|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
Shoot For Cost
Everything is expensive these days for both models and photographers. This has led to the new version of TFP (Time For Print) SFC (Shoot For Cost) If a model and a photographer are making an equal trade as far as time goes, there really is no reason why the photographer should have to pay for supplies out of pocket. I recently had a SFC shoot where the model had to purchase some lingerie and since it's only fair that the rule go both ways the final tally came to zero. Her lingerie purchase canceled out the film and processing. My two previous SFC shoots paid for supplies. How many other photographers and models are following this trend? BB Jul 07 05 11:43 am Link I like it. Jul 07 05 11:45 am Link ... not a new practice at all, just a wise one  Jul 07 05 03:16 pm Link How do you deal with your equipment depreciation? And how about the model's gym dues? There are tons of costs that can't be seen on a set--especially for those of us who shoot digitally. Jul 07 05 04:14 pm Link Since I have been in the industry over 28yrs and I have worked with a lot of clothing designers, they are more than willing to lend me samples of clothing for models. It's a way to get images for promotional and it's always been an exchange of resources that work to both our benifits, plus the models doesn't have to worry about what she will way.And the idea that I shoot for images used for advertisements for the designers will pay for a lot, so it's never a cost to me but profit for three people all around Jul 07 05 04:21 pm Link It's a good idea. As Brian asked, though, how do you deal with depreciation of the photographer's equipment; the kit costs for the MUA and/or hair stylist; the cost of clothing used (if there will be any); etc? Some of that can be free--samples of clothing, for example, in certain cases--but some won't be. Some items won't be "used up", but will have a depreciated value. Jul 07 05 06:29 pm Link I'm not talking about things like gym costs... that's just stupid... I go to the gym as often as possible and I don't model. Lets keep this just between the model and the photographer. Everything gets old and wears out and everyone has had to fork over big money for an education. If an MUA is involved and is using supplies I think the model and photographer should kick in for that as well. Keep in mind, no one loves giving away their product for free; Photographer, Model, MUA, etc but the whole point is about those times when it is benificial to do a SFC shoot. How do we keep it all fair for everyone? Please don't bring up braces some model had when she was 15 as part of the cost. Jul 07 05 06:51 pm Link This is kinda silly - especially with digital Lets say I have $15K in digital cameras, lenses, memory cards, computers, harddrives, etc.. This equipment has already been purchased - Thus when i shoot a model on any given day - my expenses for that day will be minimal. In other words, I don't have the expense of Film and Processing. HOWEVER, I do have the expense of my time to process digital images into proofs and finals (on top of all the equipment costs). The actual cost here is pretty intangible. So - how do you determine a FAIR "cost" for the photographers part of the shoot? I don't think you can. I know what i charge commercial clients for my Digital Expenses, but a model would be buying a lot of lingerie to match those costs at the end of the day. There's no good way to compare the costs involved with a shoot from the standpoint of models clothing vs. photography production expenses. Realistically, the only thing you really can trade is your time - Thus TIME for Prints. In the end - you can't really be fair. The photographer will ALWAYS have the largest investment of $ in equipment and Time involved before/after the shoot. Jul 07 05 08:47 pm Link This is a reasonable post, if you're only shooting digital. I get your point though. In the end it comes down to Photographers getting a little sick of being overwhelmed by requests to do free work. B Jul 07 05 09:30 pm Link When I stated that I liked the idea, I did not expect it to overcome the other but to add to it just to make it quickly apparent where one stands. A SFC shoot would entail a bit more investment from the model and likely the quality would be higher. We all still have to choice to say Yes or No for each opportunity. But TFP is being overused and covers a large amount of territory. I do not like to use the term at all. I find it all silly but it is reality now. Reality does bite so I just see SFC as a term that cuts down on the confusion. Maybe it just adds to it all. Jul 07 05 10:48 pm Link There's always the cost of postage, media, labels, etc. It adds up! Jul 08 05 12:16 am Link Good points all around. I think that we should just ditch the term TFP and start using SFC. It may inject a little more respect to what we all do. Jul 08 05 02:07 pm Link I've been considering asking for a split of studio and MUA costs. On other items, I figure my equipment and the model's clothes are part of general overhead. I actually think a photographer gets the short end of the stick with TFP/TFCD, because we spend more time after the actual shoot with post-processing (or, in my case, money to have somebody else do it until I master PS). Jul 08 05 02:37 pm Link If I want the model to have something in particular for the shoot, I buy it. If it's something intimate (custom vampire fangs, stockings, a particular piece of lingerie) she keeps it. If it's something washable/cleanable and reusable (trenchcoat, sunglasses, towels) I keep it. If she wants something in particular, she buys it and she keeps it. That's pretty simple. Otherwise, my costs are time, the cost of the CD (negligible) and the cost of the prints (which I consider part of her recompense.) Her costs are time and opportunity. I'm just not that worried about figuring out if one of us should be giving the other one twenty bucks for some reason. If it's a paid shoot, it's a paid shoot. If it's not, it's not, and arguing about a few bucks is just needless aggravation, IMO. M Jul 08 05 02:50 pm Link Posted by Brennan Barrett: Dude - the gate swings both ways "In the end it comes down to Models getting a little sick of being overwhelmed by requests to do free work." Jul 10 05 09:15 pm Link For those that do portrait work, why not charge like half of your normal sitting fee.. Even though most of us are shooting digital, we're now spending more time doing post production. And I'm certain that because it is digital, most are shooting more during a TFP/CD shoot then when they shot film. The model is still going to come out on top, keep the perverted comments to yourself, in that they will still get images on a disk, possible some prints and most likely more shooting time/locations then if they hired the photographer. More time because each has something specific they want image wise.. As for MUA's, they could offer a deeply reduced rate in exchange for images.. Or if they don't want images, photographer and model split the cost; both will benefit from what an MUA can provide.. Ok, tell me I'm nuts... :-) Jul 10 05 09:32 pm Link Alex Alexander excellent suggestion! Keith aka Wolfie "Even though most of us are shooting digital, we're now spending more time doing post production. And I'm certain that because it is digital, most are shooting more during a TFP/CD shoot then when they shot film." An image can (should?) be taken so that minimal time is spent in post production. I'd rather be known as "one shot sara" than "well it took all day and 6 months in post production but I got the shot I wanted". As far as more images, as a model I don't want more images, I need quality. 10 awesome beats 1,000 so-so. "photographer and model split the cost; both will benefit from what an MUA can provide.." I agree... same for hair stylist, etc. Jul 10 05 10:59 pm Link Yikes!!! Jul 10 05 11:03 pm Link I dont shoot digital, I shoot on 6x7 negs and pay for the film, processing and printing. I do most of it myself or call in favors. The first time I tried getting a mua was about 3 years ago - I didn't really have a book or anything back then of the type of work I wanted to do but all the same the mua asked me to pay the $35 kit fee. I thought about it. I was like - I am giving you a 11x14 color print for your promotional needs and I am paying for film and processing, etc - and are you putting anything toward that? I was a Freshmen in college too and they knew the whole deal. I was like WHAT? you want me to pay for everything? Looking back now alittle wiser and older I should have said then how about paying the cost of the 11x14 inch print? NYC Fair value would have been $75 for a custom printed C-Print at a NYC lab. Jul 23 05 08:23 pm Link Quote "Her lingerie purchase canceled out the film and processing." I know what lingerie is but what the heck is this thing called FILM an processing......the only thing I know that need processing is jam..........LOL I have a short memory. Jul 23 05 08:36 pm Link It took you people this LONG to figure this out. Jul 23 05 09:01 pm Link Posted by Sara Green: Totally agree that a shot should be taken so that minimal post production time is required. I'm guessing that you have never worked in a lab. The post production work I'm talking about, in part, is making fine adjustments to exposure, contrast and colour. When you print a negative, you make adjustments to exposure, contrast and colour. With digital, this is now being done by the photographer. Jul 23 05 09:18 pm Link Posted by StMarc: I would love to work with you!!!! LOL I have done a lot of TFP just because I love being photographed and because most of the photographers that have requested it are awesome and very talented. BUT it can get a little pricey. All the outfits - except for the one on my avatar pic, which was provide by the photographer - I had to buy. Jul 23 05 09:34 pm Link Photographers...Don't shoot TFP/TFCD...end of story! Now I know that this takes resolve because no matter who we are or where we are in our photography skills, WE ARE ALL BASICALLY STILL "SHOOTERS", we love this photography thing! Good luck to all of us ...and models...a LITTLE CONSIDERATION...please. Oliver Cole Jul 23 05 09:36 pm Link Posted by Sara Green: amen sara! all this bitching and moaning about post shoot processing of scores of images. wtf? i shoot film. even if i was a digital shooter i don't get the point of shooting until you run out of memory cards. Jul 23 05 09:37 pm Link Posted by Bruce Caines: Posted by Sara Green: damn, any model or photographer showing 20 images from the same situation--and you know who you are--really isn't living in the real world. Exactly Jul 23 05 09:43 pm Link |
