Calling all Photographers

[confuseddotcom]

Bringing a new product into the market (shoes) and would like to get some decent pictures taken. Having absolute ZERO photography skills, and because its an upmarket item, how much should I be looking at (approx) to get some decent images taken of it for the website (ideally in 2-3 locations).

Any advice/pricing mark ups will be appreciated before I start looking around... and to get an idea.

Cheers

 

[akirk]

How many products? Or if a location based shoot, how many days work?

Alasdair

 

[gemd89]

try www.applephoto.co.uk

Gemma

 

[Deleted member 59730]

Many years ago I did some shoe photography. The clients I worked for considered this to be a very specialised area and only gave me work because of the quality of my shoe portfolio. My advice is to find a photographer who has done very good images of shoes before. There are a lot of little secrets that someone experienced would know.

Look in the fashion magazines like Vogue for names of photographers. Expect £2,000 to £4,000 per day for a top photographer or ask if their assistant would do it for less. (That is how I started). Locations could cost you a stack more in fees, preparation and travel time. At foot level some locations need a lot of work to get to look good. I can still remember washing a section of the kerb in the Mall on my hands and knees with hot soapy water and then oiling the stones and cobbles with olive oil for a Bally shoe ad in the sixties.

 

[vvaannmmaann]

Are the photos for a brochure/catalogue or a web site?

 

[London Photographer]

Find a photographer whose style you like. You might want studio or lifestyle shots? Ask them for a quote and negotiate any fees and licences prior to the shoot.
Cheers Grant

 

[Paidpal]

Bringing a new product into the market (shoes) and would like to get some decent pictures taken. Having absolute ZERO photography skills, and because its an upmarket item, how much should I be looking at (approx) to get some decent images taken of it for the website (ideally in 2-3 locations).

Any advice/pricing mark ups will be appreciated before I start looking around... and to get an idea.

Cheers

Whenever you'll start to look, make you you stress out that you are looking for a good photographer, not a photoshop master.

I'm not into stock photography myself (I'm the suspended sport photographer), but if you're looking for cheap option, you can always try gumtree and it's skills exchange section

 

[confuseddotcom]

Cheers everyone

Wow 2-4k, wasn't expecting this amount!! lol

The images (approx 3-4) are for stock images for the website. Location wise, airport and some decent scenery - probably one day job or less. Nothing Armani etc like.

 

[confuseddotcom]

Find a photographer whose style you like. You might want studio or lifestyle shots? Ask them for a quote and negotiate any fees and licences prior to the shoot.
Cheers Grant

I want to ideally go to one or two locations to have photo's taken. In geeky terms, its a "shallow effect" that I want where the show is in focus and the background is kinda faded (but you can still make it out).

Im sure it can be done within 3-4 hours max, the entire shoot. How much do you think one should fork out - of course, taking into mind post-processing and editing?

Cheers

 

[akirk]

If you only have 3 - 4 images needed, and are happy with a location shoot with item in context, shallow depth of field - good bokeh (quality of out of focus bit!) etc. then assuming you / your models move swiftly it could be wrapped up in less than an hour...

you shouldn't have to pay more than £100 for the shoot, though you may have travel time / processing time to pay as well...

Alasdair

 

[confuseddotcom]

If you only have 3 - 4 images needed, and are happy with a location shoot with item in context, shallow depth of field - good bokeh (quality of out of focus bit!) etc. then assuming you / your models move swiftly it could be wrapped up in less than an hour...

you shouldn't have to pay more than £100 for the shoot, though you may have travel time / processing time to pay as well...

Alasdair

Alasdair,

Thanks for the tips, greatly appreciated.


Thanks mate.

 

[puffin]

buy your own dslr.
and play about with the settings.
You most probably wont get as good as the photographers whom it is their job.
However you should still got some GOOD pictures.

I recently bought a dslr, after a bit of time, fiddling with things thinking about how I take the shot the pictures come up very good.

Do it yourself, save some money, and for the price theyll probably charge youll have a camera also.

 

[PhoneTrader1221]

I will do the photo shoot for £200. Ill pm you my portfolio.

 

[confuseddotcom]

buy your own dslr.
and play about with the settings.
You most probably wont get as good as the photographers whom it is their job.
However you should still got some GOOD pictures.

I recently bought a dslr, after a bit of time, fiddling with things thinking about how I take the shot the pictures come up very good.

Do it yourself, save some money, and for the price theyll probably charge youll have a camera also.

lol - DSR's ain't cheap, just checked Amazon. *gulp*. Plus i dont think its as easy. I'd rather not waste time on it.

I will do the photo shoot for £200. Ill pm you my portfolio.

Cool mate, send it along.

 

[InternetMarketingPlatinum]

Bringing a new product into the market (shoes) and would like to get some decent pictures taken. Having absolute ZERO photography skills, and because its an upmarket item, how much should I be looking at (approx) to get some decent images taken of it for the website (ideally in 2-3 locations).

Any advice/pricing mark ups will be appreciated before I start looking around... and to get an idea.

Cheers

Our photographer is used to doing our web work. PM me with a spec and I shall provide you with a competitive quote. Thanks Mick.

 

[akirk]

considering that a pro will be using pro kit, that would indeed cost a lot...
as an example - I would probably shoot that on a D700 & 24-70 - when you add up the costs of that / batteries / cards etc. it is c. £4,000 worth of kit...

but there are reasons for having that kind of kit - the noise levels / IQ / lense quality / etc. is at the top end.

Alasdair

 

[InternetMarketingPlatinum]

considering that a pro will be using pro kit, that would indeed cost a lot...
as an example - I would probably shoot that on a D700 & 24-70 - when you add up the costs of that / batteries / cards etc. it is c. £4,000 worth of kit...

but there are reasons for having that kind of kit - the noise levels / IQ / lense quality / etc. is at the top end.

Alasdair

Breaking even on the kit in a day's work would be nice.

 

[akirk]

Breaking even on the kit in a day's work would be nice.

It has been known
purely depends on how much you charge...
Alasdair

 

[360interactive]

Be careful with locations, you mentioned airports? Expect a large bill for the privilege, usually around £350 an hour for landside (before the security bit!).

Many locations wil come with a large charge, or a huge fine if they find you using images of their venue for commercial shots (even bokeh effect).

 

[Deleted member 59730]

I just found this in a press release:- With hotel research and booking now done almost entirely on the web, the impetus for this unprecedented investment came from research carried out by IHG which showed that high quality photography had a strong positive impact on booking levels. “Our research has shown that professional, high quality images improve our brand perception and online sales, especially if the images are consistent across all of the properties” said Steve Sickel, IHG Senior Vice President of Distribution and Relationship Marketing. “People expect to be able to make informed comparisons and decisions online, so the most important thing for our
potential guests is to be able to see accurate, realistic and high quality photographs of our rooms and facilities, including virtual tours.”

And the OP has an 'upmarket' product but all the advice is to shoot cheap not quality.

 

[360interactive]

I just found this in a press release:- With hotel research and booking now done almost entirely on the web, the impetus for this unprecedented investment came from research carried out by IHG which showed that high quality photography had a strong positive impact on booking levels. “Our research has shown that professional, high quality images improve our brand perception and online sales, especially if the images are consistent across all of the properties” said Steve Sickel, IHG Senior Vice President of Distribution and Relationship Marketing. “People expect to be able to make informed comparisons and decisions online, so the most important thing for our
potential guests is to be able to see accurate, realistic and high quality photographs of our rooms and facilities, including virtual tours.”

And the OP has an 'upmarket' product but all the advice is to shoot cheap not quality.

For a photographer, that type of quote is like gold. Have you got the source?

 

[Newcott]

As mentioned I'd always recommend going for a dirt cheap photographer and also for you to do it yourself unless your more then comfortable on this.

In addition to the on shoot equipment/costing look at post production as well - I spend alot of time on Photoshop making sure the photo's perfect regardless of how well the shoot went.

Put it into another context - when I get a wedding booking its not just for the day's shoot - its normaly for a solid 3/4 days afterwards getting the best out of the photos.

By all means I'm not saying go with the most expensive just beware you will get what you pay for.

 

[akirk]

And the OP has an 'upmarket' product but all the advice is to shoot cheap not quality.

nonsense

the price I quoted is an upper-end commercial price.
3 - 4 items will not take long to shoot - £100 is ample for that (esp. when added to travel costs and processing costs).

Trust me - that is not cheap photography... nor would it be low quality photography... if he wanted low quality photography then my suggestion would have been to take his own...

Alasdair

 

[Newcott]

nonsense

the price I quoted is an upper-end commercial price.
3 - 4 items will not take long to shoot - £100 is ample for that (esp. when added to travel costs and processing costs).

Trust me - that is not cheap photography... nor would it be low quality photography... if he wanted low quality photography then my suggestion would have been to take his own...

Alasdair

I wouldnt agree with that - £100 would get you a good amateur but £100 for a upper end commercial I doubt.

You'd be looking at someone to do a half day job - especialy if you have to travel in 2/3 locations & post production

I'd expect a upper end photographer starting rate to be £200-£250 upwards

 

[akirk]

I wouldnt agree with that - £100 would get you a good amateur but £100 for a upper end commercial I doubt.

You'd be looking at someone to do a half day job - especialy if you have to travel in 2/3 locations & post production

I'd expect a upper end photographer starting rate to be £200-£250 upwards

It is always a shame when people don't read a post

I said both times:
£100 for the c. 1 hour needed (3-4 products in one place)
plus travel
plus PP

though I don't advertise my photography business as I run it as a closed business, for private clients only, I am a pro photog. and get flown around the world to do it - I would say that I am far from cheap but this is a very small job.

Alasdair

 

[Newcott]

Alasdair - I did read your post which is why I'm disagreeing.

The OP has said that he wasn't 2/3 locations now unless thats changed and I missed that bit and unless the locations are within the same building/street I would of thought it would take more then 1 hour.

I'm not doubting your skills or ability but I don't know many photographers that don't charge a minimum of half day on a shoot like this.

 

£100 is completely off the mark. (or did you mean per hour?)

There are two types of photographers, cheap and quality.

Unfortunately a lot of clients go for the cheapest quotes thinking they are saving money then realising that the photos are so bad they needs hours of work in Photoshop. Professional photographs are composed in cameras using composition and lighting by trained and talented photographers. There's no button in Photoshop for that skill.

I know photographers who are very well trained but charge bottom rate and point and shoot...sad really. People don't want to spend the money.

I personally don't deal with the general public for commercial work. All photography work is commissioned through PR and advertising companies but to answer your question, expect a day rate of at least £700 or simply ask for some studio shoots to reduce time and cost.

Quotes depend on image usage, who you are and the time required to produce a shot suitable for your needs.

 

[Newcott]

£100 is completely off the mark. (or did you mean per hour?)

There are two types of photographers, cheap and quality.

Unfortunately a lot of clients go for the cheapest quotes thinking they are saving money then realising that the photos are so bad they needs hours of work in Photoshop. Professional photographs are composed in cameras using composition and lighting by trained and talented photographers. There's no button in Photoshop for that skill.

I know photographers who are very well trained but charge bottom rate and point and shoot...sad really. People don't want to spend the money.

I personally don't deal with the general public for commercial work. All photography work is commissioned through PR and advertising companies but to answer your question, expect a day rate of at least £700 or simply ask for some studio shoots to reduce time and cost.

Quotes depend on image usage, who you are and the time required to produce a shot suitable for your needs.

I'll agree with 90% of what you said but I'll disagree with the Photoshop side of things.

Its a old school of photography that see's photoshop as just a error fixing tool - when it it much much more then that.

now I do a mixture, depending on what the shoot is but whats the difference in having a skill and knowledge with lighting compared to the skill and knowledge of photoshop (and I'm not talking auto curves/levels!)

RAW photography is much more powerfull in anything that is not ideal studio lighting so unless thats all you shoot then I wouldn't knock peoples ability with post work,

 

[akirk]

Alasdair - I did read your post which is why I'm disagreeing.

The OP has said that he wasn't 2/3 locations now unless thats changed and I missed that bit and unless the locations are within the same building/street I would of thought it would take more then 1 hour.

I'm not doubting your skills or ability but I don't know many photographers that don't charge a minimum of half day on a shoot like this.

maybe there is a misunderstanding - he said 2 / 3 locations, but mentioned airport - so my assumption is 2 / 3 settings in one place - e.g. by kerb, getting out of taxi / on escalator / in 1st class lounge / etc. logically if one is having to move around the country to a number of locations that will take more time! but as he was talking about product shots in an out of focus context, variety in one location may be sufficient...

my original comment was that if this was just that number of products then it could be done in an hour - so my pricing suggestion was based on that.

Alasdair

 

I'll agree with 90% of what you said but I'll disagree with the Photoshop side of things.

Its a old school of photography that see's photoshop as just a error fixing tool - when it it much much more then that.

now I do a mixture, depending on what the shoot is but whats the difference in having a skill and knowledge with lighting compared to the skill and knowledge of photoshop (and I'm not talking auto curves/levels!)

RAW photography is much more powerfull in anything that is not ideal studio lighting so unless thats all you shoot then I wouldn't knock peoples ability with post work,

My post referred to a recent discussion with a graphic designer mate who needed to spend hours trying to fix some cheap photography work for a clothing catalogue.

"Get the photography done cheap and fix it in Photoshop."

That's how it works unfortunately. The company went full circle and realised they needed to spend the £££s on good photography which required minimal touching up in PS. That's how it should be done.

High end graphic design work in PS as you mention is another medium entirely.

Anyway, it's Friday afternoon, I've got work to do....

 

[Newcott]

Alasdair - fair enough I think thats the misunderstanding with time.

Bode - in that context then yes, seen that time and time again where clients won't take you on becuase they found cheaper/family friend who can do it then come back to you 6 months down the line for new work.

 

[confuseddotcom]

What about picking up a decent camera up from Amazon and messing around with stuff (<£150 or less, 12MP). I use Aperture for the Mac now and then for doing some editing (family pictures). The only thing im not prepared to do is learn and use CSS cause it looks like a right pain. That said, I get great results from Aperture.

Just thinking this would be a better route, don't have the kind of cash some photographers are asking for (even although i know they would do a splendid job, no doubt) but i've not got the budget for it.

 

[akirk]

feel free to do it - at the end of the day you will still have the camera even if it doesn't work out...

buying a cheap camera though will not give you a) the creative control b) the image quality (e.g. grainier in low light) etc. of better kit...

if buying a compact camera then you will have more difficulty getting the shallow depth of field / and quality of bokeh that you talk about wanting...

you need to make a decision on what makes a difference for your business - a cheap camera in the hands of a creative person will still allow you to get good photos - do you need a specific look, or just a smart crisp photo etc.?

you haven't got a lot to lose in trying it... you could still then use a pro photog.


but do think it through - what you don't want to do is end up with bad photos and damage your business...

(CSS is cascading syle sheets on the web - you might be thinking of CS5 - the Adobe suite - which incidentally is easier to use than Aperture )

Alasdair

 

[pajophotography]

Are you still looking for a photographer?

 

[aje]

Wow! Shame I didn't see this post earlier.

I am surprised that the OP is thinking of doing it himself at the 11th hour!

Just my 2 pennies worth: I took the traditional route into photography with many years assisting work. The photographer I worked with most often charges the same or less as he did 20 years ago, despite having to re-invest in kit a lot more regularly now!

The digital revolution is great for the masses, and photographers fees sometimes seem high, but most freelancers cannot find work every day, do not have any sick or holiday pay and usually aspire to having their own property like everyone else.

When I was at college around 16 years ago we were told that you'd need £30,000 to start up a photography business( with studio) so god knows what the estimate is now, especially if you've gone to Uni first!

There is no doubt that anyone can learn to take pictures, but to what quality and to what effect?

A large part of professional photography is problem solving, enabling you to create outstanding images in any situation, with any client. It's all very well getting lucky shots at the weekend, but if you're asking to be paid for your efforts you need to guarantee results.

I know what I need to charge to cover my costs and maintain a decent standard of living and luckily I have clients who appreciate that.

Regarding the Shoe job: that would go down as a half day rate of £250 + travel expenses. PP is included. The pictures are guaranteed to sell more shoes!

Have a great week

Amanda

 

[pajophotography]

I have just opened my food photography company and the quote I made for my studio was much less than that.
If you look carefully on places like ebay you will be able to get the full studio for around £2000... of course you will continue spending but that is the basic.
The most expensive will be the camera and a good lens.

Wow! Shame I didn't see this post earlier.

I am surprised that the OP is thinking of doing it himself at the 11th hour!

Just my 2 pennies worth: I took the traditional route into photography with many years assisting work. The photographer I worked with most often charges the same or less as he did 20 years ago, despite having to re-invest in kit a lot more regularly now!

The digital revolution is great for the masses, and photographers fees sometimes seem high, but most freelancers cannot find work every day, do not have any sick or holiday pay and usually aspire to having their own property like everyone else.

When I was at college around 16 years ago we were told that you'd need £30,000 to start up a photography business( with studio) so god knows what the estimate is now, especially if you've gone to Uni first!

There is no doubt that anyone can learn to take pictures, but to what quality and to what effect?

A large part of professional photography is problem solving, enabling you to create outstanding images in any situation, with any client. It's all very well getting lucky shots at the weekend, but if you're asking to be paid for your efforts you need to guarantee results.

I know what I need to charge to cover my costs and maintain a decent standard of living and luckily I have clients who appreciate that.

Regarding the Shoe job: that would go down as a half day rate of £250 + travel expenses. PP is included. The pictures are guaranteed to sell more shoes!

Have a great week

Amanda

 

[joiner]

Why do photographers charge so much??

As a joiner I trained (formally) for 3 years, I have over £4000 worth of kit, and over 15 yrs experience. Yet photographers often charge more per hour than I can charge per day!!

Mark.

 

[akirk]

Beacause photographers are not just charging for the time on the shoot...

a half day shoot might well involve half a day / a whole day / more afterwards in post processing etc. depending on the needs of the client...

so the hourly rate is much lower than you think...

also, the two are not comparable - a management consultant might have no formal training / no kit other than his laptop and be charging evern more per day...

charging is not just a factor of training / kit / experience - it is also results and market based

Alasdair

 

[pajophotography]

I often ask myself the same question, specially when you have so much offer.

I decided to keep my prices accessible even when I provide a specific type of photography, I am a qualified chef and photographer, and had to invest £3000 in a camera, lens, studio lights, backgrounds and much more...

But I have different prices that will match the type of customer and project.

 

[Dawg]

£3000 barely buys you a decent studio lighting pack let alone a system, a medium format digi back system is going to cost well north of £10k, even a basic studio kitchen to do food photography will set you back £4k.
Any working pro has to charge fair bit just to break even. A £750 day rate is a starting point, and charging by the hour, unless for an exceptionally good client with shed loads of repeat business, is foolish, I think.