Dancesport Photography

[pasoviennese]

I'm a seasoned competitor in Ballroom dancing, at the moment I am taking some time off my competition career to focus on becoming a dance coach. One other thing I would like to get into is dancesport photography. There is currently a professional in the industry, but he only attends major championships. Hence there's a lack of photographer at smaller competitions and intra-studio competitions. That's what I'm more interested in.

Now the professional charges $10 for a 6x4 photo, $35 for a 8x12 and $90 for a 20x24. Digital copies are $15 each for unlimited use.

I'm really just an amature, don't have the experience yet, nor the reputation in the industry. So I'm really just trying to break into it. Wondering about what I should charge people. I'm thinking that for intra-studio competitions, I can sell the digital copy and distribution right to the studio and they can sell prints at what ever price they want. Since I'm really just starting, I'm thinking a cheap start, so people are more likely to give me a go and not costing them much.

How's $1 per digital copy? My first photo shoot I took over 1000 photos and about 200 keepers. So for a day's work $200 is pretty good I guess. What do yous think?

[Jim Bryant]

$1.00 per digital copy? Jesus.....don't get me started. That's what you charge your client when shooting the job, it's called digital capture fees. Then you charge them digital processing fees and then per image. $15.00 sounds about right. In my area I charge $20.00 per digital download. And that's a low res for Face Book.

If I was a professional in your area, I'd look you up and seriously educate you. Amateur or not, people in that line of competition expect to pay those prices, don't, I repeat don't sell below the set prices as you'll be hurting those photographers who actually take pictures full time and try to make a living of it.

Back in the film days, we used to charge a client a 50% markup per roll, plus processing and contact printing charges

If you have any hopes of up grading your equipment, you need to charge more. I don't know how much wear and tear your shutter takes each time when you press the shutter button, but for a Canon it costs $400.00 just to replace the shutter. And a shutter is good for about 150,000 frames more or less.

Better yet, find a professional in your area and ask them for their thoughts.

[pasoviennese]

Thank you for your advice! Much appreciated

The thing is I don't have my own website, nor do I want to start one and be comeptitive against the current professional. So I'm thinking about selling all digital copies to the studio that ran the competition together, and they can sell individual copies as they see suitable. Say If I charge $10 for photo, selling them 500 photos is going to cost them $5000. The entire competition doesn't even cost that much to run.

It's not a great effort for me, I take the photo and I go home on GIMP and do a 3:2 ratio crop, level adjustment and sharpening. Takes me less than a minute to process each photo.

Please have a look at my previous set on the Australia Dancesport Championships and let me know what you think in terms of quality. Would people want to spend money on my photos? If you are in their shoe, would you?

Australian Dancesport Championships 2010 Sunday Evening - a set on Flickr

I used my Canon 30D with Tamron 18-270mm f3.5-6.3
All photos were captured with same setting, ISO 800, 1/125 at largest aperature depending on focal length.

*facepalm*

~Eric

[pasoviennese]

Originally Posted by maxharvard

*facepalm*

~Eric

That bad?

[Jim Poor]

First, 200 "keepers" does not equal 200 sales. I have just over 300K photos in my files from last year and those are all what I would consider keepers. Wish I could have sold them all (even for $1.00, but that's just not reality.)

$200 for a day's work? I wouldn't even get out of bed for that when it comes to my photography. Let's pretend this is an 8 hour day which includes travel, shooting, sorting, processing, delivery etc. You're down to $25 per hour. Forget about equipment depreciation and think about; the cost of a disc, postage (or gas if you take them to the studio) packaging (even a simple jewel case or paper envelope). I buy my products in bulk and I still end up paying about $3.81 per disc which includes the disc, the jewel, the ink for the label (printable discs) the envelope, and postage.

Now figurea in wear and tear on your camera (how many clicks is your shutter rated for?) Don't forget computer needs and failures.

Second, after looking at the first dozen or so photos in the set, you are just not ready to be selling them yet.

- Motion blur can be a great thing occasionally, but at 1/125 you are getting way too much way too often. With your max f/3.5 you aren't going to get the shutter speeds you need to really stop motion.
I shoot a lot of fast action in dark venues and even with f/2 I'm shooting up around ISO 6400 and higher. I don't think the 30D will stand up to that sort of ISO in terms of noise.

- Even discounting the motion blur completely, you've missed focus on the majority of the images in the set. What's worse, is that with the missed focus obvious at web-resolution, it will be even worse at full res for printing.

I'd recommend a lot more practice before you consider venturing into any sort of selling.

[Jim Bryant]

Thanks for the link to your sight, After looking at what Jim posted I have to agree with him.
You might get one job, but after looking at your quality, you wouldn't be asked back a second time to photograph the event. You have to take in account of your reputation and if you're not quite ready to venture into this and do it would have future repercussions. But, that's my opinion. Practice, practice, practice as I say and you'll get better.

[pasoviennese]

First, 200 "keepers" does not equal 200 sales. I have just over 300K photos in my files from last year and those are all what I would consider keepers. Wish I could have sold them all (even for $1.00, but that's just not reality.)

That's why I'm not selling them individually. I'm selling them as a batch to the studio that ran the competition at a lower price, so they can sell individual photo to dancers. This way I make my share, and the studio get something out of it too.

$200 for a day's work? I wouldn't even get out of bed for that when it comes to my photography.

So maybe I'll charge $5 per photo. Given that the standard 4x6 print sells for $10, the studio will still gain a $5 profit from the sell and not having to do anything themselves.

Second, after looking at the first dozen or so photos in the set, you are just not ready to be selling them yet.

- Motion blur can be a great thing occasionally, but at 1/125 you are getting way too much way too often. With your max f/3.5 you aren't going to get the shutter speeds you need to really stop motion.
I shoot a lot of fast action in dark venues and even with f/2 I'm shooting up around ISO 6400 and higher. I don't think the 30D will stand up to that sort of ISO in terms of noise.

- Even discounting the motion blur completely, you've missed focus on the majority of the images in the set. What's worse, is that with the missed focus obvious at web-resolution, it will be even worse at full res for printing.

What's wrong with motion blur? It's a fast sport and I think motion blur is great at showing speed when they're doing fast moves. Now if the dancers are doing a picture line (like the ballroom pose), then I don't think there's a motion blur issue. You're right that my 30D can't stand up to that sort of ISO, and I don't have money to upgrade to a f2.8 at the moment. But most competitions are brighter, the photo set was taken in the evening program where lights are dimmed significantly.

Well yea, admittedly some of the focus can be better. It was my first photo shoot, and at the time I've only had the camera for 2 month and it's my first SLR. But I don't think it's that far off, as far as I can tell anyway. Could you please give an example ie which pic, and where my focus actually appears to be etc. Also, I thought a 4x6 print is significantly smaller than the computer screen.

Thanks for the link to your sight, After looking at what Jim posted I have to agree with him.
You might get one job, but after looking at your quality, you wouldn't be asked back a second time to photograph the event. You have to take in account of your reputation and if you're not quite ready to venture into this and do it would have future repercussions. But, that's my opinion. Practice, practice, practice as I say and you'll get better.

So apart from shutter speed isn't fast enough and focus isn't accurate enough, is there anything else wrong with my photos?

I've taken some more photos recently, and my last set was from Australia Day 2010. Have I made any improvement? Please give me some honest opinion. All my friends are saying that "the photos look amazing, you should become a professional". But then again, they're friends. I appreciate some harsh blunt truth from professionals like you on the forum. Thanks!

Australia Day 2010 - a set on Flickr

That's why I'm not selling them individually. I'm selling them as a batch to the studio that ran the competition at a lower price, so they can sell individual photo to dancers. This way I make my share, and the studio get something out of it too.

Places don't usually buy batches... but, hey if they do... they are probably suckers, so go for it!

So maybe I'll charge $5 per photo. Given that the standard 4x6 print sells for $10, the studio will still gain a $5 profit from the sell and not having to do anything themselves.

So your price just went up from $1 to $5? I thought you were going to 'batch' sell them..?

What's wrong with motion blur? It's a fast sport and I think motion blur is great at showing speed when they're doing fast moves. Now if the dancers are doing a picture line (like the ballroom pose), then I don't think there's a motion blur issue. You're right that my 30D can't stand up to that sort of ISO, and I don't have money to upgrade to a f2.8 at the moment. But most competitions are brighter, the photo set was taken in the evening program where lights are dimmed significantly.

Motion blur in the sport can be very cool.... if (big IF, here) you can get it right. I've seen alot of dance photos where motion blur looks pretty cool, but honestly... it's a hard one to get.

Well yea, admittedly some of the focus can be better. It was my first photo shoot, and at the time I've only had the camera for 2 month and it's my first SLR. But I don't think it's that far off, as far as I can tell anyway. Could you please give an example ie which pic, and where my focus actually appears to be etc. Also, I thought a 4x6 print is significantly smaller than the computer screen.

If we can tell it's out of focus with that small thumb nail, imagine what it looks like at %200-300.

So apart from shutter speed isn't fast enough and focus isn't accurate enough, is there anything else wrong with my photos?

I've taken some more photos recently, and my last set was from Australia Day 2010. Have I made any improvement? Please give me some honest opinion. All my friends are saying that "the photos look amazing, you should become a professional". But then again, they're friends. I appreciate some harsh blunt truth from professionals like you on the forum. Thanks!

Australia Day 2010 - a set on Flickr

I've looked at the link you posted and frankly it's more of the same.

Nothing all that inspiring to open my wallet and the last pic of really out of focus. One of the landscape shots has a horizon all katty-whompous.

~Eric

[pasoviennese]

So your price just went up from $1 to $5? I thought you were going to 'batch' sell them..?

But you guys just said $1 is a ridiculous price!

If we can tell it's out of focus with that small thumb nail, imagine what it looks like at %200-300.

Now why would anyone view an image at 200-300%

I've looked at the link you posted and frankly it's more of the same.

Nothing all that inspiring to open my wallet and the last pic of really out of focus. One of the landscape shots has a horizon all katty-whompous.

Ok, I don't know whether it's me or you who got it confused, but when a image is not sharp because it was taken at 270mm at 1/5 of a second, I'd call it camera shake instead of out of focus.

And what's katty-whompous?

And people, I would really appreciate some constructive comments such as why isn't my photo worth selling, what's the difference between mine and one that is worth selling, what I can do to improve, etc. Instead of "your photo is out of focus, you can't sell them. it doesn't looke sharp at 200%, you can't sell them, your photos is shit, you haven't improved at all" etc. Show me a photo that's crystal clear with knife cut edges at 200% and I'll buy it on the spot! Or tell me why it's shit, not just cause "it's out of focus, it's katty-whompous" WTF is that anyway?