Finding a photographer

[scrub-jay]

No, there isn't, except it is illegal.

It is because the photographer refuses to release the usage rights to these photos. I have legally-binding written permission from the photographers to use my photos as I see fit, as if they were taken by me. I have complete personal rights to scan, copy, print, manipulate, post, use in publications, or use for advertising any of my wedding photos. Therefore, I have ownership of the photos from my wedding and it is NOT illegal for me to use them in any way. My photographers have gotten more business offering this for a price (I think they charged me an extra few hundred) because no other photographers want to offer this.

[SoonerTexan]

Scrub Jay, you are right. What you got is pretty rare.

Heidi, I couldn't support myself full time on What I charge now. No freakin way. I can do it now because I have a full time job outside of photography and I still consider myself a beginner. I don't have half the equipment I really need (like a backup quality camera body), I didn't get liability insurance this year (a risk, but many of my shoots were free for friends and I wasn't doing weddings), didn't insure my equipment, and don't have to pay for individual health insurance. Most of the costs I listed above are yearly fees and investments in equipment and software that is obsolete quickly.

Travel charges are fine, but difficult in a large area like DFW. People balk at travel fees when they live in the same metro area.

Cheap photographers don't last forever...they either go out of business or raise their prices. Or they are operating on the side and maybe illegally. Ironically, many of my colleagues have found they actually got more clients when they raised their prices and those clients were less demanding. I hope to get to that point someday, but I don't have the time to build my business to that point right now. Honestly I'm a little burned out on it right now because it is SO much work for so little payback besides my own personal satisfaction right now. I didn't mind doing it before as a hobby and helping friends out, but now that doing it means less time with the baby, I'm going to reconsider how much effort I put into it.

[SoonerTexan]

Back to your original question, Peggy, I would ask around. You're going to get a better price with someone who doesn't show up immediately in a google search.

[scrub-jay]

Scrub Jay, you are right. What you got is pretty rare.

This is so true, and probably the reason I can't find a photographer here

[SoonerTexan]

My offer to do a free photo session for any IMSNer that comes to live in DFW still stands though...I've been paid back by each person I've done them for with awesome friendships and help when I really needed it.

[scrub-jay]

I'll tell DH I've put it on the residency location list!

[GreyhoundsRUs]

Also try Craigslist That's how we found our wedding photographer.

[MissCrabette]

ST, your example of 20 sessions per year at 6 hours of work each adds up to 3 regular work weeks. No wonder you're losing money. That's a hobby, not a business. Nothing wrong with that, but you can't expect to break even at that rate. Like you said, you're still in the early stages, and you're still building a portfolio, but I wouldn't worry about established photographers not making enough money.

Personally, I wouldn't even consider a photographer that didn't offer the full resolution files for a reasonable price. True, you pay more for a better photographer, but there are SO many of them out there so that there's no need to settle, particularly in a large metro area.

[SuzySunshine]

Wow, I'm sure Peggy didn't expect this to be such a debate. I sure didn't. I don't think comparing this to medicine is apples to apples though because in most cases consumers, and providers, are limited to what they can choose in medicine.

In photography the providers usually start as ST has. Start it as a hobby, if they find they enjoy it and think they can make money off of it they usually quit their full time jobs and it becomes their full time job. Anyone who goes into photography for the money won't survive.

I think its interesting how many of you are adamant that you want your photos. What I think is great about photography is that if that is something you want, find a photographer that offers that, they are out there.

My KC photographer was my maid of honor and I LOVE her work. Is she pricey? Yes, very! Do I care? No because I know that she does what she does because she loves it and she's good at it and I'm willing to pay for her impecable work. Most of the things we buy from her are also framed and her framing is actually cheaper then Michaels, Hobby Lobby, etc. and because we've used her for years all of our frames match. I also know that she will be business for many years to come and I asked her once what happens if you decide to stop doing this and she said then she would sell all of her clients their images because they deserve to have access to them if I'm no longer going to provide that access. I think that is key, you need to form a relationship with a photographer if you plan to use them and they don't give you your photos because what happens when they do retire? You can buy a CD with a screensaver like show of all of your images and you can buy some other electronic things like that but you can't buy the images for reprinting but you can always go back and ask to have something reprinted in whatever she is currently offering.

We had a different photographer do our family photos in Rochester before we left because the timing got all screwed up and my KC wasn't able to make it up. I chose them because I knew the wife from a mom's group I was in. They did allow you to buy the images after you spent a certain amount with them, I don't remember what that was but we bought an album so that wasn't an issue. The only thing I have done with those images since I got them was have one canvas print made at Costco. Otherwise they just sit on my hard drive. Was it worth buying them? No probably not because I could have ordered a canvas from the photographer for cheaper then I paid for the canvas + the images.

Am I happy with the annual photos we have done of our kids, yes, absolutely! Am I happy with the photos we had done in Rochester, yes, absolutely! Two different photographers with two different visions, two different business models and two different philosophies. You have to be a vocal client, be comfortable with who you're working with and be clear about what you want.

And MissCrabette said it best when she said, "Personally, I wouldn't even consider..." because like most things photographers are a personal choice, you have to find one that is going to capture your family the way you want it captured.

I don't really have a point I'm just giving some illustrations.

[MissCrabette]

I wanted to add that the main reason I want my photos is because I'm ridiculously indecisive. Yeah, I'm like B, spending well over an hour looking for the perfect flights with just the right schedule and price. I could never pick only a handful of pictures. I want them all.

And like you said, Cheri, what happens when your photographer goes out of business, moves, gets sick, or dies? I don't want to have to keep track of him/her.

[Ladybug]

I think it goes awry when you start to think of photographers in terms of hourly wages. If you work X hours I only owe you X dollars based on your COGS, and if I do the editing myself and reduce your time by X percent then you should reduce your price by X percent. Eek! It's art, not hard labor. You're purchasing images which should capture your family's unique connections and personailites. There are plenty of picture places and photographers that can adequately focus, pose and light for a family portrait and their price points reflect the high availability of those portraits. They do not have the time, environmental flexibility, personal connections and artistic eye to capture your family's unique connections. That's what I'm purchasing with custom photography...not photo paper quality, high res files or 3 hours of the photographer's time. Not all photographers, regardless of what they are charging, are capable of *consistently* producing these types of images.

Peggy, you may want to start by looking at photographers globally and identifying what types of portraits you're most drawn to--hazy, soft and dreamy; vibrant and colorful, vintage, edgy, black and whites, close-up detail shots, interactactions, etc. Once you've identified the feel and look that you're drawn to then look for photogs in your greater metro area that have a similar style. Of those photogs then look at their ability to draw out their subjects' personalities and connections with their family members.

Digital editing is a highly significant factor in the final feel and emotional response evoked by an image. Few photogs would divorce their in-camera image from their digital interpretation of that image (their edited image). It's rare that a photog would release their RAW/high res files with copyrights. It's artistically weird IMO. I don't meant to imply that it's not a visually or emotionally evocative final image, but it's an authentic expression of no one, and I feel the same way about professional editing services.

[MarissaNicole]

Didn't read all the prior responses so my apologies in advance.... but I am currently looking for someone to do maternity pictures, and my usual photographer is $150 for the session then another $150 for the digital prints. I also thought I'd ask a nurse who does it on the side hope she was cheaper... she was $125 for the session and then $200 for the digital prints! OUCH.

Anyways I decided to look on Facebook (the marketplace) and found someone who appears to be starting out and their sitting fee is $75 and INCLUDES the digital images. I don't need anything fancy, I just want to be able to capture my pregnancy/belly in a quality slightly nicer than a point and shoot camera! Anyways I think I will try this person out (they have a website and appear legit). Just an idea for a place to look if cost is an issue!

[SoonerTexan]

ST, your example of 20 sessions per year at 6 hours of work each adds up to 3 regular work weeks. No wonder you're losing money. That's a hobby, not a business. Nothing wrong with that, but you can't expect to break even at that rate.

Some rough math:

If I did a session every weekday for a year (261, I believe):

$52200 gross profit
-$6000 sales tax
-$15000 overhead (If I truly did that many sessions, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume I would need another $10k in advertising, equipment, and insurance...and this might be on the low end)

= $31,200 before income taxes (which honestly might not be much at that level of income). That would be hard on a single person, harder considering I would have no benefits, and almost impossible factoring in childcare. Plus, 261 sessions/year solo is just not even doable in terms of time or finding that number of clients. Plus the admin duties of running a business on top of it.

At any rate, I completely agree that discs are an awesome option. I have discs for every session I've ever bought and I wouldn't hire a photographer who didn't offer them either...and I look for the best deal in prices too! I don't agree that not offering a disc, charging a high price for the disc, or not including all rights for the photos is unreasonable, though. That means the photographer cant use them in his/her own website, blog, advertising. That's a privilege a client should pay highly for.

[niener]

Much of what I would add to this discussion has already been said. Its not a literal representation of real life. Its art. If you just think of the image that comes straight out of the camera as the primary thing you're paying for then you're going to think you're being ripped off. If all you want is a someone to push the button and give you whatever comes out, you can find people that do that and wont charge you a ton. Or you can rent a more expensive camera and have a friend take them, upload them on your computer and you can do whatever the heck you want with them. There are cheap options out there to getting photos of your family if you're just looking for something a little nicer than what your point-and-shoot camera can do, you don't have to pay a professional for that.

As far as why photographers charge a smaller sitting fee and a lot for the prints or CDs, its just pricing structure. Some photographers like to put the bulk of their pricing on the prints or CDs because either they prefer to roll all of their post-production costs (i.e. anything they do after they leave the photo shoot) into the deliverables, or (I think the more common reason) they don't want to scare people off with higher initial fees. While some of y'all may be willing to pay more upfront knowing you'll get a high-res cd or whatever at the end, most people aren't like that. Most people would see $600 vs. $200 and go with $200. People don't read details, they just see dollar signs. In the end they'll probably pay about the same, but the $200 guy got the business and the $600 guy didnt. Some do it the other way and roll a big chunk of post-production fees into the up front costs. I personally prefer this way because whether you buy a print from me or not, I'm going to do a good deal of post-production on every single image I show you. Nothing I show is straight out of the camera because that's not the final image, its not my full vision, and its not what you paid me for. But a lot of photographers don't do heavy editing until after you've committed to buying a print of a particular image, so that cost doesn't come in until later.

Regardless of what pricing stucture they use, photographers should be VERY clear about what you are paying for. Anything called a sitting fee is typically just that, a fee you pay for the photographers time to show up and take the photos and any associated overhead. No significant post-production work aside from uploading the images and maybe color correcting them, no prints, no CDs, etc. Those things are priced separately. And they should be VERY clear about what comes in a package, whether the CDs are high or low res, etc. I think a lot of times portrait photographers forget that their clients are not also photographers. If a photographer sees a $200 package that includes sitting fee and a CD, there is no question in their mind that that's a low-res CD. But what is obvious to them probably isn't obvious to people who don't work in that industry. They may not be trying to be skeezy about it (some are, there are bad apples in every bunch), they may just not understand their client which is a mistake.

Peggy I think you've already gotten good advice, but I will echo that by saying have an idea ahead of time what you're looking for not only stylisticly but whether you want prints, a cd, an album, etc and when you contact photographers make sure you get a good idea of what all of those things will cost totalled. There's nothing worse than unexpected expenses.

[niener]

Might should also add, I've hired two pro photographers ever - one for my engagement photos and one for our wedding. The engagement pics were done with film and I purchased the negatives. The wedding pics were digital and I purchased a high-res cd. Also got full reprint rights with both. Our wedding photos were about half of our entire wedding budget (which was smaller than average anyway). It was the only thing I felt strongly about, aside from the person I was marrying , so it didn't bother me that it was such a huge expense. I wanted talent and I wanted control so that's what I paid for.