# Another noob wondering how much to charge :P



## owen07 (Jan 13, 2012)

Hello! I signed up about 20 mins ago.

Yeah, I know its been over several times, but still no straight answer. I guess there isn't one really.


Basically, My brother is a Football Player (Soccer Player) for Blackburn Rovers, and has just got his pro contract for the 1st team. His Agents have just set up a new website and want me to do the photography for them.

Now, see, I have been using DSLR for video/films for a year and a half now and know about composition, lighting, exposure etc. But I have no clue when it comes to 'photography' itself. eg: Use of Flash, portraits, etc

I have told them this but the still want to pay me properly for my 'troubles'.


The jobs they are offering:

First (Monday 16th) - Office/ Employee photos, in the office (I dont have a flash gun, just internal and a diffusion bag thingy)

Mainly - Athlete portraits and action photography. Now this I will be fine at as I will do this outdoors and do MTB and BMX photography.



I just need a baseline figure basically. Totally unsure about how much to charge. Was thinking £100 for the employees shoot and like £75-£150 per Athlete shoot gig. But again, I have no idea what your suppose to charge.

Don't forget... these guys have money, they have several Athletes under their belt. But im still and noob at this thing. anything else, let me know.

Thanks
Owen


----------



## o hey tyler (Jan 13, 2012)

I would insist that you not charge at all. You don't have the equipment or the experience to charge 100 pounds IMHO. I'd do it for free, take your time, make mistakes, and learn from the experience.

You're a noob, so you should really not be charging. Or else you might be in legal hot water.


----------



## jwbryson1 (Jan 13, 2012)

*£75,000*


----------



## mishele (Jan 13, 2012)

$2,000


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 13, 2012)

£10,000,000.  Land the deal, and you're set for life.


----------



## owen07 (Jan 13, 2012)

Thats what I was saying to them. Id do it for free for a little while before im completely comfortable shooting.



The kit I own is:

Canon 60D

Sigma 24-70 f/2.8

Sigma 70-200 f/2.8

Apeture 3 and Photoshop CS5.1



They are used to being quoted £700+ for photos apparently.


----------



## gsgary (Jan 13, 2012)

I charge £45 per hour but i have everything needed ie. studio flash and lots of camera equipment and the knowledge of how to mix ambient and flash or just studio flash, but for this i would give them a set sum which would work out a lot more than £45 per hour


----------



## owen07 (Jan 13, 2012)

I appreciate you posting silly figures, but if you have noting good to post, please dont post it. I am seriously looking for some real enlightenment here. Its a steep leaning curve for me, and could get me some very good contacts.

Thanks


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 13, 2012)

What you own is not relevant. It's what you can deliver to the customer.

One photographer could command £5,000 with less gear than you.  Another may spend £20,000 on gear and won't even be considered for the job.

Knowing how to use a camera, lens, lighting, etc. and how to post-process is one thing.  Running a business is a whole other universe.


----------



## owen07 (Jan 13, 2012)

So if I say like maybe, £20ph? do you include travel expenses, or put it on top?


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 13, 2012)

owen07 said:


> I appreciate you posting silly figures, but if you have noting good to post, please dont post it. I am seriously looking for some real enlightenment here. Its a steep leaning curve for me, and could get me some very good contacts.
> 
> Thanks



If you can't take it here, you ain't gonna be able to take it out in the real world.


----------



## Joey_Ricard (Jan 13, 2012)

Just take some excellent natural light shots, present them for use. Then maybe they will ask (or you can offer) to do more player profile images for a fee.

Yes ago when I first started doing web graphics, I did a couple of sites free for a couple of buddies that I raced with. Next thing you know, I had everybody asking for me to do sites for them.

Your work needs to speak for itself quality wise.


----------



## tirediron (Jan 13, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> I would insist that you not charge at all. You don't have the equipment or the experience to charge 100 pounds IMHO...


The old expression, "If you have to ask how much..."  Really, are you even allowed to charge?  Are you authorized or licensed by the appropriate govenment agencies to engage in trade?  What about your contract?  One of the reasons that big companies like to use new/inexperienced people for jobs like this is because they believe that they can push them around.  Have you discussed usage and licensing?  What are your rights and obligations with respect to copyright for commissioned work?

As mentioned, you don't have the equipment, experience or resouces to engage in this undertaking.  In fact, given the nature of it, I would go one step further than Tyler and bow out totally.  

To give you an idea, based on my pricing, I would probably charge ~$100/head for the head shots, and significantly more for the atheletes.  Of course use would be a huge factor.  How/where will they be used, for how long etc.  As you can see, there are a LOT of moving parts to a situation like this.  It's not just "How much". 

Good luck!


----------



## gsgary (Jan 13, 2012)

I went on a masterclass with Brian Griffin he shot the Olympic portraits for free because he didn't want anyone else to shoot them except him
briangriffin.co.uk
I would charge more than £20, travel is on top, if i lived nearer i would have come and given you a hand


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jan 13, 2012)

Do it for free and ask for free tickets.


----------



## owen07 (Jan 13, 2012)

I get a free season ticket and a players lounge pass anyway


----------



## owen07 (Jan 13, 2012)

tirediron said:


> o hey tyler said:
> 
> 
> > I would insist that you not charge at all. You don't have the equipment or the experience to charge 100 pounds IMHO...
> ...



Thanks, that was insightful, I didn't know about this. Ill look into that when I next talk to them!


----------



## jwbryson1 (Jan 13, 2012)

owen07 said:


> Now, see, I have been using DSLR for video/films for a year and a half now *and know about composition, lighting, exposure* etc. But I *have no clue when it comes to 'photography' itself. eg: Use of Flash, portraits, etc.*



These seems inconsistent to me, hence my "silly" response.  I'm not sure how to respond to this but I think Sparky nailed it.


----------



## gsgary (Jan 13, 2012)

owen07 said:


> I get a free season ticket and a players lounge pass anyway



That must be worth all of £10


----------



## owen07 (Jan 13, 2012)

gsgary said:


> owen07 said:
> 
> 
> > I get a free season ticket and a players lounge pass anyway
> ...



At the rate they are going, I would aggree!


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Jan 13, 2012)

jwbryson1 said:


> owen07 said:
> 
> 
> > Now, see, I have been using DSLR for video/films for a year and a half now *and know about composition, lighting, exposure* etc. But I *have no clue when it comes to 'photography' itself. eg: Use of Flash, portraits, etc.*
> ...



I see no real inconsistencies here. Video/film and photography are not lit the same way.


But my response would be very close to the one tirediron gave you. A lot of the fee has to do with usage aspects and unless those are nailed down we can't really help you.


----------



## Destin (Jan 13, 2012)

Honestly man, turn it down. Maybe offer to do the action stuff, because you have some experience in it. But shooting the portraits is not going to go well. You'd need backdrops, stands, lighting equipment, and knowledge of how to use it. I would simply decline the job and reccomend they hire a professional who can deliver professional results. Seriously. 

Putting bad work out there with your name on it will come back to bite you in the future once you are able to produce better images. It just doesn't seem like you've yet reached a point where charging for your work, or even doing a job like this, is feasible.


----------



## MLeeK (Jan 13, 2012)

I know you are frustrated as hell with these answers, but the truth is we can't tell ANYONE what to charge. It's based on your expenses, cost of doing business, COG and your skill. While I may charge a $250 sitting fee, someone else may be charging $100 and yet another $500. It's a very personal number and it's based on some cold hard dollar figures and on the value you put on your time and skill.


----------



## ph0enix (Jan 13, 2012)

jwbryson1 said:


> owen07 said:
> 
> 
> > Now, see, I have been using DSLR for video/films for a year and a half now *and know about composition, lighting, exposure* etc. But I *have no clue when it comes to 'photography' itself. eg: Use of Flash, portraits, etc.*
> ...



I was wondering about that too.  Contradicting statements!


----------



## owen07 (Jan 13, 2012)

ph0enix said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > owen07 said:
> ...





Not really, It may seem the same, but the way you do it is slightly different.


----------



## etnad0 (Jan 13, 2012)

owen07 said:


> ph0enix said:
> 
> 
> > jwbryson1 said:
> ...



Definitely not the same at all. I do both and lighting for film is much easier than lighting a photo shoot, at least in my opinion. Often in film you want shadows, underexposure, etc. depending on the mood of the scene. We shot a film scene last week where the main character's face was half in shadow the entire time because we don't want the audience to see who he is right away. I've never seen a photo shoot done that way, but I could be wrong..


----------



## ph0enix (Jan 13, 2012)

etnad0 said:


> owen07 said:
> 
> 
> > ph0enix said:
> ...



It makes sense.  I thought about it after posting and realized that I had probably jumped the gun on that one.


----------



## gsgary (Jan 13, 2012)

etnad0 said:


> owen07 said:
> 
> 
> > ph0enix said:
> ...




Photography is all about shadow play


----------



## etnad0 (Jan 13, 2012)

gsgary said:


> etnad0 said:
> 
> 
> > owen07 said:
> ...



From what I understand, in most cases it's about keeping it off of the person or subject. From what I've read on the forums, most times harsh shadows on the subject are bad.


----------



## gsgary (Jan 13, 2012)

etnad0 said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > etnad0 said:
> ...




Well you have heard wrong, without shadows there is no definition, harsh shadow are ok if used in the right way
Here's a CD cover i shot for a local singer song writer, she wanted harsh light


----------



## Vtec44 (Jan 13, 2012)

etnad0 said:


> From what I understand, in most cases it's about keeping it off of the person or subject.



...then you have flat lighting.  Flat lighting is good for certain things but not always desirable.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jan 13, 2012)

etnad0 said:


> From what I understand, in most cases it's about keeping it off of the person or subject. From what I've read on the forums, most times harsh shadows on the subject are bad.



Depends on what you are trying to do! Sometimes it can create really striking photos.. if done properly and intentionally! The problem with harsh light is that it is usually used UNINTENTIONALLY.


----------



## orljustin (Jan 13, 2012)

owen07 said:


> Not really, It may seem the same, but the way you do it is slightly different.



Yeah, those strobes are a ***** to use on video shoots.


----------



## tirediron (Jan 13, 2012)

orljustin said:


> owen07 said:
> 
> 
> > Not really, It may seem the same, but the way you do it is slightly different.
> ...


:lmao:


----------

