Jules NYC wrote:

I know this is a hypothetical, but interesting in it, I am a waitress:)

If you are a lawyer, then you would have more money to pay me I'd figure.

I'm broke but I still adore you.

Autonomy II wrote:

I'm broke but I still adore you.

I never cared about $
Seriously.

Robert Helm wrote:
Photographers that rant about costs are not charging enough. Guys billing 5 and six figure jobs are not complaining about the cost of their camera.

I guess that means me. 

Well perhaps not. It depends on how you look at it.

I never "rant" about cost but I do worry about cost.  I never buy toys for the sake of buying toys (Though I would like to.)  I have to honestly be able to justify everything I buy and it has to fit into the types of gear that make up the bulk of my income.  Everything else is rented here and there if it's needed.

I have never made 6 figures for a job. 

I rarely make 5 figures though I have occasionally. 

I don't live fancy and I do have to watch my spending but I do survive and love what I do. (Most of the time.)

Yes, there are big money 6 figure photographers out there out there but the bulk of them are like me and I most certainly do not undercharge my clients.  I never under any circumstances underbid or undercut my fellow photographers. 

To say that every photographer that does not routinely work 5 and 6 figure jobs is undercharging is a flat out an insult to 99.99%  or more of the professional photographers out there that are working to support them selves and their family's. 

This is the world that we live in. Simple as that.

SB Glamour Photos wrote:
In saying that, your work is only worth as much as someone is willing to pay for it. You have to be worth more than your expenses, otherwise you have wasted your money buying more than you can afford....... or you are the owner of a nice fun hobby!

1. Our work is only worth as much as someone is willing to pay.  If we charge more than someone was willing to pay then we have an income of zero. That is when our businesses becomes just a hobby.

2. I was talking about CDB and the fact that CDB must be covered first.  I did not say that CDB was the be all and end all of what was charged to the client.

3. I'm sure you knew and understood that but nice just the same.

rp_photo wrote:
I am proud of:

Being self-taught and spending virtually nothing on education.

Doing what I can with "very low 5 figures" worth of gear.

Never taking pay.

Paying worthy models more and more.

"never take pay"   so what is your day job?

-Koa- wrote:

I'm impressed!

Not really, but I figured you needed the ego boost.

-Koa-
www.borikenwarrior.com
www.facebook.com/borikenwarriorstudiosmodels

I don't know about him, but I sure as hell do.

KlassyKlix wrote:
Bragging about the cost of equipment seems silly. I don't hear llamas bragging about their expensive clothes.

I do.

robert b mitchell wrote:
So many egos to contend with. It will never end "the I AM better than you" syndrome. Just take the darn photos.

My photos are better then yours, because I use a Nikon.  :>)

Jules NYC wrote:

It does.
Annoying when anyone on the team (if there is one) thinks their time is more valuable.

It's not that anyone's time is more valuable. It's just that I won't go out of my way for a day off of my day job when the pay isn't worth it.

rp_photo wrote:
We've all read the rants about how much photographers spend on equipment and software, but the latest I saw also made mention of how they spent almost 6 figures on an education at a questionable local art institute.

I'd be impressed... by their stupidity!





Just my $0.02

Ciao
Stefano

www.stefanobrunesci.com

MichelleGenevieve wrote:
Ansel Adams was trained as a concert pianist and never spent a dime studying at an art institute or trade school, as far as I know.  And from what I can tell his equipment was the standard photo lab setup and large-format cameras (as well as some 35mm and medium format cameras for non-landscape work) in use by photographers working in his genre at the time.  Nothing exotic. 

I'm not minimizing the value of professional training and equipment investment; it's important and useful!  But if you want to impress me show me what you can do, not how much you spend.

There were no photographic trade schools during his formative years.

Ansel spent most of his life teaching and writing books on photographic technique.

He was on the staff at Art Center College of Design for many years

He believed that a good solid educational foundation in photography was essential.

KM

Ken Marcus Studios wrote:
He believed that a good solid educational foundation in photography was essential.

Oh, so do I!  And I apologize if I implied otherwise.

As a photographer I also began my career with professional training, and some of my contemporaries have gone on to further their training at other photographic institutes and have become even more successful.  I make this point to anyone who says that training isn't important.  It is!

I do not skimp on either quantity nor quality of the equipment I own. If it will help me achieve a result that I just cannot get with what I have on hand I buy it or build it.  But my work really improves because I spend time honing my skills and not simply because I spend money buying more stuff.

KlassyKlix wrote:
Bragging about the cost of equipment seems silly. I don't hear models bragging about their expensive clothes.

Because they don't buy expensive clothes. Most models wear 'fast fashion'.

I didn't spend a $/£ on my photo education but  studied at one of the finest institutes for photography. Good old days where education didn't cost. As a bonus it opened doors to assist some of the worlds finest.

GreatMomentsPhotography wrote:
I never would think of going to school to learn photography. There is so many books and videos with minimal investment to learn the trade. For my first studio shoot I went to you tube to get a brush on the skill.

With the internet and youtube tutorials and the vast amount of photographic literature, adding talent, drive and creativity, you can gather the technical knowledge on your own and become a good or excellent photographer.

I utilize some tutorials to close the gaps in my own self taught, informal education.

But... when I started photography, in the mid 70's, there was no internet and I started to go to mini workshops at the local community center (in Germany), did internship at the photolab of the largest German tv network and worked there part time for 2 years.

I read books, like a great TimeLife series about all aspects of photography... however... at that time, there wasn't even a university degree in photography in Germany (the only one today is "Photo-Design") and it's usually learned via the apprenticeship system in Germany.

Although I work as a full time fashion photographer and photojournalist in NYC, which is pretty exciting in itself... I do wish sometimes that I had a formal education in photography in my youth... and I am certain that my path would have been different (not via engineering, financial markets route for almost 2 decades) and more successful, especially financially!

rp_photo wrote:
I am proud of:
Never taking pay.

That's the only difficult part of photography, getting paid. It's practically an art unto itself. I wouldn't be proud of never making any money.

KlassyKlix wrote:
Bragging about the cost of equipment seems silly. I don't hear models bragging about their expensive clothes.

Aren't YOU supposed to provide the garments at the shoot??? (Via designer, client?)

KlassyKlix wrote:
Bragging about the cost of equipment seems silly. I don't hear models bragging about their expensive clothes.

well, open your search feature & read to your heart's content: the 'who pays' vs 'who gets paid' rants from both photographers & models have lasted here for years, each side having those feeling they have the most cogent argument for the final say.

rp_photo wrote:
I am proud of: Being self-taught and spending virtually nothing on education.

those of us who've watched you since the start, as those who've read your threads since you came to MMayhem, might recall otherwise how this has worked out over the years ...

rp_photo wrote:
I am proud of: Paying worthy models more and more.

... but going forth to imply anyone's being "worthy" simply sets a disappointing new high for you.

Jules NYC wrote:
I know this is a hypothetical, but interesting in it, I am a waitress:)

If you are a lawyer, then you would have more money to pay me I'd figure.

I'd argue that the lawyer, given what they do and what they offer to society compared to what a waitress offers, the waitress has the more important job. I'd rather have better service than more leeches.

udor wrote:

Aren't YOU supposed to provide the garments at the shoot??? (Via designer, client?)

I'll gladly buy a bottle of SPF50... the sun here can be harsh.

Neil Snape wrote:
Brag about why?

Cause my dick is bigger than yours cause I have a 1DX










actually I have a T2i.....