Are my prices too high?

[private]

if we would not pay the $100 he is just being a cheap skate - he was making excuses.

[kirbinster]

Maybe change your wording and just have it as digital images not high resolution images. Charge less for that, maybe $200 for something that would only allow for a 5"x7" at 150 dpi. Then you can charge more for the one that would allow high resolution. Just a thought.

[valleygirl]

Originally Posted by private

if we would not pay the $100 he is just being a cheap skate - he was making excuses.

Thanks. I thought so, too. That seems awfully fair to me for 50-60 web ready images. Just try and get Sears or JC Penny to sell you a copy of the digital negative! Not even going to happen!

Originally Posted by kirbinster

Maybe change your wording and just have it as digital images not high resolution images. Charge less for that, maybe $200 for something that would only allow for a 5"x7" at 150 dpi. Then you can charge more for the one that would allow high resolution. Just a thought.

YES! Great idea! I like that.

[k9mom]

The other option is to offer the CD in varying package sizes, e.g., 10 high res photos for $100, 25 for $250, etc....or just charge a flat $10 or $20 fee for each high res negative and let the client choose from proofs (low resolution, non- or minimally processed photos) which of the 50 or so they want to buy, then spend time doing post-processing on only those the client wants and is willing to pay for. And require a deposit of some percentage (25 or 50%) before you start doing the post-processing and CD burning, just in case the client ends up being a dead-beat flake...

[kencaleno]

Hi,laurenfitz, Your prices are good-if you charge any less,you will just be considered an "average" camera owner.Regards, Ken

[maritimer]

Your prices are good-if you charge any less,you will just be considered an "average" camera owner.

Depends.... First off, how long have you been in business? That is the main point right there. If you've only been doing this for a little while then yes, you probably are charging too much.

People will not pay top dollar for a name they don't know... especially in photography. You can never go by what everyone else is doing / charging. Those others could have years on you and again, people will pay for work by people that have the reputation.

Bottom line... until you can successfully charge $100+ per image, you should take what you can get. Plus, you do a 'deal' for someone who doesn't know you and that person could turn around and say ' blah blah did great work for me for a great price' = just generates more business in the end for you.

Took me about a year to get to this point ( $100+ per image ). I started charging $45 for image + print and framing costs for my landscape / wildlife photos. Portrait work was $200 single / $350 family+group work. I now get around $250 per image ( print and framing included ) for the landscape / wildlife, and double mentioned for the portrait work.. You have to start at the bottom. Trying to get top dollar right away will only hurt you as word spreads faster than money = people tell people you charge too much.

If you're established and have been successfully doing this for a while, totally disregard everything I've said here.

You should, though, always release top resolution to your clients no matter what. Why would someone pay top dollar to get work done and not be able to display it in their home right? Also, you have to get out of the 'XXX per image for portrait work' ; charge the flat rate + XX per hour for processing. In the end, you have to remember you're trying to establish yourself and you can't do that if you try to charge top dollar right off the bat....

just my 2 cents

P.S. Try a disclaimer on your website / business cards that state you only sell prints, if that's what you want to do. Maybe these folks felt ripped off because they expected ( for your price ) something more than non full resolution images on a CD.
Your bottom line as a photographer is two fold : give people what they want and give them something they are proud to display for others to see. There aren't too many people out there who pay for portrait work only to be given something they can't use in the end ...

[valleygirl]

Originally Posted by k9mom

The other option is to offer the CD in varying package sizes, e.g., 10 high res photos for $100, 25 for $250, etc....or just charge a flat $10 or $20 fee for each high res negative and let the client choose from proofs (low resolution, non- or minimally processed photos) which of the 50 or so they want to buy, then spend time doing post-processing on only those the client wants and is willing to pay for. And require a deposit of some percentage (25 or 50%) before you start doing the post-processing and CD burning, just in case the client ends up being a dead-beat flake...

I really like this idea. I probably should have offered this to them. I think I may change my price structure to include the pay per image idea. Because really, how many photos from a single session are people really going to want multiple copies of? Probably not all 50.

Originally Posted by maritimer

People will not pay top dollar for a name they don't know... especially in photography. You can never go by what everyone else is doing / charging. Those others could have years on you and again, people will pay for work by people that have the reputation.

Bottom line... until you can successfully charge $100+ per image, you should take what you can get. Plus, you do a 'deal' for someone who doesn't know you and that person could turn around and say ' blah blah did great work for me for a great price' = just generates more business in the end for you.

You should, though, always release top resolution to your clients no matter what. Why would someone pay top dollar to get work done and not be able to display it in their home right? Also, you have to get out of the 'XXX per image for portrait work' ; charge the flat rate + XX per hour for processing. In the end, you have to remember you're trying to establish yourself and you can't do that if you try to charge top dollar right off the bat....

.

Thanks, that is food for thought for sure. As for photography, I have been doing this for 30 years. For money, about 9 months. I structured my fees based on how much work goes into what I do, not necessarily the amount of time I've been charging money. But you are right, maybe if I charged less I'd get more business and hence more of a reputation. I just don't want people coming to me because they think I'm the cheapest...I think that could actually hurt my reputation. But I see what you mean about the friend referral,etc...maybe I should just take it and be happy for the business. :-)

What do you mean by $100 an image? Do you mean framed print, just a print or the digital file?

[Mr Guy]

Not paying $500 dollars for your time doesn't make them cheapskates, it makes them unable to afford your services. Photography is a luxury item, plain and symbol. Either people will pay it, or they won't. As a professional, the only decision you have to make is whether your pricing is going to cost you more customers than the money in prints is going to make you. Hopefully you keep good records so you know exactly how much money you make comes from prints.

Personally, I'd much, much, much rather pay a set fee for time, and not pay for the CD. The few times I've had to pay for the digital image set my teeth on edge, because they were situations where I was without other options: IE Vacation spots, cruises, etc.

Prints have almost no value to me, digital images do. I'm not a professional, but as a consumer, I know that I'd personally prefer you figure out how much you need to make from each customer and make pricing options accordingly.

IE

If you need to make $500 for each customer to stay open, and you do two hour sessions, and for each of those two hour sessions you actually do four hours of post processing, as a consumer, I'd prefer the option of just paying you for 6 hours of work and you give me all the results, good or bad.

For me, the product I want to buy is your talent behind the camera, and all the images that produces. For me personally, I'm not buying 4x6 or 8x10s, I'm buying your skill in lighting and artistic vision, and it sticks in my craw to pay a premium for the format the end result comes in.

[bagofscraps]

Before I had a DSLR a friend asked if her husband could come and take some shots of my toddler to use in his portfolio. I was offered a free print as a thank you, but I asked for a CD of images, which he didn't offer as a service. He did me one, and charged me £65. At the time, I thought that was expensive.

Now I have a DSLR and know more about post-processing, I realise what an absolute bargain I got.

I think one of the problems is that non-photographers have NO idea about the work that goes into it. And on top of that there's the value that needs to be put on the skill of the photographer. Anyone can go out and buy a DSLR and set themselves up as a pro, but that doesn't mean they can all produce images of a good standard artistically.

I agree that a well-known photographer can more easily charge a higher amount, but I also think that even a less well known one can charge as high a price if their work is of the same standard - although the less well known one may find it harder to get as many bookings.

I would say that the service you offer and the quality of your work is worth the money. I can easily see your website and decide that. BUT, I could never afford to pay that. I'm guessing that this chap has seen and liked your work and not only has no idea that the cost is justified, but that he probably can't afford it anyway.

My guess is that you'll get a few chancers like that for a while, but that in a few years you'll be better known and will get people who CAN afford the fab work you do.

[valleygirl]

Originally Posted by bagofscraps

I would say that the service you offer and the quality of your work is worth the money. I can easily see your website and decide that. BUT, I could never afford to pay that. I'm guessing that this chap has seen and liked your work and not only has no idea that the cost is justified, but that he probably can't afford it anyway.

My guess is that you'll get a few chancers like that for a while, but that in a few years you'll be better known and will get people who CAN afford the fab work you do.

Thank you so much. I appreciate the nice compliment. :-)

And I agree with you 100%. I think that these people (and maybe most who only dabble in point and shoot), probably thinks the photos come straight out of the camera looking that way and that all I'm doing is taking the pictures and unloading them onto a CD. They have no idea how much post-processing goes into each image. I think $500 for 50 images is a steal when you consider how much work goes into it.

Thanks for the advice and comments.