i recently got a call for a product shoot and a shot they described this image they have in mind, didnt have anything to do with the water droplet stuff and guestimated a figure for them, but said it was just a ballpark figure. ($500 with a few hours of shooting and post, both at $100/hr.)
then i told them i have the special knowledge and equipment to photograph water droplets and splashes etc and they were immediately interested and excited as was i. they either want to incorporate water stop action into the shot with their product (custom shoot) or i might be able to interest them in some stock shots i have of water droplets and splashes.
if i was in a real town, this would be easy, but i think less here
i would usually shoot and license the images and collect the appropriate fees for both. the norm here is to include a buyout of rights to the client when they hire me and actually im fine with that. its the reality of working here.
i anticipate a problem if they are interested in a stock photo and ask why they have to pay for the use vs. custom photography where they dont.. more specificially the problems could be (from their point of view)...
1. so if i have you shoot my product i dont pay for use, but for stock ones i do? easy reply actually, its how the stock industry works, so no problem here
2. can you recreate the stock image using our product? (a liquid. basically changing the color of the liquid which could be PS'd.)
perhaps the answer is no... not the best thing to say at an interview. i would like the business and satisfaction of doing a shoot, but then realize i am somewhat screwing myself cuz they wont expect to pay useage and i would be in no position to charge for it. i feel i should get it, but cant and accept that fact working where i do.
my training in this taught me to bill a creative fee, expendables/materials, post production fees and usage for commercial shoots, summarizing ofcourse. in regards to special shoots using specialized gear or knowhow, to bill extra, as it seems reasonable to do so in such a situation. for the water droplet stuff, adding 40% to the creative fee was deemed appropriate and adding upwards of 25% to usage.
now i am not complaining why cant i be like the big cities, im trying to take what i learned and apply it in a small town, simple minded kind of way that will make sense to me and the client.
in summary, i do feel like i deserve more compensation for my special skills for the shoot. so some of my ideas for solutions are:
1. do quote a creative fee with atleast 40% extra added in... i was thinking of perhaps much more because i cant get usage in the future and it makes more sense to the client to pay me 2x as much upfront for the shoot which includes use vs. 1x for the shoot and 1x for usage in the future even though i cant get usage.
2. ask for usage if the shoot involves water droplets....doesnt sound great to me though... what grounds do i have to ask?
and finally i anticipate their question of why do you charge extra for this one thing you know how to do...? ( i charge $100 an hour if im doing a product shoot, food shoot, architectural shoot etc... but have never been asked to do water droplets, i could see their argument here if really simple thinking is used)
thanks for reading all this and for replying with your thoughts.
Linear Mode
