Tuesday, 6th April, 2010 · 6:02 pm
↓ Jump to Comments

Value

I photographed a wedding at the weekend where I was asked to stay a bit later and cover the speeches.

In Ireland, the speeches usually follow the wedding dinner, so I had a little downtime and a quick bite to eat in the hotel bar while the couple and their guests enjoyed their meal.

Not feeling very inspired, I ordered the beef burger and chips from the bar menu.

Now, I don’t know about you, but “Beef Burger” brings to mind an image. Quite frankly, to me it means the same as “Hamburger”.

This is what was put in front of me:

Beef Burger and Chips

Beef burger and chips for €11. (c) Roger Overall 2010

I did a double take – and then checked the menu again. What you see is actually what was described on it. I hadn’t bothered to read the small-print description properly before ordering. I just assumed it would be a burger on a bun. My bad.

But that wasn’t really what bothered me. What bothered me was the price: €10.95.

That’s right, €11 for a patty, a slack handful of chips and a dollop of potato salad hidden under a slice of tomato.

Eleven.

Euros.

And the glass of Coke and ice you can see there? That cost €5.20.

Five euros! I can get a couple of two-litre bottles for that at my local supermarket.

The entire meal, with a coffee cost me close to €20.

Which raises the question of price in relation to product. It’s an important issue because my own services don’t come cheap. For instance, my couples pay very close to €3,000 to have me photograph up to the speeches. And I’m undercharging at that. I’m actually developing a wedding product at the moment that is unique (as far as I’m aware) and which I will offer at prices starting at around €5,000, possibly €7,500.

Now, you probably think I’ve become separated from my marbles. How can I complain about an €11 burger, even if it does come without a bun and minimal chips, when I’m charging that kind of money for my own work? Pot. Kettle. Black. Hypocrite.

The answer is value for money.

For €11, I’m practically expecting Mishima beef … Okay that’s an exaggeration. I’m guessing a Mishima beef patty would be an absolute steal at €11. But you get what I’m driving at. Provided the price matches the value expectation, the consumer is happy.

Let’s look at what my wedding clients get for their €3,000 investment.

They get emotive documentary photography of one of the most significant days in their lives. They get my respect, which means I step back from the day rather than trying to run it for them. They get to live the day as they want to, and I record it in such a way that they will treasure the photographs all their lives.

The album my couples get will last a century at the very least, most likely double that. Being very conservative, that’s 100 (years) x 365 (days) = 36,500 days (excluding leap year days).

€3,000/36,500 days = €0.08/day.

So for eight euro cents per day a couple gets a highest-quality book of evocative photographs depicting one of the most wonderful days of their life. Their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren also benefit hugely from that eight cents a day.

Tell me that isn’t value for money. Certainly compared to a €11 beef burger – which was as tough as boots, I might add.

38 Comments

Filed under Business, Costs and Prices, Where I'm coming from

Tagged as

  • http://www.visionary.ie Darren Purcell

    That’s not a burger, Roger, that’s a meatball. From the kid’s menu.

  • Roger Overall

    Ah, I should have known when the waiter brought out a colouring book and some crayons.

  • Jay

    3k for wedding photos is not value for money.

  • Roger Overall

    Thank you for commenting, Jay.

    Maybe you could take the opportunity to explain why you think it isn’t value for money?

    Roger

  • Jay

    It depends how much work goes into the 3000euro package, or the proposed 5000euro package. We got excellent documentary style photos of our entire wedding day for under 400euro. As an artist and keen photographer I think I can safely say they were good quality and therefore excellent value for money.

  • Roger Overall

    Thank you for responding, Jay.

    Even in such a short response, you raise a number of interesting issues. I’d like to go through each one.

    “It depends how much work goes into the 3000euro package, or the proposed 5000euro package.

    The value of something often bears no relation to the amount of work that goes into it. The classic example is that of a doctor who within a few minutes can diagnose an illness and prescribe a course of treatment. Do you pay him or her for the work done in those few minutes, or for their medical ability built up over many years?

    As an artist and a keen photographer, you will be able to appreciate that artistic skill and vision are more important than the physical work it takes to create a painting or sculpture. The same goes for photography.

    So while an average wedding represents a week’s work in terms of effort and time for me, those aspects only account for a small part of the investment a couple make in monetary terms. They are paying for my skill and my vision as well.

    They are also investing in the capture and preservation of a very significant day in their life and history. My own couples see this as a worthwhile investment in return for which they get true value.

    While I’m not yet ready to reveal any details about the project I’m working on at the moment, it will add significantly to the value of my offering.

    I suppose that ultimately it comes down to this: whether or not you think I am value for money to photograph your wedding. You say I’m not. I believe I am. And that’s fine. Fortunately, we live in a world of free choice in that regard.

    “We got excellent documentary style photos of our entire wedding day for under 400euro.”

    That is indeed stunning value. No doubt about it.

    Let’s take a more detailed look.

    The VAT rate for wedding photography is 13.5% if it is delivered in an album and 21% if it is delivered in an electronic format, for instance on a disc as image files.

    You don’t mention what you got for your €400, but let’s assume you received a disc. (I’m assuming this as a quality album that will preserve properly prepared and printed photographs for a century or more costs at least €400 on its own).

    21% of €400 is €84, which goes straight to the government. Your photographer doesn’t see a cent of that.

    That leaves us with €316. This has to cover equipment costs, insurance (including professional indemnity and public liability), office overheads, and car and petrol – to name a few. As I don’t know what costs your photographer has, let’s be very generous and say that all of those accounted for only €100 – a hugely under-estimated figure. Indemnity and liability insurances alone account for that each month for most professional photographers.

    That would leave €216 for labour costs, and artistic skill and vision – before taxes.

    An entire day’s wedding coverage is about 12 hours’ photography. To that you need to add consultations (usually two hours a go) and post-production (a day in my case – 7 hours). As we’ve based this on a disc-only package, we can leave out the time for album consultations and album design. But we should add on travel time to and from the photographer’s home, say an hour each way.

    That still gives us 23 hours work.

    Even if we didn’t put any stock in ability and artistic vision, that would work out at an hourly rate of €9.39 – again, before the government takes its income levy and income tax.

    The minimum wage for “an experienced adult worker” in Ireland is €8.65 – only 74¢ under the hourly rate we’ve calculated for the person who provided you with wonderful photographs of a great day in your life. That is indeed excellent value for money.

  • http://gallopinggreen.com Stephene

    When I got married in 1997 we were photographed with film. No post production, just a photographer who charged for his time and the prints. A photographer who knew how to take actual photographs. These weren’t documentary photos or anything fancy but we look back occasionally and they’re our photos from our day and we love them.

    Modern togs shoot 1,000+ images over the day now and then toil over them in Photoshop (or whatever) looking for 40+ decent ones in their “mess” to post process into an acceptable deliverable and expect to be paid for that. This is not professional photography, this is sad.

    I think anyone who would pay over 3K is either leaking money or just plain stupid and are really just subsidising substandard photographic execution.

    The position of an album lasting 100 years is bogus – my father-in-law just posted a photo from his parents wedding (1934) which he scanned and posted on Facebook. That will most likely last a lot longer.

  • http://gallopinggreen.com Stephene

    I would add, that I do absolutely believe in “value for money” and that “value” is the highly subjective judgement of the purchaser. If a couple wish to do something “different” from the norm, then extra cost is a part of this.

    A wedding photographer who’s work I do love could be in this category in my opinion (though I’ve no idea what he charges) http://www.jeffascough.com

  • Roger Overall

    Thank you for your comment Stephene.

    It is, though, a shame you have taken such a nasty dig at my clients by say that “anyone who would pay over 3K is either leaking money or just plain stupid”. My clients are neither, and it is a pity you feel you should say this about them.

    If you have time, could you explain why they are “subsidising substandard photographic execution”? It would be a revealing insight.

    I would also like respond to your comment regarding digital versus print. My belief is that digital does not guarantee that your wedding photographs will survive the 76 years your father-in-law’s parents’ prints have. There are a number of issues that concern me:

    1) The ink layer in CDs/DVDs will corrode. Magnum, one of the leading photographic agencies, rates them at about 10 years – after which they can become illegible.
    2) Even if they last longer, computers in the years ahead may not be able to read them. Apple is already shipping computers without optical disc readers. Remember those old floppy discs? The same will happen to optical discs.
    3) Placing image files on hard drives doesn’t solve the problem entirely, as they are prone to failure.
    4) Backing them up in the cloud is an option, but doesn’t guarantee access for later generations. Will your children and grandchildren have access to your cloud account?
    5) File formats become obsolete. For instance, Canon has already shifted its proprietary RAW format once and allegedly doesn’t support its own old format. Also, the most popular file format at the moment is JPEG, which will be replaced. Who knows what file formats can be read in 100 years time? It’s impossible to say. What we do know is that a print will still be visible. It is tried and tested.

    Prints in a high-quality album are a simple and elegant solution. Low tech and no software upgrades required.

  • http://www.Francispeacockephotography.co.uk Francis

    Roger,
    I think the crux of the matter here is “What is value for money”. It is subjective and dependent on so many factors. Coming from a previous career in corporate marketing more time is spent trying to understand this problem than is measurable. In fact consultants have made careers on this.
    Anyway…. couples/clients make decisions (hopefully informed ones) based on your previous work, your reputation, their artistic wants as well as your artistic merits and vision. This is not forgetting your reliability. You have delivered a very reasoned argument regarding your input to the wedding day and therefore your value. That will not impress everyone but you will never please all.
    My only note of censure is that you ought to have been as discerning as your clients – you ought to have checked the menu regarding price and what you were getting for that price. Regards

  • Roger Overall

    Stephene,

    Jeff is a phenomenal photographer.

    Be careful, though. I once saw that his prices start at £3,250. He might not like what you think of his clients paying that kind of money ;-)

  • http://gallopinggreen.com Stephen

    (I’ll start by correcting the spelling of my own name)

    I certainly don’t mean to say your clients are stupid – bad choice of words on my part. I would consider me stupid for spending that much, though I was married 13 yrs ago and things have changed…

    Perhaps it would be easier and fairer to the discussion to discuss the breakdown of a typical wedding photo shoot. Let’s say for example it’s EUR3,500. How is this broken down across…

    - Your time
    - Your direct expenses (travel, materials etc)
    - Media (print, album, digital etc)
    - Margin. What is the expected margin?
    - Taxes payable – don’t you claim VAT back?

  • http://gallopinggreen.com Stephen

    BTW – By Subsidising substandard photography I mean a photographer who takes 1000 shots to sell me 40, but charge for the time to dig these 40 out of the 1000 and make them presentable.

    Questions like – How many do you shoot? Do you shoot digital or film or both? How long do you spend getting the good ones out of the days work? Do you compose in camera or fix after the fact? Actually, is substandard in this regard a thing of the past and the digital darkroom is just a fact of modern photography?

    I don’t have the answer to be honest, I should find the monies in question to be quite astonishing.

  • http://www.petercox.ie Peter Cox

    €400 is indeed astounding value. But the photographer who produced that work can’t possibly earn a living by charging so little.

    Asides from the costs Roger already noted (which doesn’t even cover all the costs incurred running a business), how does the photographer pay for their mortgage, car, food, entertainment, holidays (by which I mean weekends and other days off), school books for kids, etc, etc, etc.?

    People look at a figure of €3k or €5k and think it’s all gravy. The profit from that after you take everything else out is much less. And it’s worth what the client is willing to pay. If I want to be sure that my wedding is captured conscientiously, with great skill and artistic vision, I would expect to pay for that.

    Yes, it’s true that there are good photographers who charge peanuts to do the work. It’s also true that they don’t last, because sooner or later they can’t make ends meet. Either that or they do it as a hobby and have a ‘real’ job during the week.

    Yes, it’s true that there are poor photographers who charge a lot. They last even less time (one would hope) before they are found out and people simply refuse to pay for a sub-standard product.

    The middle ground is photographers who do their work well and earn a decent wage from it. They stick around, providing a reliable service for an unrepeatable occasion.

    Stephen – as for your comments on photographers shooting thousands of images as a way to use the law of averages to produce the odd good image – that’s tarring the whole sector with an awfully big brush. That’s like me saying that all amateur photographers are morons who don’t know one end of the camera from another – it’s simply not true.

    Kudos to Roger for allowing this sort of open discussion on his blog, which is of course a part of his business. It’s a mark of his (justified) confidence in his own abilities and his clients’ that he’s allowed these comments to stand.

  • Roger Overall

    Thanks for commenting, Francis.

    I shall, from now on, read the menu descriptions carefully, then quiz the waiter on what it is I’m getting, and finally send my lawyer into the kitchen during the preparation of the meal.

  • http://www.cjwriting.com Calvin Jones

    I find myself agreeing with different aspects of this debate, and seem to have my feet firmly in both camps. Perhaps that’s sitting on the fence… but I don’t think so.

    Firstly, I absolutely agree with Roger that it’s not just about the work / toil / graft / hours invested. People aren’t just paying for time, they’re paying for talent, expertise and experience. That’s what commands a premium, and typically differentiates the results.

    I also agree with Stephene that shooting 1,000s of images and charging the client for trolling through them and retouching the relatively few “keepers” isn’t really professional photography… it’s more of an image lottery, with similar chances of a winning result in the end.

    But here’s the rub… if you pay €3K+ you’re much less less likely to get a scatter-gun shooter, and more likely to get a seasoned pro with a great eye and the talent to capture the real essence of your special day.

    Is wedding photography worth €1K, €3K, €5K… there’s really only one group of people who can answer that: cients.

    If the client is happy, and feels they’re getting value for the money they spend, that’s really all that matters.

    At the end of the day the market will dictate what is or isn’t a reasonable price… and while there are talented amateurs and fledgling pros who may deliver outstanding images at bargain basement rates, more often than not people will be disappointed.

    If you’re prepared to take the risk… go for your life, but there’s a good reason people tend not to flock to the cheapest wedding photographer in town.

    So Roger, as long as you continue to delight your clients, more power to you, and best of luck with the €5K and/or €7.5K premium packages.

  • Roger Overall

    Hi Stephen,

    I can oblige you there.

    I wrote some posts on my old wedding photography blog. The pricing’s outdated, but it’ll give you an idea:

    http://altarnarrative.wordpress.com/2007/07/11/the-price-is-right/

    Then there’s this:

    http://altarnarrative.wordpress.com/2008/05/20/whats-up-duck/

  • http://www.cjwriting.com Calvin Jones

    I wonder whether any of the Celtic Ross’s clients are “delighted” with their burger and chips?

  • Roger Overall

    I think substandard has less to do with the technical side of photography these days. It’s pretty hard to take a photograph that isn’t correctly exposed. And if you do, you can get away with murder in post.

    However, where I think substandard comes into it is in the content of the photograph. Composition, light, form, colour, gesture – these can all be good or bad. Good photographers get it right, bad ones don’t.

    A final point – and I’m quite happy to reveal this here: my clients typically see around 200 final photographs from their day. And they usually choose over half of those as “can’t live without, must have in the album”.

  • Roger Overall

    Thank you for your thoughtful comments Calvin. You speak wise words.

  • Roger Overall

    Credit where credit is due: someone at the hotel did acknowledge the blog post and tweets on Twitter. They are looking to improve things.

  • Pingback: Ronan Palliser's Photoblog | Memories are made of this

  • Ronan Carroll

    This interesting debate reminds me of a time a few years ago when I visited Venice with my now wife Debbie. We were due in Rome a few days later, and it was my intention to propose to her while in Rome.

    They say ‘when in Rome do as the Romans do’ but in this case is was more do as the Venetians do…..ie Take a Gondala ride on the canals. Now I’m not one of the worlds romantics, far from it. It’s fair to say that I felt under a bit of ‘unspoken’ pressure to offer to go on the Gondala.

    Now, how much is a ride in a Gondala worth for less than 20 minutes? How much would you pay? Would you pay €80 cash for a few short minutes? Is this an outrageous price? These prices were in 2004, so not sure if they are still similar, but you get the idea. Normally I wouldn’t even contemplate spending so much on something that lasted such a short time.

    However, I knew that a) if I didn’t offer, then the chances of a proposal acceptance later might not be on the cards! b) When was I next going to be in Venice ? and c) Would I have regrets if I didn’t ?

    Well, I think I made the right choice and went for it. Proof is that she said yes while in Rome and we all lived happily ever after. Was €80 a small price to pay – I think so…

    Price is relative, but the memories and emotions last for a long time.

    I guess a lot of your wedding clients go through similar emotions, and that is one of the reasons that they may choose you.

  • Jay

    Obviously people are paying for talent, expertise and experience in addition to fixed costs. I don’t agree this should run to 3000euro for a days photography and then post-production.

    Your point about printed photographers is quite frankly rubbish. Backing up photographs in the cloud is most definitely the best way to preserve them and make sure they last forever!

  • http://www.johnmottershaw.com John Mottershaw

    Jay, I just wanted to add to your comment. When people pay 3000 euros, this is not just for “a days photography and then post-production”.

    As has already been explained, this is for generally about a week of a skilled operator’s time, usually an album (my last album cost over £500, even without prints), insurance, the wear and tear of thousands of euros worth of equipment etc etc etc. And like any profession, it’s impossible for a photographer to do 40 hours of paid work per week when there is so much time with other work essential to running a business.

    If you had to pay an electrician or a plumber for a week’s work plus materials you would have quite a shock. If you paid a solicitor for the same amount, then you would need a much bigger scale!

  • http://www.petercox.ie Peter Cox

    Jay, that’s the wonderful thing about a market economy. If you don’t think it’s worth it, no-one’s putting a gun to your head to pay it.

  • Jay

    Peter,

    Absolutely, totally agree. Demand is what creates supply. If someones willing to pay it, there will be someone willing to provide it. My main point I suppose is that you can get great quality for less if you do your research.

  • Roger Overall

    Thank you for sharing Ronan.

    I proposed to Anne in New York. It didn’t go quite right. It was supposed to be atop the Empire State Building, but the queue was horrendous, so the deed was done at Grand Central Terminal – a wonderful location.

  • Roger Overall

    John,

    That’s a great comparison – insightful and useful. Thank you.

  • Roger Overall

    Amen, Peter.

  • Roger Overall

    Jay,

    While your insights are appreciated, your rudeness and aggressiveness aren’t.

    If you cannot put across your arguments politely, then you will be blocked from commenting here. You are a guest on this blog and some very reputable people have taken the time to engage with you. Please treat them with the respect they deserve.

    As to your faith in the cloud, your opinion is as valid as any other. You believe the cloud will preserve photographs forever. I have my doubts that it will afford people’s descendants easy access in 100 years’ time. What I do know is that a print will be around a century from now. That is not “rubbish”; rather it is fact. Prints older than 100 already exist.

  • http://www.dmpr.ie Christine

    My oh My – this really has stirred debate! All I can say is that you get what you pay for.

    Roger, your work is outstanding so it is easy to see why couples decide to fork out extra for your service. Pictures, regardless whether for a wedding or corporate brochure should be seen as an investment. You often only get one chance to get it right (especially for a wedding!) and I think anyone who would leave such a thing to chance would be foolish. Photographs are really the only thing you are left with after the big day apart from your own memories which unfortunately fade over time – brilliant photography, however, never fades.

    I have come across people who pass themselves off as photographers because they have a good camera and have taken a course but photography is a special skill and talent. Although I have heard of people getting packages for €400/€500 I have to pose the question about the authenticity of such a “photographer”. Having seen results from such packages they could never be compared to your style and one should compare like with like.

    At the end of the day, it is a case of each to his own but you do get what you pay for and if people are happy to budget extra for someone they know will do the best job possible then that’s a huge piece of mind on one of the most important days of their lives.

    Best of luck with the new packages Roger – I am sure they will go down a storm!

    Christine

  • Roger Overall

    Thank you for your kind words, Christine.

    You’ve actually stirred a thought in me that I haven’t expressed here yet. It’s this:

    I care. I really do care about my couples and their wedding day. Just like I care about my corporate clients.

    This needs explaining, and it will form the basis of a future blog post.

    So, another thank you for triggering the thought.

  • http://www.k2c.ie/ Liam-Og Griffin

    Fair play Roger. Even your photograph of the scimpy burger looks good. I wonder how many people were watching on as you carefully lined up the shot and adjusted the depth of field to focus on the top edge of the burger!?

    In seriousness though, I support your pricing structure 100%. Photography, like many other art forms takes years of dedication, personal investment, sacrifice and passion in order to achieve excellence.

    It’s not simply a matter of a day’s ‘pointing & clicking’ with a ‘fancy camera’, followed by post processing with Photoshop and printing/binding etc. You simply can’t quantify experience, talent or taste.

    I have a background in martial arts & music so I appreciate the endless hours, months and years of grueling practice one has to accumulate to get to the point of being able to produce something that others would care to buy. Once you’re there, you simply must be confident in your hard earned ability and set the price you feel you are worth.

    Best of luck with the new products… I’d be interested to hear the innovation behind the ideas.

    Liam-Og

  • http://www.rogerverall.net Roger Overall

    Thanks Liam-Og,

    There isn’t any innovation as such, as I’m not creating anything that doesn’t already exist. Rather, I’m bringing together things that haven’t (as far as I know) been brought together before.

  • Jay

    Roger,

    I have taken all points on board. Agreed with some disagreed with others. Rudeness or aggressiveness are not something I would ever engage in, and I don’t appreciate being called either rude or aggressive. I simply have stated my opinions, perhaps strongly, as I have the experience to back them up. Its an interesting topic and one that I’ve enjoyed participating in. Thanks for the opportunity to do so.

  • http://www.360-dpi.com stephen crozier

    This is a rather interesting debate. I am please roger you have allowed it to happen on your site. thanks for that

    i see the point behind costing things the way they do.

    The one point i have to comment on is prints

    Yes there are traditional wet prints that have been around for a very long time.

    But there are not any modern digital print as the technology is not that old. prints from pro labs or inkjet prints have idea of how long they will last based on accelorated testing, but not on actual knowledge

  • http://www.rogerverall.net Roger Overall

    @Stephen – Thank you for reading and commenting.

    Your point about prints is a very valid one. Ctein made a similar observation in an interview a couple of years ago, highlighting the lack of real-world experience we have of inkjet prints. We don’t actually know what 25 years of aging in the real world does to the chemicals. Something may happen that accelerated testing doesn’t trigger.