How many should I expect?

[bluejean]

I love taking pictures, but for our newborn son, I wanted to hire a "pro" and get portrait quality pictures. I asked around and found a college girl that was reputable for taking great shots, reasonably priced. I had her out to my home and did a 2+hr photo shoot with my son. When I got the disk back, I was rather unimpressed- there were maybe 12 shots worth printing out.

So, I am curious, how many portrait quality photos should I expect from a 2 hr photo session?

My husband's remarks, "you get what you pay for". I paid $50. She is a young photographer trying to get a portfolio built up. Did I really get what I paid for?

[Mr Guy]

Assuming the ones you got back were pretty good, well edited, and suitable for framing, $50 for 12 is four bucks a picture. Are the pictures worth four bucks each to you?

*Edit* I think I sound way more harsh than I meant to. I'm sorry. I rephrased the sentence to convey more what I meant and less meanness!

Doing a shoot in someone's home is going to be more difficult than in a studio, or even in the photographer's home studio. I'd try and be happy with what you paid for what you got, and then if you want more either talk to her and say that you'd like another shoot, or find someone else. Where are you located, maybe we can help you find someone?

[private]

The common misconception is that if you pay more you will get better quality. I do not charge that much - some might say too cheap and I generally give my clients about 25-30 pictures to choose from after a one hour session. And so far, 98% of my pictures have been purchased. Although, I am not saying that they are portrait quality -

How many pictures did she give you? If she gave you 300 pics and you only kept 12 - then I would be bummed. BUT, if she gave you 20 and you kept 12, I would not be so sad.

Also, what was your expectation? Did it match what she sd was going to deliver?

[superdewa]

Did she give you a CD with the images on it for you to print or are you paying her to print for you?

[valleygirl]

Without actually seeing this girl's work, it's hard to say if you got what you paid for. In general, $50 for a two hour, on-location shoot sounds dirt cheap to me. I charge $100/hour for people to travel to ME and I give clients about 30-50 proofs to choose from.

I think if you got 12 shots for $50 you did great. I'm not sure what you were expecting. If you go to a place like Sears, you would have paid that much for 6 "okay" shots and would not have even been given a CD with that.

[candleman]

[QUOTE=laurenfitz;307943] In general, $50 for a two hour, on-location shoot sounds dirt cheap to me. [QUOTE]

too right,, i wouldnt have done it for that price... and i'm not charging yet! its allot more work than just the 2 hours you paid for.

Wat "non photographers" dont understand is how much work can be put into them in post production.
its not uncommon to spend half an hour on a single in photoshop. (this is assuming she actually did tweak them)

ALSO, you got the CD by the sound of things, you're pretty lucky as allot of people dont do that.

[steelese]

I had a long answer prepared, but I decided to answer it this way. I did a family photograph taken on remote location, it was a family of 6. I charged a $50 on location fee, plus a distance charge (gas is expensive still). That came to $75, then I charged $50 for the couple plus $10 for each additional child, so now we are up to $165. She wanted individual pictures of each child, I normally charge and additional $20 per child seating. So now I am at $245. They asked for the digital originals to print so they payed $50 extra for that. So for $300 for about 2 hours of work they got the following. I gave them a CD with the 6 best pictures of their family. This included general post processing about and hour of work afterward. Then each child had 2 or three shots that I thought were the best. So my total was 16 high quality photos.

I think they got a good deal, and they seemed to think so too. I don't give them all my photos because I don't want them to print up photos that I think poorly represent my work. It is an artist prerogative. So 12 photos that you like is dirty cheap for $50, and you have all the photos, including the crappy ones.

Okay so this is a long answer as well.

[bluejean]

I guess my expectations are really high.

I am a descent photographer and can edit photos really well in photoshop, only my camera is just a point and shoot. If I am going to pay for pictures, I have very high expectations.

She gave me a disk of around 300 + pictures. Very few had been edited to print ready shots. And the ones she had edited weren't done very well. (backgrounds were blackened out and obvoiously edited.) I improved the 12 I liked with just mere minutes of photoshopping.

I don't have to pay for prints, she is going to let me get prints of the ones I want. (Only she didn't give me a letter releasing the rights, so I am not sure how easily I will be able to get prints made.)

I am in the Cincinnati, OH area, anyone in this area that you could recomend for a photoshoot with a baby?

Thanks for the thoughts and comments.
bluejean

[Mr Guy]

It's not impossible that she was very early on the learning curve, and maybe her time turned out not to be worth 15 to 20 an hour (depending on how much post processing she did), but in fairness you did know she was a student and more of an aspiring photographer when you started.

Consider tossing up some examples on flickr or photobucket and post links here, and maybe we can help make some post-processing adjustments that may give you more usable results.

[CrashTECH]

Originally Posted by bluejean

I guess my expectations are really high.

I'd say so. You only paid $50. That is less than most sitting fees I have seen. You probably got "about" what you paid for. If I was you, I would try to give them some feedback, they could probably use it; and if they really care about learning will accept your feedback graciously. As long as you aren't a jerk about it.