The most LA problem I've ever had
October 23, 2014 10:34 AM Subscribe
Are my expectations with regard to my photographer unreasonable?
The tl;dr of this is that I'm concerned about the prices my photographer is charging for the finished prints of the photos I hired her to take. Is $75 for an 11x17 (photo paper) reasonable (keep in mind I already paid her $350 for the actual photography session- this is just for the actual physical print)? It seems if you have the hi-res files, you can get them printed a lot cheaper than that...
Full story:
I recently became one of Those People who hires a pet photographer. My boyfriend's dog had a cancer scare a month ago, and after he recovered from the surgery, I realized it would make a great birthday present for my boyfriend to present him with some professional photos of the pup in his favorite milieu. So to that end, I looked around on Yelp and whatnot for photographers, and found a 5/5 star-rated pet photographer based in the area (unlike some of the other photographers, who are not exclusively pet photographers and are based farther away, but travel to weddings etc).
Before I hired her, I looked over her site, and I noticed that she said people usually paid ~$2000 all in all, a number that seemed extremely high to me. So, using her contact form, I messaged her saying that based on her portfolio, I was interested in hiring her, but I was concerned that my budget might not be worth her time. She wrote back to say that the $2000 figure was for people hiring her for the fancier service, the fine-art session, but that otherwise, her one-hour session, in which she travels to a location of your choosing, etc, was $350, and finished products were as cheap as $50.
While still a lot of money for me, this was more doable, and in addition, her Yelp page was offering a Yelp deal (like a groupon) of 50% off, so, for $175 one would get $350 worth of services (per the wording on the deal). This was highly fortuitous for me, so I purchased the deal, and shortly thereafter we met in person to discuss the upcoming session. During that discussion, she told me that the Yelp deal was actually only for a mini-session lasting a half hour, in which I would bring the dog to a park near her location and have her take some photos- I had my heart set on having her come to a bigger park elsewhere in the city, which is a setting of sentimental significance, and she told me that that option was only available for the one-hour session, which would be $350, and that I could get a refund of the yelp deal and pay her $350 if I wanted to do that.
I was kind of annoyed by this, so I wrote her an email explaining that I understood if it was not economically feasible for her to offer her skills at this discounted rate, but that I felt misled by the Yelp deal, to which she responded that she had no control over the wording of the ad, and intended it as a promotion of her "mini-sessions" (she also changed her website to advertise these mini-sessions, something that was not on there previously when I was looking through it).
Anyway, I decided to go through with the full-price one-hour shoot, so I paid her $350, and we met at the park I wanted to meet at, and I was really impressed by her work. She definitely knows what she is doing and set up some great shots. When she sent me the link to view the gallery online, I was delighted, as the photos are gorgeous. However, she also sent me a pricing guide, which offers a variety of finished products- photos printed directly on aluminium, plexiglass, photopaper, etc. The prices for these were shockingly high, with the largest plexiglass offering priced around $2500. For the prints that I want, an 11x17 and an 8x10, she wants $75 and $50, respectively. I looked online and discovered that there are many services that will print a high-res photo on these materials for much, much less, with photopaper prints being under $15 even for most of the larger sizes.
So, my question is, are the prices she is charging for the prints unreasonable? I understand that each photo might take some work such as color-correction etc, before it is printed, but these are definitely being printed at a lab- she is not developing them herself (which I know because she explicitly referenced sending them to a lab). Per the contract we signed, she keeps, and will not sell, the original hi-res files, which I understand is necessary so that I don't get rich selling high-quality photos of my dogs to the masses. But it seems unnecessary to me for the prints to be so expensive largely on account of the fact that I have no other options.
As a final wrinkle, she emailed me last night requesting that I leave her a review on Yelp, offering a free 5x7 print should I do so (with, of course, the instruction that should I feel she merits fewer than 5 stars, she would like to hear about it from me before I post the review). This feels unethical to me.
I know it's hard running a small, independent business based off an artistic skill that is frequently undervalued, and I know very little about the hidden costs of this kind of an enterprise. So please, MeFi, enlighten me on this matter.
The tl;dr of this is that I'm concerned about the prices my photographer is charging for the finished prints of the photos I hired her to take. Is $75 for an 11x17 (photo paper) reasonable (keep in mind I already paid her $350 for the actual photography session- this is just for the actual physical print)? It seems if you have the hi-res files, you can get them printed a lot cheaper than that...
Full story:
I recently became one of Those People who hires a pet photographer. My boyfriend's dog had a cancer scare a month ago, and after he recovered from the surgery, I realized it would make a great birthday present for my boyfriend to present him with some professional photos of the pup in his favorite milieu. So to that end, I looked around on Yelp and whatnot for photographers, and found a 5/5 star-rated pet photographer based in the area (unlike some of the other photographers, who are not exclusively pet photographers and are based farther away, but travel to weddings etc).
Before I hired her, I looked over her site, and I noticed that she said people usually paid ~$2000 all in all, a number that seemed extremely high to me. So, using her contact form, I messaged her saying that based on her portfolio, I was interested in hiring her, but I was concerned that my budget might not be worth her time. She wrote back to say that the $2000 figure was for people hiring her for the fancier service, the fine-art session, but that otherwise, her one-hour session, in which she travels to a location of your choosing, etc, was $350, and finished products were as cheap as $50.
While still a lot of money for me, this was more doable, and in addition, her Yelp page was offering a Yelp deal (like a groupon) of 50% off, so, for $175 one would get $350 worth of services (per the wording on the deal). This was highly fortuitous for me, so I purchased the deal, and shortly thereafter we met in person to discuss the upcoming session. During that discussion, she told me that the Yelp deal was actually only for a mini-session lasting a half hour, in which I would bring the dog to a park near her location and have her take some photos- I had my heart set on having her come to a bigger park elsewhere in the city, which is a setting of sentimental significance, and she told me that that option was only available for the one-hour session, which would be $350, and that I could get a refund of the yelp deal and pay her $350 if I wanted to do that.
I was kind of annoyed by this, so I wrote her an email explaining that I understood if it was not economically feasible for her to offer her skills at this discounted rate, but that I felt misled by the Yelp deal, to which she responded that she had no control over the wording of the ad, and intended it as a promotion of her "mini-sessions" (she also changed her website to advertise these mini-sessions, something that was not on there previously when I was looking through it).
Anyway, I decided to go through with the full-price one-hour shoot, so I paid her $350, and we met at the park I wanted to meet at, and I was really impressed by her work. She definitely knows what she is doing and set up some great shots. When she sent me the link to view the gallery online, I was delighted, as the photos are gorgeous. However, she also sent me a pricing guide, which offers a variety of finished products- photos printed directly on aluminium, plexiglass, photopaper, etc. The prices for these were shockingly high, with the largest plexiglass offering priced around $2500. For the prints that I want, an 11x17 and an 8x10, she wants $75 and $50, respectively. I looked online and discovered that there are many services that will print a high-res photo on these materials for much, much less, with photopaper prints being under $15 even for most of the larger sizes.
So, my question is, are the prices she is charging for the prints unreasonable? I understand that each photo might take some work such as color-correction etc, before it is printed, but these are definitely being printed at a lab- she is not developing them herself (which I know because she explicitly referenced sending them to a lab). Per the contract we signed, she keeps, and will not sell, the original hi-res files, which I understand is necessary so that I don't get rich selling high-quality photos of my dogs to the masses. But it seems unnecessary to me for the prints to be so expensive largely on account of the fact that I have no other options.
As a final wrinkle, she emailed me last night requesting that I leave her a review on Yelp, offering a free 5x7 print should I do so (with, of course, the instruction that should I feel she merits fewer than 5 stars, she would like to hear about it from me before I post the review). This feels unethical to me.
I know it's hard running a small, independent business based off an artistic skill that is frequently undervalued, and I know very little about the hidden costs of this kind of an enterprise. So please, MeFi, enlighten me on this matter.
This about what I would expect. You're paying for her time and her expertise as much as the print itself.
I would personally not send a Yelp review to someone I was reviewing ahead of time. That seems super shady, although I can absolutely understand why a not-actually-shady person would think asking for that favor made sense. I don't agree, but I understand the thinking.
posted by Narrative Priorities at 10:51 AM on October 23, 2014
I would personally not send a Yelp review to someone I was reviewing ahead of time. That seems super shady, although I can absolutely understand why a not-actually-shady person would think asking for that favor made sense. I don't agree, but I understand the thinking.
posted by Narrative Priorities at 10:51 AM on October 23, 2014
Photographers have ALWAYS "overcharged" for prints and "undercharged" for the shoot -- it's a classic razor and blade business model, and nothing's wrong with it. However, it is extremely dishonest for a photographer not to give a client a full and accurate price list for prints and digital media before taking their money for a shoot. The kind of dishonesty that also leads one to pay for Yelp reviews...
Small claims to get back your shoot fee, or to have the court order a turnover of the digital media.
posted by MattD at 10:51 AM on October 23, 2014 [2 favorites]
Small claims to get back your shoot fee, or to have the court order a turnover of the digital media.
posted by MattD at 10:51 AM on October 23, 2014 [2 favorites]
Best answer: So, my question is, are the prices she is charging for the prints unreasonable?
Well, they're expensive, but reasonable is a complete irrelevance. She told you the prices (upwards of $50) which she represented accurately and in advance. If you didn't want to spend that much, you should have walked away. Or at the very least got a list of prices for prints and a better idea of what you got for your money before agreeing to go ahead.
Ignoring the mini session issue for a minute - you knew this photographer was expensive from the very beginning. It seems you just keep getting surprised by the same fact that you mentioned right at the beginning of your research. You picked a photographer with very good reviews that charges a lot of money and people pay it.
So if people are happy with her work at that price, then of course it's reasonable unless she misrepresented the charges and it doesn't sound like she did. If her services were too much for you, then you didn't do enough research on the total price it was likely to get to, frankly.
It sounds to me that you really wanted a service that was costs more than you wanted to pay, but convinced yourself you needed but the harsh financial reality is hurting so you're hunting for reasons to decide it's too expensive. Photographers charge on the quality of their work and not on the cost of materials, but are very much at the mercy of volume. If they decide to offer a premium priced product because or to allow them reduced volume then that is their business (literally).
posted by Brockles at 10:53 AM on October 23, 2014 [16 favorites]
Well, they're expensive, but reasonable is a complete irrelevance. She told you the prices (upwards of $50) which she represented accurately and in advance. If you didn't want to spend that much, you should have walked away. Or at the very least got a list of prices for prints and a better idea of what you got for your money before agreeing to go ahead.
Ignoring the mini session issue for a minute - you knew this photographer was expensive from the very beginning. It seems you just keep getting surprised by the same fact that you mentioned right at the beginning of your research. You picked a photographer with very good reviews that charges a lot of money and people pay it.
So if people are happy with her work at that price, then of course it's reasonable unless she misrepresented the charges and it doesn't sound like she did. If her services were too much for you, then you didn't do enough research on the total price it was likely to get to, frankly.
It sounds to me that you really wanted a service that was costs more than you wanted to pay, but convinced yourself you needed but the harsh financial reality is hurting so you're hunting for reasons to decide it's too expensive. Photographers charge on the quality of their work and not on the cost of materials, but are very much at the mercy of volume. If they decide to offer a premium priced product because or to allow them reduced volume then that is their business (literally).
posted by Brockles at 10:53 AM on October 23, 2014 [16 favorites]
Best answer: Only responding to this part:
Is $75 for an 11x17 (photo paper) reasonable (keep in mind I already paid her $350 for the actual photography session- this is just for the actual physical print)? It seems if you have the hi-res files, you can get them printed a lot cheaper than that...
Yes, it's reasonable.
The $350 covers the photographer's investment in time and equipment for the shooting and editing. A relatively minor photo shoot can involve a lot of time both before and after the shoot. 4 to 7 hours is not an unreasonable figure. So the photographer may gross $50 - $75 an hour for the initial "sitting fee." Expenses, taxes, overhead, etc. all come out of that, so it really is not a way to make a living.
The print fees are where a photographer makes money. Yes, you can get a print for $10, but then there is no profit for the photographer. Wholesale and raw material costs for anything are substantially less than the final selling price.
The "sitting fee + cost for prints" standard has been around forever, and it really is a good system if you think about it. It gives the photographer motivation to produce the best possible quality of final images, because the client will see those as worth paying for. The more quantity of desirable images produced means more potential sales, and more potential profit.
There are other ways to do it. Some photographers are willing to charge a higher up-front fee, then give you the files and you can print them yourself. But that up front fee is likely to be 4 or more times greater than the standard sitting fee. Some photographers don't like this arrangement because they lose control of the final quality of the image. What if you take the file to a lab that does a crappy final print? Then you tell your friends that "So-and-so Photo Studio shot these!" This can be bad for the photographer's reputation, through no fault of their own.
Photographer's side rant: Cameras are now everywhere thanks to cell phones. And they are excellent quality. We are bombarded with a massive amount of photographs every day, many of which are actually excellent images made by an average non-photographer. This is a good thing. But it has devalued actual, thoughtful, portraiture and professional photography as well. The ubiquity of photography has robbed it of its uniqueness. But when it comes to actually hiring a photographer to take the photos you want, you should indeed be prepared to pay for quality.
posted by The Deej at 10:54 AM on October 23, 2014 [12 favorites]
Is $75 for an 11x17 (photo paper) reasonable (keep in mind I already paid her $350 for the actual photography session- this is just for the actual physical print)? It seems if you have the hi-res files, you can get them printed a lot cheaper than that...
Yes, it's reasonable.
The $350 covers the photographer's investment in time and equipment for the shooting and editing. A relatively minor photo shoot can involve a lot of time both before and after the shoot. 4 to 7 hours is not an unreasonable figure. So the photographer may gross $50 - $75 an hour for the initial "sitting fee." Expenses, taxes, overhead, etc. all come out of that, so it really is not a way to make a living.
The print fees are where a photographer makes money. Yes, you can get a print for $10, but then there is no profit for the photographer. Wholesale and raw material costs for anything are substantially less than the final selling price.
The "sitting fee + cost for prints" standard has been around forever, and it really is a good system if you think about it. It gives the photographer motivation to produce the best possible quality of final images, because the client will see those as worth paying for. The more quantity of desirable images produced means more potential sales, and more potential profit.
There are other ways to do it. Some photographers are willing to charge a higher up-front fee, then give you the files and you can print them yourself. But that up front fee is likely to be 4 or more times greater than the standard sitting fee. Some photographers don't like this arrangement because they lose control of the final quality of the image. What if you take the file to a lab that does a crappy final print? Then you tell your friends that "So-and-so Photo Studio shot these!" This can be bad for the photographer's reputation, through no fault of their own.
Photographer's side rant: Cameras are now everywhere thanks to cell phones. And they are excellent quality. We are bombarded with a massive amount of photographs every day, many of which are actually excellent images made by an average non-photographer. This is a good thing. But it has devalued actual, thoughtful, portraiture and professional photography as well. The ubiquity of photography has robbed it of its uniqueness. But when it comes to actually hiring a photographer to take the photos you want, you should indeed be prepared to pay for quality.
posted by The Deej at 10:54 AM on October 23, 2014 [12 favorites]
I don't know if the prices are reasonable, but I am sure they aren't unreasonable. Photographers have priced their services like this for years. The economics have changed somewhat in the digital area, but ultimately you are paying for their time and skill, not the cost of materials.
On the other hand, one reason professionals can command their fees is that they know their trade well. One could argue that if you do pet photography, that even in LA, you can expect to come into contact with a lot of customers who aren't aware of how photography is usually priced and, therefore, you need to be up front with them before the session is booked. Even so, that doesn't change much, but it gives you a little leverage.
posted by Good Brain at 10:55 AM on October 23, 2014
On the other hand, one reason professionals can command their fees is that they know their trade well. One could argue that if you do pet photography, that even in LA, you can expect to come into contact with a lot of customers who aren't aware of how photography is usually priced and, therefore, you need to be up front with them before the session is booked. Even so, that doesn't change much, but it gives you a little leverage.
posted by Good Brain at 10:55 AM on October 23, 2014
This is a pretty standard business model for photographers, yeah. Their cost of business includes equipment, expertise (in this case with pets in addition to photography), and time, and the way they get compensated for that is a combination of the "sitting fee" and the print prices. It's possible to find photographers who will charge you a sitting fee and a flat price for a disk with images from the shoot, but that's not what you paid for here, and it doesn't seem to me like there was any misrepresentation on her part. (With hindsight, she could have offered and you could have asked for a detailed price list up front in that email exchange about cost. But it doesn't sound like she said anything untrue in her message to you.)
On the Yelp request, I think a lot of businesses do that. Feel free to decline if you don't want to participate. (And lesson learned to look at *all* YELP reviews a little more skeptically in the future).
FWIW, I had a pet photography session for my two cats, and the prices were not dis-similar to these (and I don't live in a major metropolitan area where prices are likely higher in general).
posted by msbubbaclees at 10:56 AM on October 23, 2014
On the Yelp request, I think a lot of businesses do that. Feel free to decline if you don't want to participate. (And lesson learned to look at *all* YELP reviews a little more skeptically in the future).
FWIW, I had a pet photography session for my two cats, and the prices were not dis-similar to these (and I don't live in a major metropolitan area where prices are likely higher in general).
posted by msbubbaclees at 10:56 AM on October 23, 2014
And yes, to be clear: if she didn't send you a pricing guide ahead of time, and if that information wasn't clear and available either in the contract you signed or on the website you presumably looked at before you decided to hire her, that is pretty shitty of her, and you should definitely mention it in her yelp review. Whatever her reasons, she shouldn't obfuscate that sort of thing -- prices need to be clear up front.
I think small claims court is a little overboard, personally.
posted by Narrative Priorities at 10:57 AM on October 23, 2014
I think small claims court is a little overboard, personally.
posted by Narrative Priorities at 10:57 AM on October 23, 2014
Regional price differences aside, no, none of this is dodgy.
The prices for the prints are for high-quality paper and ink (I'd hope), instead of grocery store prints without colour-correction that will fade and discolour rapidly, plus her post-processing. I do amateur work for my own pleasure and it can take, literally, days to go through and process files - and I'm not doing it for a living! Comparing it to a Costco print is really unfair.
The price for the one-hour session was fair, considering she's a 5-star rated local photographer. The Yelp review offer thing is the only thing that's even a little dodgy and even then it's not unethical (yikes, what a word!) - it is, at best, someone trying to sweeten the pot and your mood, given that you didn't seem to understand her pricing schedule (and, to be fair, she doesn't sound any too clear on it herself). She refunded you your Groupon, and I've seen enough small businesses locally fall afoul of those because they weren't really sure how to phrase them so NO LOOPHOLES WERE FOUND - I can't fault her on that, either, though she should've been clearer. Sounds like she definitely did not expect the response she got.
She's been fair throughout. I agree with Brockles; you're trying to figure out ways she isn't worth it, but obviously she was worth it when you looked at her portfolio to begin with.
posted by Nyx at 10:57 AM on October 23, 2014
The prices for the prints are for high-quality paper and ink (I'd hope), instead of grocery store prints without colour-correction that will fade and discolour rapidly, plus her post-processing. I do amateur work for my own pleasure and it can take, literally, days to go through and process files - and I'm not doing it for a living! Comparing it to a Costco print is really unfair.
The price for the one-hour session was fair, considering she's a 5-star rated local photographer. The Yelp review offer thing is the only thing that's even a little dodgy and even then it's not unethical (yikes, what a word!) - it is, at best, someone trying to sweeten the pot and your mood, given that you didn't seem to understand her pricing schedule (and, to be fair, she doesn't sound any too clear on it herself). She refunded you your Groupon, and I've seen enough small businesses locally fall afoul of those because they weren't really sure how to phrase them so NO LOOPHOLES WERE FOUND - I can't fault her on that, either, though she should've been clearer. Sounds like she definitely did not expect the response she got.
She's been fair throughout. I agree with Brockles; you're trying to figure out ways she isn't worth it, but obviously she was worth it when you looked at her portfolio to begin with.
posted by Nyx at 10:57 AM on October 23, 2014
Response by poster: These are very reassuring responses, thank you everybody! Just as a side note, I've already ordered and paid for the two prints I wanted, at the price she asked for them, so I'm not intending to demand a lower price or throw a fit or anything like that. I did, and do, intend to review her on Yelp, however (positively, as I do think she is an excellent photographer) but I didn't want to say anything negative about her pricing if it is SOP, or alternately, omit important pricing information to potential clients should it have turned out to be irregular.
posted by Aubergine at 11:02 AM on October 23, 2014 [1 favorite]
posted by Aubergine at 11:02 AM on October 23, 2014 [1 favorite]
I think she was dodgy as hell about the deal -- she offered "pay 175 for 350 worth in services", then refused to do the services that were worth 350. Obviously she could have worded it correctly initially, since she fixed it after you went to her. The Yelp review thing is icky but common. I'd certainly comment about the discount issue in a yelp review.
posted by jeather at 11:59 AM on October 23, 2014
posted by jeather at 11:59 AM on October 23, 2014
I'm in LA and we've seen recommendations for tons of photographers. Most photographers in LA who are just starting out offer mini-sessions and even regular sessions for lesser prices and include say, 5 digital images. But once they've got some experience under their belt and a good reputation, yep, the prices go up to what you were quoted. So I think your photographers' pricing in common for the area.
The only thing that is unclear to me is whether you knew at the outset that digital images were not included in her package. But at this point she's pretty much got you over a barrel if you want the images; you're going to have to pay her prices. You could try to negotiate a different price to get the images without prints, but it would depend on how many of the images you would want.
I would skip the Yelp review until this is all said and done. Then leave an honest review. Don't sell your soul for a 5x7.
posted by vignettist at 12:29 PM on October 23, 2014
The only thing that is unclear to me is whether you knew at the outset that digital images were not included in her package. But at this point she's pretty much got you over a barrel if you want the images; you're going to have to pay her prices. You could try to negotiate a different price to get the images without prints, but it would depend on how many of the images you would want.
I would skip the Yelp review until this is all said and done. Then leave an honest review. Don't sell your soul for a 5x7.
posted by vignettist at 12:29 PM on October 23, 2014
I think the pricing scheme is reasonable, but also that she should have been more upfront throughout the entire process. I would leave a Yelp review to the effect of: "I was extremely happy with the photographs, but the photographer was difficult to deal with. I felt I was given a bit of a run around with some confusion over a Yelp deal, and additionally there was some confusion over the pricing of prints. You should be aware that the deal advertised on Yelp only applies to mini-sessions, and not full service sessions. While I am very happy with the finished product, be sure to get all the details clearly laid out in writing if you work with this photographer."
I think this gives potential customers the relevant information they need to know -- that your experience had both positives and negatives. If it was just one mixup/point of confusion over pricing, I might not mention it, but the fact that it happened more than once does merit a mention, I think. Plenty of potential customers may be similar to you in that they just don't know what's typical in photography pricing, and so this is just giving them a heads up that they need to ask questions early and often since the photographer seems not-too-great at communicating.
And, I'm sorry, but I call bullshit on the idea that "she responded that she had no control over the wording of the ad, and intended it as a promotion of her "mini-sessions"." Um, no. I find it impossible to believe that Yelp literally makes up ads out of thin air and puts in random stuff that the PURCHASER OF THE AD has no control over. If that really is the case, there should be a big sign on her website saying "YELP FRAUD: PURCHASES WILL NOT BE HONORED AS THIS IS A FAKE AD GENERATED BY YELP." This sounds like total baid and switch on her part, and I do think some mention of it belongs in a review of her business. No one cares about your "intentions"...if you choose to offer something, you should honor it. If nothing else, other customers should be aware that they definitely should not purchase the advertised deal since it is a lie (unless they want the reduced-quality service).
posted by rainbowbrite at 12:32 PM on October 23, 2014 [1 favorite]
I think this gives potential customers the relevant information they need to know -- that your experience had both positives and negatives. If it was just one mixup/point of confusion over pricing, I might not mention it, but the fact that it happened more than once does merit a mention, I think. Plenty of potential customers may be similar to you in that they just don't know what's typical in photography pricing, and so this is just giving them a heads up that they need to ask questions early and often since the photographer seems not-too-great at communicating.
And, I'm sorry, but I call bullshit on the idea that "she responded that she had no control over the wording of the ad, and intended it as a promotion of her "mini-sessions"." Um, no. I find it impossible to believe that Yelp literally makes up ads out of thin air and puts in random stuff that the PURCHASER OF THE AD has no control over. If that really is the case, there should be a big sign on her website saying "YELP FRAUD: PURCHASES WILL NOT BE HONORED AS THIS IS A FAKE AD GENERATED BY YELP." This sounds like total baid and switch on her part, and I do think some mention of it belongs in a review of her business. No one cares about your "intentions"...if you choose to offer something, you should honor it. If nothing else, other customers should be aware that they definitely should not purchase the advertised deal since it is a lie (unless they want the reduced-quality service).
posted by rainbowbrite at 12:32 PM on October 23, 2014 [1 favorite]
A few extra comments:
1) The way Yelp/Groupon/LivingSocial work is that they generally take 50% of the cut from the people that buy the ad. One of their requirements is that it be an existing product offering (you're not supposed to come up with some special product to sell on a limited basis).
This is why you saw her website change - the photographer created the "mini-sessions" to sell through the Yelp deal, otherwise it devalues the primary product (the $350). So of the $150, the photographer is probably getting $75 - which is why it was 30 minutes, probably at a park close to the photographers' house, etc.
Given the above, it's also why they are charging per print on top (to make back some of that revenue lost).
2) In the future, you should negotiate all of this up front. Everything is on the table with a photographer, as everything has its price. If you want all of the photos from the camera, you can get that. If you want an album, you can get that as well.
posted by unexpected at 1:39 PM on October 23, 2014
1) The way Yelp/Groupon/LivingSocial work is that they generally take 50% of the cut from the people that buy the ad. One of their requirements is that it be an existing product offering (you're not supposed to come up with some special product to sell on a limited basis).
This is why you saw her website change - the photographer created the "mini-sessions" to sell through the Yelp deal, otherwise it devalues the primary product (the $350). So of the $150, the photographer is probably getting $75 - which is why it was 30 minutes, probably at a park close to the photographers' house, etc.
Given the above, it's also why they are charging per print on top (to make back some of that revenue lost).
2) In the future, you should negotiate all of this up front. Everything is on the table with a photographer, as everything has its price. If you want all of the photos from the camera, you can get that. If you want an album, you can get that as well.
posted by unexpected at 1:39 PM on October 23, 2014
So this is fairly similar to wedding photography. You see a wide range in the costs and policies for wedding photographers. Most of those are actually moving away from refusing to turn over the digital images, but instead have a cost for those. For our wedding in 2006, we refused to use anyone who wouldn't give us the digital images, we were willing to pay more to have them, but we wanted them. For both of my kid's school pictures this year (from two different studios as they are at different schools), both had an option for a digital copy at a certain price. But there are many photographers who do do the pay for prints version and that is how they make their money, their "sitting" fee is cheaper but then they get you on the cost of the prints. I don't think her cost for the prints is unreasonable for the industry. However, all that being said, I've never had a photographer (wedding, school, whatever) who didn't give me an exact sheet of what everything would cost before hand. That is the only place I think this photographer was particularly shady. I don't know about the Yelp deals, but I would definitely comment to her (after getting your prints) and on Yelp about her not being upfront about the cost of the prints.
posted by katers890 at 5:02 PM on October 23, 2014
posted by katers890 at 5:02 PM on October 23, 2014
Yelp specifically discourages business owners from soliciting reviews like that.
posted by jimw at 10:38 PM on October 23, 2014
posted by jimw at 10:38 PM on October 23, 2014
« Older How do you organize your digital recipes? | Managing aggression between a dog and a cat? Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
Assuming she didn't explicitly mislead you here, the terms are likely outlined in the contract, and are in line with what i would expect. In the future, ownership/printing rights is the #1 question to ask potential photographers about.
posted by susanvance at 10:50 AM on October 23, 2014 [1 favorite]