A new business model selling HiRes digitals

[kirbinster]

I know many photographers won't sell high resolution digitals, but I really think that is a mistake. This business needs to move out of the 19th century business model it still uses. I discussed this in another thread but it probably got lost so I thought I would start a new one here. Most businesses that sell information products (yes a picture is information too) use some form of versioning to maximize their revenue and enhance customer satisfaction. Its time for photographers to do the same.

Versioning simply means you sell your product / service in many different forms and at many different price points. Example, some newspapers put the entire daily edition online for free, but after a few days you have to pay if you want to get an older article. The WSJ has article intro's for free but you have to go to the pay site for the full text. There are many more examples I could come up with.

So, photographers could continue to use the current model of a nominal sitting fee, no digital images, and rape the customer on prints - OR they could come up with other packages.

One such model would be a higher sitting fee and lower print costs with low res digitals images for a price. Another would be up front Hi res digital images obviously for a higher price. Unlike the newspaper business, you are unlikely to sell that image to anybody else except the original customer, assuming its not an artistic photo. But here is a twist many have not thought of. That digital images has a declining value over time. If a customer has not ordered additional prints after a year, the odds are they never will. So, have a lower price for those hi res digitals after a year. You get more money and the customer gets something they want. Have another lower price after two or perhaps three years. Explain to the customer that if they don't buy them that you will destroy those files at that point in time. I would bet that offer would get you sales you would never have gotten, and you clear up all those files from your system that will never be used anyway.

Comments more than welcomed.

[andyw]

Originally Posted by kirbinster

I know many photographers won't sell high resolution digitals, but I really think that is a mistake. This business needs to move out of the 19th century business model it still uses. I discussed this in another thread but it probably got lost so I thought I would start a new one here. Most businesses that sell information products (yes a picture is information too) use some form of versioning to maximize their revenue and enhance customer satisfaction. Its time for photographers to do the same.

The difference between a newspaper or magazine selling a print copy and an online copy is they have many thousands of customers for that single issue.
Those who cannot get the print version will look for the online version.

A photographer (talking specifically about portrait/weddings here although commercial is not that much different) has a single customer for their product, the product itself is specific to that customer (ok before you say it, there may be 2 or 3 people in the family who want a copy)
Therefore their pricing has to be geared effectively to a one time sale.

Originally Posted by kirbinster

So, photographers could continue to use the current model of a nominal sitting fee, no digital images, and rape the customer on prints - OR they could come up with other packages.

"rape" the customer on prints - again with this sort of phrasiology??
Why? What is the problem with offering a finished product? which is what a print is.

Do you think Ford or BMW are "raping" you by offering a finished car or is Sony "raping" you with a finished stereo rather than just giving you a box of parts?

Originally Posted by kirbinster

One such model would be a higher sitting fee and lower print costs with low res digitals images for a price.

Great and all the photographers that I know in the portrait business would love to do this.
But in their experience the customers do not actually want that.
They want to be able to choose their outlay on the final product.
They baulk at paying the high sitting fee because they "might not like" the way the shots come out and thus don't buy them.
There is NEVER a guarantee that a customer will like the shots you take however good they are.
It would be great for photographers if they knew they were still getting 500 quid/bucks for that session even if there was no purchase but that is not going to happen.

Originally Posted by kirbinster

But here is a twist many have not thought of. That digital images has a declining value over time.

You are wrong if you think this has not been thought of already. Be it film or digital, photographers already know this and have done for many many years.
This sort of thing has been happening since I first became involved in photography back in the 70's and before that.

Bottom line as far as I am concerned is, sure sell digital files, but price them properly and ensure they are the finished article rather than what the "weekend warriors" offer.
Then the pricing and thus profit remains the same.

[Photologyst]

Excellent idea, Kirb.

I agree with you that many photographers will lose out if they do not move with the times. There will always be some who still do silver gelatin prints, etc. However, that is a very limited, special market niche.

After a few years photos of certain things like family, tend to go into the proverbial “shoe box.” So, "striking" or selling in a timely fashion are imperative.

The last time I hired a photographer without digis was about 15 years ago. One of the best in town and I was shocked that she was still into film. Now, I have to scan those photos and negatives. What a pain!

Everyone can do their own thing of course. However, I do believe that the photographers who refuse to give their digitals will lose in the end. Rather like the music business tried to force people to continue to purchase their products. Cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face or Luddite come to mind.

I would only offer the best shots, mostly in JPG or occasionally in TIFF format, that have been PS processed with all Exif data intact along with the copyright on the photo—if the photographer felt that was necessary. The contract could be written in such a way that if they change anything, they must give the photographer credit including all online info.

I recently took some photos at a memorial service. There were many lovely family portraits. One of the people wanted my RAW shots so he could make an album. I only gave the PS processed ones. He did not ask again.

“Cheap” prints may be the only way that some people can afford any prints. If they want to exhibit the photographer could suggest a good printer and write into the contract that s/he must be given credit and if the prints have been altered, that should also be stated.

[autofocus]

"Great and all the photographers that I know in the portrait business would love to do this.
But in their experience the customers do not actually want that.
They want to be able to choose their outlay on the final product.
They baulk at paying the high sitting fee because they "might not like" the way the shots come out and thus don't buy them.
There is NEVER a guarantee that a customer will like the shots you take however good they are.
It would be great for photographers if they knew they were still getting 500 quid/bucks for that session even if there was no purchase but that is not going to happen."

+1 Andy. I think you have a better chance of up selling a customer by offering a fair and reasonable price on the sitting instead of jamming a high price down their throat for something they have not even had the luxury of seeing [the finished products] Pricing a sitting for $500 - $700 and charging some small fee for digitals or enlargements just doesn't work for me. It's almost analogous to buying a high end used car without doing a test drive first. I think most clients would not want to buy your service if that were the case.

[BK553]

I basically already do this, clients can purchase prints if they want, or purchase digital copies with reprint rights they can do whatever they want with. Smugmug allows differentiation between low, high and full resolution images, and different pricing based on each level. So they can buy prints, digital copies, or any combination thereof. It really doesn't have to be any more complicated than that. After I get paid for the sitting fee, I expect to make about 50-150 dollars in additional purchases. This is an average, and my sitting fee is based on this. Prices up front, and everybody gets what they expect. The sitting fee guarantees I cover more than my costs, and any additional purchases are 100% profit.

I don't agree in a huge up-front sitting fee though, it should be balanced. It's also important to realize though that many uses (facebook, email, digital frames, etc..) are rather new, and may require some re-thinking in how our products are delivered.

oh yeah, and I would NEVER deliver my RAWs, those are not a finished product. Finalized JPGS only.

[autofocus]

Originally Posted by BK553

I basically already do this, clients can purchase prints if they want, or purchase digital copies with reprint rights they can do whatever they want with. Smugmug allows differentiation between low, high and full resolution images, and different pricing based on each level. So they can buy prints, digital copies, or any combination thereof. It really doesn't have to be any more complicated than that. After I get paid for the sitting fee, I expect to make about 50-150 dollars in additional purchases. This is an average, and my sitting fee is based on this. Prices up front, and everybody gets what they expect. The sitting fee guarantees I cover more than my costs, and any additional purchases are 100% profit.

I don't agree in a huge up-front sitting fee though, it should be balanced. It's also important to realize though that many uses (facebook, email, digital frames, etc..) are rather new, and may require some re-thinking in how our products are delivered.

oh yeah, and I would NEVER deliver my RAWs, those are not a finished product. Finalized JPGS only.

Many years ago there was a bit on Saturday Night Live about a bank that only made change. So a customer could come in, ask for change of a dollar, and the bank would give him 4 quarters or ten dimes, etc...and that was the only service they provided. With a rather puzzled look on his face the person interviewing the bank manager asked, "interesting, but how do you make a profit?" The manager quickly replied, "we make it up in volume." Needless to say I thought it was hysterical, and still do to this day. As for me/us, (my wife and I) we'd rather do higher profit, lower volume business than to work, and I hate to use the term, "cheaply." For the amount of time that goes into providing a good quality product for our clients we expect them to pay a fairly good price. Giving up a disk with images, regardless of the resolution, is only done on an exception basis and for a pretty steep fee. Maybe we are fortunate that we live in an area that allows us to do that. But for the amount of hours that goes into this business (not to mention your cost of doing business) and to only make $100 - $150 on an order, in my mind it's just not worth the trouble.

[sk66]

I do think the industry is going to have to shift with the times and adjust the thinking. I do think the digital files are going to be (already are) as much "the product" as the prints are.

It is reasonable to think you could have a pricing structure for the digital files...unedited Jpegs, Edited Jpegs, Low/Med/High res....

I think when you are talking "studio/wedding" it is pretty much a one time sale and after that the images/digital files have next to no value for you....You would be better off selling them (and getting them off of your storage system).

Hell, when I got married a couple decades ago we got the prints and a video made from all of the images...not much different than giving images on disk IMO.

I think a "reasonable model" might be "average" sitting fee...+ Selected images for print, + images on disk (might as well give the (good) RAW files IMO, but edited Jpegs would probably be better).

This would NOT apply to all forms of photography, but pretty much anything done "under contract" (journalism excepted). The only stipulation I would make is usage rights for the photographer.

[sk66]

Originally Posted by autofocus

Many years ago there was a bit on Saturday Night Live about a bank that only made change. So a customer could come in, ask for change of a dollar, and the bank would give him 4 quarters or ten dimes, etc...and that was the only service they provided. With a rather puzzled look on his face the person interviewing the bank manager asked, "interesting, but how do you make a profit?" The manager quickly replied, "we make it up in volume." Needless to say I thought it was hysterical, and still do to this day. As for me/us, (my wife and I) we'd rather do higher profit, lower volume business than to work, and I hate to use the term, "cheaply." For the amount of time that goes into providing a good quality product for our clients we expect them to pay a fairly good price. Giving up a disk with images, regardless of the resolution, is only done on an exception basis and for a pretty steep fee. Maybe we are fortunate that we live in an area that allows us to do that. But for the amount of hours that goes into this business (not to mention your cost of doing business) and to only make $100 - $150 on an order, in my mind it's just not worth the trouble.

Higher profit/ Lower volume is always "better" IMO....but you have to have the client base/market to support it.
It is "easier" to make the same money by doing larger volume/lower profit, but by "easier" I mean it's easier to find a market.....Of course there is a lot of scrapping for "that market".

For those that are starting out I always say if it doesn't pay 1.5x your regular hourly wage it's just a hobby and not time "well spent" financially....You could be working overtime making more money.

[BK553]

Originally Posted by autofocus

Many years ago there was a bit on Saturday Night Live about a bank that only made change. So a customer could come in, ask for change of a dollar, and the bank would give him 4 quarters or ten dimes, etc...and that was the only service they provided. With a rather puzzled look on his face the person interviewing the bank manager asked, "interesting, but how do you make a profit?" The manager quickly replied, "we make it up in volume." Needless to say I thought it was hysterical, and still do to this day. As for me/us, (my wife and I) we'd rather do higher profit, lower volume business than to work, and I hate to use the term, "cheaply." For the amount of time that goes into providing a good quality product for our clients we expect them to pay a fairly good price. Giving up a disk with images, regardless of the resolution, is only done on an exception basis and for a pretty steep fee. Maybe we are fortunate that we live in an area that allows us to do that. But for the amount of hours that goes into this business (not to mention your cost of doing business) and to only make $100 - $150 on an order, in my mind it's just not worth the trouble.

I'm pretty sure I said (or meant to) that the orders represented an additional 100-150 dollars, plus the sitting fee (usually $150) so figure $300 for an 1-1 1/2 hour long portrait session. If you can charge more than that, good for you. Most of my clients are younger couples (my age) who won't pay more than that.

You charge $50 for a 5X7, does that represent the work put into the "enlargement" or the actual shoot? Your sitting free is 1/2 what mine is. I'd rather make money on the time spent shooting. "enlarging" is editing I have to do anyway.

[autofocus]

Originally Posted by BK553

I'm pretty sure I said (or meant to) that the orders represented an additional 100-150 dollars, plus the sitting fee (usually $150) so figure $300 for an 1-1 1/2 hour long portrait session. If you can charge more than that, good for you. Most of my clients are younger couples (my age) who won't pay more than that.

You charge $50 for a 5X7, does that represent the work put into the "enlargement" or the actual shoot? Your sitting free is 1/2 what mine is. I'd rather make money on the time spent shooting. "enlarging" is editing I have to do anyway.

Our sitting fee is $75 for one child/person..and it goes up for each incremental subject. That fee is for the shoot done in our town..we will also charge as much as $50 - $125 more for out of area locations. You only seemed to comment on our 5x7 price without noting that we charge $18 each for 4x6's, but they're only available to purchase on orders that exceed $250. We charge $220 for 16x20 gallery wraps (we sold two to a client last week and her total order was over $1000, and that did not include the out of town sitting fee for her two boys). Hey, I'm not trying to make it sound like we are the greatest thing since sliced bread, but we work hard for our business, and have a loyal following who place repeat orders year over year with us, and our marketplace (northeast) supports our pricing (and I recognize that's a key component in the equation) Considering the bad economy, we actually grew our business this year over the past two years...so I guess it's working