• wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    7 hours ago

    At $100 per shoot she can pay off her camera in one year doing one shoot a week. That’s if it’s a hobby.

    But since it’s not a hobby for her, as she points out, that means she can do 3-5 shoots per week. If she charges $300 per shoot, and averages let’s say 4 shoots per week, that’s over $60k per year. A small salary, but people get by for less.

    If she wants to make more, that’s fine. But she has to convince people that she’s worth a higher price by doing quality work and demonstrating consistency, professionalism, building a network of returning clients and recommendations if she wants to be fully booked each week. Not by telling them how expensive her equipment is…

    • Soulphite@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Just playing devils advocate here, there should be more involved than simply taking pictures. There will be editing, and putting together an album that makes sense to the customer as well; therefore she could charge more for her time and upcharge for album features such as hard copy decorative stuff.

      Then again, there is that saying “starving artist” and all…

      • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Sure, but I factored that in by considering 5 shoots per week “fully booked.” That gives you an average of 8 hours per shoot for everything from transport, set up, shooting, take-down, editing, archiving, billing, etc.

        Not unreasonable, especially considering that’s a 40 hour week. Overtime exists if she needs longer, and should be billed accordingly. $1500 in one week is more than a lot of people make, even working over 40 hours.

        Is the $100-$300 she mentions a flat rate or an hourly rate? Even as a flat rate that would be decent for one day’s work. If it’s hourly, that’s pretty lucrative and leaves no room to complain, especially not about all the extra stuff that’s involved.

        Physical copies would of course be charged a la carte or as a bundle or whatever; it’s pretty standard for those to be add-on costs, unless a certain number of items were already part of the negotiated contract. But with print-on-demand services these days, that adds very little additional work or overhead expense for the photographer.

        But yeah if she wants to charge more than $300 for one shoot, then she needs to spend time building her reputation, not complaining about the cost of her equipment and acting like her cheapskate customers are to blame.

        You can build a reputation with a $400 mirrorless camera, if you’re a good photographer. Then invest in professional equipment when you can afford it.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      At $100 per shoot she can pay off her camera in one year doing one shoot a week.

      Assuming you don’t value your time, sure. Pro-photographers charge a lot more than that. Also, who wants to give up a year’s worth of weekends for a fancy camera?

      • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Let’s look at the rest of that paragraph you selectively quoted:

        At $100 per shoot she can pay off her camera in one year doing one shoot a week. That’s if it’s a hobby.

        [emphasis added]

        What a bad faith attempt to stir shit up over nothing.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          ???

          Get some thicker skin, my guy. If you’re getting paid for the work, its going to be more than a hobby. Especially if you’re planning to work 50 separate gigs.

          Ffs, if you can file taxes as a business, we’re well past the point of hobbying. That’s just a part time job

          • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 hours ago

            This isn’t about having thin skin, this is about you being unnecessarily combative. Don’t flatter yourself thinking I’m torn up about it.

            If you’re getting paid for the work, its going to be more than a hobby. Especially if you’re planning to work 50 separate gigs.

            Ffs, if you can file taxes as a business, we’re well past the point of hobbying. That’s just a part time job

            Hence where the rest of my original comment comes in. I know you like cherrypicking excerpts devoid of context, but ffs everyone can see my whole fucking comment. It’s right there. And you’re acting like you’re actually making a point here? Go away.