Home › Forums › Am I a Fauxtog? › Need some critiques :)
- This topic has 31 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 1 month ago by
fstopper89.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 11, 2013 at 3:12 pm #7656
CapturetheMoon
ParticipantHere are a few photos from recent shoots… please tell me how I can improve and also how much I should/could charge? I’m not sure if I am charging enough for my time. Thanks in advance!
March 11, 2013 at 8:06 pm #7662Intuition
ParticipantRegardless of your photo’s ( which need technical work themselves) what you should charge shouldn’t be solely based on the opinions of internet people, nor solely on your talent level. Now before everyone screams at me 😛 I mean that you need to figure out the cost of business. You have taxes to figure, equipment wear and tear, travel, marketing, insurance, household/studio bills, and more and that will get you to a baseline to ‘break-even’. From there you have to figure how often you can or want to shoot, and how much you’ll want to take home in salary. Add your wanted salary + your bills and divide by shoots per year and that’s what you should make off each client round about. I’m terrible at math so ehhh feel free to fix any of that. It’s not just picking an arbitrary number and hoping it works.
March 11, 2013 at 8:18 pm #7663ParticipantHaha, thanks. I wasn’t asking for a specific number… more like a $ $$ $$$ $$$$ type thing lol…
Mostly trying to see what bracket I fall in to.
Thank you 🙂
March 12, 2013 at 11:23 am #7702IHF
ParticipantSeriously, you are going to laugh at Intuition’s advice? There’s no “bracket” to fall into when pricing. Pricing isn’t based on skill, especially when just beginning. It’s a careful formula of costs, vs hours working, vs product sales, vs salary. It’s a formula that only you can figure out, because only you know what your cost of doing business is. Your state’s minimum wage, licensing, taxes, and sales tax laws vary from state to state. Insurance, file storage costs, web presence costs, marketing costs, printing and packaging costs, legal costs, equipment and maintenance costs, etc all vary from tog to tog. Demographics, and skill come into play as well, but pricing for profit, is just that. As your experience and business grow, so do your costs, so pricing should be visited regularly. On average when a legit part time photography business starts, they need to charge $100 + to $200+ per session just to clear minimum wage. But, this again is just a round about figure because of so many different variables. Here is a business calculator. Enter your numbers honestly, and it will figure out your cost per assignment and what you would need to charge per session/assignment to make the salary you need/desire. Keep in mind that even just hobbyists need to break even, and any profit per year needs to be claimed federally, and once again your state and local tax laws vary.
https://nppa.org/calculatorIf you’re not serious enough about your photography to be legal, protect yourself and your clients, and price for profit, then… Well… You don’t care, and I don’t care and your photography is irrelevant. I look forward to your reply. If you are serious, and care about being a legit tog for hire, I will take the time to go through your photos and give a through critique.
March 12, 2013 at 1:01 pm #7705nairbynairb
ParticipantBased on those pictures alone? I probably wouldn’t charge people for those.
You have focus issues, colour issues, and composition issues.
The only picture I really like of them all is the one with the girl laying on the branch. (and maybe the toddler on the bridge, for the colour and expression – not the composition)
The baby in the mirror has weird colour, making the baby look like she has jaundice.
In no way do I mean you should stop taking photos… just don’t charge yet. I don’t think you’re where you need to be to be selling your product.March 12, 2013 at 1:23 pm #7708ParticipantYea it’s not about brackets. You won’t ever make a living off that. If you had a restaurant you wouldn’t just arbitrarily pick menu prices, you’d pick them from figuring out food and salary costs, and then think about quality and what you think people would pay for the quality of your food. I got my payscale down relatively cheap ( 200 dollars a client x 4 a week) only because we’re military and we have an allotment ( BAH) for housing and what not. So I don’t technically have to worry about making sure I get enough to have a place to live. Without that, I was averaging 600 each client. 200 is also the starting point, what I have to make each time to average out to about 20,000 a year in profits. I can adjust from there. But you have to do this stuff to run ANY successful business. Believe me, I hate all this stuff, i’d much rather just “take pretty Pictures” and be done with it all. lol
I just quickly did the NPAA one IHF linked, and came out with round about the same figures. 197 vs. my 194. This is all without paying for studio space all that, that’s where my business will change and grow. A dedicated studio space outside my home. 🙂 It’s in my 5 year business plan 😉
March 12, 2013 at 1:52 pm #7709ParticipantThanks everyone… I’m not thinking about it as a full-time, only income career. It’s just something I enjoy and like to do on the side. I never thought of it as not based on skill level, but as a profilee level. Thank you for that. I am charging $50 now per session so I can practice. I have only been or acting for a year and I can see major improvements already. I know I still have a whole lot to learn, but I am proud of what I am doing currently. In the beginning I struggled with lighting and coloring… Believe it or not its gotten a lot better! Lol. Please continue to critique them. I never thought about the baby looking like she has jaundice! Lol I actually used a preset for that effect but I haven’t used it since.
March 12, 2013 at 1:53 pm #7710ParticipantProfit**
March 12, 2013 at 1:54 pm #7711ParticipantPracticing** ugh stupid phone!!
March 12, 2013 at 2:31 pm #7712fstopper89
ParticipantI noticed some focus issues and color/exposure on the skin. I do like the child lying down, with the blue eyes. The photos are not all bad at all. If I were you I would do plenty of more practice and like the others said, figure in what it would cost you, and price from there. For right now offer shoots as portfolio-building shoots and make people aware of that. Personally, charging when your goal is to just get practice is “fauxtographer-ish” but your images are not really lacking skill so it kind of falls into a gray area, in my opinion. They just need some technical improvements.
I am also doing photography as a side business because right now I can’t make a living off of it. Maybe I’ll be there someday but not yet. I will be getting busier now that the weather is warming up here.
March 12, 2013 at 2:52 pm #7714ParticipantIf you are currently only in this to learn photography (and it looks as though you are, now that I have looked at your photography), then why are you in business shooting for others? When learning you should shoot for yourself, and only after having a good understanding of the technical aspects, and the ability to make good SOOC shots, editing, lighting, light modification, color managing etc BEFORE you offer your services to people. It’s not necessary to have clients and millions of different faces to work with, when learning the basics. It’s actually very hurtful to your learning process to take on clients rather than shooting for yourself. Shooting for others takes on a whole different dynamic than shooting for yourself does, and all the more important stuff you need to learn (your foundation), will take a back seat to marketing, people skills, customer service,and what not. This is a road taken by a lot of people. Get a camera, take some pictures, learn some sort of short cut editing, start having people request you take their pictures, start charging, start getting more requests, start charging more, fumble around for a few as the burn out kicks in, and then POOF done.
Taking the time to build a good understanding of how to photograph and building that technical foundation is a must if you want to be successful. Without it, you only have a business based on having a camera, and relying on people’s emotions to sell your products and services, just like all the fauxs. It’s the short and fun easy way to go about it, and as long as you aren’t in it for the long haul. Go for it, because people seem to have a blast doing just that. It’s easy because people are already personally invested in their pictures before the session even takes place. The photos are sold as soon as you click because themselves and their loved ones are in the photos. That’s why it’s so important to strive to always offer quality, otherwise you will never legitimately be profitable. You’ll be stuck being a cheap busy tog until you burn out, and move on to something else. This is THE definition of fauxtography.
Currently, just by going by what was said, and your photography, it seems to me you are in this just to make some fast easy under the table cash. You’re not in it to earn a living or even a part time income on any sort of long term basis, and you are not in it to learn either.
Some things to think about:
Client photographer contracts are very important to protect both parties involved
personal property insurance will not cover your equipment (camera, computer, externals, lights etc) if the equipment is used to make money
If you aren’t paying federal taxes, and/or do not have a state tax ID and someone reports this to either your state or federally, they will go by the income that is actually reported by other togs in your area to figure out what you owe, especially if you don’t keep records, or have a separate account set up for your photography. Devastating stories like this happen more and more every day
I’m sure others will have even more to add.
O.K. so you just got lectured… I apologize because I know this isn’t what you were after. Just know, that I may hate fauxtography, but I don’t hate the people that create it. I know it is due to a lack of understanding/knowledge and literally thousands of people make the same mistakes. What makes you different, is that you inquired. That shows me you really DO care, and that’s why I took the time to reply. I don’t want you joining all the others who are missing out on what photography really is. Missing out on learning this wonderful medium. If you have any questions at all, or need any help understanding anything, I’m here, and I’ll try to answer to the best of my ability.
March 13, 2013 at 12:51 am #7758kbee
ParticipantThe others have fully covered all the boring, frightening nitty gritty of what it takes to start a real, honest photography business. I second all of their posts. They don’t bring it up to scare you off, but to really give you an idea of how much it costs to run a legitimate, profitable photography business. And any tog who charges $25, $50 a shoot is underselling themselves.
On a side note, a great resource that I’ve recently gotten into is Rachel Brenke’s The Law Tog site and newsletter: http://www.thelawtog.com/ She gives you straightforward, nitty gritty on business aspects of photography. I never sign up for newsletters but in the last few weeks she’s been invaluable for info. Gives you a lot to think about and digest.
Now, to answer what you came here for (keeping in mind this is my amateur opinion): I do like your photos. They are much better than many of the fauxs on this site by far. They show you’re experimenting, you have various models and shooting locations, and you’re playing with certain styles.
That said, what the others pointed out is important. Focusing issues, composition, white balance, crooked horizons etc. My favorite shot is on the girl lying down. It’s clear, focused, the color is nice and not overly warm. In comparison, you have a vintage sort of washed-out greenish/yellow tone on your other photos, with rather heavy vignetting. That might me what you’re aiming for but overall it feels heavy and dated.
My suggestion: watch your color balance. When you shoot and in post. Have you done a calibration on your computer monitor lately? I do mine every month or so and it’s invaluable. I would also watch the vignetting. I do it myself from time to time, but it’s very low transparency, like 10%. Very subtle, not quite as noticeable as yours, and not on every photo. And it’s my personal preference but I would brighten them up by 1/3 stop at least.
As a potential customer: would I pay you $50 for a shoot? Maybe so. But if I got photos like your examples, I’d be sorely tempted to crop out the vignette, correct the colors and tilt the photo to straighten the horizon.
That said, you have a nice portfolio for a beginner, and I would love to have your opportunities to shoot and practice. Yet, I wouldn’t, if these were my pics, charge just yet. I hope that gives you a little insight. Don’t at all be discouraged, though. As mentioned previously, the fact that you’re here and asking – particularly this firing squad here at YANAP, who can be brutally honest – shows you care. You’re starting out great, I’m sure you’ll continue to improve to be the kind of profitable photographer you’d like to be.
March 13, 2013 at 1:14 am #7759ParticipantI hate photography- first you said you could see I am in it to learn and then later you said I am not? I assure you, I am in it to learn as well as a part time income. I do not wish to be at this skill level charging $50 for the rest of my life. The reason I posted here was to receive critiques and be able to work on things I’m doing Wrong. I would rather ask for advice from the pros every once in a while for self assurance and also so I do not continue to make the same mistakes. I appreciate everyone’s advice on the business front and I would love more criticisms as well since i will not be charging until my work is adequate. Thanks for your time.
Btw, intentional tilted horizons are a no-no?
March 13, 2013 at 3:03 am #7762Sassy
Participanti Second what all the others have said, but thought you might like some critique on each individual image. I am not a pro i am an amateur who doesnt charge currently.
lovely moment, dont love the angle and the composition. i dislike the pavement visible in the back ground, lighting is nice but i don’t like the sepia or chocolate conversion. focus looks ok.
Look like a lovely setting but the back ground is blown out and is a bit distracting, i dislike the pose, unsure why he is on his knees feels odd. nice expression but image looks soft may just be facebook. the weed near his knee i would clone out. whole image looks a little underexposed and cold while the back ground is over exposed in areas.
Better pose but same issues as above. location looks spectacular but it doesnt shine really in the photo.
composition is a little boring, looks a little too staged. pose isnt horrid, i think its more the composition smack bang in the middle letting this shot down.
Idea is good but execution isnt terrific. colours are really really odd. My eye looks straight at the blown out bit of the mirror not the cute bubba.
Image looks soft, odd angle, colours look a little off as well. Some shots look great with the subject not looking at camera… this isnt really one of them. For me I would bin this.
Cute kid, great expression. props dont really fit with the back ground though. the lines are a little distracting, i automatically look behind her not at her. looks to be in focus.
Angle makes me want to reach through and stop her falling off the boardwalk, very cute kid, very cute expression, love that her outfit matches the setting. boardwalk rails look like they are coming out of her head. Again i will mention i really dislike the angle, dutch angle is very rarely done well.
I see no selective colour which is a good thing. you look like you build a report with the people you shoot and consequently capture some good moments. you need to look at composition, lighting and back grounds. Dump any image which is not well focused on the eyes. You need to look at post work, and getting the colours spot on. there are heaps of info on line… actions should only be used when you understand what they do. Check out Ask Damien and take his classes, they will rock your world. https://www.facebook.com/groups/195567190503489/
hope this is the kind of info you were after.
March 16, 2013 at 2:13 am #7870ParticipantCTM – tilted angles aren’t necessarily a no-no, but let me put it this way: there are those so-called “rules” in photography. Dutch angles are traditionally intended to convey unease or tension. So you can break those rules, but I want to understand WHY you broke them.
What is the point of tilting the camera in this shot? What did it achieve? Did it improve the shot? Some people are dead set against Dutch angles; I’m tolerant as long as they’re an artistic exception and not the rule. I went through a tog’s gallery not long ago and each. and. every. one. was. angled. I spent the entire time with my head tilted to the left, wondering if the tog’s left foot was amputated, causing a permanent tilt to her photos.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=348149448619096&set=a.196205227146853.31419.194647207302655&type=3&theater Like Sassy pointed out, why angle this? You have really strong lines here, and yet it looks like the walk is tilting to the side about to slide into a ravine or something.
I’ve been guilty of doing dutch angles, but only last week and mostly intentionally as experimentation. What I found was:
a.) I’m frustrated because now I cannot, in post, straighten them out and retain sufficient background for a good crop (or if I did, I would have to carefully recreate it without making it look obvious);
b.) I was doing it because I was lazy with my 50mm prime lens. Instead of backing up to frame my subject better with a horizontal plane, I tilted the lens to fit them in to the shot;
c.) I cannot justify any artistic reason for doing it in the first place, except to “give it a shot”. It looked trendy, but that’s about it. It didn’t make the shot pop better than a straight one.
A photo I did last weekend, while I think is very sound technically and one of my favorites in terms of quality, I am annoyed at because it’s angled steeply and I know the people here at YANAP would be quick to point it out. I can’t justify quite why I did the angle, not sufficiently.
Hope that gives a bit of insight.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.