I actively read the APA message group on Yahoo. It’s a great place to share ideas and questions with other advertising photographers. The topic has been brought up in the last few days of the many changes in the photography industry.
Many are bemoaning the way things are headed with budgets, usage, etc. It seems many are going out of business, taking part-time jobs or finding new ways to broaden their horizons. Many, many photographers are blaming shooters who will shoot for peanuts. They feel that those who are racing to the bottom, shooting for next to nothing, are bringing down budgets across the board. This all got me thinking and I replied to a thread with this response:
“I feel like the photography industry is paralleling Communism. When a Communist government takes power their aim is to rid society of the middle class. The middle class is where the stability and security of the nation lies. There ends up being only the poor who are under the government’s control and the wealthy elite.
Photography is headed the same place. I believe there is a place for the low-end bargain shooters and the high-priced elite shooters. But it’s the middle class of photography that is being systematically killed off.
What a shame because those of us who make up photography’s middle class are it’s best chance of survival.”
A note: I don’t think there is some Communist plot to overthrow photography. It’s just a metaphor I thought of.
What do you think?
There was a point early on that I wanted to take anything that came in the door, but I found myself complaining more and more about the lower priced clients. After reading something about where I valued myself as a photographer I made the decision to charge the appropriate rate (which seemed high to me at the time) and not settle because I thought I “needed” it. Now I have to turn away lower priced shoots, but I’m still getting shoots at the “higher” rate which I once though was unattainable. Now that I’m at this point I’m starting to feel more and more the tension that charging next to nothing brings to the industry. It was a tough jump for me, but it was really all mental. Now I’m shooting for the clients I want and getting paid for it. It makes me love what I do even more.
You know, I consider you near the top. But, I read a comment yesterday on Aphotoeditor.com about the “Say No to $200 Jobs” and a guy made a passing comment to this effect. It stuck with me. It does seem like all the forces at work between new photographers trying to do something (like myself) creating a glut in the market and stock > microstock > RM > RF all see to be washing away the middle. Those of us not even at the middle yet look at it and just wonder….
I’m one of the “low-end bottom dwellers”, so I have a slightly different opinion then the one you posted. For me, the opportunity for the bottom-dwellers to make money from their work is a welcome thing, even at the expense of the ‘high and mighty ones’.
But you have it backwards. It’s the elite of the party that are falling, not the middle class. There never was a middle class in photography, you either were selected into the elite, or you didn’t work. Elite or nothing.
The internet and the free-market changed that elite structure. It’s taking down the power from the elite and gives it to all. Anyone now has a chance in photography, not just the people that could make it into the club or the ones with an agent. The internet levels the playing field.
You want higher wages? Then create a better product.
If you can’t compete with the bottom dwellers, that’s not the bottom dwellers fault, that’s yours.
It seems like both you guys have good work. Daniel, I’ve followed your stuff for a while now. Why wouldn’t you charge more? I don’t think the issue is crappy shooters charging next to nothing… I think it is the good shooters that don’t charge what they are worth. Why not pay way less for someone who is just as good, if not better. I think thats where the argument is relevant. Give yourself the credit and price tag it deserves.
Daniel,
I have to disagree and say that there most certainly is a middle class to photography. I know because I am in it.
IMO, there are at least 3 tiers to the photo industry. You have the people who charge next to nothing and accept any offer that comes their way. These are the people who either don’t understand the value of what they do, don’t believe in themselves enough to charge what they should, are honest enough about their inexperience to charge what they do and those who lowball based on fear of not getting a job they bid on.
There are many other reasons I’m sure for people to lowball and I think we’ve all done it at least once in our careers. I’m not here to point fingers or blame anyone. It’s just the facts; group one are the lowballers.
Group two are the middle class. People like me who started in the first group but who have worked their way up the ladder by hard work, creativity and a little bit of luck. I am far from the “elite” class of shooters. I don’t shoot for Conde Nast, command six figure rates per shoot or have a staff of 10 people.
Yes, people will only rise up out of the first level and into the the second but not if they sell themselves short at every or most opportunities.
The third class are the ruling elite of photography. These are people like Norman Jean Roy, Patrick Demarchelier and others who most of us only hope to aspire to as much success as them.
The internet has leveled the playing field greatly. I attribute a great deal of what success I do have to it’s invention. However, it is not going to put me on equal footing with Annie Leibovitz on it’s own. It has allowed for people who are unknown to showcase their work, contact with clients, etc.
The elite will not be overly hurt by what those who charge too little do. They aren’t even competing for the same jobs.
BUT, the first group and the middle class compete for jobs often. And when a client starts basing their needs on budget and not talent alone, things go to the first class and the budgets get pulled down for the middle class.
Trust me I’ve seen this many, many times. I’ve been on both sides of this issue. I’ve been the low bid and I’ve had people undercut me. I personally hate when I’m hired purely for budget reasons. There is nothing so satisfying as a photographer than being hired for your eye rather than your price.
Peace,
I have been wondering about this too. As an amateur wanting to turn semi pro I keep wondering how I should charge and what should I offer. More and more people seem to not want prints… they just want a CD of images and some don’t really care about the quality. Those of us on the bottom don’t have the chops yet to charge the high prices but we need the experience to get those chops. And for myself, until I get to that level I don’t feel right charging a lot. But I don’t want to stay here either. I wont intentionally accept mediocrity for what I do. Its my time as much as it is the clients and I don’t want to have work floating around that I will be embarrassed by in 10 years.
But the line is blurred between the camera and picture quality from the Rebel to the Mark II. You can even pick up a used 30D for a few hundred bucks and shoot a wedding. Guys do that. And the reality is, if the person knows what they are doing, they can do a great job. Most cant tell the difference between L glass and a $500 “consumer” lens and when most images these days are viewed (right now) on an sRGB quality screen, you don’t need to spend a lot for the gear. The digital age has done away with the need for prints and $2500 and up cameras in most peoples eyes. Those were things that kept “your cousins uncle” from being able to shoot a wedding or do a portrait session, that and knowledge of how to expose an image without a 3″ LCD and a histogram. Only the high end sports shooters and crazy nature guys need the high dollar stuff now. I don’t personally think this and I love having a histogram on the LCD but I think my point is accurate.
I think the high end guys have figured out its also %50 about your brand and your marketing. You have to sell now. Photographers didn’t have to really do that in the same way in the past… it was word of mouth. You had a camera, some lights and a portfolio and people had to come to you to see your work or look at someones album that you did. You also had the added benefit of people coming back to you if they needed more prints because Walmart didn’t print photos and Facebook and digital frames didn’t exist.
Maybe the middle of the road should go away so there becomes a distinct line between what is quality and what is not and to give those of us on the bottom something to look way up to and to strive to achieve. The plus side is that while $500 can get you a decent used camera and 1 lens. It wont give you knowledge and passion for your art. It also wont give you a personality and that may be worth more than the gear when it comes to shooting people.
Now I just need to use all this theory to see what happens.
You posted the same time I did David… good points. Thanks!
Hmm…lots of thinking going on here…which is good.
Here’s the way I see it. 3 groups just as David and others have stated.
Lower priced photography - People who are lowballing, RF and Micro Stock, and people who don’t value their work.
The problem with this group is two fold. Not only are they underselling the work they perform…they are also not paying attention to their CODB. If you don’t know what your CODB is or don’t know what a CODB even stands for, then you won’t be in business long. So you say, if they won’t be in business long then so what! Well, it’s this group of people who compete and drive down the value of the work that the next group does so that they can no longer make a living. (Yes this is business and it’s OK to make a profit!)
The tough part here is that some people in this lower priced group don’t do this for a living. They are hobbyists, budding photographers or students who are happy to pay for their hobby/interest. They don’t take into account the true cost of doing the work, because to them, it’s not work.
Mid Tier priced photography - People who work hard, have great talent and I’d guess make up 60% or so of the pack. They do their homework, have a professional approaches to shoots and run their business like a BUSINESS.
These folks know not only how to visualize a concept, light it, and deliver the client a motivating image but they also know what it takes to run a professional shoot. They’re not off winging it with some talent they pulled off the latest modeling website and playing run and gun to get the shot. They plan, prepare and invest in the shoot.
It’s this group that as David describes is having a hard time. They are often bidding against lower priced photogs and losing to them not because the money is not there for the shoot (because it is), not because their work is overpriced (because it’s not - see CODB), and it’s not because their work is “just as good as” Jon Bob lowballer. It’s because the lowballers have delivered on occasion in the past and the AD/CD/AB’s say “why not” save a few bucks. Here’s where the rub comes. The folks who think they are not doing a dis-service, well I’m curious to see where you are in 5 years. I bet you’re not shooting anymore or you’ve raised your rates. If you are still shooting for peanuts, you’re not doing it for a living. No one who bids at the lower level and gets work can sustain it. If you are in the camp that oh, it’s just digital it doesn’t cost anything past the camera. Think again….there’s that CODB again….go ahead wiki it!
Higher Tier priced photography - Truly talented and visionaries in the industry as well as a few “fluffers” who command their price because of “who they are”. You know I’ve met a few of the guys I classify in these ranks. It’s not necessarily that they’ve shot for Nike, Paramount, Apple or REI…but that they have a true talent, see the value in an image as it relates to marketing, a campaign or a message. They not only make a picture speak, they know how to sell it. More power to them, I can continue to strive to be there someday. Whether I ever make it…oh well…they drive me to do better work! And yes David, you are there! You challenged me then and continue to now.
Thanks for letting me rant, hope in some small way my comments meant something to one of you.
Cheers,
Rick
Full disclosure, I am a hobbyist photographer who is looking into and working on going semi-pro. Also, I am very tired so this may be a little scattered.
I have seen a lot of discussion over the past few months on pricing, particularly in relation to people “under-charging” for photography services. While there is certainly merit in educating people in properly charging for their services, this should mostly be to keep them from cheating themselves. Telling people that they need to charge more because they are hurting the industry is wrong in an economic and business sense, and follows in the footsteps of numerous other professions that have and are going through changes brought on by modern technology. Each person has their own cost of doing business. For a person who isn’t really in it for the business will obviously have a much lower cost and thus can charge much less. A person should feel completely free to charge whatever their time is worth to them, without consideration to what the competition is charging. If that collectively drags down the prices for photography, then that is the way it is. Basic economics tells us that when supply outweighs demand, or when the marginal cost is reduced, prices will go down.
Now I understand, that for professional photographers, this sucks. It also once sucked for profession scribes. They had their amazing artwork, but at some point it became easy enough for just about everyone to write well enough to get the job done and no one was interested in paying the high prices of a professional. If people are ok with the quality of the $1000 wedding photographer, why should they pay $6000? It is up to the modern professional photographer to show their potential customers that they really do provide $5000 more value.
Bottom line:
You can’t blame the customer. They are paying what the lowest price that provides them with the quality and value they feel they need.
You can’t blame the low-balling photographers. They are providing a services at a price that covers their individual costs and rewards them in accordance with how they value their own time. That is the way business works.
You can feel free to blame yourself. If a professional photographer is unable to compete with the low-baller at a price they are comfortable, they are either not providing sufficient value to warrant their higher costs, or they aren’t properly educating their potential clients as to what their value truly is.
Don’t over think it. Just take pictures and find a way to enjoy it. Be passionate. enough not worry about what everyone else is thinking about or what they think of you. If theses are the things that are in your mind all the time, you are blocking the positive energy around you.
Michael
“When a Communist government takes power their aim is to rid society of the middle class. The middle class is where the stability and security of the nation lies. There ends up being only the poor who are under the government’s control and the wealthy elite.”
A nitpick: this is the reality of many Communist governments, but does not reflect Communist theory, which, although may not be possible, is about having a classless society.
I really enjoy good discussion. I guess that’s the philosophy degree coming out in me…LOL. Seriously, I have to agree with Jonathan on this one. I pay for a product based on my perception of the value of said product. You can’t hate low end photographers or gripe at them because they don’t charge what others do. And for some people, like myself, I am still learning this art form; although I have admired it and studied it for more than a decade. But my dilemma is this, what do I charge for my work and why? I charge according to the value for the client. If Jane Doe needs some shots done, and she can only afford $200; should we deny her or send her to a bottom end photographer? Does Jane Doe not deserve great pictures at a price that she can afford? I am by no means a professional photographer. I am working on developing a portfolio that is worthy of charging some decent pricing. But my time is worth something, and therefore why do something for free when I can at least pay for my time (even if it is at a reduced rate)?
I would love to do nothing but photography and graphic design for a living. But supporting a family of five when attempting to change careers simply doesn’t allow me to do that overnight. Therefore, I bless others knowing that it will come back to me. And one day, I might attain the “professional” status. Then again, maybe I won’t. But I’m still going to do my best regardless.
Why is this happening in a capitalist economy?
Very thought provoking piece! Great points!
I’m a strictly amateur photographer who’s never made a dime of his photos, so I can’t comment on the photography industry and the way opportunities for photographers are changing.
But I am, as it happens, a professional when it comes to communism — an academic who studies different political theories and systems. And I can tell you that communist governments don’t work the way they’re portrayed. In every case in which communist and socialist parties have gained significant power — whether through violent revolution (Cuba, the Soviet Union, China) or being democratically elected (Chile, Scandinavian countries, arguably Chavez in Venezuela) — the society has been sharply divided between a small, elite wealthy class and a large, poor or peasant class. If there was a middle class, it was minuscule and largely irrelevant; if members of the middle class were persecuted (which was not always the case — in Scandinavia, for example) it was largely because of their political identification, not because of their economic status. For example, scientists and intellectuals who didn’t toe the Soviet party line would be persecuted for that reason, *not* because they were middle class.
These movements were generally quite successful at raising the standard of living for the poor or peasant classes. Life expectancy and literacy in Cuba, for example, rivals that of the United States, and Cuba does so with a much smaller GDP per capita (and today, I’d add, without significant external subsidies). When socialist and communist parties failed, it was usually a combination of political system that made politicians unaccountable to the people (a lack of effective democracy, in other words), un-sustainable production methods (pollution and other environmental problems, basically), and military coups (Pinochet’s overthrow of Allende in Chile, arguably with the help of the CIA, for example), not because of the lack of a middle class.
I do apologize if this is too far off-topic, but `socialist’ and `communist’ are epithets that people have been tossing around a lot lately, without any real understanding of what those words mean. Obviously, I find it quite frustrating.
Dan,
Thanks for the thoughts. I should have known using the word Communism would end up taking this discussion away from the point at hand. I think in hindsight I should have called the article “Where is the Middle Class?”
So as long as we’re off topic; I’m no political scientist but the way I see it, the aim of socialism & communism is equality for all. But in order to do that they don’t make it possible in any way shape or form to bring the lower class out of poverty. Instead the methods they use bring those who have down to the level of the have nots.
There is no incentive or system in place for the poor person to rise above. Sure, they will get taken care of like a zoo animal (health care, education, food, etc.) but with no way to climb a ladder to a better life they are merely zoo animals or slaves to the state.
The government provides the basics for survival so the people can just become little worker bees that keep quiet and do what they’re told.
The rich elite will always be around in these governments because they need each other to scratch each other’s backs. But everyone else is brought down to the role of servant of the state.
I see the same thing happening in this country now. The government wants to be our caretakers and babysitters so that we will feel taken care of and become dependent on them for our every need. In return they want our votes to keep them in power.
It’s not helping the poor, it’s enslaving them in a trap which they can’t or are encouraged not to, escape from.
That’s how I see the healthcare overhaul that the President just forced upon us all. It’s a way of and the beginning of massive government control over our lives. Bush wasn’t much better at it. I think every president keeps making it worse.
Just my opinion given in a friendly way.
Unfortunately, I think this problem will stop a lot of really good photographers from ever getting the exposure they deserve. Technology is great but as it does with most things, it makes photography so easy that anyone can do it.
It lands on the laps of the consumer to pick good photographers and not settle for the low end, budget package. The problem here is that like the photo industry the crunch is on in every market so in most cases they don’t have a choice.
Let me ask a question, taken from a book title of a great marxist….
“What Is To Be Done?”
Interesting topic.
I am entering the “middle class” as we speak. One of the most surprising things I found was, I raised my prices just $400 last year on my wedding photography, to be able to come down if someone needed a break for their wedding (which I would never recommend now) but it threw me into a different level of customers. I no longer have people asking me to come down and shoot for a lower price. Instead every one is upgrading and I am getting more of the customers that I wanted in the first place who actually like my style of photography. Who would have thought?! I’ll be raising my prices again this year, because sometimes I feel like the low baller and I would like for there to be a standard that people expect to pay for good photography.
One other thought.
I think one of the hardest things for good photographers who are “low ballers” to realize is what to charge for Artists, weddings, bands, advertising…. etc. I had to ask a real good friend who was open and honest with his pricing what he charged for some Signed Artist shoots and it blew my mind that companies/ Record labels actually pay big bucks for Photography.
Maybe we should educate more Professionals on what to charge, instead of just telling them to raise their prices.
And I do agree with Michael… “take pictures and find a way to enjoy it”
Amen brother.
Pillspot.org. Canadian Health&Care.No prescription online pharmacy.Special Internet Prices(up to 40% off average US price).PillSpot.org. Vitamins@buy.online” rel=”nofollow”>.…
Categories: Antibiotics.Womens Health.Mens Health.Blood Pressure/Heart.Antidepressants.Anti-allergic/Asthma.Mental Health/Epilepsy.Antidiabetic.Pain Relief.Anxiety/Sleep Aid.Weight Loss.General Health.Eye Care.Stomach.Cholesterol.Skin Care.Antivir…
snowboard http://jleaduv2eoqs.04FORDPARTS.US/tag/Jackets+Snowboard+snowboard/ : Snowboard…
snowboard…