RE: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
Actually, it's not eBay economics. It's the bidders, and sellers(wherever they are from) that cause all of the anomalies. As eBay says, they are only a venue. Like a public highway, they aren't responsible for the actions and decisions of the drivers of the vehicles that use it. Trash or treasure is all in the opinion of the individual. When you have millions of individuals involved, there's no guarantee things will go the way that you think they should. Len --- > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 8:40 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics > > > David, > > The only way to get a Super Program in black is to get a > Super A. Those are > scarce in the States, and some Americans will pay a premium > to get one. KEH > charges more for the Super A than they charge for an SP in the same > condition. > > > "David P. Chernicoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > A broken SP body went for $104, > but I had only 1 bidder for a working SP body with 50mm f1.4 and MEII > winder, all in excellent shape, which went for $195. FWIW, > the same setup, > with a Super A rather than a SP, and the body not in as nice > shape and a 50 > f1.7, went for a BIN of $275. I just don't understand ebay > economics rant> > > David< > > > Paul Franklin Stregevsky - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
David, The only way to get a Super Program in black is to get a Super A. Those are scarce in the States, and some Americans will pay a premium to get one. KEH charges more for the Super A than they charge for an SP in the same condition. "David P. Chernicoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: A broken SP body went for $104, but I had only 1 bidder for a working SP body with 50mm f1.4 and MEII winder, all in excellent shape, which went for $195. FWIW, the same setup, with a Super A rather than a SP, and the body not in as nice shape and a 50 f1.7, went for a BIN of $275. I just don't understand ebay economics David< Paul Franklin Stregevsky - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: RE: Fairy pics
For my 1995 wedding, the wedding pro wanted something like $2000. Well, we're talking about a wedding comprising about 15 total people, counting the bride, groom, and their families. That was too rich for my blood. Not being aware that my request might be a big deal, I also asked whether I could have, or buy, the negatives, He said, "After 3 years, you can buy them from me for $150.00." His thinking, correctly I suppose, was that few couples would be patient enough to wait three years to make reprints. Well, on to Plan B: I approached an aspiring young photographer--age 17--and asked her to photograph the wedding for expenses plus $150. We would get a good rate, and she would get some experience for her portfolio. She was delighted by the offer but informed us, with regret, that she had an academic test to take that Sunday morning. On to Plan C: A friend told us of a woman who worked at a mall-based portrait studio who freelanced. The woman agreed to shoot our wedding for $250 plus expenses; I can't recall who came up with the $250, but the "plus expenses" was definitely my suggestion. "May I have the prints on Photo CD?" I asked. Certainly, she replied. (Picture CD had not yet been invented.) When she delivered the contact prints, she lent us the negatives so that we could order as many reprints as we liked, at any size we liked, bypassing her completely. The only constraint was that we would have to use a local lab so the negs couldn't get lost in the mail. We used a Kodak lab. The job took three months, because we ordered many of the frames in several sizes, and one of those sizes was 8 by 12, apparently an unusual request. Each size required a new "run" through the system. When the prints finally came back, we showed them to our photographer and returned the negatives. As a "tip" of sorts, I presented her with a video, taken by a friend of ours, that documented the photographer's entire outdoor portrait shoot of the bride, groom, and family. She was delighted, explaining that she had never been privileged to see herself at work. She planned to use our video to show others that she could work well with people. Tanya, you might consider doing the same. I was not out to deny anyone a living. I didn't begrudge the fee asked by the "real" wedding pro; I just couldn't afford him, and the small ceremony didn't warrant it. Our photographer used a 35mm SLR. I had led her to understand that flash would be unacceptable, so she came prepared to shoot in available light. But when the rabbi corrected me, "Of course, she can use flash," I quickly informed her, and she came with 200-speed film and an auxiliary flash mounted on a bracket. My only disappointment was that she did not use an auxiliary battery to quick-charge her flash, and hence she missed one or two nice shots while waiting for her flash to charge. "Tanya Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: O M G, now THAT is an insult to ANY photographer. To date, I have been considering (because they have all been paying for their own film/processing) my keeping the negs as my form of "payment" as I think that they are my most necessary learning tool. Paul Franklin Stregevsky - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: RE: Fairy pics
Bucky wrote: > Don't believe a word Bill says; we're all filthy rotten pigs up here in the > frozen wastelands. Speak for yourself! I have a woman who does my laundry, so that makes me a clean, freshly-scented pig. And if she ever reads this, I'll probably be back to doing my own laundry. And in the hospital. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: Re: Fairy pics
David Chernicoff wrote: "The mild ones are the stories about customers who come in to complain that the color photocopy enlargements they did themselves of the 5x7 they bought (not wanting to spring for 8x10) doesn't look good." I really don't think I want to hear about the not-so-mild to hot stories It is stories like these that remind me what a sad, sad world it is that we occupy... It also brings up the point of copyright that I wanted to ask about. I am guessing that in light of my "transition" into the world of child portraiture, I should at least "invest" in some sort of mechanism for marking my shots with copyright information. Can you guys offer suggestions as to the best way to do this? ie. a sticker/stamp on the back etc? And how should this information be phrased? What information should be included? I'd better look into some sort of "business name" too, perhaps I'll call it "Fairygirl's Frames". hehe... fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Subject: RE: Fairy pics
Tanya, that's sweet of you to say, but I forgot to mention the part where I cordially invited them to pound sand. Don't believe a word Bill says; we're all filthy rotten pigs up here in the frozen wastelands. "HAR" Mike Vancovuer, Canada -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tanya & Russell Mayer Sent: April 11, 2001 6:20 PM To: Pentax Discussion List Subject: Subject: RE: Fairy pics O M G, now THAT is an insult to ANY photographer. To date, I have been considering (because they have all been paying for their own film/processing) my keeping the negs as my form of "payment" as I think that they are my most necessary learning tool. I can't say that I would have been as polite as you in this situation, Bucky...you are to be commended for having such self control! fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: Re: Fairy pics
Tom V wrote: "This guy is obviously an ass." True, I agree that he is, but he is also a rich one who is making lots of $$$ from this town by being just that BTW, I have FINALLY gotten through reading/replying to all of the digestsI am yet to respond to those who communicated to me off-list, however, I think it is time to give me kids a bit of attention. You "kids" can have me back in a couple of hours when the other two go down for their naps Thanks again to EVERYBODY who gave advice, a response or told of a personal experience with respect to my questions. Be ware, I will be asking some stuff about copyright a bit later on... :-) fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: RE: Fairy pics
Bucky wrote: "I resolved to give them enlargements as a wedding gift, and made an album of 4x6 proofs for them to look over, not telling them that any they chose would be presents (partly as a test, to be honest, since they had made no mention of paying me for my materials). I just suggested that they look my copies over and let me know which ones they wanted me to print for them. They said, "Well why not save yourself the trouble and just give us the negatives?" I picked my jaw up off the ground and suggested that I wanted to keep the negs in controlled conditions (a sleeve in a binder in my drawer)." O M G, now THAT is an insult to ANY photographer. To date, I have been considering (because they have all been paying for their own film/processing) my keeping the negs as my form of "payment" as I think that they are my most necessary learning tool. I can't say that I would have been as polite as you in this situation, Bucky...you are to be commended for having such self control! fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: RE: Fairy pics
- Original Message - From: "Tanya & Russell Mayer" Subject: Subject: RE: Fairy pics I can't say that I would have > been as polite as you in this situation, Bucky...you are to be commended for > having such self control! > > fairy. Like me, Bucky is a true Canadian. Never rude. Always polite. HAR William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
Big Eating Grin - Original Message - From: "Tanya & Russell Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Discussion List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 6:57 PM Subject: Subject: Re: Fairy pics > Doug Franklin wrote: > > "Called a "mom", if I have the vernacular correct. :-)...No, the rest of us > can't mask out the noise they make like you can." > > Too true! My two are standing at my door (child-proof gate that they can't > get passed) screaming at me as we speakh, silence IS golden > > BTW, what does "" mean? > > fairy. > > > > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: Re: Fairy pics
Treena Harp wrote: "Sadly, this attitude applies no matter what skill you possess. I'm a skilled and experienced seamstress, but I utterly refuse to sew for other people. I tried to out of the goodness of my heart for friends, but when I did, suddenly I was treated as a servant -- they wanted EVERYTHING for free, were hypercritical of everything I did and were totally ungrateful no matter how good the finished product was. This goes for my other hobbies, too, photography included. I believe most people truly don't appreciate things that don't cost them anything. I say no because I'd rather have them experience a couple of moments of annoyance with me, than do it and possibly lose a friendship over it." I have done the exact same thing (as far as designing an making clothes for friends go), Treena, and when you put it in this context, it truly makes me realise the point that everybody has been making about this whole thing. In fact, at the moment I am fixing a zipper in my friends "favourite pants" and my machine broke down. She is phoning me everyday saying stuff like "are you every going to finish them?" and "how long can it take just to change a zip". Of course, she has never once offered to help pay for the repairs to my machine which would of course, have them fixed much faster I guess it is the same for photography, people DO always seem to appreciate something that they have had to pay for more than something they've been given (not so with me though)... The wedding stories that you guys posted are also testament to this... fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
Tom Rittenhouse wrote: > > The only time you are charging too much is when you can not get > customers at that price. Of course, if that's the cheapest price in town, you don't want those customers anyway. > Another thing to think of is that in my experience people who > look only for price are > never satisfied. There is no way you can make them happy. Exactly. Good post. You listening Tanya? tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
Hi, Tanya, Tanya & Russell Mayer wrote: > The mother of the little fairy in the shots I posted earlier > said to me that the thing that really > "got" her about the shots I took was that they have so much "heart", and > that I went to great lengths to consider the > child's and the parents beliefs, personality etc and to cater specifically > to those things rather than just > saying "smile" and then "that's a wrap!". Well, Tanya, this is what you are selling. Not what you don't have, or can't do, but a service that is valuable to your customers. If a guy with years of experience and lots or equipment produces mediocre pictures and your produce pictures that have the verve your customers are looking for which is the more valuable product? You are not selling your experience. You are not selling your equipment. You are not selling your studio. What you are selling is your ability to make a picture that satisfies your customer, from your quote of one of your customers that is more than satisfactory. You should be paid for what you provide. Now there is an economic reality factor involved. No one is likely to pay you much more than they can get the same product for. The competitor you mention is booked up weeks in advance. What is it worth to your customers to not have to wait those weeks? He produces mediocre work. What is it worth to your customers to get more sensitive and insightful photos? The only time you are charging too much is when you can not get customers at that price. Another thing to think of is that in my experience people who look only for price are never satisfied. There is no way you can make them happy. Whereas people who expect to pay a fair price have realistic expectations. The expect to get what they pay for, and nothing else. Years back I tried to get jobs based on my making about $10 and hour, the jobs I got were nothing but a pain. I raised my expectations to $100/hr by bidding on a job I didn't really want. I got the job. The client was happy. They recommended me to other clients. Their most reveling comment about my bid was, "That's reasonable. Not cheap, but reasonable." If I had bid my usual cheap price I would not have gotten the job, they would have figured I was only worth what I was asking. That is, not much. --Tom - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
You just don't know me very well yet. I think someone coined the term "dirty ol man" after they met me ;-) William Robb wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Ken Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Guess I should have waited with my response. I think I just > found a kindred soul. > > You are much more polite > William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
- Original Message - From: "Ken Archer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: April 11, 2001 2:24 AM Subject: Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics > Guess I should have waited with my response. I think I just found a > kindred soul. You are much more polite William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Subject: Re: Fairy pics
William Robb wrote: > You still don't believe me? Look at all the photofinishing > complaints generated on this list. You think companies like > Wal-Mart have done photographers any favours by making > photofinishing a low profit game? What do you think suffered > when the cost of a roll of photo processing fell to a quarter of > what it was 15 years ago? Amen. Wal-Mart, Loblaws and Costco have destroyed quality consumer photofinishing as we know it, because no one can compete with them AND offer a quality final product AND make money. Just because someone else lowballs, why do you have to lowball? And especially when you think their work is bad! If their work is bad, you should certainly be charging MORE. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Subject: Re: Fairy pics
John Francis wrote: "Sounds pretty darn cheap to me! By the time you work out an hourly rate (accounting for *all* the time you are there, waiting for kids to be ready), and adding processing, preparation and book-keeping time, you're probably working at below minimum wage, and with no allowance towards the cost of your equipment." William Robb wrote: I think you are selling yourself WAY to cheaply. You should be charging that much per hour, not per shoot. Guys, my husband agrees with you all 110%, and so do I to an extent. However, there are many other factors that I must consider here. These include but are NOT limited to the following; 1. First and foremost, my lack of experience. Despite being given the gift of an "eye" for photography and generally for "what looks good", I still have a lot to learn technically, and as I said before, I still don't trust myself enough to be sure that I will get ANY good shots out of 3 rolls, albeit 10 good shots from one roll. Therefore, I feel that I must offer somebody who is willing to pay me at least 3 rolls to ensure that they get enough shots to fulfill their needs. 2. My lack of equipment. I cannot possibly expect people to pay me good money when I can't offer them the "best" technology and procedures around. (I mean, I don't even have a flash that works properly and I don't even have a hand held light meter (and wouldn't know how to use one if I did), I have to rely completely on TTL) 3. Lots of competition. Due to the fact that this is such a small town, my competition is many and varied. There are frequent travelling setups (like Pixifoto etc) who come through town. In fact there were two lots here just last week. There are also at least 4 or 5 local "pro" photographers who have the experience and equipment that I don't, and most of who also work in the few minilabs in town so don't have to pay for ANY processing costs and very little for film. One such guy that I know quite well charges only $150 per session for a "studio" sitting (plain grey backdrop, softbox/strobe lighting), for about 1-2 rolls of film with all of the 4x6 prints given to the customer. He has over 15 years experience (about 15 times what I have), all of the latest equipment and still only charges this much. He also manages the Kodak minilab and has no processing/film costs so puts the 100 bucks straight into his pocket. On average, he spends about half an hour with each "client" to "achieve" the shots that they want. I personally find his portrait work boring and uninspirational (he is an incredibly talented landscape photographer though), and feel that he charges too much (particularly because I know that it doesn't cost him anything and he spends so little time and energy with the people), but he still gets many "clients" and his weekends are booked up for months in advance. So, somehow, if I am to make a go of this, I need to compete with people like this guy. The only way I know how, (because I don't have the experience or the equipment), is to try and offer better "value for money" which in this case means, larger prints, more prints, more time and energy spent with the kids. The mother of the little fairy in the shots I posted earlier said to me that the thing that really "got" her about the shots I took was that they have so much "heart", and that I went to great lengths to consider the child's and the parents beliefs, personality etc and to cater specifically to those things rather than just saying "smile" and then "that's a wrap!". 4. Because I am only learning here, I consider that being paid "below minimum wage" is not really an issue. I am hoping that with this approach, "my time will come" one day, and I will reap the rewards then by having the experience to be able to charge top dollar for a service that I consider to be first class. As I said before, my husband disagrees strongly with this, particularly as I spend alot of time while I am not shooting preparing, designing and sewing, backdrops, costumes, props etc and he feels that people don't appreciate all of the effort that I put in. But, as I said, I believe that "my time will come" and that alot of effort put in now will result in hopefully, one day, me becoming somebody whose talents are highly sought after (not at all ambitious, am I?). And besides, how could I possibly sleep at night knowing that I had overcharged somebody when I know that there are others in town that could do a "better" job than I can. Bill D. Casselberry wrote: "I had just read Tanya's original post and was about to say the same. This sounds almost a give-away. Most destructive to gainful employment is the double 6x8 prints. Not only are they surely more expensive than 4x6 *PROOFS!* - they are most likely sizable enough that enlargment orders will be the exception, rather than the rule." I understand this Bill, but I see it like this - it costs me au$14.95 for a set of doubles of 4x6 prints from a roll of 24. It
Subject: Re: Fairy Pics...
Paul Stenquist wrote; "Hi Fairy, Some beautiful pictures here. I particularly love the BW of the grouped flowers, the flower toppling over in the vase, and the baby on the cloud. (I guess I'm a softy.) Many other good shots as well. Nice work. Paul" Thanks for taking the time to view my pics and to comment, Paul. Ths shots that you mentioned are my favourites too. It is actually quite interesting as the b&w shot of the tulips is quite possibly my MOST favourite pic I have ever shot, and yet it doesn't tend to draw the attention that the colour ones do. I just love the contrast and the way the light falls on the top of the flowers. Speaking of light, I forgot to mention that EVERYTHING on that page was shot with only available light (I only own one flash - a crappy Achiever 630AF, that doesn't seem to work properly - always seems to overexpose everything so I rarely use it). The first group of shots on that page (the still lifes) are about a month old now, but I have left them there as collectively, they are still my all time favourites. I am glad that you enjoyed viewing them and thanks again for commenting. BTW, for anyone who is interested, I just had a phone call from the mum of the two little girls that I shot on the weekend (the little girl dressed as a fairy is the sister of the one with the coloured flowers around her). She was so overjoyed with the results. She called me a "legend!". Anyways, apparently she took them to the childrens day care centre this afternoon and now has a list of at least 10 other mums that want me to perform some sort of magic with their kids. Of course, I am extremely excited by this prospect (I may actually be able to make some money to buy the new flash that I need and a decent printeranother PZ-1P would be nice too...) but at the same time am also extremely nervous at the idea. I mean, this could turn into a very large volume of work, and what if the shots I did this past weekend were just a fluke and I end up stuffing up big time with the next lo t? Then my name would be mud in a very small town where I have suddenly been placed at celebrity status just cause I managed to make this lady's little girls look cute on film (they already look extremely cute in real life). Also, I am a little worried that I will run short of ideas to make each shoot as individual to the child as possible. I don't want to become like these supermarket jobs such as Pixifotos where they do the same setup with each kid regardless of their personality, take 10 shots (all of them smiling or laughing) and then say, "next" I also don't want to be denigrated to doing cheesy and gimmicky setups with the kids, I'd like to keep them as natural as possible while still adding some element of creativity and fun into the shots. Ok, so I know I am rambling, so I'll shut it now, but any advice from others who have shot alot of family/portraits/kids would be greatly appreciated. fairy. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
