Anonymous wrote:I don't understand this sentence ^

For $5K they came to our wedding and took pictures. From the semi-processes batch of pics we selected a package of X many prints (_ many 5x7's, Y_ many 8x10s) and we received a bound album. In addition to the printed pictures we could select 5 high res digital images in case we ever wanted or needed to re-print those select 5 pictures again in the future - or just make more copies

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I only do shoots. I detest logging photos and editing and album work. I won't do it. Frankly, it's not worth my time and the tedium.

I charge $500 for the first 90 minutes, then $500/hr after that , and I give you the card out of the camera when I'm done. What you do with it after that is your own business. Everyone thinks they're a better photo editor than a professional photographer anyway, so I got tired of dealing with it.

for some that might work, but I don't think the majority of people have any clue how to process RAW images (since as you know its not a matter of taking the disc to Costco and printing). the pro's we work with charge more BECAUSE of the post processing technique they use, not just because the shots are well composed and don't require much correction for composition/lighting etc. Are you just giving them in camera processed PDFs?

^meant jpegs

Anonymous wrote:I only do shoots. I detest logging photos and editing and album work. I won't do it. Frankly, it's not worth my time and the tedium.

I charge $500 for the first 90 minutes, then $500/hr after that , and I give you the card out of the camera when I'm done. What you do with it after that is your own business. Everyone thinks they're a better photo editor than a professional photographer anyway, so I got tired of dealing with it.

for some that might work, but I don't think the majority of people have any clue how to process RAW images (since as you know its not a matter of taking the disc to Costco and printing). the pro's we work with charge more BECAUSE of the post processing technique they use, not just because the shots are well composed and don't require much correction for composition/lighting etc. Are you just giving them in camera processed PDFs?

I don't understand this sentence ^

we paid $5K for our wedding photos and aside from the prints we got, only got to choose 5 fully processed high res digital pics for reprinting... the most popular photog will command more $$$

I only do shoots. I detest logging photos and editing and album work. I won't do it. Frankly, it's not worth my time and the tedium.

I charge $500 for the first 90 minutes, then $500/hr after that , and I give you the card out of the camera when I'm done. What you do with it after that is your own business. Everyone thinks they're a better photo editor than a professional photographer anyway, so I got tired of dealing with it.

Anonymous wrote:Wow - my photographer charges $375 for an hour and gives us about 50 digital images on a thumbdrive. And she is awesome! OP, I don't think you are being cheap.

if she could charge you more (i.e. there was more demand for HER work) she would. the best photographers will charge a lot more and won't give you digital copies. so if you are happy with the work you get that's great... just pointing out that she's not cheaper and giving away more just to be nice

Most pros make their money on the prints or wedding albums you order through them (at mark up) more so than their shoot fee. So if they gave you the digital files to go print yourself they don't make enough... PP is right, if they ARE giving a disk of fully processed pics they are either less popular (good)/ less experienced or charging you a lot for it

Totally normal. Less popular and budding photographers often offer more for their fee (including a disk with digital copies), but the better/more popular/experienced photographers only have so much time to process prints and charge more for less (i.e. you only get X many processed pics and digital copies)

Less experienced photographers also relay more on post-processing software to do bulk edits to raw picture files whereas the more experienced do more selective post-production and often have techniques that make their prints have a certain look.

Yeah, it's annoying but very common.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Totally normal. It was most likely all spelled out in the contract you signed or their price list. Why are you expecting to get something for free?

I'm not expecting anything for free. I spent 2k on prints.

I bought the session at a charity event via a fundraiser and it wasn't spelled out at the time. I wasn't informed actually until AFTER we had done the shoot about this or any pricing.

Well then, lesson learned. Read the fine print!

Photographers spend hours that you do not see working on your photos. They make their money selling the photos in all formats after the shoot. Good, high end photographers do the pricing the way you see it.

There was no fine print to have read at the time and she doesn't post any of this on her website. I think had she told me in the first phone conversation or had it on her website I wouldn't be so annoyed.

Had I bought the 5k package I would have gotten all the digital files. I just feel like that seems a little OOTT. Like I said I bought a lot in prints, I'm not being stingy, I get that is their livelihood but 5k so I can have backups in case of a fire or whatever?

Shame on her for not sharing pricing immediately. That said, business is business. She probably takes home half of what she charges, and pays taxes on that, too. If you value it, pay for it. If not, let the photos go and find a cheaper alternative next time.

Anonymous wrote:Wow - my photographer charges $375 for an hour and gives us about 50 digital images on a thumbdrive. And she is awesome! OP, I don't think you are being cheap.

Better get on that while you can. She will be out of business within 5 years.

Photography has become a hard way to earn a living. So many pretty bad photographers for very high priced

Anonymous wrote:Typical DCUM, expecting something for almost nothing, then being indignant when told "no".

Shouldn't be surprised though, as people here also balk at paying plumbers, electricians, HVAC and car mechanics, too.

I can't imagine most of the country outside DCUM would pay this amount willingly. At the least the photographer could give the digital copy of the printed photos for backup. She already bought the prints, there's nothing to be gained.

Wow - my photographer charges $375 for an hour and gives us about 50 digital images on a thumbdrive. And she is awesome! OP, I don't think you are being cheap.

Anonymous wrote:Typical DCUM, expecting something for almost nothing, then being indignant when told "no".

Shouldn't be surprised though, as people here also balk at paying plumbers, electricians, HVAC and car mechanics, too.

2500 (prints+sitting fee) is almost nothing? For a photographer? I paid 5k for my wedding photographer who spent 7 more hours and delivered hundreds more photos. That is the nature of a family shoot vs a wedding shoot of course but I don't feel like I've been cheap here at all.

For those who think I am cheap what is the going rate on a single high res digital image?