Here's another reason why you should not charge too cheap... in case this happens 2u

[Cowseye]

JasonB, I don't think a sweeping statement of "any $2000 and below is doing disfavor" is fair. I believe we all start somewhere, picks up skills, mold our style and learn the ways of business along the way. If each new player in the market comes out and start advertising a S$2000 package, will he get any business? Maybe he might, eventually... But how long is the wait??

 

[JasonB]

JasonB, I don't think a sweeping statement of "any $2000 and below is doing disfavor" is fair. I believe we all start somewhere, picks up skills, mold our style and learn the ways of business along the way. If each new player in the market comes out and start advertising a S$2000 package, will he get any business? Maybe he might, eventually... But how long is the wait??

You can bear the entry level prices early on its totally fine but you need to find ways to move up or the declining industry will force you out by sheer economics alone. Full timers will starve and partimers will find it impossible to enter full time to pursue their dream, and end up burning out very fast doing 2 jobs with no weekend rests. But once a niche is set it is still a viable business to be in but know that there is no safe place among the 'price war zone' below $1000 and not even between $1000 to $2000 coz at this zone most are good but just 'common good' with no enough special 'oomph' or client base. That's why it's hard work at this zone too.

If you can get couple's to spend 2 to 5K, you are probably also selling high end albums, that is where the real profits starts. Too bad most new togs don't grasp the idea of selling. The smart bridal studios owners does, and they did it with mediocre, ordinary pictures.

 

[Cowseye]

That I agree. But it takes time for the new players to move up. It's good that you share how one can differentiate from others. But the beginning stage, it is most likely inevitable that one has to start charging below $2k to get people to be interested hiring you. Imagine spending S$2k or higher on a newbie, I would think most couple would rather to use that and hire a decent, more well known photographer that has an establishment in this trade.

 

[Kit]

I see it this way. Its not about people telling others what to charge but rather, how to charge. If you are making a living out of this, there is a need for you to step back and look at the bigger picture of sustaining your business and not be lured into taking up jobs at rates which you make you suffer. When photographers suffer, no one gets the last laugh.

 

[lancey]

I am sorry but I have to comment that your title is inappropriate. The issue in the video is NOT that PG charge too cheap. It is the lawyer bullying the PG regardless of how much the PG charge.

I am sick of professional PGs every day complaining others charge too cheap and spoil their market. It would give me the impression that these so called professional PGs most likely can't secure enough bookings and have to blame everyone else. As if their constant complaining about others charging too little will change anything at all.

I agree. You never see newbies telling pros to charge cheap. Know why? Cause the former DGAF what others charge...unlike the latter(s). The latter(s) would even give lectures on how to charge, what to charge and when to charge so that they won't get undercut left right centre.
Some even go so far as to charge for such lectures.

You seldom see this phenomenon in other trades, e.g one chicken rice stall owner telling another to charge higher.

 

[lancey]

And instead of discussing and sharing how to improve on and overcoming technical dufficulties during wedding shoots which would better benefit the newbies, some pros concentrate on advising the newbies the pitfalls of charging too low.
Sadly, this has what it has become..our current trend.

 

[sjackal]

I agree. You never see newbies telling pros to charge cheap. Know why? Cause the former DGAF what others charge...unlike the latter(s). The latter(s) would even give lectures on how to charge, what to charge and when to charge so that they won't get undercut left right centre.
Some even go so far as to charge for such lectures.

You seldom see this phenomenon in other trades, e.g one chicken rice stall owner telling another to charge higher.

Obviously, most hawkers are smarter than some photographers.

 

[sjackal]

And instead of discussing and sharing how to improve on and overcoming technical dufficulties during wedding shoots which would better benefit the newbies, some pros concentrate on advising the newbies the pitfalls of charging too low.
Sadly, this has what it has become..our current trend.

Hmm, because this is the Photo Biz forum dedicated to discussing the business of photography? The technical aspects of photography are discussed at the General Tech Talk forums, and the Newbie forum, where some pros participate and give pointers quite regularly.

 

[lancey]

Obviously, most hawkers are smarter than some photographers.

not really. Most hawkers just know that by taking care of their own recipe, the crowd will still come in. But by trying to take care of what his neigbours charge a plate, would not stop people from buying cheap chicken rice.

don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.

 

[lancey]

the rational is if u charge a wedding too low. just one fine day, u get sue for nothing, u could easily go bankrupt. so part of the cost when u take in to account is the possibility of getting sued. u need dough right to prevent such cases.

what nonsense is this? You mean a doctor should charge a patient sky high no matter what the original cost of surgery just so as he could cover his lawyer's fees if and when he got sued for nothing?
With ideologies like these, no wonder professional photography is unsanctioned and unregulated...

 

[sinned79]

what nonsense is this? You mean a doctor should charge a patient sky high no matter what the original cost of surgery just so as he could cover his lawyer's fees if and when he got sued for nothing?
With ideologies like these, no wonder professional photography is unsanctioned and unregulated...

dude u dun need to charge sky high, just set a side small percentage of the cost to be prepared.

unless u so suay and bad, every job u take u kana sue. a few jobs built up, if unlucky, got one, at least u have some cost set aside for legal.

what i am referring to is those charging like $10-25 per hr... then just 1 legal case, all your past earnings gone.

 

[White Wolf]

In the photography business, the ease of entry is low.

Hence it will always be tested if your differentiation among your competitor is low. Anywhere in this business world worked the same. So I would say, improve yourself/your services or face being ousted.

Complaining is part and parcel and that is why this forum exists to let our voice heard. At the end of the day, don't blame other ppl for your own downfall.

 

[White Wolf]

What makes you think professional photographers has no rights to "make noise"?

first thing first, professional photography is a trade, when the trade is invaded by "outsiders", the "outsiders" going around everywhere offering cheap or even free services, potential harming the living hood of the photographers and the industry, can't the photographers inside this trade do something about it?

and what kind of measure did the professional photographers really do? Not by slamming down "invaders", instead offering advices, workshops to help the "invaders" how to conduct business.

but to tell you the truth, most people have no patient, only keen to make some quick buck, can't even make the cut to be in the trade, going around find guinea pigs, or offer themselves as guinea pigs, more than 80% quit within a year, maybe one or two left after three years.

tell me, professional photographers have no rights to do anything about these?

Hello moderator, honestly how pro photographers are going to do?

If a client can't tell the diff between a pro and armature who i assume charge a lower fee, then something is really wrong..

To me, I pay for what I deemed is most valuable of my $ spent. Not necessary the cheapest nor the most expensive.

 

[agws1970]

JasonB, I don't think a sweeping statement of "any $2000 and below is doing disfavor" is fair. I believe we all start somewhere, picks up skills, mold our style and learn the ways of business along the way. If each new player in the market comes out and start advertising a S$2000 package, will he get any business? Maybe he might, eventually... But how long is the wait??

No offense but a clients wedding day is not the time to pick up skills and mold our style. Wedding photography is one trade where apprenticeship is really needed but being circumvented nowadays. You cannot afford to re-shoot a wedding.

 

[agws1970]

what nonsense is this? You mean a doctor should charge a patient sky high no matter what the original cost of surgery just so as he could cover his lawyer's fees if and when he got sued for nothing?
With ideologies like these, no wonder professional photography is unsanctioned and unregulated...

That is not nonsense.
Do you or have you ever done any business costing? These are contingency costs that have to be factored in if you want to survive.
Sanctioned and regulated only by customers pocketbooks. Same goes for $10 haircuts and $200 haircuts.

 

[lancey]

What makes you think professional photographers has no rights to "make noise"?

first thing first, professional photography is a trade, when the trade is invaded by "outsiders", the "outsiders" going around everywhere offering cheap or even free services, potential harming the living hood of the photographers and the industry, can't the photographers inside this trade do something about it?

and what kind of measure did the professional photographers really do? Not by slamming down "invaders", instead offering advices, workshops to help the "invaders" how to conduct business.

but to tell you the truth, most people have no patient, only keen to make some quick buck, can't even make the cut to be in the trade, going around find guinea pigs, or offer themselves as guinea pigs, more than 80% quit within a year, maybe one or two left after three years.

tell me, professional photographers have no rights to do anything about these?

by offering the "invaders" advices, who are u trying to help? your own ricebowl(since u said u were invaded) or the invaders? did the invaders ask u for help or advice? how do u know the invaders are not happy charging cheap but getting lots of budget wedding couples? based on what? based on the fact that u feel invaded? why don't you conduct classes for pros on how to survive during these periods of invasion?

so next time your neigbour want to sell his house for a lower price, stop him, and conduct a class for him to sell higher, so that he could never sell his house and so that it'd be easier to sell yours?

your logic as a pro(i assumed) is so flawed im floored.

 

[lancey]

That is not nonsense.
Do you or have you ever done any business costing? These are contingency costs that have to be factored in if you want to survive.
Sanctioned and regulated only by customers pocketbooks. Same goes for $10 haircuts and $200 haircuts.

sure, normally i buy external insurance at my own cost but not passed on to clients in any form or shape.

if u go into a wedding shoot knowing your are worth $x but charge $x+y, where y>x but not >2x and y>0 if x>0, because of legal fears, then it seems a lil sad....but knowing no insurance companies would cover(which is why the trade is unsanctioned/unregulated) screw-ups by potentially anyone holding a camera nowadays, i stand corrected, it's not nonsense....it's a no brainer in fact, to charge that way.

 

[lobsterkia]

sure, normally i buy external insurance at my own cost but not passed on to clients in any form or shape.

Seriously ?!?!?!? U r in the business of doing charity ?!? U absorb cost for your clients !?!?!

*facepalm*

 

[White Wolf]

How does the insurance work? Does it cost alot?

 

[sinned79]

if u go into a wedding shoot knowing your are worth $x but charge $x+y, where y>x but not >2x and y>0 if x>0, because of legal fears, then it seems a lil sad....

its just equation?

if u only stick to this equation then its sad.

why not this?

if you are worth $x, u can simply charge 105-110% of $x which will cost additional cost for legal. That way as I mentioned earlier, unless you suay, every job u take you kana sue, you are better off quiting this trade.

the chances of getting sued in Singapore for bad wedding photography I will say is very low but you still need some costs aside to protect yourself especially if you do not have any insurance coverage. insurance is not a must then if you are just starting out.

10 jobs x 105-110% of $x (eg 10 x 110% of $800 = $800?) worth should set you aside some costs for legal in cases of any even if you have just 10% chance of facing one. you dun even need to charge sky high, that's exploiting.

just imagine if you did not factor in this (legal costs), then charge low somemore, it just took one legal suit to wipe you out.