# When should I start charging?



## robrod14 (Jun 24, 2014)

When is it ok to charge for photos? I know the easy answer... When someone is willing to pay for your pics, but is there another answer. I have been shooting and think i'm starting to get good enough to charge someone. However, I'm an honest guy and don't want to rip anyone off. So how do i know when my pics are good enough for someone to pay for my services. My pics would be of people, like weddings, Engadget photos, or just a personal photoshoot.

Thanks for the advice


----------



## SnappingShark (Jun 24, 2014)

Engadget photos... Sweet deal!! 

Or or maybe you meant engagement? Hehe

either way, you charge when somebody asks how much


----------



## e.rose (Jun 25, 2014)

:addpics:


----------



## e.rose (Jun 25, 2014)

Also, I don't know that there is a definitive answer to your question.


----------



## fooby (Jun 25, 2014)

My personal feeling is that once you have the skills to capture exactly what you see in your head & then be able to do the same whatever the conditions might be. Also, if somebody else can look through your portfolio and tell immediately what YOUR style is, then you can start thinking about moving into business.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jun 25, 2014)

When you are consistent every time with the images you produce, when you develop the skills to read light and shoot without a flash, or on auto mode all the time.  It has nothing to do with when people are willing to buy your pictures, it has everything to do with the quality of the pictures you are willing to pass off as acceptable.  You can do like many and sell mediocre images, or you can rise about the majority of starters and produce high quality images.


----------



## KmH (Jun 25, 2014)

Jump in and charge, but to start charging you need to have a legal business with the required local, state, and federal business documentation like contracts, accounting records, model releases, property releases (for wedding/engagement venues), etc.

Consequently, the amount you charge is driven by your cost of doing business (CODB) and your cost of goods sold (COGS).
To determine those numbers you need a well researched and written business and marketing plan.

Starting & Managing a Business | The U.S. Small Business Administration | SBA.gov
Registering a Business in Virginia -- Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Taxation


----------



## SnappingShark (Jun 25, 2014)

Just remember - if you're charging, you're probably going to want insurance against accidents in the locations you work, and theft against equipment.

Just because if your equipment falls on somebody ... uh oh!


----------



## TWright33 (Jun 25, 2014)

imagemaker46 said:


> when you develop the skills to read light and shoot without a flash



Could you please explain what exactly you mean by this?


----------



## e.rose (Jun 25, 2014)

TWright33 said:


> imagemaker46 said:
> 
> 
> > when you develop the skills to read light and shoot without a flash
> ...



Read Light = Being able to really see light... what it's doing... how to manipulate it... how to use it to your advantage

Shoot without a flash = On camera flash, built in flash. I assume. But he could also mean being able to read available light, and use it, without having to blow your subjects away without flash every time. <----- That's actually much harder than people realize. When you're using natural light, there is still such a thing as good light and bad light... even in the shade... facing one way or another is still often times yields different quality light.


----------



## TWright33 (Jun 25, 2014)

e.rose said:


> Shoot without a flash = On camera flash, built in flash.



The shooting without a flash is what I was curios about.

It just seems strange to make a reference to being skilled enough to not shoot with a flash. 

I hope he was meaning not using pop up flash.


----------



## e.rose (Jun 25, 2014)

TWright33 said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > Shoot without a flash = On camera flash, built in flash.
> ...



I think that's what he meant.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jun 25, 2014)

e.rose said:


> Also, I don't know that there is a definitive answer to your question.



Of course there is.  March 13th, 2021 at 14:00 zulu time.  That is exactly when you should start charging for your photos.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jun 25, 2014)

TWright33 said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > Shoot without a flash = On camera flash, built in flash.
> ...



I meant being able to shoot in available light without using any type of flash.  So many people see something, love how it looks and throw a flash on the camera, when they look at what they saw and what they have, is not the same.  Some can't figure out why.  If you see it, you can shoot it.  I own a flash, I use it maybe .5% of the time when I'm shooting.  Learning to really see light is something that many don't take the time to do, light is photography.  

A flash changes everything.  Learning how to shoot without one will make a person a better photographer, using one after understanding light will make you a better photographer, it will help with light balance, a little flash fill on those really sunny days. There are a great many times when a flash is going to be necessary, but it does depends on what is being shot.


----------



## e.rose (Jun 25, 2014)

imagemaker46 said:


> TWright33 said:
> 
> 
> > e.rose said:
> ...



Yup. I have my flash with me all the time, but so much of what I shoot anymore, outdoors, is without one. I use other light modifiers. 

If I intentionally wanna make something more dramatic, I'll certainly throw a flash up... but I don't do that as much as I used to.

I always laugh when people accuse "natural light photographers" as not really knowing photography.

Natural light is hard to be good at, unless, like you said, you can read the light. That's something I'm still working at, but I understand it much better than I used to and it shows from my previous natural light images to the ones I do now. The only difference between the old images and the new ones is that I learned how to see the light better and how to place the modifiers when I use them.


----------



## tirediron (Jun 25, 2014)

e.rose said:


> ...I always laugh when people accuse "natural light photographers" as not really knowing photography...


A good photographer understands light.  Period.  He/she knows when _*ambient*_ light alone is sufficient, when reflectors, diffusers and scrims are necessary, and when full-on strobed light is necessary.  With one exception, every self-proclaimed "natural light" photographer I've known has been: (1) Someone who doesn't understand how to effectively use supplemental light to enhance their images and tries to excuse that ignorance by decrying it; and (2) someone who doesn't realize that there is no such thing as artificial light.  Artificial light sources?  Yes, but a photon is a photon is a photon...  They attach some sort mystique to strobed light and feel that it makes things look bad.


----------



## KmH (Jun 25, 2014)

Many cities require proof of liability insurance to register a business. Many wedding venues will require a COI (Certificate Of Insurance) and will require that the venue be added as a additional insured entity.

More and more city, county, state and federal parks require permits (and a COI with them listed) to shoot for pay.


----------



## CAP (Jun 25, 2014)

Wait till you have to have liability coverage and photographer malpractice insurance Ouch!

Did a wedding at Disney World and they require the photographer have a 1,000,000 dollar liability policy on him self.

I pay about $5,700 a year just in insurance.


----------



## TWright33 (Jun 25, 2014)

imagemaker46 said:


> I meant being able to shoot in available light without using any type of flash.



Although I understand your point behind knowing natural light and how to use it, I do not think a photographer that uses a flash is not a skilled photographer because they use a flash.

If there is no light available, what are you supposed to do?

There are instances where you need a speedlight because there isn't enough light. Like wedding receptions. (I know that you know this, but I don't understand your reasoning).


----------



## TWright33 (Jun 25, 2014)

tirediron said:


> e.rose said:
> 
> 
> > ...I always laugh when people accuse "natural light photographers" as not really knowing photography...
> ...



This is kind of the point I was trying to make.

If there isn't enough ambient light to make the image you want, then am I not skilled because I used a flash?


----------



## ruggedshutter (Jun 25, 2014)

CAP said:


> Wait till you have to have liability coverage and photographer malpractice insurance Ouch!
> 
> Did a wedding at Disney World and they require the photographer have a 1,000,000 dollar liability policy on him self.
> 
> I pay about $5,700 a year just in insurance.



I have a pretty basic business policy and my coverage has a $1M liability.  I thought that was on the low end to be honest.


----------



## e.rose (Jun 25, 2014)

TWright33 said:


> imagemaker46 said:
> 
> 
> > I meant being able to shoot in available light without using any type of flash.
> ...





TWright33 said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > e.rose said:
> ...



I don't think he was talking about those instances. I think he's talking about the instances where the light is perfect outside, but people ruin it by throwing up a flash because they don't know how to manipulate and read the abundant light that is there. 

Obviously if there isn't enough light available, you need to add some.

I could be wrong.

Image can correct me if I'm assuming incorrectly about what he said.


----------



## DeadEye (Jun 25, 2014)

When you are able to create a photograph. Just taking a properly exposed frame that is in focus don't cut it. 
 First ask the customer (Find Out) what they want then be able to deliver that to them.


----------



## e.rose (Jun 25, 2014)

CAP said:


> Wait till you have to have liability coverage and photographer malpractice insurance Ouch!



Whoops.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Jun 25, 2014)

ruggedshutter said:


> I have a pretty basic business policy and my coverage has a $1M liability.  I thought that was on the low end to be honest.




Agreed 1 mil seemed to be the min. 


To the op if you know your skills right and can take great photos in the worst conditions (not just the best conditions ) and know the legalities if your area and the federal stuff and the insurance and marketing and accounting then go for it. Chances are the worst thing that will probably happen is you fail.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jun 25, 2014)

TWright33 said:


> imagemaker46 said:
> 
> 
> > I meant being able to shoot in available light without using any type of flash.
> ...



If there is no light it is dark.  What I'm saying is that it takes a skilled photographer to really understand, read light and work with it. It does not take a skilled photographer to attach a flash or use a pop up flash to shoot an image. That's pretty basic stuff


----------



## manaheim (Jun 25, 2014)

This is one of those questions that only you can answer.

I know someone who is a wedding photographer. In my opinion, he has almost no business doing it, but he does well and makes decent money and folks love him.

It's not a matter of it being subjective, so much as it being a matter  of what the market will bear, and whether or not you can personally fill a need in that space.

Asking a bunch of random forum yahoos when you are ready is not the way to go about this.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jun 26, 2014)

manaheim, you are quite correct in everything you said. It is difficult for anyone to tell anyone with a camera if they are ready to make a business out of it, there is only one person that can truly decide.  I know a lot young guys(in their early 20's) that that would be doing really well if they of been around 20 years ago, but in these times they are trying to cut up a smaller pie, and unfortunately they are fighting for the crumbs.

There are holes in every field of photography that can be filled, but generally, it's going to be a stressful battle finding the ones that can generate enough clients/work to maintain a workable and successful business.


----------



## tirediron (Jun 26, 2014)

TWright33 said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > e.rose said:
> ...


That's my thinking!  Skill is creating a pleasing image.  Full stop.


----------



## manicmike (Jun 26, 2014)

In my area, everyone that owns a camera has a business and charges $50 for a session for crappy photos. So, I'd say go for it now. Everyone else is.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jun 26, 2014)

TWright33 said:


> imagemaker46 said:
> 
> 
> > I meant being able to shoot in available light without using any type of flash.
> ...



Wow... really?  Photography 101 here.  If there is no light available, you sacrifice a virgin to the volcano, appeasing Tirediron's anger so he brings back the sun.  Man.  Like page one of the manual there buddy.


----------



## TWright33 (Jun 26, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> Man.  Like page one of the manual there buddy.



I'm not sure what's going on in this thread now.

I don't know who understands the context of my question lol.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jun 26, 2014)

TWright33 said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > Man. Like page one of the manual there buddy.
> ...



Well my own answer was tongue in cheek of course. Everybody knows Tirediron will only bring back the sun if you toss in two virgins.

Ok, but on a more serious note, I think TI is referring to situations where there is more than enough natural light but people will go ahead and use flash anyway often with detremental results because they don't understand how to use the light they have on hand.  There are some situations naturally where you don't have enough light or you do actually want the effect a flash will provide - and in those cases of course you'll need one.

But if I understand TI's original point, a good photographer should understand the difference between the two.


----------



## photog4life (Jun 27, 2014)

I am in no means a professional.
Now that I am done with the disclaimer. Look at some pictures that photographers in your area have shot. If you look at those pictures and feel you truly can do BETTER then them then start charging. That being said, most people start as an assistant on shoots or as a second shooter. Going into this alone does not seem like a good idea. You need hands on experience not just a technical understanding of it. Atleast that is how I feel. You wanna climb up the ladder.


Again not a professional. Go ahead and ignore everything I said for all I care. This was just my two cents


----------



## e.rose (Jun 27, 2014)

photog4life said:


> I am in no means a professional.
> Now that I am done with the disclaimer. Look at some pictures that photographers in your area have shot. If you look at those pictures and feel you truly can do BETTER then them then start charging. That being said, most people start as an assistant on shoots or as a second shooter. Going into this alone does not seem like a good idea. You need hands on experience not just a technical understanding of it. Atleast that is how I feel. You wanna climb up the ladder.
> 
> 
> Again not a professional. Go ahead and ignore everything I said for all I care. This was just my two cents



I'm gonna go ahead and disagree.

There's always gonna be someone better and someone worse than you.

Just because you can make better photographs than the worst person in your area, doesn't mean you're ready go to into business. 

Also, I'm just gonna go ahead and say that you can totally go into business not having been an assistant.

I did.

My hands on experience was 90% my own shoots.

I didn't actually really start to assist on shoots until I moved to Nashville last year, and I had been shooting for about 4 years and in business already.  

Not saying it's not a good idea... I'm just saying that's not what is standing between you and your being able to start a business.

That being said... if you're going into WEDDINGS... yeah... DEFINITELY second shoot first before you dive into that... but portraits? You don't *need* to have assisted someone else to get good at that. And there's less risk in portraits, usually.


----------



## fooby (Jun 27, 2014)

I think learning how to properly use flash is one of the most important things to learn, especially for somebody going pro. Sure, if you're under your own time, you can wait for the perfect light, but if a client wants you to deliver an image, they don't care if it's a flat day or if the light isn't perfect - you need to be able to make it perfect!


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jun 27, 2014)

I'm not really sure how to set the flash I own. I bought one in case I need one. I can set up studio lights and work with them.  I don't consider it one of the most important things to know, certainly not in my field of photography.  The light isn't always perfect and the client should expect the best images possible, regardless of the situation. That is part of what professionals are expected to do.


----------



## gsgary (Jun 27, 2014)

fooby said:


> I think learning how to properly use flash is one of the most important things to learn, especially for somebody going pro. Sure, if you're under your own time, you can wait for the perfect light, but if a client wants you to deliver an image, they don't care if it's a flat day or if the light isn't perfect - you need to be able to make it perfect!



Here's a fantastic photographer that never used flash, here favourite setting was F2.8 1/60
Interactive: The complete Jane Bown: a lifetime in photographs | Art and design | theguardian.com


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jun 27, 2014)

I think you just know, at least I did. Remembering back, I know the first time I went out on the ice to photograph the ceremonial pregame puck drop (which was of a well known retired MLB player) I was nervous and excited and remember thinking, please just don't let me fall on my ass in front of this entire arena full of people! LOL But I didn't have any doubt that I could do it. 

I don't know that you can go completely by people wanting your pictures, although that gives you some idea that you're good at it, but I think you have to be able to look at your own work and know it's good. How does what you do compare to other working pros in your area? that might give you an idea if you can compete and be successful. Or maybe try to find a pro in your area or take a class to consult with the pro/instructor or find some way to get some feedback on your portfolio.



And I don't use a flash much either, you often can't at event level and I don't do studio work - it depends on what you do.


----------



## dennybeall (Jun 27, 2014)

If you're taking photos for your own reason then no charge, if you're taking pictures for someone else's reasons then you charge. You give them pictures that meet their needs then you did it right. No client has ever asked me what "f' stop, ISO or camera model.
It's really neither rocket science nor as complex as made out to be. Getting really great photos is but that's a different subject.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jun 27, 2014)

photog4life said:


> I am in no means a professional.  Now that I am done with the disclaimer.



Ok, not a professional myself so I'll include my own disclaimer: Must be 18 or over to participate.  Offer not valid in all states.  Offer void where prohibited.  Price does not include tax, title, or license.  Some assembly required.  Items may be sold separately, batteries not included.  Objects in the mirror may be closer than they appear as indicated by the loud crunching sound.  If conditions persist contact your physician.  Keep out of the reach of children.  All rights reserved, but some wrongs are still available.  



> Look at some pictures that photographers in your area have shot. If you look at those pictures and feel you truly can do BETTER then them then start charging. That being said, most people start as an assistant on shoots or as a second shooter. Going into this alone does not seem like a good idea. You need hands on experience not just a technical understanding of it. At least that is how I feel. You wanna climb up the ladder.
> 
> 
> Again not a professional. Go ahead and ignore everything I said for all I care. This was just my two cents



Well, just my humble opinion of course but if you have to ask if your ready to turn pro, your not ready to turn pro.  Actually making money as a professional photographer is a whole lot more about being able to run a successful business, marketing yourself, and building a client base.  Finding out what niche you can fill in your local market place and filling it.    The guys that I know who shoot for a living often tell me it's about 80-90% about business and marketing, and 10-20% photography.

Most of the folks who I know who do shoot professionally tell me that it took years for them to get established and build a sufficient client base to be able to make a go of it full time instead of having to work other jobs to make ends meet, and frankly the number of people who can make a full time career out of it is fairly small.  So when your ready to go pro you'll be at a point where you know it and nobody else can talk you out of it.  Just my 2 cents worth of course, YMMV.


----------



## photog4life (Jun 27, 2014)

e.rose said:


> I'm gonna go ahead and disagree.
> 
> There's always gonna be someone better and someone worse than you.
> 
> ...


What you said makes sense. 

 I thought he had said early in the thread that he was going to shoot weddings so I was going off that. I'm not even sure how you would second shoot portraits. lol it seems like it would be awkward.


----------

