Photography costs
Discussion
Just looking into the costs for a good photographer. The product would be furniture, parasols set in house/pool location.
I’d have thought 2 days on site plus whatever post production time to get the images finished.
I’m after a photographer who will supply raw images to me. Thanks
I’m hoping to find someone very good for £7-800 per day.
I’d have thought 2 days on site plus whatever post production time to get the images finished.
I’m after a photographer who will supply raw images to me. Thanks
I’m hoping to find someone very good for £7-800 per day.
Edited by Burwood on Thursday 20th September 19:33
A lot will depend on what degree of lighting is going to be needed. Camera, lenses and computer aren't much trouble to take on site but a bunch of lighting and modifiers sufficient for a furniture shoot are.
I'd be surprised if any pro would let you have the RAW files. Can't think why you would want them anyway, they are still going to have to be processed.
I'd be surprised if any pro would let you have the RAW files. Can't think why you would want them anyway, they are still going to have to be processed.
£7-800 per day is low for a very good photographer especially when you include the post and the fact you want RAW files.
I am a pro and the only time I hand out RAW files are if the client is doing the post work or if they've paid a fair rate for a buy out - usually based on total media spend.
Have you budgeted for location, lighting equipment, any extra crew that might be needed as well as props and potentially a product stylist? Might be getting ahead of myself but those are things you may/may not need. If you're shooting furniture is it being photographed at the factory (meaning you need set build) or are you transporting to a rental property location?
It's not my usual field of expertise but I'm based in London / Surrey area and am happy to answer any questions or even pitch for the work. Feel free to PM me.
I am a pro and the only time I hand out RAW files are if the client is doing the post work or if they've paid a fair rate for a buy out - usually based on total media spend.
Have you budgeted for location, lighting equipment, any extra crew that might be needed as well as props and potentially a product stylist? Might be getting ahead of myself but those are things you may/may not need. If you're shooting furniture is it being photographed at the factory (meaning you need set build) or are you transporting to a rental property location?
It's not my usual field of expertise but I'm based in London / Surrey area and am happy to answer any questions or even pitch for the work. Feel free to PM me.
Evolved said:
You’ll be lucky to get someone to fly out, transport gear etc for that money per day.
If the equipment can be rented locally and delivered to set then I don’t see the problem with the pricing?It’s no hassle for a Photographer to take his camera in his hand luggage and meet lighting and any larger items at the set.
Burwood said:
Evolved said:
You’ll be lucky to get someone to fly out, transport gear etc for that money per day.
Why? 2 days on site, 3-4 post. 6 days all expenses paid. Seems a nice gig to me. I figured I’d be quoted a price I won’t pay. Cheers anyway 
Why would you possibly hold back raw unless you’re looking to make more money from being the holder of that IP in the future?
Do photographers working in this kinda work really see a valid future income potential from that to hold back RAW?
Fair enough for weddings and studio portrait stuff, but in the more corporate end of the spectrum is it still a thing?
For £4,000 I’d get a local team to get hdri spheres and back plates.
Photogrammetry the parasols/sofa (cg basically)
Then just render away till your hearts content.
Photographers are gonna shoot (lol) themselves in the foot with their high pricing and silly constraints on their ‘artwork’
Do photographers working in this kinda work really see a valid future income potential from that to hold back RAW?
Fair enough for weddings and studio portrait stuff, but in the more corporate end of the spectrum is it still a thing?
For £4,000 I’d get a local team to get hdri spheres and back plates.
Photogrammetry the parasols/sofa (cg basically)
Then just render away till your hearts content.
Photographers are gonna shoot (lol) themselves in the foot with their high pricing and silly constraints on their ‘artwork’
Mr Whippy said:
Why would you possibly hold back raw unless you’re looking to make more money from being the holder of that IP in the future?
Do photographers working in this kinda work really see a valid future income potential from that to hold back RAW?
Fair enough for weddings and studio portrait stuff, but in the more corporate end of the spectrum is it still a thing?
For £4,000 I’d get a local team to get hdri spheres and back plates.
Photogrammetry the parasols/sofa (cg basically)
Then just render away till your hearts content.
Photographers are gonna shoot (lol) themselves in the foot with their high pricing and silly constraints on their ‘artwork’
It's not just about IP but reputation too.Do photographers working in this kinda work really see a valid future income potential from that to hold back RAW?
Fair enough for weddings and studio portrait stuff, but in the more corporate end of the spectrum is it still a thing?
For £4,000 I’d get a local team to get hdri spheres and back plates.
Photogrammetry the parasols/sofa (cg basically)
Then just render away till your hearts content.
Photographers are gonna shoot (lol) themselves in the foot with their high pricing and silly constraints on their ‘artwork’
If someone gets your RAW files and edits them so they look like a pile or poop that's not going to help you get future work in your name is tied to these 'edited' photos.
I get that photographers make their income from image rights. I know f
k all about raw or jpeg. My only experience, bad , was my wedding. It just so happened one of the guests and his family attended mine many years ago. He offered to do it for 1500 quid. Given him, his wife and daughter, who was a bridesmaid attended. I thought it fair.
Post event he upped his price and withheld images.
That’s why I say ‘raw’
What I want is to obtain the rights to the project, agreed upfront. End of
k all about raw or jpeg. My only experience, bad , was my wedding. It just so happened one of the guests and his family attended mine many years ago. He offered to do it for 1500 quid. Given him, his wife and daughter, who was a bridesmaid attended. I thought it fair. Post event he upped his price and withheld images.
That’s why I say ‘raw’
What I want is to obtain the rights to the project, agreed upfront. End of
Simpo Two said:
Fair enough, but RAW files are nothing to do with 'rights' aka copyright - and you can't print them, or if you could, they'd look awful.
What you need to do is ask for copyright.
I’m curious on this, but if you’re contracted to do a job and the copyright isn’t assigned, who does it naturally fall to?What you need to do is ask for copyright.
When you hire a photographer it seems they retain everything except things expressly requested via the contract?
Because really copyright doesn’t even mean provision of raw images either.
I think you might need to retain copyright and all original camera imagery specifically in a contract.
Frankly I’d want raw. Usually a designer will make the editing calls for final use (print, web, etc may be treated differently), not the photographer.
Mr Whippy said:
Frankly I’d want raw. Usually a designer will make the editing calls for final use (print, web, etc may be treated differently), not the photographer.
I daresay you would want raw, but most pro photographers would be very reluctant is not point blank refuse, mainly because the developing of raw images is part of the artistic process and they wouldn't want someone else possibly fking up their images.Mr Whippy said:
I’m curious on this, but if you’re contracted to do a job and the copyright isn’t assigned, who does it naturally fall to?
Copyright is always with the photographer by default. The photographer is the person who presses the shutter button. Mr Whippy said:
When you hire a photographer it seems they retain everything except things expressly requested via the contract?
Photographer almost always retains the 'rights' or copyright of images, he/she will grant usage licenses to the client for the client to use the images in an agreed format for an agreed period of time. Mr Whippy said:
Usually a designer will make the editing calls for final use (print, web, etc may be treated differently), not the photographer.
Honestly, RAW files are awful straight out of camera. Designers would never use a RAW image, they'd usually used a processed image. Wether they do this themselves or get the photographer to do it is usually negotiated before the shoot starts. Yes, the designer would choose the layouts in which the image is to be used and the designer might make small changes to the image but I doubt they'd be processing from a RAW file.
As a client you want to be asking for High Res finished files and agreeing on usage.
For example you want final images delivered to you on a hard drive, in TIF format at 300DPI or whatever it is you want.
Most photographers hear the words 'unlimited use in perpetuity' and think $$$$$$ because it's just not the done thing in advertising/commercial photography.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff