# High res digital files and web images



## SHaller (Mar 1, 2012)

I have done a bit of research and have read up on some other threads. I have an idea of what to do, but I wanted a little bit of insight. I want to be able to offer high res digital files to a client, but I don't want it to cut too deeply into print sales. I am not asking "how much to charge", but my question is if I should offer digital files at a high price, or should I make it an incentive. For example, I would say that you can't buy the files, but if you buy x amount worth of prints, then I will give you the files. Of course this is going to be a somewhat substantial number. I am leaning towards the second option but I want to know what has worked best for you.

Also, how do you handle giving clients facebook images. Personally, I feel that I should only give them the images after they purchase a fairly low amount of prints. Probably around $200. I just don't want to be completely screwed if a client is only hiring me to get pictures for her facebook. Let me know what you think.


----------



## SHaller (Mar 1, 2012)

To make things a little clearer, when am referring to incentive part, I am talking about a number that isn't reached very often from print sales.


----------



## KmH (Mar 1, 2012)

I used a minimum purchase total as the qualifier for the priviledge of buying a disc of high resolution images, and the disc was not inexpensive ($1200, and up).

High resolution images provided on disc kill print sales.

With every retail photography session I did, I included a license and disc of watermarked low res images (600 pixels on the long side) for social network/online use.


----------



## CCericola (Mar 1, 2012)

Yes, the profit margin on prints is GYNORMOUS but you are not selling pieces of paper, you are selling pieces of art. So the digital file should be priced well beyond a piece of paper. (This is for retail portraits or fine art photography). 

I would suggest the cost of a digital file be the same as your average sale. So if you average $600 in products from a shoot then the digital fle is $600. For web sized pictures, offer them free with a minimum purchase but watermark them and they only get the files they chose for print not the whole kit and kaboodal.


----------



## SHaller (Mar 1, 2012)

KmH said:


> I used a minimum purchase total as the qualifier for the priviledge of buying a disc of high resolution images, and the disc was not inexpensive ($1200, and up).
> 
> High resolution images provided on disc kill print sales.
> 
> With every retail photography session I did, I included a license and disc of watermarked low res images (600 pixels on the long side) for social network/online use.



So you are saying you set a minimum print purchase before you even make high res files available for purchase?


----------



## KmH (Mar 1, 2012)

They could meet the minimum purchase requirement with any combination of purchases. Prints, albums, press books, matting and framing, etc.

But yes, they had to meet the minimum purchase requirement before they qualified to buy a high-res disc.


----------



## orljustin (Mar 3, 2012)

I wouldn't hire anyone doing any of this nonsense.  Like most consumers today, I want a disc of images to use as I like.  One price, end of story.


----------



## KmH (Mar 4, 2012)

Which would disqualify you from being one of my customers.

That is a subject that doesn't come up much here on TPF, qualifying customers.

I didn't shoot for everyone that wanted me to shoot for them. Many potential customers didn't qualify for my services, and got referred to other photographers more likely to meet their needs than me.


----------



## orljustin (Mar 4, 2012)

That's too bad, as I am more than willing to adequately compensate.  I'm just not willing to play nickel and dime games so you feel "valued".


----------



## Canuk (Mar 4, 2012)

orljustin said:


> That's too bad, as I am more than willing to adequately compensate.  I'm just not willing to play nickel and dime games so you feel "valued".


Has little to do w/ nickel and diming and a lot to do w/ knowing your market. Your definition of adequately compensating could be way different that mine, or someone else. If you don't like the way someone is running their business then you go elsewhere. If you don't want to have restrictions, placed on you or your order, then you may have to go somewhere else.That's the beauty of a free market society.


----------



## SHaller (Mar 4, 2012)

Don't provoke the troll!!


----------

