Mercedes, Audi, BMW,
Rolex, London Photography
All the brands listed are luxury brands. Uncompromising of quality and prepared to consistently meet and exceed consumer expectations. One more thing... none of these brands are CHEAP!
When a customer walks into a Louis Vuitton outlet store they are aware that they are expected to pay top dollar for this season's trends. Similarly, when one goes into the Mercedes dealership there is a certain expectation, a status of driving a Mercedes or of even being seen in the dealership, no one really expects a discount because the value of the product is understood and the associated cost.
Against that backdrop, why oh why would clients expect photography services to be free or near free? Why would there be a conversation with a client that goes like this?
Customer: "Hey Keith, can you do the photography for *event named* on *date stated* at *time stated*. I love the quality of your work and moments you capture.
London Photography: "Sure thing no problem. I know you are familiar with the quality of our work. So the quote would be *figure stated*
Customer: *Radio Silence*
London Photography: Hello??
Customer: Ummm yes, I am here I just did not expect photography to be that expensive. Can you do it for free?
London Photography (in my head): (Jesus take the wheel!! why is my knowledge of green verbs tested)
London Photography: Oh I am sorry, I am not able to undertake your event for free.
Customer: Oh ok well do not bother then.
London Photography (in my head): (Woooooosaaaaaahhhh!!! Breathe...just Breathe)
London Photography: Thanks for you interest in London Photography, have a great day
Why is London Photography expected to be free? Even when dealing with the "oldest profession in the world" customers do not expect it to be free. In fact, historically, persons have paid very well for such "services" but yet still for photography there is the expectation of free. I guess there is more nobility attached to being a photographer than an ummmm... "service provider".
Concessions are made for the occasional charity jobs and discounts where applicable, but the perception of photography being cheap is due to the advance of technology (the "selfie" age) and "point and shoot" digital cameras. The consumer does not appreciate the specialist equipment needed to create those magical moments. Point and shoot cameras are the everyday digital cameras and the cameras attached to phones. Photographers on the other hand use single lens reflex (SLR) cameras which engages the use of a mirror and prism system through a lens for the photographer to see the exact image. There are three primary components which are critical for a photographer
1) Camera body
2) Lenses
3) Lighting
None of which are particular cheap. Please note not everyone with a camera is a photographer. Additionally, training courses are critical towards photographers staying on top of the game. When an opportunity comes along to work with a top photographer or be part of a workshop it is a eagerly seized upon. In all, its a skill set of time, energy and considerable capital.
There are many other facets that determine the final cost of work, including that of the value of intellectual property. Much like an artist that paints on a canvas with the photographer's canvas being what is seen through the lens and the perspective that is created.
So next the time a client asks for free photography, I will politely inquire what other "services" are they able to get for free... None I suspect!
Be guided.
