| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Freelance Pricing for Sports Coverage
Michael Starghill, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Washington | DC | United States | Posted: 10:59 AM on 04.06.10 |
| ->> I was wondering if any of you sportsshooters out there had info or would be willing to share info about pricing for college and/or pro sport game coverage for a freelance photographer. Excluding image usage, is there a typical base fee or hourly rate that one would charge just to cover the game? Thanks and I look forward to reading your responses. |
|
Stanley Leary, Photographer
|
Roswell | GA | USA | Posted: 11:23 AM on 04.06.10 |
->> Michael:
Prices are all over the place on this topic.
Here are a few insights I have had over the years.
1. If there are a lot of photographers begging to be on the sidelines for a school sport then that particular sport will be difficult to get a fair wage for when so many are willing to give their work away for free just to be there.
2. You can get a fair wage for where the first isn't the case. So, if you cover women softball you have a better chance getting paid, because there are not 50 people begging to stand there and give their photos away.
3. Portraits and Team photos generally pay better than games, especially if the photographer uses studio strobes. If you can do a good job for example of getting good portraits of baseball players with their hats on where there are not shadows on the face cast by their hat, then you will have a good chance to be hired to shoot their head shots for their media guides.
4. Different is paramount in this industry. If you can deliver photos that are different than most other photographers, then your work will stand out and make you more desirable. This can help secure more money than someone else.
5. Do not be surprised that SID will hire you only a couple times a year if you are better than most in this industry and the rest of the time they have some alumnus shooting the rest of the time. This is very typical and helps them stretch their money. They have you shoot enough shots they have 1 photo they can count on for the media guide and the other photographer may get something they can add in occasionally.
6. In time you will most likely discover in your career that you have to move on to clients for whom you can pay your bills with rather than those who are not willing to raise their rates to work with you.
7. Be sure you can live with your arrangement. Your positive attitude with everyone will give you the branding you need for a long career. |
|
Max Waugh, Photographer
|
Bothell | WA | USA | Posted: 11:50 AM on 04.06.10 |
| ->> Image rights aside, I think you also need to take into account all the extra work that will go into the job. If a game is 2-3 hours, how much other time will you be spending commuting to the venue, setting up and breaking down your gear before and after the game, processing and delivering photos afterward, etc.? Calculate how much time it'll all take and then figure out what "hourly rate" is going to work for you. |
|
Michael Starghill, Photographer, Assistant
|
Washington | DC | United States | Posted: 11:11 PM on 04.07.10 |
| ->> thanks for your responses stanley and max! |
|
Mark Sutton, Photographer
 |
Herndon | VA | USA | Posted: 1:44 AM on 04.08.10 |
->> Michael,
You need to give me a call. |
|
Louis Lopez, Photographer
|
Fontana | CA | USA | Posted: 2:02 PM on 04.08.10 |
->> This type of thread is started many times over the years and no one actually gives even a ballpark price. They all state the obvious.
Michael must have a price in mind and I am sure he is interested to know if he is undercharging or way over for his area. Who cares what the guy in Peru is charging he wants to know what the competition in Washington DC is charging. Right? |
|
Anantachai Brown, Photographer
|
Jacksonville | FL | | Posted: 3:34 PM on 04.08.10 |
| ->> my thoughts exactly Louis...its a vicious cycle. people complain about pricing but no one willing to give any figures. |
|
Michael Durisseau, Photographer, Assistant
|
Santa Fe/Houston | TX | USA | Posted: 4:15 PM on 04.08.10 |
| ->> I think that if we start talking price, it would be better for all of us...we shouldn't be complaining if we don't want to change things to make pricing consistent and the projects/work that we do worth the time. |
|
Delane B. Rouse, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Washington | DC | US | Posted: 4:30 PM on 04.08.10 |
->> My goal is to get $350 per game...if it's an existing client that I have a REAL relationship with (not that vague "there will be more business in the future) I can knock off $50-100 depending on the logistics.
If I got a call right now from a brand new client asking me my rates for shoot a Nationals game, Maryland/Georgetown Lax, PG County track meet...whatever...I'd ask for $350 (with 50% up front).
I also won't/don't shoot on spec anymore.
FYI...I recently heard that certain agencies (that are members here on SS) have been recruiting shooters in Washington DC, Philly, Jersey, and Baltimore to shoot MLB...of course on spec and I think that's a bad deal for the photographers. |
|
Michael Starghill, Photographer, Assistant
|
Washington | DC | United States | Posted: 7:44 AM on 04.09.10 |
| ->> @Mark will do. @Delane thanks for your help. |
|
Darren Carroll, Photographer
|
Cedar Creek (Austin) | TX | USA | Posted: 11:41 AM on 04.09.10 |
->> @ Delane--
Those "agencies" are recruiting, they've been recruiting, and they'll keep recruiting. Someone mentioned a "vicious cycle" above--well, that's part of one, too: namely, an "agency" or "wire service" recruits photographer A to shoot on spec, photographer A does a few games and realizes he/she isn't making any money so he/she stops doing it, and now "agency" or "wire service" needs to find photographer B. And so on.
I wrote a piece for the newsletter a while back that might be worth referring back to...
http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/2210
As long as there are people willing to give their efforts, their talent, and their finished products away for free it'll never end.
@ Michael--
As to the subject of pay and rates, there's a lot that goes into (or should go into) determining what rates you set or whether or not what a potential client is willing to pay works for you. Most important, of course, is that you get paid for your work and that in so doing you make a profit. Some factors that will determine that, however, include: primary usage and licensing, secondary resale potential, an honest appraisal of the client's budget as it compares with expectations, comparative market rates, and your cost of doing business, and the value you place on your time, both for shooting and post-production.
Those are a lot of variables to consider, and I know that it's easy to criticize people for not providing a concrete number but honestly, there isn't a magic one that works for everyone, be it on a local or national level. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:01 PM on 04.09.10 |
->> "Some factors that will determine that, however, include: primary usage and licensing, secondary resale potential, an honest appraisal of the client's budget as it compares with expectations, comparative market rates, and your cost of doing business, and the value you place on your time, both for shooting and post-production.
Those are a lot of variables to consider, and I know that it's easy to criticize people for not providing a concrete number but honestly, there isn't a magic one that works for everyone, be it on a local or national level."
Well said, Darren. Wish I could give you two informatives instead of just one. Your post is the best explanation/justification why it is difficult many of us to toss numbers out.
In addition to factors that Darren highlighted I also consider expected income over the lifetime of the image (EIL). I work from the perspective that every image or event has a certain value. The definition of lifetime can be the length of time the image is available in your inventory, the lifetime of the copyright holder, the time span the image exists or lifetime of the subject. This value is based on both historical and projected value. Some images or assignments would have a very high value, while others much lower.
In my book, licensing, rights and assignment fees are not mutually independent but parts of an equation. The assignment fee is reasonable if there is no limitation on distribution (secondary use allowed or no imposed embargoes) and I retain all rights. If secondary use is limited or there is only a small market available to produce a secondary income stream then the licensing assignment fees have to be adjusted upward accordingly to meet the target EIL. |
|
Chris Hutty, Photographer
|
London | UK | UK | Posted: 6:58 AM on 04.14.10 |
->> These threads amuse/frustrate me in equal measure. How many times do we hear complaints about photographers not valuing their work highly enough and setting their fees too low? Here is a guy who wants to know what the market rate might be - presumably because he wants to charge a realistic fee and not undervalue his work - and he gets one solid reply. If people are not willing to share their rates then quit whining when photographers undercharge. If nobody tells you what to charge when you start out then you naturally will charge what the clients wants to pay. Why are we so scared to help someone out when it comes to pricing?
I'm afraid I'm not much use as I work in the UK with a whole different market. There's not much of a market at all beyond football (soccer) and some rugby and you'll be lucky to get £150 out of a paper for covering a game - and that will include useage. That said, I don't really know because surprisingly nobody has ever been able/willing to tell me what I should be charging. |
|
Mike Ullery, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Piqua | OH | USA | Posted: 8:26 AM on 04.14.10 |
->> I would be cautious about quoting a price on this forum and then having someone take it "for gospel."
Although all may be equal as far as quality of work, equipment used, time invested, etc. I have learned that geographic location dictates different prices.
The east and west coast, and maybe in/around other major metro areas, such as Chicago, are in one price "structure" and areas such as the mid-west are totally different.
I have been in situations where I've quoted a price based on what I have heard is expected/reasonable for example in New York to a prospective client here in the mid-west and gotten "you gotta be kidding me."
I have also quoted a price, thought fair in the mid-west, to a prospective client in Chicago or California and been told, "oh, you're not charging enough." (Yeah, there are some very honest customers out there)
Bottom line is that I believe that you have to look at your market. This is not a one-price-fits-all business. |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Denver | CO | USA | Posted: 9:47 AM on 04.14.10 |
->> Unless you are established and/or have unique access or perspective, you will be lucky to get more than a couple of hundred bucks a game, and you will have to fight for usage.
If you are established, have an excellent portfolio with major publication credits, and are covering a sport with broad general appeal, you can probably get more...and have more leverage for rights. But when you are at that level, you typically also have more invested in equipment and prep work. So in terms of cost-of-doing-business, it starts to even out.
It's a tough business. Most of the time publications are just looking for one or two images to fill a hole in a sports section, and just like we have cost-of-business calculators, they have calculations on how much money they can make on a given page based on ad rates (which are proportional to circulation - and circulation has been dropping). If it's a mid-season game with not much significant going on (i.e. no major injury, etc.), it's not worth more than a couple of hundred bucks to the publisher. If you're in a small market or covering teams that are not really on a championship track, it's even worse. If they can't get a photo cheap, they just won't run anything.
None of this has anything to do with the "moral" issue of what they SHOULD pay based on what people think the terms should be. It's just business. You have a number that you need to make to survive. They have a number they can afford to pay based on the subject and the ad rates. If you have a unique style, unique access and are covering a team or game of high interest, both numbers can go up. If not, they won't even be close.
But even if you're covering something of high interest, your reputation is key. The publisher/wire service has to commit to paying you before they see the result. What's more, editorial resources will be allocated based on the expectation that you will deliver great images to justify your rate. That's why they won't go with the $50-a-shoot guy when tournament time comes, and why getting your name associated with that price point is not a wise marketing strategy.
Yes, it is chicken-and-egg...you have to have experience to build a reputation, but how do you build experience when they won't pay you enough to survive? There is no one easy answer, and much of it involves networking and marketing and stuff that has nothing to do with shooting. |
|
Michael Durisseau, Photographer, Assistant
|
Santa Fe/Houston | TX | USA | Posted: 11:02 AM on 04.14.10 |
| ->> @ Darren Carroll-I realize there is no concrete number because of the variables, but even a ballpark figure, qualified by where you are at least, would be a start. Again, we need to stop complaining about undercharging if we're not ready to talk about what we charge, even in a general sense. |
|
Ric Tapia, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 12:00 PM on 04.14.10 |
->> OK.
I have made a quick, 10 question survey:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/BTS7YJC
It is anonymous and I will share my results with everyone here on ss.com on a later date. Thanks,
Ric |
|
David Welker, Photographer, Student/Intern
|
Springfield | MO | USA | Posted: 12:42 PM on 04.14.10 |
->> I think there is something we all can agree on at some level or another. At this time and age, there is very little money shooting professional sports for a living. Sure, there are many people who do it, but many of those people have different connections as staffers as well. The truth is, shooting high school sports and selling to parents as well as having a contact with the school to shoot team/individual photos will provide the best income- provided you have a good business sense and marketing skills- than shooting professional sports.
I think many people don't always want to shoot high school sports because well, it isn't as exciting or good enough for some- Telling people you shoot for (insert big MLB team) on a regular basis, becomes a side effect if asked "Who do you cover/shoot?". Shooting High school just is not as impressive so to speak. BUT, it pays the bills and Id rather do that then be able to say that I shoot (Insert NFL team). |
|
Lee Weissman, Photographer
|
XXXXX | NY | USA | Posted: 1:20 PM on 04.14.10 |
->> Here is another fun side to this question. A buddy of mine shoots for a local university. He gets a good, fair rate for the services provided. His work is high quality, and his service to the client is excellent. When he can't do an assignment, I do it so that the client gets service when needed, at comparable quality. This has been the arrangement for years with no complaints. here is where the fun begins.....
Scenario number one...A photographer who has to drive almost 100 miles round trip, and go over bridges approached the school. He offered to shoot games for $90.00 per game. Full res cd's, no useage fees. Just straight up $90.00. Gas, Tolls,and time for a whopping...let me say this again $90.00. And yes, he is issued a tax form.
Scenario number two...Same friend, same university, different photographer. This photographer works for several universities in an area. Each time my friends school plays at one of the others schools he offers a full res cd to the opposing school for $50.00. Now the reality is he is really only offering 1/2 of a game since he still has to deliver to his own school. You would think that someone who is in the same position at another school would understand why this is wrong. But he doesn't. When contacted, he basically could care less.
Now who is at fault? The University? Nope, they are taking the cheap deal, why wouldn't they. They do admit that the quality is not near what they are used to. They have also had the sports re-shot by us because of the quality. But they figure they might get useable images, so they go for it.
The real blame are the people who are not business people, put no value on their work, and are clueless until they figure what they made for the year for their time. Best of luck to them, and their maxed out credit cards. |
|
Mike Anzaldi, Photographer
|
Oak Park | IL | USA | Posted: 1:57 PM on 04.14.10 |
->> i think there would be some benefit in discussing the 'other' method of establishing a rate- which would be what the job is worth. i have been increasingly skeptical of the 'cost of doing business' method of establishing rates for news and sports gathering. i don't really think these assignments can be justified for most freelance photographers who own the tools necessary to do a proper job at covering such events. nobody is quoting rates because nobody does it. how many are actually supporting themselves, their business and their family with freelance news and sports assignments? Delane is right on. the rate is $350 on the high side, $200 low. period. you can talk about usage, rights, resale, CODB, blah, blah, blah. the best one in these discussions is the clients budget. whaaaat? you mean if the client can afford to be gauged, then you gauge? i'm sure there is a finer point there, but it sounds an awful lot like charging a rich man $5 for a coke that you charge the average man $1 for. what business actually does this successfully besides the government?
the cost of doing business method- and even the budget considerations are probably better used in the studio. that's what i've found, anyway. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 4:45 PM on 04.14.10 |
->> Mike,
The fact is that the freelance editorial market has almost completely ceased to exist as a viable market. Very few can pursue it without making up their editorial losses with other work. That or living with their parents.
--Mark |
|
Mike Anzaldi, Photographer
|
Oak Park | IL | USA | Posted: 5:05 PM on 04.14.10 |
->> that's what i think as well mark.
documentary photography is a blast for sure. everybody seems to like news and sports gathering. but, it's no way to make a living. this is why i think the cost of doing business approach is not reasonable for determining a rate for a game. i'd have to bring $20,000 worth of gear to a basketball game, right? (2 bodies, 3 lenses, notebook computer, wireless card, CF cards, parking, mileage, insurance, profit) yeah, no, $350 is not going to do it.
remember, $350 is on the high side. there is no real money to be made at a game as a freelancer shooting spec or editorial assignments. it's nobody's fault, it just is. do it for fun, do it because you love it and collect some of your expenses doing it. but it ends there. don't expect to profit. |
|
Chris Hutty, Photographer
|
London | UK | UK | Posted: 8:18 PM on 04.14.10 |
->> "I would be cautious about quoting a price on this forum and then having someone take it "for gospel."
Come on Mike, credit people with some intelligence - nobody is going to take it for gospel, people just want to know some ball park figures. Yes geographic location dictates price but how are we supposed to know if we're being screwed if nobody is willing to discuss specifics? Some posters here are right, there is no money to be made shooting sports these days. Perhaps if photographers had stuck together and shared information a little earlier, instead of jealously guarding their own little piece of the pie, this might not be the case. |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 11:22 PM on 04.14.10 |
| ->> chris, you are wrong about the "jealously guarding their own little piece of the pie" statement. technology and gwc's who just want a byline and give their stuff away for free or a credit line ushered in the demise of getting paid for shooting sports. the "oh hey, I got a photo in ESPN magazine" (didn't get but $50 but who gives a shit).... are the real problem. and the deal is, the gate is open, the horse is out and it's game over. every day there is proof this is happening....it's pretty much useless arguing about it or casting blame on professionals who have tried making a living being, well, professionals. we can scream until we are blue in the face but there are an enormous amount of people with the means (the best camera equipment) and the access who don't give a rat's ass about being paid. they want to be able to brag to their buddies that they were published in SI, ESPN or the BumF$#K Times. sad but true...and guess what? it's starting to happen to the wedding photographer market also. geez.....sorry...let's bash a camera....any camera..... |
|
Ric Tapia, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 1:37 AM on 04.15.10 |
->> So far 40 people have responed to my survey:
"I have made a quick, 10 question survey:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/BTS7YJC
It is anonymous and I will share my results with everyone here on ss.com on a later date."
I would like at least 100 to get a more accurate result. Thank you to everyone who has already an answered. Please Answer ALL question honestly and truthfully. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 11:27 AM on 04.15.10 |
->> Ric,
Nice job and thanks for putting this together.
I took a peak at your survey. I think you should break down the compensation question down to five for a more accurate survey that would help people - "How much do you charge per hour for shooting? How much do you charge as a creative fee? Do you bill the client for mileage? How much do you charge for an 8x10 print? How much do you charge for unlimited use of a digital file? How much do you charge for newspaper editorial use of your images?"
One more helpful question would be to add what state and if their city we operate our business in is metro, city 25-80K in residents or rural. Since pricing and cost of living varies in these three areas.
Thanks again for putting the survey out there. |
|
Ric Tapia, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 12:18 PM on 04.15.10 |
->> Clark,
Great suggestions, that might have to be version 2.
Ric |
|
Ric Tapia, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 8:36 PM on 04.17.10 |
->> 80+ people have responded!
"I have made a quick, 10 question survey:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/BTS7YJC
It is anonymous and I will share my results with everyone here on ss.com on a later date."
I would like at least 100 to get a more accurate result. Thank you to everyone who has already an answered. Please Answer ALL question honestly and truthfully. |
|
Michael Fischer, Photographer
|
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 10:38 PM on 04.17.10 |
->> Clark, I got you covered on the informative :-o
There have been numerous threads on costing/pricing recently. Have to know your true costs. Mr. Loundy has certainly stressed this in many posts. Stanley is spot on. Mr. Harpe also writes a excellent post. Listen to what is being written here, Michael. Guys like Darren Carroll, with high levels of success, years of experience ... are telling you that the niche IS NOT profitable.
Let's say you get $300 for a game. Last weekend I did a commercial shoot for a client. Environmental portraits .. grossed almost $2100 .. licensed for the web and PR. Not as exciting? It was to me, but even if it wasn't, IT WAS 7X more money than shooting a game you'd be lucky to get $300 for.
I recently wrote that many people choose to be poor or unprofitable with the business decisions they make. You can't pay the bills with the glory of shooting many levels of sports. Keep in mind that while I'm no Darren Carroll, I've got 10 years NFL experience ( til I quit because there was no money in it) and more Iowa Newspaper Association awards first place sports photography awards then anyone else in the state over the last 10 years. And I'm a squished bug compared to a lot of shooters on here. And I'm telling you, this is a very hard business to make money in if you concentrate on major sports. ( As Stanley points out, it's a different story on some of the not so popular ones... maybe). Sports photography may be part of the answer, but too much of it and you're bankrupt. There are guys on here shooting T and I, and are making money, but that's a entirely different beast.
Know your costs. Charge what you need to charge. Walk ... no, run, away from bad deals. And when it comes to sports photography, there are a LOT of them.
It's that simple. |
|
Colin Heyburn, Photographer
|
ARMAGH | NI | United Kingdom | Posted: 12:31 PM on 04.18.10 |
| ->> You are dead right there. I have been shooting for about 4 years now. At the start I was getting ripped off as I did not know any better. It is hard to build your prices back up in this highly competitive market where quality is not always best. I have now drawn a line in the sand and will do without rather than devalue the pictures. Having said that it was only after having been given a chance by an agency that I began to realise how much I could charge. |
|
Brian Dowling, Photographer
|
Philadelphia | PA | USA | Posted: 1:37 PM on 04.18.10 |
| ->> When I first started shooting a few years ago, my friends used to always ask if I got emails from girls saying they'd sleep with me for modeling photos like in the movies and I would laugh. I told them it was mostly guys begging me how to get access into football games or saying they'd carry my gear for free in exchange for a sideline pass. Which, pretty much sums up the NFL/College Football market for freelancers in my eyes. That and I bought my first 1D Mark II off a soccer mom. It was four years old with 10k clicks. :]] |
|
Frank Niemeir, Photographer
 |
Woodstock | GA | usa | Posted: 7:13 PM on 04.18.10 |
| ->> On the survey with the quote on speculation "Do you photograph on spec?" reminds me of former Atlanta Journal-Constitution staff photographer W.A. Bridges Jr. replying on the phone "Yeah, I spect to be paid!" |
|
Michael Durisseau, Photographer, Assistant
|
Santa Fe/Houston | TX | USA | Posted: 9:10 AM on 04.21.10 |
->> Mr. Tapia,
What's the status of the survey? |
|
Ric Tapia, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 8:10 PM on 04.21.10 |
->> I have received over 100 responses, Thanks,
I will be busy the so I hope to get it done in a week or two. |
|
Tami Chappell, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Atlanta | Ga | USA | Posted: 12:09 PM on 04.22.10 |
->> AMEN to W.A., Frank. I spec to be paid also. I've had the spec discussion with many people. Many that don't see anything wrong with it. I have increasingly become so frustrated with it I just have to step aside now with the discussion. I know I have hurt some people's feelings but as a business decision it hurts everybody to do it.
As for the rate's Michael.... I don't know of many freelancers that get paid less than 300 dollars for sports events unless its the rate by the AP which if I am correct is 200 dollars a game. |
|
Michael Fischer, Photographer
|
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 2:49 PM on 04.22.10 |
->> Tami, I'm not sure which Michael you're referring you. Regardless, if you're talking $300 for assignment versus $2100 - there's still a heck of a lot of difference.
As I wrote in the thread on $200 assignments,you can be profitable at $200 - it entirely depends on the time and expenses involved; put another way - it's ultimately about "how much net profit" as opposed to "how much revenue"?
Those that think that both terms are the same thing are the problem. Then again, those folks probably think shooting on spec is a good idea, too. |
|
Tami Chappell, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Atlanta | Ga | USA | Posted: 8:59 PM on 04.22.10 |
| ->> I was referring to Michael Starghill that started the thread. He asked about being hired for game coverage. Not as a commercial venture. Shooting environmental portraits to me is entirely different then covering a game. Of course I would expect nothing less than a couple of thousand dollars on what you are referring to what you shot. But covering a college or even a pro game for another newspaper (depending on the size of the paper) or a wire service usually generates between 300-350. However, what i said was I think that the AP pays 200 dollars for game coverage. |
|
Tami Chappell, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Atlanta | Ga | USA | Posted: 9:16 PM on 04.22.10 |
| ->> I should add Michael Fischer..you won't find anyone that agrees with you more on what your saying regarding 200 dollar assignments. I was just being honest on what the other Michael should expect for game coverage rates. |
|
Ric Tapia, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Michael Starghill, Photographer, Assistant
|
Washington | DC | United States | Posted: 7:42 PM on 05.01.10 |
| ->> Thanks Ric, it all makes sense now ;-). But seriously thanks to all the folks who provided some information. I understand it's not an exact science but this definitely helps. |
|
N. Scott Trimble, Photographer
|
Lake Oswego | OR | USA | Posted: 9:36 PM on 05.01.10 |
->> I am a little disappointed you threw out the 1-25 shoots last year. I am in that group unfortunately, and I am 100% vested in my business, meaning I don't have another job. The economy killed me last year but I am running my own business full time, so omitting that data hides what I and others are dealing with when I put out 72 bids and only got 11 projects last year.
I think too many photographers are acting like a-holes treating how they come up with rates or giving smart ass comments about what their biz structure is like. That is why so many client potentials are done with us and would rather take their chances buying a good camera or hiring aunt Chloe.
Me? CODB and averaging national rates on licensing. |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Denver | CO | USA | Posted: 7:38 AM on 05.02.10 |
->> I think too many photographers are acting like a-holes treating how they come up with rates
I disagree. The bigger problem is too many people start doing freelance photography without approaching it as a true business.
When you do freelance photography as a career, it is a full-fledged service business. It's just like setting up as a plumber, a roofer, a landscaper, anything. Just because it's a field that requires a certain level of artistic talent and creativity and produces a product that might have licensing value doesn't make it any less a business. And just like every other business on the planet, there are steps you have to take to make your business successful and live on past your first year or two.
Why is this the bigger problem? Because if everyone approached photography as a true business, the LAST thing they would do is ask for pricing guidance in a public forum.
Pricing is a competitive tool just like cost of materials, skill level and diversity, marketing ideas, promotion, advertising, everything else. It is one element in a much bigger picture. Asking a photographer about how they price their work is like Wal-Mart asking Target when they are going to run a sale on Microwave Ovens. You're not going to get an honest response, and it is a big red flag indicator that the person asking the question is probably not running their operation as a true business.
If you believe the only reason you're not getting gigs is because your prices are too high, it means you aren't looking at the bigger picture of how to make a sustainable business. In any business, it takes constant effort to establish and maintain the relationships necessary to keep the business going, and to do all the other things necessary for consistent cash flow.
Most photographers love taking pictures, they tolerate post-production and the backend work, and absolutely hate paperwork, invoicing and marketing. Usually they have zero enthusiasm for follow-up calls, networking, market analysis, marketing strategy, cold-calling, P/L modeling and analysis, etc. The smart ones hire people to help them do the other stuff while they go out and produce product and refine their craft.
If you do a proper business analysis, in most markets you will probably find that simple, one-gig-at-a-time freelance photography is not a sustainable business as a solo operator. There just aren't enough gigs to keep you going. This is the correct answer for a lot of different businesses. If you open up a shop that sells nothing but gummy bears, you won't make it past your startup loan. Even if you diversify into other candy, the market just might not be there to make it a viable business. Blaming the customer for not wanting to pay $10 an ounce for gummy bears, or blaming Walgreens for not sharing their pricing model for candy isn't going to do you a lot of good, and it isn't going to change a thing.
Stop asking about pricing, and stop beating up other photographers for not sharing their pricing models. It's pointless. If you can't figure it out on your own, buy some books, go to school, or hire someone to help you. If you want to do photography (or any business) for longer than a year, you need to do your Business 101 homework. Otherwise it's just a hobby that you do for beer money. |
|
Margaret Bowles, Photographer
|
Houston | TX | | Posted: 12:28 PM on 05.02.10 |
| ->> I also think it would be a relevant question for Ric's survey to ask the freelancers how many have other jobs that pay the bills. It's one thing to have photography as your bread and butter and another thing entirely to view the photography income as gravy. I think a lot of the confusion over pricing would go away if you separated out the fulltime photographer from the part timer with another job. My guess is that most of the spec shooters are part timers and that most of the photographers who accept low paying jobs are also part timers. I think it skews the results. Probably most people who have other jobs would agree that if they were shooting fulltime, their business model would not work. It's only because they subsidize their photography with another job that they can accept the low paying assignments or can shoot on spec. I know my perspective changed completely once I lost my job and started shooting fulltime. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|