Unfortunately whatever hyperboleer wrote this self-serving trash has no concept of how prices are set in a market place. They are set via perceived value and competition - not 'the costs of doing business.' That's like Burger King jacking its whopper to $10 a burger, and then when you scoff and go to McDonald's, they bitch at you and go "hey man, do you have any idea how expensive our shipping costs have risen due to gas prices and that political conflict in the shit-pen in Mexico we get our tomatoes? That's a $10,000 grill back there. We have to feed 8 employees per hour AND have enough money to bribe the health inspector. How do you think those costs are going to be covered, huh?" "That's not my fucking problem, asshole. This is your goddamn business to run. Customers will pay what they find is reasonable for the value." Now, if gas prices raise will BK raise its prices? That depends, but if it does, it's to fit the new profit maximization curve - which already takes into account that there will be less demand at higher prices. They don't 'bitch at you' for not coming to the same valuation for their services that they - the fucking proprietor - have determined. Oh, and they pirated a $500 Photoshop application? Oh golly gee. The only reason it's priced that high is because they know everyone who actually buys Photoshop is so dead-set on *legitimately* buying it, they'll pay out the ass for it. $2,000 computer that they use anyway? Who gives a shit.
Seriously? You believe cost of doing business has no bearing on pricing? You can't process the simple concept that it's a barrier to market entry, which lowers competition? In any event, I wasn't equating cost of materials with cost of the service. I was pointing out to the poster that there was a lot more value built into his purchase than the motion of pressing a shutter button. Regardless, I'm not sure how seriously anyone should take the opinion of someone who cannot look an inch to the left of a post to see the username of the poster. Living up to your username once again.
It's really something that varies place to place, business to business. From what I've seen over the past ten years, with various "wedding profiteers" your price depends on how flashy your window dressing is. For instance, my own territory--disc jockeys-- is a prime example. I'm what everyone calls "grass roots". I don't have a company vehicle, a fancy (see: ugly) banner to put across the front of my table, or an actual busniess shop I might just be the cheapest DJ in town, but that reason is because I simply enjoy doing it and don't believe in charging out the ass. So, I don't charge extra for things like lights, effects, cordless mics, personalized CD's etc. It's an easy job once you learn the hard parts--mixing, gelling sets, and "reading the room". The largest business here in town called Hunters has their own place, and a big, expensive-ass Hummer H2 with their logo on the side, so they charge out the ass for JUST the basics and anything extra they will bleed you for, despite the fact all their DJ's are well over 40 years old and are stubborn towards playing the same shit they have for the past two decades. I never get compliments for how great my set-up looks. I get compliments for music selection and how much fun people have, because I'm a lot younger than 95% of these guys and can relate with a younger crowd better, and since most people that get married are in their twenties, it always works out well. You can compare it to why Coke costs more than store-brand soda even though they taste practically the same. You can pay extra for the fancy company with the fancy advertising but in the end you MIGHT not get a better product.
What I originally meant is that I feel photogs are charging way more just because its for a wedding. There is a guy in my area that will come with you to the racetrack, take 100's of pics of your car in the staging lanes, launching, racing etc, edit them all, give them to you in whatever format you'd like etc. Basically everything a wedding photog does except print them out for you and put them in a binder. He usually charges $100. Now I know he's a little bit different because he's taking pics of several cars on the same day but I feel the end labor is about the same. (an all day affair with hours and hours of editing) but he might make $600-700 Photogs charge $4000 for a wedding because people will pay $4000.
I clearly stated that costs do affect pricing - obviously - because it affects the profit/ marginal revenue, which shifts up the profit maximization curve. With increasingly expensive equipment, at one point you will reach 0 profit or negative, because no one wants to pay $X dollars for your shit. If you have a $500 camera, and need to make $400 week to stay profitable, then you find out if people value you services at that level. If you decide to buy a $50,000 camera --- and have enough outrageous costs to need to make $12,000 a wedding --- guess what --- if people don't value your service at $12,000 ---- you're fucking shit out of luck. They call that a shitty, unsustainable business idea. If a customer judges your mega-services at $8,000 --- but you think you're worth $12,000 --- you explain the VALUE and BENEFITS you provide. You DO NOT persuade him by talking about your taxes, health insurance, employees you need to feed, payments on your camera, or your mortgage rates. THOSE AREN'T HIS PROBLEM. THOSE ARE YOUR PROBLEMS. If you can't find the customers at the prices needed to cover your costs, that's not "idiot customers who don't know anything" --- that an unsustainable, shitty business idea! Period!
"I have $40,000 worth of top of the line camera gear, along with years of practice and an extremely trained eye. I understand that your bride-to-be's cousin's friend has a really cool point and shoot, but you're looking to have something professional to remember this one special night by, with no room for error. That's what I'm offering." Of course you don't say that shit about taxes and whatnot to a prospective client, but those are what you have to be thinking about when you're booking a job. I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. BV was just demonstrating that it isn't just "clicking the shutter button," there are many other factors that go into a well done, professional photography job. People are going to offer to pay what they think is a reasonable amount, but if the photographer is any good at business he can explain just that (without pricing everything out, obviously) and get a higher payout. Look, I agree that $4000 might be too much, but it entirely depends on what the photographer is offering. Also, the guy will have a portfolio. Look at it. If you consistently like what you see, you're more than likely going to like your wedding photos. If you pay $4000 and hate what you got, it's probably more your fault than anything else for not doing the research.
I'm not arguing what's fair for wedding photography. Many people would probably pay more than $4,000 so all the power to you. I'm just saying, the quoted tirade attempts to show you all the 'pains' and 'costs' behind the venture, as if costs alone justify the price to the customer. They don't.
Look. I don't give two shits what he values the services of a photographer at. I don't care if a photographer, to him, is worth $20 and a case of beer. I don't want to sell him anything. There is a difference, though, between not valuing something at a certain price point, and being completely ignorant of the time and resources that go into that service. This was the latter. This was someone saying, "you cost <x> dollars and all you do is <y>" when <y> is clearly wrong. I am not into paintings, generally. There are a few artists that I appreciate, but by and large, I don't want them hanging on my walls and I don't really appreciate their art. To me, a painting is not worth hundreds or thousands of dollars. I do not, however, state that they are not worth the asking price because "all they do is stick a brush in some paint and push it around a canvas." The value I personally attach to the service does not mean I will incredulously imply that they couldn't possibly be worth the price. You're arguing here with a point that nobody made.
On the upside, I really like the word 'hyperboleer'. I'm imagining a rotund little man scaling the dizzying heights and abseiling into the depths of a mountain of hyperbole. Possibly while wearing a bandoleer.
You're confounding the idea. As a customer, you give fuck-all about the time and resources that go into a service, at all, except for the direct benefit to you. Did the workman use pine instead of cedar, which costs twice as much? That's relevant; because it speaks to quality and the cost you'd have to pay for materials otherwise. Do you care about his non-relevant costs, like his gas prices to get to your house? His mortgage? The fact that he likes diamond screwdrivers? Guess what, unless you see a direct benefit, you give fuck-all. You see the price, you see the service, you decide. Costs do not justify shit remotely to the end consumer. Again, confounding the issue. We don't care about individual tastes and preferences. The market will bear what it will bear. YOU might not value the painting at $100,000. Someone else might though. Some people do. You know what something is worth in economics? It's worth exactly what some fuckhead will pay for it. No more, no less. I was responding to the tirade where the arrogant, egocentric "whoa is me I'll post my problems on facebook" narcissistic photographer is belly-aching about his health insurance and taxes -- yes his health insurance and taxes ---- in justifying his prices to the customer. If he said --- this $500 roll of film (quality) is going to cost the same with me as it will anybody else (opportunity/ competition/ substitution) ----- those are persuasive words to justify a customer. Talking about the price tag on his home computer and the salary of the idiot he has next to him --- are not persuasive. He's speaking to costs, not value, in justifying his price. The artistic painting is a perfect example of how value is infinitely more important than costs to the customer. I can use the Hadron Collider at FermiLab to carve out a pretty crappy Wooden Top. Then say --- crappy Wooden Top for sale --- $10,000. Do you know how much that fucking Hadron Collider costs to build and operate? How much staff was needed to recalibrate it? How much their salaries were? The countless hours for 3 months I worked to carve that top using subatomical particles? Again, I'm calling out the self-absorbed navel-gazing hipster doofus who wrote "look at how high my costs are !! Why do customers always argue with me??? Waaaaaa!!" who is focusing on the wrong end of the equation ( value, stupid!) because he's so self-absorbed, he thinks a customer actually GIVES A SHIT about his costs!
John Maynard Jackass, I'm glad you took some economics courses, but I'm not arguing with what the market will bear or why market pricing is set the way it is.
I was talking to the fiancee about our wedding and photography came up. I pointed her to the last two pages of this thread and and its given her*...new ideas. I did call up some people I know that are married to get their opinions, and they all acted like I was an asshole for inadvertently pointing out that they never look at pictures they spent a small fortune on. So there's that** *I really don't give a shit so long as it's not ridiculously expensive **Belongs in the "Most annoying sentence" thread
I agree this is the most important reason. But is very hard to comparte weddings to other photography jobs. A good wedding photographer must take pictures of excellent quality without disturbing the flow and fun of the party. In my wedding I hardly noticed the photographer (there were almost no requests to look at the camera), but I was surprised with the amount and quality of the photos we had in our album (me or my wife appeared with all our guests). I paid something close to $1000 dollars at the time and think it was money well spent.
I took issue with a pompous quote, you jump on me, then you say you're not arguing. I don't think even you know what you're arguing at this point, binary brain cells.
Can one of the mods please lock this thread so the jackasses can stop bickering about something they'll never get the opportunity to pay for anyway??
Guy I know was married a few years ago, and the mother of the bride got a hold of the gift registry. They ended up with a bunch of these: Spoiler It's an ice cream fork. A mother fucking fork for ice cream. And they run upwards of $200 a pop.
Shut the fuck up about wedding photography. Just shut the fuck up. Wedding photography is a shit job and nobody sane would do it for $4k a wedding. If you had enough brains to figure out what it costs to be a wedding photographer, and how much time and effort goes into that shit, and how much it fucking sucks to work for brides and the family of brides - you'd understand why so many wedding photographers working for $4k a wedding are shit. Also, and this is key, it's not the fucking topic of the thread, so if you don't get back to the topic of the thread, I'll just delete your posts. I've almost always just given cash for weddings. For engagement gifts, I used to give people really, really nice photo albums. Super high end ones that will last forever and look amazing. Now so many people get those printed photo books or whatever, so I've mostly gone back to just giving cash for those too.