>>> "SELL TO VALUE, NOT TO COST!!!!"
Definitely this is the core of it all, but how will people get to know what
is the value of their work if they don't even know how much is costing them
to produce it?
The analogy set with a Digital Bureau is just ideal. Make any shooting,
deliver the whole thing to such digital shop for them to have it all done
for you ( for your client actually), set a MarkUp figure ( from 10 -30%) and
bill your client accordingly , and you have set yourself away from loosing
money for the digital postproduction of the shots. If you are not going to
deliver the work to any digital shop but you are going to do it yourself,
then you already a minimum figure to estimate your PostProd services. THis
has nothing to do with film and processing costs. It is WAY more.
Now Value comes into play by the time you have to decide how much to charge
for your services, beyond the operational costs from above. So , if you are
using a standard Licensing system, you will then make a partial estimate of
your figures based on the extension of the usage intended for your images
( how many diferentpublications/media, how many regions, countries, etc) and
finally set your fees regarding your input, resulting from your talent and
experience to perform such shooting.
Add all those figures and that should be the final figure to charge.
So my first post had just to deal with costs, and I was putting this apart
from Value because production and post productions costs had nothing to do
with the professional fees for making any shot. They are just a separate
set of items in an estimate. Not understanding this basic premise may lead
to lots of misconceptions and errors when estimating and billing.
>
> need to point this out to your client but, if they understand basic commerce
> and economics, they will appreciate your stand.
One of the biggest problems we have to deal with is precisely the fact that
we are not seen or perceived as a business entity. We show ourselves more on
the side of an "Artist" ( and more recently , as a Digital Artist) whatever
that means, and that is of no benefit to anyone.
>>> I also realise that, unless we form a united front to clients, and
>>> educate them as to the TRUE value of the work we create, and the
>>> services we can now provide in the new fresh world of digital image capture,
A few days ago, William Curven said a very important thing about us ,
photographers, being "unpaid beta testers" for Camera manufacturers for the
newborn chip technologies regarding digital cameras.
I will add to this dramatic arguments, that the same manufacturers have done
an extremely good Advertising and Publicity job for shaping the public
opinion into the general argument that "Digital is Cheaper" and this has
provoked an inmense array of bad things to us.
Now most of the big corporations are trying to push the same argument to
justify either keeping the low fees they pay today and even lowering the
already low fees, because digital is cheaper and "everyone can do it".
Same trend is moving along Stock Agencies, Adverting Agencies and
Publishers/Editors for magazines, books and newspapers. They are drawing the
new economic maps of the digital enviroment for us, up to the point of
creating the contracts under which we are supposed to provide our services
for them.
I would love to set the terms and conditions when I go an rent a car at the
airport, or tell an emergency plumber how much will he get paid, according
to my own estimate, not theirs...
This can't be more preposterous, but it is happening, as part of the
"Digital Revolution". It is definitely up to us if are going to accept these
terms or fight for better options. We have to start seeing ourselves ( and
acting like) business entities, with all the formalities required for such
endeavour.
Jorge
Jorge Parra Photography
APA / EP
http://JorgeParra.com/
http://TheStylePortfolios.com/
===============================================================
GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
