How much are your photos worth?

[student]

Yes, there are ample supply. But does it need to be free supply?

Take resale of HDB flats for example, have been pretty much in the slump, but at least there's a value to it. And how much is the valuation depends on a few factors like location envrioment...etc. Similary, for photography, there's positioning and marketing and not to mention salesmanship.

But I digress, I'm hoping that this thread help to allevate "free services" syndrom that is getting virulent here. What I'm trying to get to is to check if any kind CSer can help by providing some references as to how can wannabe's price their services rendered.

Why can't I chose to provide free supply if that is what I desire?

If I am not in need of money from photography for my living, nor do I bother about getting money to upkeep my hobby, AND I am in need for some fun, why I can't do it for free?

HDB does not belong to an individual. It is an institution with financial accountability. The example is inappropriate.

Who am I accountable to in my expense on photography? I! ME! MYSELF! Who dares to tell me how to spend my money on my hobby?

I can price my services any amount I wish to. You too can put any price on your services. Very quickly you will know your true worth. And to price yourself accordingly.

 

[Genesis,OurDreams]

Why can't I chose to provide free supply if that is what I desire?

If I am not in need of money from photography for my living, nor do I bother about getting money to upkeep my hobby, AND I am in need for some fun, why I can't do it for free?

HDB does not belong to an individual. It is an institution with financial accountability. The example is inappropriate.

Who am I accountable to in my expense on photography? I! ME! MYSELF! Who dares to tell me how to spend my money on my hobby?

I can price my services any amount I wish to. You too can put any price on your services. Very quickly you will know your true worth. And to price yourself accordingly.

My apologies for the wrong example presented, I simply extracted the supply vs demand out of the complex equation of valuation as I thought selling a photograph is as complex but was summarised to a simple supply and demand equation.

Yes, every individual answers to themselves, as mentioned in my first post of this thread I quote myself: "so that even if someone wants to undercut the market, they will do so with full knowledge with what they are forgoing."

And I can see that you are doing so with full knowledge. I'm not disputing this. But as Singaporean, there are plenty who simply "monkey-see, monkey-do" without a shread of comprehension of what's going on.... this thread are to help such people help themselves.

 

[student]

... this thread are to help such people help themselves.

I do appreciate this effort. Thank you.

 

[Genesis,OurDreams]

I do appreciate this effort. Thank you.

No problem.

I'm only wondering why those who complains that the market is being under-cut isn't sharing their knowledge at least by trying to be part of the solution.

 

[student]

I'm only wondering why those who complains that the market is being under-cut isn't sharing their knowledge at least by trying to be part of the solution.

Could it be that those who complain that the market is being undercut are actually undercutting others.

But they do not want others to undercut them?

We know of at least ONE example.

Now what do we call these types?

 

[Genesis,OurDreams]

Let me put an example in this case.

Common charges for photography (per day/event) that I encountered are:

For the lower tier, $200 - $1K (normally for free-lancer)

Middle tier would be anywhere from $1K to $3K (I guess that working photographer would be around here).

The rest that are above is above my current focus/capability.

But how does those prices breaks down? How much is the "minimum"? Is there a middle ground where freelancer and bread and butter photographer can meet at price point so that most would be better off?

 

[Genesis,OurDreams]

Could it be that those who complain that the market is being undercut are actually undercutting others.

But they do not want others to undercut them?

We know of at least ONE example.

Now what do we call these types?

Lets not point finger. Because it goes round the world and comes back to you.

Different photographer have different overheads. The lower your overhead, the better you can price your services.... yes in some ways most business compete using price factor, undercutting each other.

But there are competitive competition and destructive competition. I think the line must be drawn somewhere and should be understood.

I also know price is a sensitive issue, but I'm not proposing that we let our prices be known. But to highlight the considerations that we go through when we price our services.

 

[waileong]

Think we're getting a bit lost here. I think you're trying to educate people here why they should charge a certain "market" rate for their photos. This is apparently because there's a lot of people spoiling the market at the moment.

However, as pointed out, people are free to do what they want, and not all photog wannabes read CS, so I doubt that your message will be received by everyone you want.

They'll also not likely agree anyway-- as student said, if someone willing to do for free, he will do it no matter what this thread suggests.

My apologies for the wrong example presented, I simply extracted the supply vs demand out of the complex equation of valuation as I thought selling a photograph is as complex but was summarised to a simple supply and demand equation.

Yes, every individual answers to themselves, as mentioned in my first post of this thread I quote myself: "so that even if someone wants to undercut the market, they will do so with full knowledge with what they are forgoing."

And I can see that you are doing so with full knowledge. I'm not disputing this. But as Singaporean, there are plenty who simply "monkey-see, monkey-do" without a shread of comprehension of what's going on.... this thread are to help such people help themselves.

 

[ortega]

if you are not a pro and you do not depend on your photos to put rice on the table
then your photos would be worth as much as you like

lets say i have a crap photo
and this magazine wants to use it.

I can give free or i can sell it to them at $10K (pardon the extremes)
if they are not willing to pay then so be it.
No lost to me.

But i'd say sell it as high as you can.
If the client pays quickly then you are too cheap

 

[Genesis,OurDreams]

if you are not a pro and you do not depend on your photos to put rice on the table
then your photos would be worth as much as you like

lets say i have a crap photo
and this magazine wants to use it.

I can give free or i can sell it to them at $10K (pardon the extremes)
if they are not willing to pay then so be it.
No lost to me.

But i'd say sell it as high as you can.
If the client pays quickly then you are too cheap

I like the way you put it across. :thumbsup:

Yup, it's this "selling as high as you can" that's we should be striving for, at least for myself.

For magazine's I understand that the price would also require to factor the usability, reputation of the magazine and the distribution of your pics. But as to the worth of these factors, I'm still clueless regarding Singapore rates.

 

[reachme2003]

similiarly, if i have a 1920-30's photograph featuring a co's office, then, i will 'hang it up to sell' i.e. at my price, for the company which is still in existence today. especially when i know they do not have it.

 

[ortega]

if you think your images are really good and cannot be reproduced
then sell high, see if they pay, but don't back down if they don't

instead offer them another not so good image for a different price.
test water to see what they can afford

 

[Genesis,OurDreams]

Think we're getting a bit lost here. I think you're trying to educate people here why they should charge a certain "market" rate for their photos. This is apparently because there's a lot of people spoiling the market at the moment.

However, as pointed out, people are free to do what they want, and not all photog wannabes read CS, so I doubt that your message will be received by everyone you want.

They'll also not likely agree anyway-- as student said, if someone willing to do for free, he will do it no matter what this thread suggests.

I'm not trying to reach out to those who know, but choose not to apply. But rather those who don't know how to value their services. I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of photographers wannabe is drooling for the latest techno-wiz-bang body only to take a look at the price and dream about it. So long as you know what tangibles you are justifying for it's easier to put a price to your services.

Else, you'll be valuated solely "intangibles, artistic talent" which is almost non-existant to stingy people during price negotiation.

 

[ortega]

don't sell to people who do not appreciate "Artistic talent"

I hope you are not a pro.

 

[Genesis,OurDreams]

if you think your images are really good and cannot be reproduced
then sell high, see if they pay, but don't back down if they don't

instead offer them another not so good image for a different price.
test water to see what they can afford

I don't think my photos are as good as the first condition. But there are plenty those between there and junk. :embrass:

I havent experience before that a magazine would take a "not so good" but affordable pic. Maybe I haven't enough exposure.

 

[Genesis,OurDreams]

don't sell to people who do not appreciate "Artistic talent"

I hope you are not a pro.

"Pro" is pretty sensitive nowadays :nono:

Nope, I'm not...yet. Passion calls, but stomach insist it takes precedence.

But I do encounter quite a few who can't simply appriciate the difference between acceptable photos and simply trash photos.

 

[Genesis,OurDreams]

similiarly, if i have a 1920-30's photograph featuring a co's office, then, i will 'hang it up to sell' i.e. at my price, for the company which is still in existence today. especially when i know they do not have it.

I'm actually curious, there are pics of old singapore around, what's their value? Do that keep such photos in Singapore Archive?

 

[ortega]

OK sorry, let me re-phrase

I hope you are not depending on Photography to fill your stomachs.

 

[Genesis,OurDreams]

OK sorry, let me re-phrase

I hope you are not depending on Photography to fill your stomachs.

Not yet. But still trying my luck.

 

[reachme2003]

yes, some can be found in the archive.

I'm actually curious, there are pics of old singapore around, what's their value? Do that keep such photos in Singapore Archive?