additional assistant and the bill is going to about double. How would you put all the possible variables in an online rate sheet that made ANY sense.
What I always want is someone to look at my website, decide I am the one they want to shoot this and have them call me. That way I am in the drivers seat negotiating fees. After hearing from them the first thing I do is research the company and see how large they are, where there main offices are, what level of photography they have on their website, if credited who are the photographers they have been using etc. This helps me get a feel for their budget expectations. Then I call them back with an estimate (I don't want a quote-I want an estimate if possible, because that gives me more flexibility shooting the job).
-
What I always want is someone to look at my website, decide I am the one they want to shoot this and have them call me. That way I am in the drivers seat negotiating fees. After hearing from them the first thing I do is research the company and see how large they are, where there main offices are, what level of photography they have on their website, if credited who are the photographers they have been using etc. This helps me get a feel for their budget expectations. Then I call them back with an estimate (I don't want a quote-I want an estimate if possible, because that gives me more flexibility shooting the job).
Wow, I think in recent months we have made a full circle here on LL. After talking couple months ago about photography business being destroyed by young clueless photogs we reached the closing point here and Kirk's quote is the greatest illustration of it.
Of course it would be great to be always in the drivers seat negotiating fees, it would be even nicer if the companies that want to hire an artist photographer would have to offer a complete disclosure of their financial resources prior to negotiation so you can charge them according to their means. Unfortunately it is more likely Kirk that instead of you researching the company to get the feel of their budget, somebody in the company you are hopping to do business with is going to type in Google ( Kirk Gittings Rates Fees ) and in just few seconds find THIS on LL to help them understand how your rates are calculated.
I know that you have been doing a successful business for 30 years but please stop and think about it for a second.
Times have changed. Your thoughts are not private any more. Being and artist does not equal being businessman. We are living in AG era ( AFTER GOOGLE ).
Andre
-
True enough. Most Google returns on my name originate at LuLa... LoL. Good thing I don't dish on my clients here!
-
Wow, I think in recent months we have made a full circle here on LL. After talking couple months ago about photography business being destroyed by young clueless photogs we reached the closing point here and Kirk's quote is the greatest illustration of it.
Of course it would be great to be always in the drivers seat negotiating fees, it would be even nicer if the companies that want to hire an artist photographer would have to offer a complete disclosure of their financial resources prior to negotiation so you can charge them according to their means. Unfortunately it is more likely Kirk that instead of you researching the company to get the feel of their budget, somebody in the company you are hopping to do business with is going to type in Google ( Kirk Gittings Rates Fees ) and in just few seconds find THIS on LL to help them understand how your rates are calculated.
I know that you have been doing a successful business for 30 years but please stop and think about it for a second.
Times have changed. Your thoughts are not private any more. Being and artist does not equal being businessman. We are living in AG era ( AFTER GOOGLE ).
Andre
Did you actually read what I said? What I have stated is exactly what my clients do when negotiating with their clients-they research the project and client and then negotiate the most favorable price. There is nothing I have stated here which isn't a normal everyday professional way of doing intelligent business. My clients are not idiots or children-they are professionals just like I am. You don't check out your clients? Seriously? You don't think they know I would charge a top 10 national firm in a major market that designs world class buildings more than a local two person firm in Albuquerque that designs elementary schools? Come on. Get real. You don't think that top ten firm won't get more usage out an image than a small local firm (like allot more traffic on their website for one) justifying the higher price? Photographers need to do business like a business.
-
Lots to think about here and I realize that I am not nearly as experienced as those who posted, but charging more based on where the firm is located just does not seem right. I understand the concept of being in a bigger market will get more people to look at the work of the firm meaning higher licensing fees for the images. And also, bigger firms have larger marketing budgets meaning more use and higher fees. I just feel this style of pricing is going to become outdated.
As we move more and more into a social media and internet platform for marketing, I just dont think a firm needs to be geographically located in a top area to get plenty of exposure to areas across the country (or world). It is not a stretch today for a firm in Albuquerque to be commissioned to design a hotel in Jamaica (for example?). And from speaking to an architect who designs hotels, you dont need to be big any more to get a job like that and to be able to design it. You can be anywhere any size and still get the same exposure with the Internet today.
The real question becomes if geography no longer depicts the type of work a firm gets, where the project is going to be built, and the scale of reputation they can produce, how do you charge accordantly for the use while still being able to explain yourself, make sense and not offend a client? Very difficult to answer.
Just as a note this is the first time I have heard of doing this and I have no idea what the correct answer is. This will be on my mind for quite a while.
-
Did you actually read what I said? What I have stated is exactly what my clients do when negotiating with their clients-they research the project and client and then negotiate the most favorable price. There is nothing I have stated here which isn't a normal everyday professional way of doing intelligent business. My clients are not idiots or children-they are professionals just like I am. You don't check out your clients? Seriously? You don't think they know I would charge a top 10 national firm in a major market that designs world class buildings more than a local two person firm in Albuquerque that designs elementary schools? Come on. Get real. You don't think that top ten firm won't get more usage out an image than a small local firm (like allot more traffic on their website for one) justifying the higher price? Photographers need to do business like a business.
i work the same way and agree a 100%
as soon as there is a new client on the horizon i check out their website and google searches results
if i don't like the client's work or if it just does not feel right for any reason i will not take them on
allthough i have been working on getting some standards in my rates, each quote or estimate is different in the end
if a job goes well for a good client more discount will be applied,
i might do work for free if it is for a 'good cause'
charge a starting designer who's work i really like only 50%
i might charge a pompous client extra, if i don't get the job fine, if i get it, i get extra to deal with his/her attitude
and after all it is just all about the good ol' economic law of supply and demand.
-
I try to find a middle ground. Like it's been said earlier, as an architectural photographer, I need to be able to converse with the potential client about their specific project. Although architectural photography is an artistic skill there is an extreme amount of technical creativity with both an architectural photographer's finished photographs and with the architect's design. I might be somewhat biased, but the relationship with the photographer and architect is much greater than that with a photographer and art director for a fashion shoot. It is easier to put package pricing for that type of work. Dealing with smaller firms, it's almost a balancing act. I try to learn as much about the potential client as I can before sending them a quote or estimate. It's very easy to tell by their website how serious they are. Dealing with larger architectural firms, its just competition.
-
I try to find a middle ground. Like it's been said earlier, as an architectural photographer, I need to be able to converse with the potential client about their specific project. Although architectural photography is an artistic skill there is an extreme amount of technical creativity with both an architectural photographer's finished photographs and with the architect's design. I might be somewhat biased, but the relationship with the photographer and architect is much greater than that with a photographer and art director for a fashion shoot. It is easier to put package pricing for that type of work. Dealing with smaller firms, it's almost a balancing act. I try to learn as much about the potential client as I can before sending them a quote or estimate. It's very easy to tell by their website how serious they are. Dealing with larger architectural firms, its just competition.
Not to hi-jack anything, but do you actually want art directors around at all? In the fashion example you mentioned, the art director should really stay snug at the agency and hire the photographer for his skills; that's how it used to be - I remember it very well.
Oh well, I did say there was once a Golden Age...
Rob C
-
for clients who are not exactly familiar with market costs, it helps to give them guideline prices.
It's a really daunting process to have to run through 20 different suppliers in a cost estimate, of course a client's going to worry if they're being screwed over on any particular area.
I don't think having it on a specific photographer's site is necessary (unless it's a direct to consumer service like portrait photos)
but having certain guideline rates for contractors on a site like ASMP is helpful for photographers to figure out rough pricing and also for clients to get educated.
-
I try to find a middle ground. Like it's been said earlier, as an architectural photographer, I need to be able to converse with the potential client about their specific project. Although architectural photography is an artistic skill there is an extreme amount of technical creativity with both an architectural photographer's finished photographs and with the architect's design. I might be somewhat biased, but the relationship with the photographer and architect is much greater than that with a photographer and art director for a fashion shoot. It is easier to put package pricing for that type of work. Dealing with smaller firms, it's almost a balancing act. I try to learn as much about the potential client as I can before sending them a quote or estimate. It's very easy to tell by their website how serious they are. Dealing with larger architectural firms, its just competition.
I think more than biased, you may not know a lot about fashion photography.
Relationships between photographers and AD, vary depending on the character of the individuals more than the field they work in.
I would not classified or stereotype anything, since each case is different.
As for "extreme amount of technical creativity", that apply for many fields of photography and again it depend on the individual way of approaching his tasks.
-
Not to hi-jack anything, but do you actually want art directors around at all? In the fashion example you mentioned, the art director should really stay snug at the agency and hire the photographer for his skills; that's how it used to be - I remember it very well.
Oh well, I did say there was once a Golden Age...
Rob C
I think the golden age is still there.
AD in general, interfere very little. At the end we are the art directors at the shoot.
If the AD is there, most likely is listening, sometime pretending they are saying something....
Generally, inputs are given, but sometime not at all, the direction is chosen by the photographer and "they" thrust his/her judgement.
-
However, in a lot of cases these days, they just want you to cover all bases - by providing them with images that they can use in different ways.
i hate when that happens especially if they ask me to shoot something that they will never ever use for sure, but you have to be polite and swallow and keep shooting
always wonder why they can't make up their minds before hand (actually i know but can not say it here! haha)
m
-
Charging per image was one route I used to employ - in fashion - an image meaning, more accurately, one garment. Nobody was going to use more than the one shot of it for an ad or for a catalogue, and it allowed me to charge a worthwhile rate and it was then up to me to decide when I had it in the can and whether or not I needed to spend more time on it.
I didn't like the idea of day rates, because to make them worthwhile numbers was a bit daunting to clients before a shoot - far better to let them make their own price up as they went along by limiting the cost to the number of articles they wanted me to shoot; that way, they felt - and were - in charge, even if they probably spent more in the process.
Regarding calendars, that was a whole other bundle of fish and the only way I ever found I could devise, and come out on top with, was to cost everything out beforehand to the best of what I could imagine would be involved and then simply add my percentage on top of that. Nobody ever wanted me to break it down; all that mattered was the bottom line and an indication of what it was going to rush them per unit. Of course, the ever present problem with bespoke calendars, not being a print house, was that there used to be a minimum quantity of units needed to make it possible - I think around 3,500 was the smallest that I ever produced. Any less and the cost per unit became stupid. See what wonderful advice the old dogs can offer you?
Rob C
-
If you charge per image, then that won't happen as much, because they will know each additional image they ask for will cost them X amount more.
well i do charge by the image, but when that image is being created especially the commercial clients will want to shoot variables, like "lets put the towel in" shoot
"actually the green one is better then the red one" shoot " take the chair out" shoot 'put the chair back in" shoot etc etc
-
Fascinating discussion here. Regarding the issue of adjusting rates based on client size, I do not view it as "charging more" instead I view it as "charging less" to smaller clients because larger clients get first priority and smaller clients are used as filler between larger clients. In that since larger clients understand why you charge smaller clients less just to stay busy in free time, all the while giving them your top priority and most flexible scheduling. Otherwise charging more would just be manipulative and really this pricing scheme should be kept to a minimum.
-
After considering this for a while, I am in the process of changing my pricing guide based on use and exposure that the images will receive, and I have started to explain it like that to my clients. Although I have always operated a rights managed model, I feel this is the most profitable and fairest for your clients, as long as you can explain it in a way your clients can understand. With that said, I am still basing my estimates for architect/designers on the time it takes to create the images (mainly because all architects use the images in the same way) but adjusting my fee based on the location of the firm, which will have an impact on exposure. I also have created a social media "add-on" package for designers with prices based on the size of the firm. Firm size plays a role here because the larger the firm the more contributors to their social media outlets (in maybe more outlets) resulting in larger exposure.
For hospitalities I completely agree with Ashley on how to price, by the image and exposure received, not on time taken to create it or the amount of professionals needed. It is more of a gamble, especially if you use others besides your assistant and will eat away at your profit, but if by using other professionals and the time it takes you increase the value of the images to your client, they would be more likely to increase the range of licensing they want resulting in a larger profit for you. Also, it is fairer to your clients because you can now take their budget and type of business in account when creating the estimate; you just need to explain it to your client in a way they can understand. And of course the only way to get to work is by creating extremely valuable images that your clients will want to use.
Also, I am trying to come up with a non-threatening way of explaining to clients that the usable life of an image is not that long if you are serious about your marketing, which is true. Architects/designers are naturally aware of this and put it into action whether they realize it or not by having their latest projects at the foreground in their marketing. Because of this, and once again consistency, I am not putting a timeline for architects even though there is one. For hospitality I think the usable life would be 7/8 years before the establishment would need to start rethinking there marketing so as to stay current with the times and tastes. But others may be shorter, so time constraints here are necessary in order to be fair; you should not charge you client for 8 years if they only need the images for 3, which should be explained in a way that make sense.
Once again these are my thoughts I came to and am not totally sure if it is the best. At this time though it seems the best and most fair to me.
-
Fascinating discussion here. Regarding the issue of adjusting rates based on client size, I do not view it as "charging more" instead I view it as "charging less" to smaller clients because larger clients get first priority and smaller clients are used as filler between larger clients. In that since larger clients understand why you charge smaller clients less just to stay busy in free time, all the while giving them your top priority and most flexible scheduling. Otherwise charging more would just be manipulative and really this pricing scheme should be kept to a minimum.
I really like the above of thinking and will use it in the future if ever asked.....though in all honesty I have had an unpublished "tiered" price structure for all of my career and never have been asked. "Charging more to clients in major markets because they expect it" while absolutely true was said kind of off the cuff. Thanks for that contribution.