Post by whitepicketfence on Jan 5, 2013 9:23:55 GMT -5
We bought one of the 4 1st year packages that our photographer offers. The one we went with was $916 ($229 per session) and included 4 mounted 8 x 10s, 25 birth announcements, and a $300 print credit. I don't recall what we spent on newborn prints specifically since we've ordered them from each session, but I want to say that it was around $500. I also had a $50 GC that I picked up from her table at a "stork fair" for moms-to-be which is where I initially found her.
We've spent a shitload of money on photography in the past year but I don't regret it. Our photographer rocks and she's been worth every penny.
This is why I'm a fan of photographers who charge that way. Much better to charge a higher sitting fee since that is where the work is, not in making prints.
Lurker who is working on buillding a photography portfolio but the shoot itself is absolutely not where all of the work is. Editing the images/managing digital workflow is very time consuming, thus the high cost of the prints or the CD with digital images
yeah I don't use photographers that charge that way, even the friends I know that do great work. I shopped around and got a 1st year package for $1500 that includes newborn photos, 6 months, and 1 year. Disc of all images after each session, birth announcement design, and she'll design and print an album of the best images at the end.
We have a similar package, but it only includes 25 images (total) on a cd. It was hard for h to stomach at first, but now he wants our photog to take ds' pics monthly. Totally worth it, IMO.
This is why I'm a fan of photographers who charge that way. Much better to charge a higher sitting fee since that is where the work is, not in making prints.
Lurker who is working on buillding a photography portfolio but the shoot itself is absolutely not where all of the work is. Editing the images/managing digital workflow is very time consuming, thus the high cost of the prints or the CD with digital images
I disagree. And this will get me flamed I'm sure, but if you're a good photographer you shouldn't have to spend a ton of time editing photos.
I am shocked when I see numbers like this. She is either working all the time or scraping by because she easily spent 10 hrs on that shoot to edit the photos + shoot time/transportation. Plus she has equipment costs and pays taxes at the higher self-employment rate.
I agree this is super low, but 10 hours on a shoot and editing? That's a little over the top.
She's fairly new, only been doing it for 3ish years. It's a side job for her, she's also a SAHM with 2 sets of twins. Also we're in a MCOL.
She does charge a travel fee ($30) if you don't use her in home studio or outdoor options she suggests in her town.
There's no way she's spending 10 hours to edit each session... her turn around time is fast. For M's 9mo session the preview was on her site within 3 days & received the cd in the mail 6 days after the session. She also shot 5 other families the same day & from her fb updates I know all of their pics were ready at the same time.
Regular family/kid sessions are much quicker than newborn, generally 30 minutes.
Post by ihearttheterps on Jan 5, 2013 15:35:44 GMT -5
I think the poster who mentioned the ten hours meant time total on the job including the time with the shoot. I agree that a good photographer doesn't HAVE to spend hours editing their photos but I also don't think that editing a photo= fixing a photo. I generally prefer for my photos to have minimal edits but I think this a question of personal/artistic style more than spending a lot of time to fix mistakes. Plus, I have found that it is really easy to get sucked into making small tweaks on your images in photo software- it's pretty fun:)
I think the poster who mentioned the ten hours meant time total on the job including the time with the shoot. I agree that a good photographer doesn't HAVE to spend hours editing their photos but I also don't think that editing a photo= fixing a photo. I generally prefer for my photos to have minimal edits but I think this a question of personal/artistic style more than spending a lot of time to fix mistakes. Plus, I have found that it is really easy to get sucked into making small tweaks on your images in photo software- it's pretty fun:)
Even if a shoot is 3 hours, that's 7 hours editing photos - that's ridiculous. My husband is a professional photographer, unless you're doing crazy photoshop it shouldn't take that long to edit photos. And I'd be pissed as hell if my photographer was charging me to have (non-necessary)" fun" with software.
I think the poster who mentioned the ten hours meant time total on the job including the time with the shoot. I agree that a good photographer doesn't HAVE to spend hours editing their photos but I also don't think that editing a photo= fixing a photo. I generally prefer for my photos to have minimal edits but I think this a question of personal/artistic style more than spending a lot of time to fix mistakes. Plus, I have found that it is really easy to get sucked into making small tweaks on your images in photo software- it's pretty fun:)
Even if a shoot is 3 hours, that's 7 hours editing photos - that's ridiculous. My husband is a professional photographer, unless you're doing crazy photoshop it shouldn't take that long to edit photos. And I'd be pissed as hell if my photographer was charging me to have (non-necessary)" fun" with software.
LOL- fair enough. It is "fun" for me personally as I am learning the editing software better but I know that professionals are likely far more efficient than I am. I still don't believe that the shoot itself is always the part of the job that takes the longest.
Post by dutchgirl678 on Jan 5, 2013 23:13:43 GMT -5
You get what you pay for IMO. As a starting photographer myself I know how much goes into building a business and being profitable. a $150 sitting fee and prints starting at $30 sounds about right to me. Custom photography is a luxury item and an investment. You get memories that last a lifetime. I would expect to pay anywhere between $500 and $1500 for a newborn session.
$300 for 25 images, taken at our house. We'll get them all on a CD and can print them ourselves. This is quite low for the LA area, but I like her portfolio. I think she's relatively new to the "biz" -- I think this is her side gig.
Vic1011(from D&R from the nest) did mine. I paid her 45 dollars just for the drive, even though she wasn't charging me anything. I am so thankful for her:) She did our engagement shoot, as well, back in 2006.
What I do for my nieces pictures, I grab a few newly upcoming photographers they charge 60 bucks for unlimited pictures and fully edited on a DVD. Pictures came out great. HS's and Colleges both have photographer programs and most students are looking for the experience to learn and earn a buck.
We decided against them, but my friend who is a professional photographer gave us a discount of $350 with a cd included, no prints. He charges much more normally. And deserves every penny. He will be shooting my sisters' weddings whenever they get married. He charges about 5-6k for that.