Somebody asked a question here about pricing photo usage within the last few months, but a) I couldn't seem to get the search feature to work for me, and b) I went back through the last ten pages and couldn't find the earlier thread. So forgive me if this is redundant, repetitive and a rehash of the previous thread.
I've been asked to create a huge panoramic photo for a museum exhibit that will involve scouting a location, then taking many images to be stitched (the final image is to be 11' tall and over 80' in length) into a grand panorama. I can't imagine I'd ever have a use for this photo pano, so it'll just be something the client will use and then it'll disappear forever. In other words, I don't mind giving them all rights to the image once complete (it's not as crazy as it sounds, given the nature of the project). Anybody got any ideas what a project like this is worth? Or is there an online (free) resource that would have the ability to structure a price for this gig? I did some hunting online and didn't come up with anything pertinent.
Just to be clear: I'm only looking for advice as to what to charge to take and let them use the photo(s). They'll be handling the printing of this beast.
Todd I just emailed some info to you for a billboard printer that can do up to 16' by 100' seamless; might be a good place to start. They use inkjet - must be a huge printer
John
Id be wary of giving up rights, you never know how an image might wind up--some outside party might see it and come up with another use for it, and be willing to pay you twice as much. If youve lost the rights, you're outta luck. But, if you must, you should charge by the square inch, since there will be 126,720 of them
dude don't give up your rights to this photo, I don't care waht it is bro, don't give up your rights to the image, YOU ARE THE ONE TO TAKE THE PHOTOS,
holy sheizzleie myb pixxlie 11' by 80' that is mostrous, I would take the maximum price range of an extremely large print and double even triple it. and that is just for their right to use the image for one print. let alone any other purpose.
I am not an expert on this stuff as you all may know, but I do care about the photographer getting what he truly deserves and is worthy of. Especially as good as your photos are Todd.
While I recognize that we can't discuss specific pricing, it seems that starting with your day rate might be a good place for the "working" part, and then add on more for a creative fee. And, as others are saying, I'd be clear about whether this is a "work for hire" venture (which means you give up the rights to the images) or not...
Good luck,
Tim!
Posted by Todd Caudle on July 31, 2008 at 10:45 AM
I wasn't aware of not being able to discuss prices. Is that true? I know we're encouraged to use the classifieds page for selling stuff, but I didn't know we couldn't talk prices among us pals.
Thanks for the suggestions, everyone. I shot them a price, and now I wait to see if the client approves. Once I'm successful, I'll let y'all know what the project is.
Posted by Craig Schultz on July 31, 2008 at 12:06 PM
I'm surprised to hear we can't discuss pricing either; seems a bit off given the nature of the forum. Now selling stuff is completely different, but a discussion on how to price our photography with other photographers seems like a completely legitimate topic and would be encouraged.
Posted by Mel Ladewig on July 31, 2008 at 12:43 PM
It is discouraged to prevent the appearance of the forum acting as a place for price fixing in the market. I can't find where the rule is posted at the moment but I've seen it mentioned before. I guess I don't really understand how that has been a problem. We such a small group even withing the nature photography field that I can't see the group having the ability to fix market prices or possibly attract the ire of the government, especially when applications like fotoquote are sitting out there doing this exact thing.
I don't recall where the guidelines are displayed on NPN, but my recollection is that discussion of specific pricing is discouraged so as not to risk the appearance of "price-fixing" or other anti-competitive practices. It might be worth posting a question over in the General Discussion category if it's important to anyone to find out more.
I think there's a big difference between sharing general pricing strategies/guidelines and conspiring to drive prices up or down. I think there's a reasonable way to offer advice and guidance and still adhere to the spirit of Jim's posting guidelines.
In the view of the law and the free market, this forum is a collection of nature photographers. Not a group of friends with a common hobby (most of us anyway), but a group of competitors in the same business. If we were to discuss among ourselves how to collectively raise the price for our product, then we could be engaged in price fixing - an illegal activity. If we were to do such on Jim's site, then Jim could be dragged into any legal action that may result. So discussions of specific pricing on the site is discouraged.
As to Todd's question - I have no clue how to price things, but I'd be hesitant to give exclusive rights.
Posted by John Klotz on August 1, 2008 at 12:45 AM
Price fixing? Jezz it seems the market place is taking care of that! Todd, sounds like a good gig though... congrats!
John
Congrats, Todd! I just wish the rest of us could learn from the discussion taking place via email. In my opinion, the discussion of pricing of unique works (these are not commodities or other generic products easily substituted) on an open forum could in no way be construed as price fixing. Now, if five or six of you could blockade access to Maroon Bells, limit the market to your photos, and then collude on price, we might have a problem. The definition of market value includes the component of knowledgeable buyers and sellers reaching an agreement on price. The fact that a market participant happens to learn a competitor's pricing philosophy does not imply price fixing. There are no agreements taking place (just a sharing of knowledge), and there is no way to control or influence a market with a virtually endless supply of product and participants.
A couple of definitions of collusion:
"A secret agreement between two or more parties for a fraudulent, illegal, or deceitful purpose."
"A non-competitive agreement between rivals that attempts to disrupt the market's equilibrium. By collaborating with each other, rival firms look to alter the price of a good to their advantage. The parties may collectively choose to restrict the supply of a good, and/or agree to increase its price, in order to maximize profits. Groups may also collude by sharing private information, allowing them to benefit from insider knowledge."
I don't buy the price fixing idea but I do think those discussions would be better served in the marketing forums.
You might try asking what their budget estimate it. Most people will be honest and tell you a ballpark. Let them know you want the work, need to eat but don't want to price it out of the ballpark. Once they tell you then you can start negotiating. If they want to pay $500 then better to know that ahead of time and not waste either parties time.
Discussion
16 repliesI've been asked to create a huge panoramic photo for a museum exhibit that will involve scouting a location, then taking many images to be stitched (the final image is to be 11' tall and over 80' in length) into a grand panorama. I can't imagine I'd ever have a use for this photo pano, so it'll just be something the client will use and then it'll disappear forever. In other words, I don't mind giving them all rights to the image once complete (it's not as crazy as it sounds, given the nature of the project). Anybody got any ideas what a project like this is worth? Or is there an online (free) resource that would have the ability to structure a price for this gig? I did some hunting online and didn't come up with anything pertinent.
Thanks in advance!
John
holy sheizzleie myb pixxlie 11' by 80' that is mostrous, I would take the maximum price range of an extremely large print and double even triple it. and that is just for their right to use the image for one print. let alone any other purpose.
I am not an expert on this stuff as you all may know, but I do care about the photographer getting what he truly deserves and is worthy of. Especially as good as your photos are Todd.
Good luck,
Tim!
Thanks for the suggestions, everyone. I shot them a price, and now I wait to see if the client approves. Once I'm successful, I'll let y'all know what the project is.
I think there's a big difference between sharing general pricing strategies/guidelines and conspiring to drive prices up or down. I think there's a reasonable way to offer advice and guidance and still adhere to the spirit of Jim's posting guidelines.
In the view of the law and the free market, this forum is a collection of nature photographers. Not a group of friends with a common hobby (most of us anyway), but a group of competitors in the same business. If we were to discuss among ourselves how to collectively raise the price for our product, then we could be engaged in price fixing - an illegal activity. If we were to do such on Jim's site, then Jim could be dragged into any legal action that may result. So discussions of specific pricing on the site is discouraged.
As to Todd's question - I have no clue how to price things, but I'd be hesitant to give exclusive rights.
John
Congrats, Todd! I just wish the rest of us could learn from the discussion taking place via email. In my opinion, the discussion of pricing of unique works (these are not commodities or other generic products easily substituted) on an open forum could in no way be construed as price fixing. Now, if five or six of you could blockade access to Maroon Bells, limit the market to your photos, and then collude on price, we might have a problem. The definition of market value includes the component of knowledgeable buyers and sellers reaching an agreement on price. The fact that a market participant happens to learn a competitor's pricing philosophy does not imply price fixing. There are no agreements taking place (just a sharing of knowledge), and there is no way to control or influence a market with a virtually endless supply of product and participants.
A couple of definitions of collusion:
"A secret agreement between two or more parties for a fraudulent, illegal, or deceitful purpose."
"A non-competitive agreement between rivals that attempts to disrupt the market's equilibrium. By collaborating with each other, rival firms look to alter the price of a good to their advantage. The parties may collectively choose to restrict the supply of a good, and/or agree to increase its price, in order to maximize profits. Groups may also collude by sharing private information, allowing them to benefit from insider knowledge."
I just don't see it. OK I'm done.
You might try asking what their budget estimate it. Most people will be honest and tell you a ballpark. Let them know you want the work, need to eat but don't want to price it out of the ballpark. Once they tell you then you can start negotiating. If they want to pay $500 then better to know that ahead of time and not waste either parties time.