Selling pics on CDs...pros/cons and why is this )(*&O&* me off so much this morning!!

SitterS

Got a question for you guys. Would love to hear many thoughts and opinions on this subject from pros, amateurs, etc.

I had a friend call me today to ask me to take pictures of her kids. She said that the woman that photographs their volleyball games also takes portrait pics and will give you all of them on a CD for $200.00. Because we are friends she wanted to ask me first to photograph her kids. I don't do CDs and probably never will but it seems to be the trend lately.

1. Can someone share the pros and cons of doing this. Here are my quick thoughts.

Cons: A. person buys CD and takes it to Eckerds and has prints made. Shows them to everyone and tells them that the photographer _________ took these shots. Maybe to them they look like a decent print job but to us, the photographer, it looks like crap. Do you want your work represented in this way.

B. Is this a fair way to sell your work in a world of many photographers that take the time to put their heart into taking a good portrait, edit if needed, attend classes to better their work, etc.

Pros: The only thing I can think of is quick and easy money. I certainly can see why they are doing it. Attend a game, click away, download to CD and collect check. Job done!!!

**Do these photographers edit their pictures before putting them on CD them or are these SOOC JPEGs with no editing. I am sorry but if little Susie just reached puberty and has a huge zit on the end of her nose I think that I will help her out and do a little editing to remove it for her. Does this not happen with these photographers?

For some reason this has just "mod edit" me off this morning and I needed to vent! I just dont' have it in me to let go of my pictures this easy so I need for someone to convince me that this is the right thing to do and the way photography should go in the future.

Shane

claudermilk

I look at it as two different philosophies. In fact, at some events I shoot gratis I have a friend who also does and we are on opposite side of this. He dumps everything to CD, SOOC and gives it to the performers. While I on the other hand let them know that in a week I will have a gallery on SM that they can order prints from; I then cull the images and post the ones I'm willing to let into the wild--usually after some minor batch-postprocessing. The performers are thirlled with both methods. For paid work, I most definitely cull stuff, and am more picky. I also tell the client up front that I will give them the best of the bunch to choose from and the other shots truly aren't worth reviewing further.

So, do what makes you comfortable. If that's giving everything unedited, then so be it. If it means you prefer to go through and present only the photographer's picks, that is equally valid.

SitterS

claudermilk wrote:

I look at it as two different philosophies. In fact, at some events I shoot gratis I have a friend who also does and we are on opposite side of this. He dumps everything to CD, SOOC and gives it to the performers. While I on the other hand let them know that in a week I will have a gallery on SM that they can order prints from; I then cull the images and post the ones I'm willing to let into the wild--usually after some minor batch-postprocessing. The performers are thirlled with both methods. For paid work, I most definitely cull stuff, and am more picky. I also tell the client up front that I will give them the best of the bunch to choose from and the other shots truly aren't worth reviewing further.

So, do what makes you comfortable. If that's giving everything unedited, then so be it. If it means you prefer to go through and present only the photographer's picks, that is equally valid.

Thanks Chris. I share your thoughts on this as I do exactly what you do. Maybe I am just a little more of a perfectionist or idiot as I spend more time making the same or probably less money than the guy who sells the SOOC pics on CD. I just can't let go of my pics that easy.

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

Shane

Van Isle

I've been doing some events lately, I shoot free because it's fun, and charge because the post process is the work! I charge basically the same margin on a CD of images as I would for the same number of prints. But because there's little (or no) overhead for me to produce a CD vice a print it seems like a great deal to the client.

I shoot, come back the next week with the best minimally proofed/batch processed. And when they place the order, be it for CD or print, I further process each as if they were going to print (and I advertise them as such). It's normally 5 hi-res JPEGs to a disk. Depending on your demographic lots of folks want the digital anyway to share with family and friends. Right now I'm shooting small track, local, non-competitive supermoto (motorcycle) stuff. These guys won't spend too much $$$ on a fancy print that they pin up inside their van or garage so in this way it makes sense. I deliver a good product for a good price.

And if they DO get them printed, and faces are green, well, lesson learned eh?

VI

jonh68

If a customer pays me $200 and they want them on CD, they get them on CD. You can still edit the photos before they get them and you can also cull through the bad ones just like you can if you post them on smugmug. The only thing you don't control is the type of printer used and just tell the customer you are not responsible for the prints.

What I usually do is go through the pics and edit and fix the best ones. I put those in a seperate file. I then have a file that includes every shot taken, the good and bad. Remember, as photographers, we have a more critical eye. For the customer, they don't care as much about composition, exposure etc. Example: We would discard an overblown shot of a background or even a face shot. However, the parent does not notice and loves the expression on their face. How many tmes have we been to a house and see the pictures they treasure? How many times have we criticised the angle, lighting etc in our minds?

I think a good compromise is having the edited shots on one file, and then everything in another. If I were paying someone, I would want to see the rejects because the photographer looks for the best possible picture, the parent is looking for moments.

Dee

Me too

jonh68 wrote:

What I usually do is go through the pics and edit and fix the best ones. I put those in a seperate file. I then have a file that includes every shot taken, the good and bad. Remember, as photographers, we have a more critical eye. For the customer, they don't care as much about composition, exposure etc. Example: We would discard an overblown shot of a background or even a face shot. However, the parent does not notice and loves the expression on their face. How many tmes have we been to a house and see the pictures they treasure? How many times have we criticised the angle, lighting etc in our minds?

I think a good compromise is having the edited shots on one file, and then everything in another. If I were paying someone, I would want to see the rejects because the photographer looks for the best possible picture, the parent is looking for moments.

That is SO true... photos I'd just toss are sometimes the one the grandmother just adores... so I do the same. I fix up the ones I think are best, put them into a "best ones" folder, and another folder holds the ones I didn't process, and another holds "blurry ones" that aren't THAT bad, but OOF, blurred, or whatever. The really bad ones, no one sees, however.

For one customer who wasn't that computer savvy at the time, I used the photoshop web album to make some small size ready for the web files that she could put in her e-mails, etc.

PictureThis!

SitterS, I definitely see your point of view. I've never (and never plan on) selling a CD. People ask for them, but I see it as selling all rights and loosing any future profit (from anyone that knows whomever you sold that CD to). You may make more at the moment, but to me $200 isn't worth 2 hours at a game, 2 hours in the editing room, plus all the money you'd lose from not selling prints. That's how I run my business. Everyone is different.

SitterS

Thanks guys for your comments and honest opinions. I can truly see both sides. I will opt to not sell a CD but like my friend said last night "I can be bought for a price". He has sold a CD once or twice but the buyer paid high dollar and not for 200 pics but several edited pics that he needed for posters or whatever.

My mom just attended a reunion with about 100 family members. Thank goodness I wasn't there but then again if I was I could have been the photographer taking the pics and making the money!!! The photographer took pictures and sold the CD. I think my mom said it was for $400.00. Not bad money up front for a few hours work. Well all 100 have access to the pictures so they have printed away. Eckerds, Walmart, etc. I just cringed :cry He has his money and job is done. On the other hand lets say he sold 5x7 prints for $4.00 each (cheap) and all 100 attendees ordered at least 4 pics each. He could have had the potential to make around $1600.00 but that is a BIG...if they order... so he opted to take the money and run.

Whatever works for the individual photographer, I guess.

Shane

aktse

I think you’re making a few assumptions.

• People want prints.
• Retail photos places don’t do a good job printing
• Selling CD of photos is easier and contains lesser quality work and may be taken by a lesser qualified photog.

I think they’re just different business models in a similar vein as a brick and mortar store and a on-line only stores. Does one make it better than the other? It really just depends on the situation and what are you trying to buy. Also, you read time and time again of photographers lamenting that *many* people look at event galleries, but the photographer gets very few sales.

I’ve been discovered that people sometime just want the image file so that they can easily share it with the family and friends. And I’ve seen posting on dgrin in which pro’s go to Costco and they can do a decent job.

I don’t think one is better than the other…

You just have to figure out what’s best for you and that work in your market space.

LittleLisa

SitterS wrote:

...On the other hand lets say he sold 5x7 prints for $4.00 each (cheap) and all 100 attendees ordered at least 4 pics each. He could have had the potential to make around $1600.00 but that is a BIG...if they order... so he opted to take the money and run.

Thanks Sitter. Great thread. I was just about to post something asking everyone's opinion about this. I'm fairly new to the business end of photography and I think I don't take myself as seriously as I should as a professional, so I'm always underestimating my worth/value.

I'm currently negotiating a small wedding job for September. My initial quote included the images on CD. Now the bride's mom (who is planning the wedding) is trying to haggle me down. I'm thinking about lowering my price in exchange for not giving the photos on CD and having all of the orders come through me. Now my question is how much to lower my price by? I've only shot one other wedding (and gave pics on CD) so I don't have any idea how many prints will be ordered. My other dilemma is that she wants printed proofs. So when I don't offer the images on CD is she just going to scan the proofs and make bad color copies? (Hey, I've seen it done).

I also find in this day and age of digital photography and images on the web that people don't seem to care as much about having real prints anymore. I usually find most of my print orders coming from people who aren't as digitally connected. However, people that live on their computers view the pics online and go, cool, I saw them and I can look at them online later if I want to see them again, plus I can send the link to a friend. It's like everyone's inundated with pictures and the general public (I say this using a broad generalization) don't really appreciate a good photograph as much. Maybe it's just me. But now that everyone and their mom has a point and shoot and online access they're fine with their sub-par snapshots.

So I agree with you on wanting to have more control over your photographs. I think I respect you more as a professional because of it, but to me it's a big gamble. If I charge for prints that no one buys I make zip. At least with the CD I know what I'm going to make. But I guess I've always liked to take the safe/comfortable/guaranteed route.

PictureThis!

LittleLisa wrote:

My other dilemma is that she wants printed proofs. So when I don't offer the images on CD is she just going to scan the proofs and make bad color copies? (Hey, I've seen it done).

For my weddings, I don't offer CD, but offer a DVD slideshow with music of all the prints (and formatted so they can't pull individual files off of it). They have all of the pictures to look at. I offer discounted print packages and/or they can order individual prints. I also order proof books, included in some wedding packages - or can be ordered extra.

You can't do anything about them scanning pictures.

Shay Stephens

In the age of digital, you can't control your work the way you could in the age of film. Trying to keep that boat afloat is just going to make you mad as it sinks deeper and deeper.

The music industry is about to implode because they are trying to control music the same way, with the absolute authority and iron hand of the dictator. They are killing themselves in the process.

It is a challenge, but one that is important to consider carefully. I wrote a small article about this in the pbase magazine issue #9, the second column on page 23:
http://www.pbase.com/magazine

The article talks about making a mental shift in sharing photos on the web. It is the first step in releasing the reigns of the dictatorial past.

LittleLisa

Shay Stephens wrote:

In the age of digital, you can't control your work the way you could in the age of film. ...

It is a challenge, but one that is important to consider carefully. I wrote a small article about this in the pbase magazine issue #9, the second column on page 23: http://www.pbase.com/magazine

The article talks about making a mental shift in sharing photos on the web. It is the first step in releasing the reigns of the dictatorial past.

Shay, thanks for the insight! I liked your article! I have to say I'm not uber-possessive about my photos. I do prefer to get credit, but I'm not really about suing people for "copyright infringement" or anything. I've been targeting a younger crowd - senior pictures and youth events - since I have siblings who are still in high school and "these kids these days" :ruttare all about sharing everything online (myspace, facebook, etc). They totally love it when they can download pics from my site to use on their profiles. And I do think of it as free advertising. Plus when I see my pics on their profiles I try to comment on them and say how much fun I had meeting or hanging out with them and I find that's helping build rapport with a lot of them.

Anyway, I just wanted to say thanks for a new way look to look at things. When I first became a member of dgrin it initially set me whirling learning about all of the things "I should be doing" to protect my work.


Michelle, I like your idea about the DVD slideshow. And for the proof book how do you do yours? Is there a post anywhere about proof books?

PictureThis!

LittleLisa wrote:

Michelle, I like your idea about the DVD slideshow. And for the proof book how do you do yours? Is there a post anywhere about proof books?

I purchase the books from Topflight and print the pictures using SmugMug or any other lab. They are geared towards wedding, but you can use the idea for any event. These books have the 'reorder' pages in them.

StevenV

Shay Stephens wrote:

In the age of digital, you can't control your work the way you could in the age of film. Trying to keep that boat afloat is just going to make you mad as it sinks deeper and deeper.

for a simliar take, read and listen to some of Dan Heller's thoughts. I'm digestig all of this and trying to figure out what direction to take my "business."

SitterS

Thank you all for such interesting and varied replies to this thread. Off to photograph a baseball game but looking forward to reading the articles when I return.

Shane

PictureThis!

PictureThis! wrote:

I purchase the books from Topflight and print the pictures using SmugMug or any other lab. They are geared towards wedding, but you can use the idea for any event. These books have the 'reorder' pages in them.

Something that may be more useful for sports or other events is a printed proof book. I have looked at these, but not ordered one yet. It seems to be a good idea.

http://www.millerslab.com/services/digital_proofing/

claudermilk

Shay Stephens wrote:

In the age of digital, you can't control your work the way you could in the age of film. Trying to keep that boat afloat is just going to make you mad as it sinks deeper and deeper.

The music industry is about to implode because they are trying to control music the same way, with the absolute authority and iron hand of the dictator. They are killing themselves in the process.

It is a challenge, but one that is important to consider carefully. I wrote a small article about this in the pbase magazine issue #9, the second column on page 23:
http://www.pbase.com/magazine

The article talks about making a mental shift in sharing photos on the web. It is the first step in releasing the reigns of the dictatorial past.

Good post & good article, Shay. Definitely something to think about. We certainly don't want to become the second RIAA.

mercphoto

Lots of good talk on this subject but let me throw in some thoughts of mine. I've seen this debated on Sports Shooter as well, and that is an interesting place to read comments on that subject. Some of those members are more journalists and editorial photographers, some are commercial photographers, and some are event photographers. The event photographers see this in a much different light than the journalists/commercial photographers do.

Some of the old school guys, especially the journalists/commercial photographers, are stuck in the days of film. They seem unwilling to move into the future. They also seem incapable of realizing that many people who want a photograph do not want a print. To many people a print is useless. A digital file, however, has great value to them. They can use it in email, on a web page, and (gasp!) make their own prints.

Let's face it, in a day when the print can be made for pennies a pop people do not put value in the print. They put value in the process it took to get the print, but not in the print itself. They will pay you for your time to take the photo and manipulate it, but not to make multiple copies of it on paper.

About 5 years ago I used to race shifter karts and I would occasionally buy photos of me on the kart. I never bought a single print, I would only buy the CD-ROM. Why? See the reasons stated above.

One thing to think about is WHO are you selling to? Let's face it, I was never going to become a famous racing driver. Photos of me in my karting days are never going to be worth big money. And the photographer who scolds the photographer who sold me a CD-ROM of images that he can no longer control is a fool, whereas the photographer who sold me the CD-ROM has money of mine that he would not have otherwise.

On the other hand, if you are taking pictures of famous people, or people who very likely might become famous, or are photographing for a corporation or a real race team or whatever, then by all means follow the old school way of doing things.

SitterS wrote:

**Do these photographers edit their pictures before putting them on CD them or are these SOOC JPEGs with no editing.

I have certainly seen that but I don't agree with it. While all images can be made to look better with hand-editing you would be surprised how many photographs will look better even with automatic editing. And how hard is it to batch photos for some simple enhancements? When I used to shoot outdoor amateur motocross it was very easy to batch enhance those photos. It was always outdoors in daylight. Color balance was not an issue, exposures were always very close to correct, etc. A mild curve, some pre-determined sharpening, and voila huge improvement. As good as by-hand editing? No, but very good nonetheless for very little work.

mercphoto

SitterS wrote:

Cons: A. person buys CD and takes it to Eckerds and has prints made. Shows them to everyone and tells them that the photographer _________ took these shots. Maybe to them they look like a decent print job but to us, the photographer, it looks like crap. Do you want your work represented in this way.

I wanted to comment further on this in particular. First and foremost remember this: you are selling to the client, not to yourself. If it looks like a decent print to your client and your client is happy that is what matters most. Period.

Secondly, you would be surprised how low people's expectations are for photographs. I own a Honda S2000 and people post pictures of their cars all time. And people will comment about how great these photos are. The photographs are, more often than not, utter crap. I mean really bad. No true blacks, colors are dull, focus is soft, backgrounds are horrible, you name it. Truly awful photos. But people still rave about them. See what I'm getting at?

SitterS

Bill you have brought up some excellent points. I just attended the Rich Clarkson Sports Photography workshop and will share some information about this topic when I return. Boy has it been a busy few days. Thanks for commenting.

Shane

Dbl

I've been in the game for a few years and exclusively started out with on line sales. Then I slowly started doing "CD" shoots and my business has taken off with the increase in these shoots. I just did a 4 team T&I shoot with a CD of each team with action shots. I would not have gotten the one without the other. I made more in one week then I could in a few months of on line sales. I have a business to run, that entails bringing in revenue.

All of my shots for both web and CD are fully processed and culled. That is the way I choose to represent my work, some prefer not to go to that trouble. I shot a basketball tournament a year or two back that did poorly on sales. I learned from some mistakes and what I would do different the next time out. About 4 months after the tournament I was contacted about selling some of the photos from 3 teams for their year end DVD show. I debated about what I should do but in the end gave them a limited amount of shots on a CD for what ever PERSONAL use they deemed. I believe I more than recouped my costs of two days of 12 hour days shooting basketball. Those shots where sitting on line collecting dust, why not make some money on what I had already done? I burned the photos made a quick poster or two to include that was low res with a watermark and not only did I get the revenue of the CD but it generated a number of posters to produce, doubling my revenue from what I charged for the CD's.

Is this the trend? It certainly is for me. I rarely shoot anything on spec anymore. I now do 5 or 6 CD shoots to one spec shoot. The demand for my work has continued to increase and I now use spec work to gain other work, posters, making contact with other teams etc. The CD shoot offers the client a good value for their money. I am not sure that I go with the argument of losing potential future sales of prints, I just have not found that to be true. On line print sales peak in the first 36 hours after an event, after that it is very hit or miss. People move on, they have very short memories and many are just lookers not buyers in the on line world.

How you choose to conduct your business is....well your business. I am generating revenue for mine the best way I know how, by changing my marketing, the products I offer, and listening to what my customers want.

I don't have an issue with "letting go" the shots on a CD, I am being paid very fairly for my time and effort of shooting, processing and burning them to a CD. I retain my copyrights for any future commercial work. I don't see how it’s much different than offering your work to stock agencies.

My on line work galleries will continue to exist but only as a means to another end, a portfolio to obtain work in other areas that have higher earning potential. CD shoots happen to be one of those areas.

urbanaries

this is a toughie!!!!

I currently sell prints to clients, as well as offer CDs for a decent sum of money (for portrait sessions, I just raised it to $275). The folks that want CDs typically know they want them before they even see the pictures! It's definitely a popular item, and I would be 110% thrilled with this if I could only fullfill them through smugmug (andy, I'm grovelling now.....!!!)

Typically portrait clients will order one or two enlargements from me, and buy the CD for their own 4x6es, email and myspace, etc.

I only offer edited shots (identical to ones in their online gallery) on CD. I never let the ones on the cutting room floor see the light of day. Like bobby Brown said, that's my prerogative.

PictureThis!

Just curious, for those selling CDs. How much do you charge for your session. Do you charge this on top of a sitting/event fee?
For sports, what do you charge? Who do you sell it to? The coach, a mom, a group of people that go in together?

Also, any suggestions on what to charge for a digital download on SM? I generally charge $3 for a 4x6, which is my biggest seller for sports.

SitterS

Shay Stephens wrote:

In the age of digital, you can't control your work the way you could in the age of film. Trying to keep that boat afloat is just going to make you mad as it sinks deeper and deeper.

The music industry is about to implode because they are trying to control music the same way, with the absolute authority and iron hand of the dictator. They are killing themselves in the process.

It is a challenge, but one that is important to consider carefully. I wrote a small article about this in the pbase magazine issue #9, the second column on page 23:
http://www.pbase.com/magazine

The article talks about making a mental shift in sharing photos on the web. It is the first step in releasing the reigns of the dictatorial past.

Thank you Shay for contributing to this thread.

Shane

bsvirginian

Quite an interesting and diverse subject. Being a wedding, portrait and special event photographer I depend on print sales. Just from weddings I imagine that reprints are about 25 % of my total weddings sales. I know that if I give them a CD that I'll never hear from them again. When I do give them a "proof CD" there are only minor corrections done. No eyeglass glare removal or opening of eyes, etc. Again when doing portraits they get paper proofs only or we'll never hear from them again. Special events is a little different. There are safeguards such as monetary guarantees to encourage meeting minimum sittings. Another thing not mentioned, I believe on this thread is copywriting. Everyone of my images have my name implanted to try to discourage copywrite infringements. I am an "old timer" and the main reason that we don't relinguish our ways completely is the hope for reprint orders. Just some thoughts.
bsvirginian

aktse

bsvirginian wrote:

... Just from weddings I imagine that reprints are about 25 % of my total weddings sales. ... I am an "old timer" and the main reason that we don't relinguish our ways completely is the hope for reprint orders. Just some thoughts.
bsvirginian

Just more food for thought... My sister got married three years ago, and when she was looking for a photographer for the big event, she was only chosing between ones that fit her budget, had an impressive portfolio, and offered images on a CD. She removed any photographer off the list that would not provide her the images, even if she thought they did great work for a good price.

And it seems that most people that I know who are getting married these days are making the exact same type of decisions.

But in the end, the photographer picks the business model that he/she prefers and it is the customer who picks the photographer (or photo).

mike_k

PictureThis! wrote:

Just curious, for those selling CDs. How much do you charge for your session. Do you charge this on top of a sitting/event fee?
For sports, what do you charge? Who do you sell it to? The coach, a mom, a group of people that go in together?

Also, any suggestions on what to charge for a digital download on SM? I generally charge $3 for a 4x6, which is my biggest seller for sports.

Just wanted to bump this thread to see if anyone had any insights to these great questions...

jonh68

I would like to myself.

One thing to consider as far as making more money with pictures, is formatting them into specific sizes such as 8X10, 14X11 etc. I know most of us have a photoshop program that can create borders and making them look matted. They can be personalized text at the bottom and you can put your name on the print.

You can give them the regular pics on CD, and then create a few of the best pictures like this and post them, or even get some printed as a marketing tool.

evoryware

pbase magazine issue #9, the second column on page 23:
http://www.pbase.com/magazine

I tried to open this pdf, but it wouldn't open, even from the zip file. Said the viewer cannot decrypt this document. Never not had a pdf open before. Is this still opening for other people?

mike_k

evoryware wrote:

pbase magazine issue #9, the second column on page 23:
http://www.pbase.com/magazine

I tried to open this pdf, but it wouldn't open, even from the zip file. Said the viewer cannot decrypt this document. Never not had a pdf open before. Is this still opening for other people?

Opens for me. Have you tried upgrading your version of the Adobe Reader?