Any Professional Portrait Photographers Here?

[nvr2mny]

My wife and I purchased a gift certificate at a local charity auction for an amount to be applied against a sitting and costs for a professional portrait picture(s) package. They came out and did an amazing job and we had the viewing yesterday. HOLY SCHHITT we had NO IDEA of the costs (our bad to be sure). I have NO idea if what they are charging is customary as we have no reference point as it's not something we've done for decades. Also, for those in the biz, do they expect to negotiate off the top? We are not under any sort of contract nor are bound in any way to purchase.

If any of you have gone through this recently, please chime in.

Here's the breakdown for the following - UNFRAMED - sizes (yeah, they do that too!)

24 x 30 = 2800.00ea / 16 x 24 = 2000.00ea / 16 x 20 = 1500.00ea
11 x 14 = 1250.00ea / 8 x 10 = 250.00ea / 8 x 8 Album with 13 pictures = 990.00

The final cost for what we had picked out was damn near the cost of a high end motor rebuild.

IF we go back, we'll be pairing WAY back what we would have liked to have.

Any useful advice would be much appreciated.

[GH85Carrera]

I did portraits for many years, and weddings and commercial photography long ago. I was never anything that expensive.

There has always been the "exclusive and high end" photographers that charge tons just because they can. In the days when I was shooting the big cost was the film, and the processing and making prints to show the client. All of those costs are gone. They just shoot digital, and let Photoshop correct any exposure issues. Show the client the pictures on a large monitor, and accept the orders. Most photographers of today don't even have a studio with 25K in Hassleblad equipment, and a 20 grand darkroom as overhead.

The pictures are worth whatever you are willing to pay.

At my first job back when I was a junior in high school the place I worked at had a studio with 50 grand in lighting, and tons of camera equipment. We were known as the go to place in the high society circles. The first week I was there I watched the boss take a "passport" photo of a lady and we shot it on black and white 4x5 film. The piece of film was bigger than the final passport photo. Without asking the boss proceeded to print a 20x24 print on B&W paper with the "G" surface, and it looked great. Then he handed it to one of the employees to have her hand oil and colorize it. When she was done it looked and felt like a master painter had painted her portrait. It was stunning. We framed it, and hung it up front. When she came in with her family to pick up a the $5 passport photo, they were floored with that 20x24.

They were almost tripping over themselves to pay several grand in 1970 money. Some real effort and talent went into that print. In 2020 our print shop charges us $50 for a 20x30 so his profit margin is off the charts.

[masraum]

Wow, that sounds insane to me. I'm not even sure that we paid that much for our wedding photographer.

It seems like it would be better to pay for their time and electronic copies and then get them printed someplace reasonable (although I suspect they won't give you the electronic copies so you can do that).

[GH85Carrera]

Originally Posted by masraum

Wow, that sounds insane to me. I'm not even sure that we paid that much for our wedding photographer.

It seems like it would be better to pay for their time and electronic copies and then get them printed someplace reasonable (although I suspect they won't give you the electronic copies so you can do that).

That is a flat copyright violation. They can sue you and a judge will award 25K as a start. We sued more than a few people that "stole" our images. And we received some large settlements. By we I mean businesses I have worked at in the past. The boss made some money on copyright violations.

Not even a grey area, it is simply illegal.

[Scott Douglas]

For that kind of money you can buy yourself a pretty decent camera setup and make many more of your own choosing.

[Eric Coffey]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

That is a flat copyright violation. They can sue you and a judge will award 25K as a start.

If the images are used without permission with no releases in place, then yes. However, I would not even consider paying for a portrait session if it didn't include a (royalty-free) print-release, at minimum.
If paying a premium, I'd also expect a copyright-release (full ownership of the images). Basically, it's sort of a sliding scale between money and image control/ownership, with and several rights-managed options therein.

On the photog side, you would likely want model/property releases to CYA.

[GH85Carrera]

Unless it is written into the contract, the photographer will retain all the rights. He wants to keep the rights to be able to SELL that image to the client at the huge markup and keep those profits.

We sell aerial photographs. All of them taken from aircraft, and all of them are just pictures of the ground. We retain the copyright and each photo is copyrighted right on the print. We will sell a low resolution image for the client to use on their web site, or for in house publication, or make 8.5x11 prints or use it in any presentation. They don't have the rights to reprint the large prints, and certainly we don't want them copying the photo and making poor quality copies with our name on it.

We will sell a copyright release to a client for a limited and specif use. It us $2,5000 and up for the release. We want to control the quality of any reprints. We have provided clients of images and they make some horrible quality prints.

Often the images we produce are too big fo most clients. The project I am working on right now is not large area yet the image is 4.1 GB. Clients try to open that in Word or PowerPoint and it crashes for some reason.

[vash]

woww...maybe i should have done something with my photography degree...

personally, i dont understand portraits. at least of myself. i dont want a big ass picture of myself on the wall. i know what i look like.

maybe a painting..paint me into that scene with me playing poker with a bunch of dog.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by vash

personally, i don't understand portraits, at least of myself. I don't want a big ass picture of myself on the wall. I know what I look like.

Not ever going to happen although I get it.

There is just not enough Photoshop...some people photograph well. I have an innate distrust of those people

[GH85Carrera]

At the photolab I worked at for years we had people come in on a regular basis. One of their loved ones had died, and the only photos they had were group photos or sometimes just a driver's license photo. So we would make 8x10s for their wall. It is very sad to think of how many people will be remembered only by their DL photo, or a group shot next to other people.

Every person that has any family needs to have a decent portrait shot of themselves. It does not have to be an expensive one like the OP had. But something better than your driver's license for the family to remember you by.

Many were Olan Mills portraits. We told every one of them, to contact them, and tell them when the portrait was shot, and how long ago. They will provide a copyright release, and then we can copy it. We simply would not copy a photograph with a copyright on it like that Olan Mills stamp.

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by nvr2mny

My wife and I purchased a gift certificate at a local charity auction for an amount to be applied against a sitting and costs for a professional portrait picture(s) package. They came out and did an amazing job and we had the viewing yesterday. HOLY SCHHITT we had NO IDEA of the costs (our bad to be sure). I have NO idea if what they are charging is customary as we have no reference point as it's not something we've done for decades. Also, for those in the biz, do they expect to negotiate off the top? We are not under any sort of contract nor are bound in any way to purchase.

If any of you have gone through this recently, please chime in.

Here's the breakdown for the following - UNFRAMED - sizes (yeah, they do that too!)

24 x 30 = 2800.00ea / 16 x 24 = 2000.00ea / 16 x 20 = 1500.00ea
11 x 14 = 1250.00ea / 8 x 10 = 250.00ea / 8 x 8 Album with 13 pictures = 990.00

The final cost for what we had picked out was damn near the cost of a high end motor rebuild.

IF we go back, we'll be pairing WAY back what we would have liked to have.

Any useful advice would be much appreciated.

you might join and post at FredMiranda.com - lots of pros use that site

they are trying to get you to pay for their "professionalism" or their "art" - there is a lot to the lighting & setup beyond taking the photo

maybe hire Annie Leibowitz...

[dan79brooklyn]

My wife is a professional photographer. If a couple or a individual wants some pictures taken she typically charges $250 (friend/half day rate) edits the pictures and gives all the selects.

[LWJ]

The "donate the sitting fee"is an old scam.

1) the photographer gets to write off the "fee"
2) You are now only able to buy at whatever price they charge.

Me? I would hire a photographer of your choice and redo on your terms.

I have zero problem with ethical people doing legitimate work. You were scammed. Sorry. Don't reinforce that behavior with any $$$.

[Scott Douglas]

I'll admit to being a camera junkie. I want to know what kind of camera/lens they used.

[serene911]

I'm in an arts oriented field. I'd walk. For that kind of money I would go out and buy
some original artwork that fits in with your style and taste. If they had $500 to $1000.00
in materials that would be different,But in this day of digital cameras and processing
that's a massive profit. I like LWJ's comment as well.If it was me l would find a local
photographer and do a classic black and white photo,frame it properly and it would
be timeless.

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by LWJ

The "donate the sitting fee"is an old scam.

1) the photographer gets to write off the "fee"
2) You are now only able to buy at whatever price they charge.

Me? I would hire a photographer of your choice and redo on your terms.

I have zero problem with ethical people doing legitimate work. You were scammed. Sorry. Don't reinforce that behavior with any $$$.

this reminds me...

you could go and be very insistent on him retaking the shots over & over, then not buy anything

- assuming he is a 'dick' - he could just be a nice guy trying to make a living with his new gear in a vanishing market...

[Eric Coffey]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

Unless it is written into the contract, the photographer will retain all the rights. He wants to keep the rights to be able to SELL that image to the client at the huge markup and keep those profits.

Yup. Just wanted to mention the differences between simple print-releases and other rights-managed agreements, or full-blown copyright-releases. It's a matter of image ownership/rights/control, vs. revenue.
As a photog, you want to maintain the most control, while making the most money. As such you would typically charge a lot more for a total copyright-release than a simple print-release and/or rights-managed agreement.

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

We will sell a copyright release to a client for a limited and specif use. It us $2,5000 and up for the release. We want to control the quality of any reprints. We have provided clients of images and they make some horrible quality prints.

I am sure you have your bases covered (and probably just splitting hairs), but I would be careful with the terminology/contract verbiage there. A "copyright release" is just that, and if not articulated/worded correctly, it could have you losing the royalty rights to your images (deeming them "royalty-free"). Hence the use of limited-use licencing (rights-managed) agreements. RM agreements typically address limits on image size/resolution, mediums, distribution, time, etc. without relinquishing any ownership (copy) rights. It's basically a detailed lease agreement, where the lessor allows the lessee the use of their "property" with very specific limitations.

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

Often the images we produce are too big fo most clients. The project I am working on right now is not large area yet the image is 4.1 GB. Clients try to open that in Word or PowerPoint and it crashes for some reason.

Ask them try MS Paint instead.

You using PhaseOne or Leaf backs?

[unclebilly]

When I bought my Tundra nine years ago, the dealership included a family portrait session as a 'free' gift.

We went and had our photos taken and the session included 1 8X10 photo. If we wanted more, and the photographer did a great job, the costs would have been similar to the prices in the OP.

We took our complimentary photo (maybe we agreed to a few hundred dollar upsell) and chalked the experience up to 'nothing is free'...

[GH85Carrera]

Most of our images are something no one but that client would ever want. A high resolution fantastic color image of an industrial plant is still ugly, except to the owners. We have photographed a lot of stuff that is almost laughable ugly property in the swamps or Georgia, or the deserts area of Utah. Gravel pits and strip mines are not pretty.

The only reason we copyright it, is to get the reprint business, and to control the quality of the final print.

[jcommin]

The cost is insane. If the photos are in the photographers studio, all the equipment is there: background, lighting, etc. Photos are digital - there is no film processing. Do even get me started on frame costs.

I paint in pastels and do comission work - I have the right to make and sell copies of my art work and I state is a such. Normally I don't because the work is unique but if it is a generic city or landscape, I might. Artists make money on prints.