Myscha, I've had to be talked out of installing a spit in my kitchen three times this year alone. I want to be able to get shwarma whenever I want! Someday.
And, Bobert, you have a fantastic point. There are many places where restaurants customarily have a meal of the day, which can be the cheapest way to sample local food.
If you are going to stop for a meal in Spain, I highly recommend the menú del día! It's a fixed price, usually between 10 and 15€, for two courses, a dessert, bread and a drink. For the courses, you can usually choose between 3 or 4 things (though in some, maybe more); sometimes you have a dessert choice; and the drink is usually wine (red or white; sometimes a whole bottle!), beer (whatever they have) or water. While it's a great way to sample a lot of Spanish fare, it was jarring at first to not have a whole lot of choice in the drink department: but then I found it refreshing in a way to not have so much choice.
That being said, next time I'll definitely try out some bakeries too!
And to sum it all up:
The bottom line is you get what you pay for and a contract is a contract.
Simple as that.
If your contract says you pay for prints, then you pay for prints.
If your contract says you have rights to the digital photos, so it goes.
I was married a year and a half ago and decided that I would not hire anyone who would not give me the rights to the pictures they were taking of me. And so it went and it was wonderful.
It all really comes down to the market. Decide what you want, find someone who offers it at a price you like and strike a deal.
Don't sign something, then break the deal behind the other parties back. That's low and pretty much makes swiss cheese of one of the most important things you have, your integrity.
For the record I am a for profit photographer, but if I was I would sell my services by the hour, not by the print. Just my .02 cents.
Let me start by saying you have stolen from your photographer, and I hope she sues you to the fullest extent of the law. If I can find a way to find out who she is, I will bring this post to her attention, and encourage her to do so. Even though it's been pulled, I have a cached copy of what you wrote thanks to Google.
You think the two hours she spent at your party is all that went into your photos? Think again...
For starters, she probably arrived at your party with $10,000 worth of camera gear to do the job right -- this would be an average cost of the gear an event photographer will carry. Her camera bag probably costs more that your little point and shoot.
Her workstation, where she probably spent 5-10 hours editing your photos consisting of a high end personal computer, a high end display, a color calibration system, Adobe Photoshop software along with numerous third party add-ons, and backup storage system where she protects your precious digital negatives probably ran in the $3,000-$6,000 range.
She probably spent at least two hours preparing her gear for the day, and an hour of travel time to and from the party.
She has probably logged several hundred, if not thousands of hours working with her images in post-production over the years perfecting her techniques and developing her own style, which is why you hired her in the first place.
She has probably spent several hundred, if not thousands of dollars on test prints at her lab to nail the color and sharpness of her images with that particular lab. Printing the same image at any other lab (or sadly at Wal-Mart or Walgreen's) will produce results that are both different and inferior to what she produces with her own lab which she has an invested relationship with.
She probably has a website (and possibly a website developer) and hosting fees, a studio she pays rent on, and may have adminstrative staff.
Last, but not least, she had a contract with you. You have broken it, and have blatantly admitted to it on the web for all the world to see. If you believed her pricing was unfair, you should have said something before you signed a legally binding contract. You have stolen from this photographer in what you believe is a victimless crime, but I can assure you that in this digital age of rampant copyright infringement, it doesn't get any more personal -- you have stolen from, and victimized a single person. Not a record label or a book publisher, a single human being who probably has a family she takes care of with the money she earns taking photographs. Shame on you.
As a professional photographer myself, my contract clearly states what your rights are for reproductions. I also make it a point to verbally discuss these parts of the contract, which sometimes ends in a negotiation for limited rights to the originals. In the future you should seek out a photographer who only charges a creative fee, since this, you believe, is all that you should pay for. I can almost guarantee you the photographer you hired would have negotiated the deal you desired, but you probably wouldn't have been able to mentally justify her asking price because you clearly don't have an appreciation for what it takes to produce professional images. Hopefully my comment, along with many of the other comments above, will convince you to reverse what you have done, and not steal from another photographer in the future.
The 'Improved Metal Detector' is a spoof. By linking to it, you have ripped off Metacafe and supplied some scam artist with money. Come on. Worst waste of 3min 17sec in my life.
I second the "pack a lunch" suggestion, and would add "stop at a grocery store" under the same category. I studied in Italy for a semester and we spent a lot of time on field trips and traveling on our own. After a few weeks of buying meals at restaurants we realized how quickly it would add up. We started finding a small grocery store (un'alimentari, in Italiano) in whichever town we were visiting and buying food there. The bread was baked fresh each day, and the cheese and meats were always delicious. It also gave us a chance to try the various local foods we couldn't get everywhere. And, it usually only cost a few Euro per meal. =)
Of all the dreams I had for you I know I couldn't ask for anything more than to read such sweet words coming from my daughter in such an eloquent way. It brought tears, Babe. P.S. Hope this doesn't embarrass you too much :)
Slightly off-topic, as this relates to dsl modem issue and not the pre-paid phones.
I have been a customer of att dsl for over a year. My modem has started to blink red lights and not work. I have called repeatedly and their customer support has informed me that my line is working fine and it is probably my modem.
The issue is that I have to buy the modem myself. Turns out, their equipment is warrantied for one year. So, they told me that I need to buy a new modem ($50) to keep their internet service I am already paying for. When I asked for a replacement - NO. They told me I could go to RadioShack for one as well.
Needless to say, I am now switching to another ISP. They will cost more, but I discunt the cost of a new modem and the feelings of being punished for staying with them. New customers get a new modem. Old customers get the shaft.
Woohoo! Another shwarma and falafel fan. I think I could eat it until I freaking dropped dead. We had a blast seeing the sites in Jerusalem, although we were there during Easter week / Passover, so . . . VERY crowded on the streets.
Also, a ways away from the old walled city is the National Museum. Are you of the same opinion I am? I think it's one of the best national museums I've ever been to. Man!
You can argue back and forth about whether you do or don't like the Standard Operating Procedure in the photography industry, but it really doesn't matter, the law is the law. You broke it, and you are a criminal. If that photographer reads this post, they could sue you, and make thousands. Not only did you break the law, you broke it willingly and happily.
Let's say that your bank has a "withdrawal fee" that they charge you every time you take a large sum out of your account. Well, you don't want to pay that fee. You have already paid them other fees, given them your business.. Why should you pay a fee to get what is already yours? So you break into the bank and steal the money that is in your account. Are you going to get arrested and go to jail? Of course. It's the same thing with photos. When you signed a contract with them (assuming there was a contract), you entered into a legally binding agreement that you would abide by the law and the policies of that photographer. If you didn't want to do that, you shouldn't have signed the contract.
This is art we're talking about. Would you pay $1 million for a Van Gogh, then take it to Walgreens and ask them to make a 4x6 of it for you?
Frankly, you should be ashamed of yourself for glamorizing this practice and suggesting that it is somehow justifiable.
I am a full time wedding photographer, so I know this situation well. Here is a little reality check on the photography business:
-Most photographers only get to keep about one-third of what they charge. One-third goes to cost and overhead, and one-third goes to taxes. So if you paid $600 for your sitting fee and package, that photographer will be lucky if they take home $200, at most.
-For every one hour we shoot, that typically means 5-6 hours on the back end that you never see.
-This is skilled labor. Contrary to popular belief, we don't just show up and press a button. We must be constantly taking classes, attending seminars, buying new equipment, and doing lots of industry research to be able to provide you with the best photos possible, and all of this is not cheap.
Most photographers shoot between 20-30 weddings a year, and the average package is around $3000, which comes out to $20,000 to $30,000 take-home income. Every photographer has to have at least two professional grade cameras, sometimes three, which can range from $3k-$8k and only last about two years max, plus various new lenses, flashes, strobes, etc. That's about $6k per year. Education (seminars, workshops, industry research) runs about $1k per year. Health insurance is around $300/month, $3600 a year, and that's for a single, healthy person. Equipment and malpractice insurance is usually $1000 a year or so. So a single, healthy photographer who shoots 25 weddings (the average) at $3,000 (the average) will end up taking home, after all those costs, $13,400. That's about $1116 per month to pay rent, car payment and car insurance, food, bills, and any other cost of living.
It's really easy for a person who knows nothing about photography to sit back and say, "$3,000 for a day's work? That's absurd!" But that's just it, they DON'T know anything. They only see the finished product. It's sort of like the old adage, "Don't judge a person until you have walked a mile in their shoes." We, as photographers, don't sit around and scheme and say "How can we scam more money from our clients this month?" To be honest, it's a lot more like, "My print sales have plummeted because everyone is just scanning their photos or copying them from the website, and there's nothing I can do about it. How am I going to pay my rent this month?"
Discerning clients look for quality above pricing when choosing a photographer to capture life's special moments. And professional photographers must price their skill sets and output in accordance with competitors in their markets in order to remain in business and support their own families' needs.
A professional photographer's charges take into account years of education, training, experience, and the high overhead costs of running a small business in a very difficult economy. These costs include business insurance, health insurance, advertising, salaries, employee benefits, office/studio rent, utilities, commercial phone lines, high-speed internet, software upgrades, digital gear, and much more.
Extremely expensive camera bodies and digital backs, computers, hard drives, and printers will need to be replaced every 3 years to remain competitive in the marketplace. This is because digital capture technology is still in its infancy, and its professional-grade hardware becomes obsolete much sooner than did the necessary 'film' capture equipment of the past.
Just because there's already a Mercedes plant built in South Carolina doesn't mean that they should give you a car for free just because you want one... or that they should have given you all the E-Class options you "really wanted" since they "seemed happy" when you paid for them their base model.
Choose the most skilled photographer you can afford based upon the quality of their work and the terms of their contract. Then honor your end of the deal.
My old roommate was a professional photographer. She mostly did weddings and senior portraits.
One thing you may not realize is that if they have a studio the overhead is enormous! My roommate was very fair in her pricing and gave people really good deals, but guess what? She had to close her doors because she wasn't making enough money. She was always booked and although her prices were fair they weren't that cheap.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you want the services of a professionals photographer to be available to you in the future (the business is changing so it may not be there in the same incarnation in the future) then you should expect to pay for it.
Of course I agree with what has been said about negotiation. Photographers will usually negotiate with you. If you want a disk of the photos taken then talk to them about paying a higher sitting fee and doing it that way. Talk to them before the pictures are taken, you'll have more leverage that way. I bet you most wouldn't say no.
Well stated by many before me, but I have to chime in because this is usually such a solid site. The question has such an easy answer: Yes, you are stealing from your photographer. If you don't like the terms of business, don't agree to them. What you would discover if you honestly negotiated with candidates for your photo work is that they would have to charge you much more for their time if there was no potential for residual income from print orders. Instead, you pretend to agree to their terms and then break the contract behind their back.
If they're yours, why scan them? Just break into the studio and take the negatives yourself.
Yes. It's stealing. Yes. There are photographers who will sell or include digital files for you to print on your own, within the terms of a limited license. The latter would be the way to go if you want to print your own files legally (and ethically, with a clear conscience).
It's definitely a dilemma for professional photographers such as myself. As much as we hate to accept it, the reality is that the average Joe is far less discerning artistically than we would like to believe. I market myself to and strive to work with clients with more refined tastes in photography, and those folks do not need an explanation of "quality control" because, well, they "get" it. They'd be just as appalled at the idea of paying good money for high quality artistic photography only to have it printed by some subpar consumer-grade printer as any self-respecting, competent photographer would be to have such crap traveling around with their name on it.
It's not a character flaw not to have an artistic eye, by the way. I don't think people who can't discern such things are bad people or worthy of my disdain. I just don't care to work with them, because we're not a good match as far as the photographer-client relationship goes.
That said, there's no fool-proof way of "qualifying" clients, and occasionally I end up getting by screwed by someone I never would have guessed had it in them.
Ben-
The photographer doesn't charge a fee for each time the photo is viewed, they charge for prints/reproductions, each of which could be viewed thousands of times, or never.
If you created a wonderful website and people started copying the design exactly, but using their own content, wouldn't you consider that to be theft of your design? What if you had a contract and were paid to create a site for a company, and then they used your exact design for their subsidiary companies, even though that was expressly forbidden by the contract?
As far as "charging by the minute" for web hosting, don't you have a limit for bandwidth usage and disc space allowed? And if a hosted site goes over the bandwidth limit don't you essentially "charge by the minute" for overages? So how is the flat rate that you charge all that different, especially when averages (probably in minutes) are certainly factored in to the fee? And isn't it you who is setting those rules for your service? I know that it sure isn't me setting the rules for you or for my web host provider! So how is that really so different?
There are tons of photographers out there (just go to Craigslist and do a search), competition can be fierce. Most photographers just want to ensure that they can earn a living doing what they do, and they create contracts to "protect" themselves and their investment.
There are enough photographers out there that you can find one that will accomodate what you want/need if you really look and are upfront about it.
The problem here is that there's this attitude that people feel they are entitled to things that they don't want to pay for.
If a print costs $25 on top of the sitting fee, that is the price. If you cannot afford it, you can't have it. It amazes me how people think that they are entitled to something they won't pay for.
A few things in the original post bother me most.
"After all, the right to reproduce pictures of my kids isn't worth much to the photographer once I'm done buying my prints. "
If you are truly done buying prints, then the rights to the photos shouldn't be worth anything to you either. The fact that you want the files, tells me that you more than likely want to do something with them, like make more prints that you don't want to pay the photographer for.
"We bought what we felt was a decent amount of prints, in this case, a package that, combined with the sitting fee, cost $600. After spending that much money, we felt that we had rewarded the photographer enough for the service she'd provided us."
You may have "rewarded" the photographer what you thought was fair or enough, but it's really not up to you to decide what you think is fair once you've already agreed to the photographer's terms. And it's not a case of rewarding the her. It's compensation for work that you requested and she performed. If you want $600 worth of product, then you need to pay for $600 worth of product. If you want $1200 worth of product, then you should pay that as well.
"I also felt frustrated that, despite our best efforts, the prints did not look as nice as they would have if we'd printed from the original digital files. Since my photographer seemd happy with the $600 she received for photographing my kids, why couldn't she just give me what I really wanted?"
My guess would be that the photographer seemed happy with the $600, because she gave you $600 worth of product. If you end up with $1200 worth of product, I would guess she would NOT be so happy. Maybe she didn't give you what you really wanted because you didn't give her what SHE really wanted for it.
You get what you pay for. You just have to know how much you value photos.
I found a suit that I really liked; way better than the cheap ones I could afford. But I figured it was only a few dollars worth of fabric, and the the designer only had to design it once, so I just stole it. That's being frugal for you!
I am being facetious, of course. If you don't like the deal a photographer offers you, don't hire them. Don't sign a document saying you'll honor their copyright and then turn around and steal their work. Not worth the money to you? Fine, take the pics yourself... But stealing is stealing, and is taking bread off the table of someone who spent years learning their craft.
just because 'lots of people do it' doesn't excuse what you did. it is dishonest and you really should feel bad about it.
regarding some of the comparisons which crop up: i think there are some differences between what you did and pirating software, for instance. assuming you didn't commission the company to make custom software just for you, and also assuming that you couldn't afford to buy the software outright, then, you haven't cost the company a dime of lost revenue by copying the program. you may even have helped the company by contributing to the user base, ubiquity, and hence sustainable ecosystem of that program (this pretty much describes microsoft word's initial growth strategy). this doesn't make it legal, and may not even make it right--but it is a different case than commissioning a person for specific work and then stealing product from them.
and finally, it is hard to see the link between a site touting 'frugality' and paying $600 for a child's portrait session. how on earth is that 'frugal'? many pro photogs do great work and it is worth that much or more (very few people seem to have a clue about the expenses that go into providing such a service)--but it is obviously a luxury, not a necessity. i think this is compounding my own, and possibly others', reaction against your actions. it's not like you're stealing bread so your child can eat, here. yet you seem to feel entitled to this luxury, and frustrated when it isn't handed to you.
I walked into the software store, and bought a copy of Microsoft Office 2008. I paid a LOT for it, frankly, but the store was happy to take my money. Got it home, and some people said, wow, that's nice, can I get a copy?
So I burnt them a disk of it, got a serial number off the internet, and even though it's not 100 percent kosher, all my friends have pretty nice copies of Office on their computers.
Do I feel bad? A little, sure. But Microsoft seemed happy with the money they got from me. I mean, why would they charge so much for those extra licenses anyway? Why not just charge up front however much it would take to cover me for as many copies as I need?
I mean, in the end, it might be 'stealing' in some small sense, but it's Microsoft, for gosh sakes--it's not like I'm stealing from some small business where I know, and have a personal agreement with the owner or something!
I recently became the kind of person that charges most everything to a credit card and why not? I earn about 3% interest on my money sitting in the bank and 1-3 percent back on all my purchases. While I've just begun, I'm already seeing the benefits...
BUT, I will agree with a lot of the people here that say a credit card can lead to a lot of debt and trouble. I waited until I was 23 to get my first credit card, I had established credit through cell phone bills and responsible payments on time and got approved for a Chase Freedom (awesome rewards card). At first I was like a lot of people, very hesitant to use it, I had 0% interest for 12 months and used it about 3 times in 8 months (really dumb but I was new and like many had that fear of credit cards). I used it that year for my xmas shopping and began to relax a bit about my fears. About 9 months into the first year I began moving my money to ING checking accounts to earn interest and then paid my balance off in full.
I think about every purchase (even down to a soda!) and am always looking to save a penny. The credit card is tempting at times but forces me to consider how much money I have in my bank accounts and thus I can treat the card as essentially a debit card.
Cash only never worked for me, Id just see the cash in my pocket, spend it, then need more. Now I can track my expenses and spending online, I think more about a purchase, and overall the card has forced me to become more responsible with my money.
Another small advantage: When I go out to eat with friends I'll generally charge the meal. Not only do i get rewards,but it's essentially a free cash withdraw as my friends give me the cash that they owe on the meal right there. I put most of that case right into my bank account until the CC bill is due saving a bit for cash on hand.
Myscha, I've had to be talked out of installing a spit in my kitchen three times this year alone. I want to be able to get shwarma whenever I want!
Someday.
And, Bobert, you have a fantastic point. There are many places where restaurants customarily have a meal of the day, which can be the cheapest way to sample local food.
the last post, last line should have read:
"For the record I am NOT a for profit photographer, but if I was I would sell my services by the hour, not by the print. Just my .02 cents."
If you are going to stop for a meal in Spain, I highly recommend the menú del día! It's a fixed price, usually between 10 and 15€, for two courses, a dessert, bread and a drink. For the courses, you can usually choose between 3 or 4 things (though in some, maybe more); sometimes you have a dessert choice; and the drink is usually wine (red or white; sometimes a whole bottle!), beer (whatever they have) or water. While it's a great way to sample a lot of Spanish fare, it was jarring at first to not have a whole lot of choice in the drink department: but then I found it refreshing in a way to not have so much choice.
That being said, next time I'll definitely try out some bakeries too!
And to sum it all up:
The bottom line is you get what you pay for and a contract is a contract.
Simple as that.
If your contract says you pay for prints, then you pay for prints.
If your contract says you have rights to the digital photos, so it goes.
I was married a year and a half ago and decided that I would not hire anyone who would not give me the rights to the pictures they were taking of me. And so it went and it was wonderful.
It all really comes down to the market. Decide what you want, find someone who offers it at a price you like and strike a deal.
Don't sign something, then break the deal behind the other parties back. That's low and pretty much makes swiss cheese of one of the most important things you have, your integrity.
For the record I am a for profit photographer, but if I was I would sell my services by the hour, not by the print. Just my .02 cents.
Cached Post:
http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:Y7aiUKsA-i0J:www.wisebread.com/are-...
Let me start by saying you have stolen from your photographer, and I hope she sues you to the fullest extent of the law. If I can find a way to find out who she is, I will bring this post to her attention, and encourage her to do so. Even though it's been pulled, I have a cached copy of what you wrote thanks to Google.
You think the two hours she spent at your party is all that went into your photos? Think again...
For starters, she probably arrived at your party with $10,000 worth of camera gear to do the job right -- this would be an average cost of the gear an event photographer will carry. Her camera bag probably costs more that your little point and shoot.
Her workstation, where she probably spent 5-10 hours editing your photos consisting of a high end personal computer, a high end display, a color calibration system, Adobe Photoshop software along with numerous third party add-ons, and backup storage system where she protects your precious digital negatives probably ran in the $3,000-$6,000 range.
She probably spent at least two hours preparing her gear for the day, and an hour of travel time to and from the party.
She has probably logged several hundred, if not thousands of hours working with her images in post-production over the years perfecting her techniques and developing her own style, which is why you hired her in the first place.
She has probably spent several hundred, if not thousands of dollars on test prints at her lab to nail the color and sharpness of her images with that particular lab. Printing the same image at any other lab (or sadly at Wal-Mart or Walgreen's) will produce results that are both different and inferior to what she produces with her own lab which she has an invested relationship with.
She probably has a website (and possibly a website developer) and hosting fees, a studio she pays rent on, and may have adminstrative staff.
Last, but not least, she had a contract with you. You have broken it, and have blatantly admitted to it on the web for all the world to see. If you believed her pricing was unfair, you should have said something before you signed a legally binding contract. You have stolen from this photographer in what you believe is a victimless crime, but I can assure you that in this digital age of rampant copyright infringement, it doesn't get any more personal -- you have stolen from, and victimized a single person. Not a record label or a book publisher, a single human being who probably has a family she takes care of with the money she earns taking photographs. Shame on you.
As a professional photographer myself, my contract clearly states what your rights are for reproductions. I also make it a point to verbally discuss these parts of the contract, which sometimes ends in a negotiation for limited rights to the originals. In the future you should seek out a photographer who only charges a creative fee, since this, you believe, is all that you should pay for. I can almost guarantee you the photographer you hired would have negotiated the deal you desired, but you probably wouldn't have been able to mentally justify her asking price because you clearly don't have an appreciation for what it takes to produce professional images. Hopefully my comment, along with many of the other comments above, will convince you to reverse what you have done, and not steal from another photographer in the future.
Regards,
Scott
The 'Improved Metal Detector' is a spoof. By linking to it, you have ripped off Metacafe and supplied some scam artist with money. Come on. Worst waste of 3min 17sec in my life.
I second the "pack a lunch" suggestion, and would add "stop at a grocery store" under the same category. I studied in Italy for a semester and we spent a lot of time on field trips and traveling on our own. After a few weeks of buying meals at restaurants we realized how quickly it would add up. We started finding a small grocery store (un'alimentari, in Italiano) in whichever town we were visiting and buying food there. The bread was baked fresh each day, and the cheese and meats were always delicious. It also gave us a chance to try the various local foods we couldn't get everywhere. And, it usually only cost a few Euro per meal. =)
Of all the dreams I had for you I know I couldn't ask for anything more than to read such sweet words coming from my daughter in such an eloquent way. It brought tears, Babe. P.S. Hope this doesn't embarrass you too much :)
Slightly off-topic, as this relates to dsl modem issue and not the pre-paid phones.
I have been a customer of att dsl for over a year. My modem has started to blink red lights and not work. I have called repeatedly and their customer support has informed me that my line is working fine and it is probably my modem.
The issue is that I have to buy the modem myself. Turns out, their equipment is warrantied for one year. So, they told me that I need to buy a new modem ($50) to keep their internet service I am already paying for. When I asked for a replacement - NO. They told me I could go to RadioShack for one as well.
Needless to say, I am now switching to another ISP. They will cost more, but I discunt the cost of a new modem and the feelings of being punished for staying with them. New customers get a new modem. Old customers get the shaft.
thank you stacy! that was excellently said.
Woohoo! Another shwarma and falafel fan. I think I could eat it until I freaking dropped dead. We had a blast seeing the sites in Jerusalem, although we were there during Easter week / Passover, so . . . VERY crowded on the streets.
Also, a ways away from the old walled city is the National Museum. Are you of the same opinion I am? I think it's one of the best national museums I've ever been to. Man!
You can argue back and forth about whether you do or don't like the Standard Operating Procedure in the photography industry, but it really doesn't matter, the law is the law. You broke it, and you are a criminal. If that photographer reads this post, they could sue you, and make thousands. Not only did you break the law, you broke it willingly and happily.
Let's say that your bank has a "withdrawal fee" that they charge you every time you take a large sum out of your account. Well, you don't want to pay that fee. You have already paid them other fees, given them your business.. Why should you pay a fee to get what is already yours? So you break into the bank and steal the money that is in your account. Are you going to get arrested and go to jail? Of course. It's the same thing with photos. When you signed a contract with them (assuming there was a contract), you entered into a legally binding agreement that you would abide by the law and the policies of that photographer. If you didn't want to do that, you shouldn't have signed the contract.
This is art we're talking about. Would you pay $1 million for a Van Gogh, then take it to Walgreens and ask them to make a 4x6 of it for you?
Frankly, you should be ashamed of yourself for glamorizing this practice and suggesting that it is somehow justifiable.
I am a full time wedding photographer, so I know this situation well. Here is a little reality check on the photography business:
-Most photographers only get to keep about one-third of what they charge. One-third goes to cost and overhead, and one-third goes to taxes. So if you paid $600 for your sitting fee and package, that photographer will be lucky if they take home $200, at most.
-For every one hour we shoot, that typically means 5-6 hours on the back end that you never see.
-This is skilled labor. Contrary to popular belief, we don't just show up and press a button. We must be constantly taking classes, attending seminars, buying new equipment, and doing lots of industry research to be able to provide you with the best photos possible, and all of this is not cheap.
Most photographers shoot between 20-30 weddings a year, and the average package is around $3000, which comes out to $20,000 to $30,000 take-home income. Every photographer has to have at least two professional grade cameras, sometimes three, which can range from $3k-$8k and only last about two years max, plus various new lenses, flashes, strobes, etc. That's about $6k per year. Education (seminars, workshops, industry research) runs about $1k per year. Health insurance is around $300/month, $3600 a year, and that's for a single, healthy person. Equipment and malpractice insurance is usually $1000 a year or so. So a single, healthy photographer who shoots 25 weddings (the average) at $3,000 (the average) will end up taking home, after all those costs, $13,400. That's about $1116 per month to pay rent, car payment and car insurance, food, bills, and any other cost of living.
It's really easy for a person who knows nothing about photography to sit back and say, "$3,000 for a day's work? That's absurd!" But that's just it, they DON'T know anything. They only see the finished product. It's sort of like the old adage, "Don't judge a person until you have walked a mile in their shoes." We, as photographers, don't sit around and scheme and say "How can we scam more money from our clients this month?" To be honest, it's a lot more like, "My print sales have plummeted because everyone is just scanning their photos or copying them from the website, and there's nothing I can do about it. How am I going to pay my rent this month?"
Discerning clients look for quality above pricing when choosing a photographer to capture life's special moments. And professional photographers must price their skill sets and output in accordance with competitors in their markets in order to remain in business and support their own families' needs.
A professional photographer's charges take into account years of education, training, experience, and the high overhead costs of running a small business in a very difficult economy. These costs include business insurance, health insurance, advertising, salaries, employee benefits, office/studio rent, utilities, commercial phone lines, high-speed internet, software upgrades, digital gear, and much more.
Extremely expensive camera bodies and digital backs, computers, hard drives, and printers will need to be replaced every 3 years to remain competitive in the marketplace. This is because digital capture technology is still in its infancy, and its professional-grade hardware becomes obsolete much sooner than did the necessary 'film' capture equipment of the past.
And the current ease of scanning and copying photos (© stealing) from a small business owner (the photographer) only makes this industry a more fragile and risky venture when clients choose to flagrantly disregard the terms of the contract they've entered into with their selected photographer.
Just because there's already a Mercedes plant built in South Carolina doesn't mean that they should give you a car for free just because you want one... or that they should have given you all the E-Class options you "really wanted" since they "seemed happy" when you paid for them their base model.
Choose the most skilled photographer you can afford based upon the quality of their work and the terms of their contract. Then honor your end of the deal.
Because stealing, as always, is a crime.
Thank you for removing this article.
My old roommate was a professional photographer. She mostly did weddings and senior portraits.
One thing you may not realize is that if they have a studio the overhead is enormous! My roommate was very fair in her pricing and gave people really good deals, but guess what? She had to close her doors because she wasn't making enough money. She was always booked and although her prices were fair they weren't that cheap.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you want the services of a professionals photographer to be available to you in the future (the business is changing so it may not be there in the same incarnation in the future) then you should expect to pay for it.
Of course I agree with what has been said about negotiation. Photographers will usually negotiate with you. If you want a disk of the photos taken then talk to them about paying a higher sitting fee and doing it that way. Talk to them before the pictures are taken, you'll have more leverage that way. I bet you most wouldn't say no.
Well stated by many before me, but I have to chime in because this is usually such a solid site. The question has such an easy answer: Yes, you are stealing from your photographer. If you don't like the terms of business, don't agree to them. What you would discover if you honestly negotiated with candidates for your photo work is that they would have to charge you much more for their time if there was no potential for residual income from print orders. Instead, you pretend to agree to their terms and then break the contract behind their back.
If they're yours, why scan them? Just break into the studio and take the negatives yourself.
Yes. It's stealing. Yes. There are photographers who will sell or include digital files for you to print on your own, within the terms of a limited license. The latter would be the way to go if you want to print your own files legally (and ethically, with a clear conscience).
It's definitely a dilemma for professional photographers such as myself. As much as we hate to accept it, the reality is that the average Joe is far less discerning artistically than we would like to believe. I market myself to and strive to work with clients with more refined tastes in photography, and those folks do not need an explanation of "quality control" because, well, they "get" it. They'd be just as appalled at the idea of paying good money for high quality artistic photography only to have it printed by some subpar consumer-grade printer as any self-respecting, competent photographer would be to have such crap traveling around with their name on it.
It's not a character flaw not to have an artistic eye, by the way. I don't think people who can't discern such things are bad people or worthy of my disdain. I just don't care to work with them, because we're not a good match as far as the photographer-client relationship goes.
That said, there's no fool-proof way of "qualifying" clients, and occasionally I end up getting by screwed by someone I never would have guessed had it in them.
Ben-
The photographer doesn't charge a fee for each time the photo is viewed, they charge for prints/reproductions, each of which could be viewed thousands of times, or never.
If you created a wonderful website and people started copying the design exactly, but using their own content, wouldn't you consider that to be theft of your design? What if you had a contract and were paid to create a site for a company, and then they used your exact design for their subsidiary companies, even though that was expressly forbidden by the contract?
As far as "charging by the minute" for web hosting, don't you have a limit for bandwidth usage and disc space allowed? And if a hosted site goes over the bandwidth limit don't you essentially "charge by the minute" for overages? So how is the flat rate that you charge all that different, especially when averages (probably in minutes) are certainly factored in to the fee? And isn't it you who is setting those rules for your service? I know that it sure isn't me setting the rules for you or for my web host provider! So how is that really so different?
There are tons of photographers out there (just go to Craigslist and do a search), competition can be fierce. Most photographers just want to ensure that they can earn a living doing what they do, and they create contracts to "protect" themselves and their investment.
There are enough photographers out there that you can find one that will accomodate what you want/need if you really look and are upfront about it.
The problem here is that there's this attitude that people feel they are entitled to things that they don't want to pay for.
If a print costs $25 on top of the sitting fee, that is the price. If you cannot afford it, you can't have it. It amazes me how people think that they are entitled to something they won't pay for.
A few things in the original post bother me most.
"After all, the right to reproduce pictures of my kids isn't worth much to the photographer once I'm done buying my prints. "
If you are truly done buying prints, then the rights to the photos shouldn't be worth anything to you either. The fact that you want the files, tells me that you more than likely want to do something with them, like make more prints that you don't want to pay the photographer for.
"We bought what we felt was a decent amount of prints, in this case, a package that, combined with the sitting fee, cost $600. After spending that much money, we felt that we had rewarded the photographer enough for the service she'd provided us."
You may have "rewarded" the photographer what you thought was fair or enough, but it's really not up to you to decide what you think is fair once you've already agreed to the photographer's terms. And it's not a case of rewarding the her. It's compensation for work that you requested and she performed. If you want $600 worth of product, then you need to pay for $600 worth of product. If you want $1200 worth of product, then you should pay that as well.
"I also felt frustrated that, despite our best efforts, the prints did not look as nice as they would have if we'd printed from the original digital files. Since my photographer seemd happy with the $600 she received for photographing my kids, why couldn't she just give me what I really wanted?"
My guess would be that the photographer seemed happy with the $600, because she gave you $600 worth of product. If you end up with $1200 worth of product, I would guess she would NOT be so happy. Maybe she didn't give you what you really wanted because you didn't give her what SHE really wanted for it.
You get what you pay for. You just have to know how much you value photos.
I found a suit that I really liked; way better than the cheap ones I could afford. But I figured it was only a few dollars worth of fabric, and the the designer only had to design it once, so I just stole it. That's being frugal for you!
I am being facetious, of course. If you don't like the deal a photographer offers you, don't hire them. Don't sign a document saying you'll honor their copyright and then turn around and steal their work. Not worth the money to you? Fine, take the pics yourself... But stealing is stealing, and is taking bread off the table of someone who spent years learning their craft.
You're not frugal. You're a thief.
just because 'lots of people do it' doesn't excuse what you did. it is dishonest and you really should feel bad about it.
regarding some of the comparisons which crop up: i think there are some differences between what you did and pirating software, for instance. assuming you didn't commission the company to make custom software just for you, and also assuming that you couldn't afford to buy the software outright, then, you haven't cost the company a dime of lost revenue by copying the program. you may even have helped the company by contributing to the user base, ubiquity, and hence sustainable ecosystem of that program (this pretty much describes microsoft word's initial growth strategy). this doesn't make it legal, and may not even make it right--but it is a different case than commissioning a person for specific work and then stealing product from them.
and finally, it is hard to see the link between a site touting 'frugality' and paying $600 for a child's portrait session. how on earth is that 'frugal'? many pro photogs do great work and it is worth that much or more (very few people seem to have a clue about the expenses that go into providing such a service)--but it is obviously a luxury, not a necessity. i think this is compounding my own, and possibly others', reaction against your actions. it's not like you're stealing bread so your child can eat, here. yet you seem to feel entitled to this luxury, and frustrated when it isn't handed to you.
Be safe out there and keep up the great posts! You've got a big fan up here in Anchorage, AK!
I walked into the software store, and bought a copy of Microsoft Office 2008. I paid a LOT for it, frankly, but the store was happy to take my money. Got it home, and some people said, wow, that's nice, can I get a copy?
So I burnt them a disk of it, got a serial number off the internet, and even though it's not 100 percent kosher, all my friends have pretty nice copies of Office on their computers.
Do I feel bad? A little, sure. But Microsoft seemed happy with the money they got from me. I mean, why would they charge so much for those extra licenses anyway? Why not just charge up front however much it would take to cover me for as many copies as I need?
I mean, in the end, it might be 'stealing' in some small sense, but it's Microsoft, for gosh sakes--it's not like I'm stealing from some small business where I know, and have a personal agreement with the owner or something!
I recently became the kind of person that charges most everything to a credit card and why not? I earn about 3% interest on my money sitting in the bank and 1-3 percent back on all my purchases. While I've just begun, I'm already seeing the benefits...
BUT, I will agree with a lot of the people here that say a credit card can lead to a lot of debt and trouble. I waited until I was 23 to get my first credit card, I had established credit through cell phone bills and responsible payments on time and got approved for a Chase Freedom (awesome rewards card). At first I was like a lot of people, very hesitant to use it, I had 0% interest for 12 months and used it about 3 times in 8 months (really dumb but I was new and like many had that fear of credit cards). I used it that year for my xmas shopping and began to relax a bit about my fears. About 9 months into the first year I began moving my money to ING checking accounts to earn interest and then paid my balance off in full.
I think about every purchase (even down to a soda!) and am always looking to save a penny. The credit card is tempting at times but forces me to consider how much money I have in my bank accounts and thus I can treat the card as essentially a debit card.
Cash only never worked for me, Id just see the cash in my pocket, spend it, then need more. Now I can track my expenses and spending online, I think more about a purchase, and overall the card has forced me to become more responsible with my money.
Another small advantage: When I go out to eat with friends I'll generally charge the meal. Not only do i get rewards,but it's essentially a free cash withdraw as my friends give me the cash that they owe on the meal right there. I put most of that case right into my bank account until the CC bill is due saving a bit for cash on hand.