Video University: Video University Forums: Digital Photography for Videographers: Changes in pricing

VideoUniversity.com
Home	Free Library	Store
Free Catalog Please support VU by making your B&H purchases and links through this B&H ad. Doesn't cost a penny more.

See The New VU Postcard Catalog

To post in the forums see the Forum Guidelines.

Join or Renew Today.
New Benefits for all VU Members

Forum Guidelines and FAQ
Main Index	Search Posts
Who's Online	Log In

Home: Video University Forums: Digital Photography for Videographers:
Changes in pricing

Scott Brooks
Veteran

Jul 9, 2006, 8:02 PM

Post #1 of 13 (920 views)
Shortcut

Changes in pricing	Can't Post

I'm starting to consider a change in my pricing strategy. Right now my opening package is 5 hours of coverage and they get a CD with high rez files. Cost is $995. The next two packages to $1995 and then $2995.

I'm going to consider changing my entry package to be a CD of e-mail sized images with the option of purchasing the full rez files. I'm sure there will be some that try and get large prints out of the smaller files and will call me. But that's when I'll reinforce the fact that the full rez files are for sale OR they can purchase the prints from me and they all come from a pro lab.

I'm also considering going to an a la carte type pricing, but I'm new enough that it scares me. As much as I would like to do it I think I need to get that referral base up and start feeding me new business.

For those of you that have already added photography ... have you gone with the typical packages, print credits or maybe something else?

RustyB
Veteran

Jul 9, 2006, 8:45 PM

Post #2 of 13 (915 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Sparky] Changes in pricing [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

Talking to one of the photogs that works for the most popular big studio in town, I asked him if digital has taken away the profits from prints. He says no, they still make most of their money on prints.

I'm at a loss. I want to make money on prints, especially with a similar $995/5 hour package. But like you say, if you give them a CD with low-rez proofs, they're going to make a bunch of crappy prints unless you watermark them.

So, should you make them buy a PRINT of every photo they want without a proof watermark? Or, should you just give/sell them all the full rez images on CD, and simply figure into your pricing that you won't be making much on prints?

faith poison wedding films
anger is an energy

Jenn M
Veteran

Jul 9, 2006, 10:17 PM

Post #3 of 13 (904 views)
Shortcut

Re: [RustyB] Changes in pricing [In reply to]	Can't Post

I'm thinking that the 'budget' bride is going to go for the idea of printing their own pics - so they'll take the "proofs" (or full rez) CD over having to buy prints from you - thinking it's cheaper in the long run.

The more 'quality' bride will likely order prints through you b/c they can't be bothered to do their own - that's why they hired you.

That's considering they are weighing your packages against one another. Throw another photographer into the mix, and that could change - then they start looking at the numbers, like you said - "How much do I get and how much will it cost me." What are most guys doing in your area - thsoe that are in the market that you aim for?

I guess it depends on how much work you want to do, and which market you want to appeal to. To start, I'm looking at the first category more, just b/c I want less hassle. "Here they are, take them - they're yours..." BUT that's with the idea that we'll be selling more to brides who are interested in quality video, so I'm hoping that will keep us out of the bargain basement venues... I could be all wrong about that. AND I realize I'm limiting my market considerably - so everything could change.

RustyB
Veteran

Jul 9, 2006, 11:05 PM

Post #4 of 13 (900 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Jenn M] Changes in pricing [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

....we'll be selling more to brides who are interested in quality video, so I'm hoping that will keep us out of the bargain basement venues... I could be all wrong about that. AND I realize I'm limiting my market considerably - so everything could change.

Yeah, I could see that as being a problem with you guys...trying to sell expensive video, and cheap photography. As much as we all like to think we sometimes get priority over photo, I don't think it's very often. And even when we think the bride is paying more for us, because we checked the photographer's prices on his website, I'm guessing it's not really the case...since the photog is gonna squeeze them for extra hours, prints, bridal portraits, engagement pics, albums, etc., whereas video is just one price and that's it.

Since I have no wedding photo experience, I'd like to keep my base price low, but if the client likes the photos, I want to be able to profit from the prints, unless I can pad my bookings with add-ons enough to make a living.

faith poison wedding films
anger is an energy

Scott Brooks
Veteran

Jul 9, 2006, 11:11 PM

Post #5 of 13 (900 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Jenn M] Changes in pricing [In reply to]	Can't Post

When I first made my decision to go into photography over a year ago my thoughts were ... shoot and burn ... I don't want to mess with prints or albums. All I wanted to do was maximize the amount of money I would get per hour ... strictly business.

Not only that, but being in rural area there's a lot of that to contend with, so if your photos are a step up from the rest then it's a plus.

I've been at $995 with full rez files. To date ... 2 out of the 7 weddings have gone that route. I thought it would be more like 7 of 7. The other 5 are at $1995 up to $3000. Yesterday I even received a $100 tip! I think I got one tip in 16 years doing video. Go figure.

Anyway ... the more top of the line weddings started this weekend and the next two weeks will be big. I'm expecting decent print sales, but so far I just haven't had enough weddings to know how it will play out.

Now I could continue with the full rez files for the $995 crowd or I could go with low rez/e-mail files and make the full rez an added expense. That's where I'll have to make my decision.

RustyB
Veteran

Jul 9, 2006, 11:35 PM

Post #6 of 13 (897 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Sparky] Changes in pricing [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

..I could continue with the full rez files for the $995 crowd or I could go with low rez/e-mail files and make the full rez an added expense. That's where I'll have to make my decision.

I guess one could come up with a number and give the customer two options...for example...

Option 1: Include a proof/low rez CD of the photos, with the originals only available as prints online, with the prices marked up like 300% so you could make some money off the sales.

Option 2: Buy all the full rez photos on CD for $200, and just let them do the prints on their POS inkjet or down at the WalMart photo center.

Price of the CD and print markup is just guesstimated for the example. I just want to figure what will average the same amount of extra money for either option.

faith poison wedding films
anger is an energy

Jenn M
Veteran

Jul 9, 2006, 11:52 PM

Post #7 of 13 (889 views)
Shortcut

Re: [RustyB] Changes in pricing [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

yeah - I'm sure this year was a fluke. Less than half the contracts I had for 2006 had a photographer's name on it. We were hired first. And of those we've shot so far, and of those contracts w/ photographers listed, the Clients paid more or at least as much for the video up to the point of the wedding. I'm sure you are correct in that, after the wedding, the photogs will probably surpass us, but why can't that money go into my pocket instead. Cool

We have 7 contracts for 2007 so far - going on 8 if the most recent demo books. So of those 8, only two have contracted photographers so far (at the time of signing our contract). And I one of them asked me the same thing we heard again and again for 2006 - "Can't we just print stills from the video?" Do you know how much it pains me to have to talk someone into hiring a photographer? ME?! They insist they don't want a full-day coverage with the photographer - just a few nice formals before and after the ceremony. Now, I'm no dummy - I know their priorities change after the wedding day, and I would keep that in mind - but for those couples who don't expect much up front, I see no reason we couldn't cover both services.

So that was the original intention of making the leap for us. BUT I have a feeling I will be seduced by it and who knows what will happen. I worked my arse off this past Saturday, and though it ended up being a good day overall, I was beat. I can't count the number of times I looked over and saw the photog leaning up against a wall, or sipping coffee while I was standing on a step-stool holding a camera up over my head nonstop. Unsure

So who knows where things may lead...

OH, and one other funny sidenote - the photog said to us, "I have no idea how I ended up at this wedding..." He's a kind of low-budget guy - does a lot of basic weddings, but yesterday they had a high -end reception w/ a fairly expensive band, etc. In response to his comment, I just shrugged. But the truth was, we knew why he was there. The bride's priority was the video. She and her father were one of those Clients who asked about basic photographers (which again was why I was confused at first by her dad's comment earlier this week about working with the photographer and us not "fighting" over the bride...referenced in an earlier post). But anyway, I believe this may have been one bride who might have gone for the combo idea.

But then again, like I said, 2006 may have been a fluke...

Shadow
Veteran

Jul 10, 2006, 12:22 AM

Post #8 of 13 (885 views)
Shortcut

Re: [RustyB] Changes in pricing [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

I'm at a loss. I want to make money on prints, especially with a similar $995/5 hour package. But like you say, if you give them a CD with low-rez proofs, they're going to make a bunch of crappy prints unless you watermark them.

So, should you make them buy a PRINT of every photo they want without a proof watermark? Or, should you just give/sell them all the full rez images on CD, and simply figure into your pricing that you won't be making much on prints?

The photographer I share studio space with just changed the way she offers proofs. She found a new film lab that will print out 4x5 photos and put them into a cheap album (for proof delivery, not for a keepsake) that has some kind of coating that they can't be scanned???
So people get a little book to look through, no watermarks and she still gets the orders for the prints.

She loves the new lab because everything is delivered and she doesn't have to do much in terms of putting things together to deliver proofs.

RustyB
Veteran

Jul 10, 2006, 12:51 AM

Post #9 of 13 (883 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Jenn M] Changes in pricing [In reply to]	Can't Post

Wow! You guys are really in demand! I haven't been that much in demand since I went over $999. Laugh

The ONE prospective bride I met this year, asked me for a photog referral...but she still didn't book with me. (She didn't know my prices before scheduling the meeting.)

Like 'bear has prophecized of the "digital imaging specialist"...there's much more sharing of skillsets with digital video+photo. With a lone gunman like me, I think it makes sense to learn both, and book one or the other with each client..whatever keeps you booked and makes you the most money. And for husband/wife teams, it seems a huge waste of time to have one shooting video, while the other works for free as the #2 cameraperson, when they could be toting a DSLR and possibly tripling your income for the wedding. It only takes one person to shoot video, and one person to take pictures...and lets face it...in MOST cases, video would be easier to sell if it were an "add-on" to a photography package. Especially for us low-buck bargain videographers in the trailer park market. Laugh

When I used to do bridal shows, some brides wouldn't even raise their heads to look at my demo because I didn't offer photo+video packages. My fiance/wife was going to take some photography packages so we could do both...but she was obviously the type that would be gung-ho over something for a short time, before completely losing interest. Laugh

She was even about to apprentice with a photog friend of mine...but I could tell where she was going with that, seeing how much she flirted with him. Besides, she was always "busy" on Saturday nights. Laugh

faith poison wedding films
anger is an energy

videobear
Veteran

Jul 10, 2006, 11:13 AM

Post #10 of 13 (863 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Sparky] Changes in pricing [In reply to]	Can't Post

Scott, I know nothing about the wedding photo biz...but how about something like this:

-Your packages consist of:
- A CD with up to, say 100 high rez images
- A CD with up to, say 200 high rez images
- A package with a hi-rez CD and up to XX prints (some 8x10s, some 4x5s and wallets)
- A package with the CD, prints, and a printed album
- a set of a la carte options for extra prints, big portraits, and maybe even a DVD with a video slideshow.

- You send the client a proof CD with ALL the images on it, low rez and watermarked. They select the images they want in their final package.

Regards,
Doug Graham
Panda Productions

KevinShaw
Veteran

Jul 13, 2006, 3:41 AM

Post #11 of 13 (817 views)
Shortcut

Re: [RustyB] Changes in pricing [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

So, should you make them buy a PRINT of every photo they want without a proof watermark? Or, should you just give/sell them all the full rez images on CD, and simply figure into your pricing that you won't be making much on prints?

Having been through this as a wedding photography customer not many years ago, I have to say that I was very distressed by the concept of having to pay a premium price for every little print of every picture, after paying good money to have the pictures taken in the first place. I've said repeatedly that this amounts to double-charging by photographers and makes no sense in an era when the photographer doesn't do the work of making prints, as opposed to the days when they went and sat in the darkroom and earned that extra fee. So no, if you have a conscience you should not force your customers to pay you premium prices for every print (no matter how small), and should offer them some way to get a viewable copy of every image at a reasonable price. Charge what your time and talent are worth up front and don't worry about trying to get rich selling prints; that's ultimately not fair to the customers.

By all means make some profit on prints if your customers are willing to go along with that, but give them some options to get their pictures without having to sell the family car to pay for them. They already paid you to take the pictures, why the heck wouldn't you deliver the results of that work?

RustyB
Veteran

Jul 13, 2006, 4:09 AM

Post #12 of 13 (813 views)
Shortcut

Re: [kwshaw1] Changes in pricing [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

...By all means make some profit on prints if your customers are willing to go along with that, but give them some options to get their pictures without having to sell the family car to pay for them. They already paid you to take the pictures, why the heck wouldn't you deliver the results of that work?

Makes perfect sense to me...I'm just getting a feel as to what will generate the most money.

It sounds pretty crappy...a customer pays me what amounts to $100-$200 an hour to come to their wedding and walk around for a while, but if they actually want the pictures I took, they have to pay extra? Sounds like hiring a DJ to play at your reception, but then having to give him a $5 bill every time you want him to play a song.

Like you say...I guess it's still a leftover from when photogs actually proofed, processed, touched up, and printed the photos that the customer wanted...intead of popping a memory stick in their PC and clicking "upload". I suppose many are still milking that concept.

From what I see, the cost of a photographer is roughly the same as video...there's a huge amount of low-buck photogs. To get started, I think getting $999 might be average for a day of shooting...just like video. (Albeit the profit margin should be insanely higher, all things considered.)

$999 is tough, and I want some add-ons to pad the booking. I'm looking at doing photo montages with audio of the vows, or even crappy video done by an assistant as an add-on.

But even if the package tops out at $999...at least I won't be spending as much time editing, so it would free up time for other things to make money. Every photog I know shoots all sorts of stuff during the week, in addition to weddings. While I'd be tickled to death, just to gross $2000 a month on weddings and pay my rent+car payment. Laugh

faith poison wedding films
anger is an energy

KevinShaw
Veteran

Jul 13, 2006, 1:30 PM

Post #13 of 13 (792 views)
Shortcut

Re: [RustyB] Changes in pricing [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

It sounds pretty crappy...a customer pays me what amounts to $100-$200 an hour to come to their wedding and walk around for a while, but if they actually want the pictures I took, they have to pay extra?

Exactly my point. If photographers expect to get rich selling prints then they should only charge a nominal fee for the initial work of taking pictures; if they charge good money to take the pictures they should deliver the results of that effort to the person paying the bill. Doing both is just taking advantage of people, and it sucks big time when you're the customer.

One analogy I've come up with would be to pay $50 for a nice meal in a fancy restaurant, and then the chef holds it up for you to see and says it will cost another $50 to have it delivered to the table. I can't think of any other business in the world which gets away with charging twice for something to the extent that photographers do.