Speedlinks & Commentary - 5/13/09

It's been some time since we've done Speedlinks, so I thought I'd compile several that I thought note-worthy, and I'll add in a bit of commentary to each, so, enjoy today's speedlinks.

• Awkward Family Photos - This site is not only good for a barrel full of laughs, it is also a variation on the website Photoshop Disasters, because it shows so many photos that are just plain bad. Take for example, this one - Mothers Day, and this one - Too Close for Comfort - which makes me think the photographer had a backdrop that was too small, and he kept telling the subjects to move closer together, then there's this one, and here are "The Cling-Ons", the over-use of white in Whiteout (I mean, doesn't that photographer understand that this is over-the-top, and borderline Stepford?), and as someone who is 6'7", this - Big Love - is just composed poorly, an over-use of a primary color in Into the Blue, and lastly, - Family Tree - that photographer just isn't right in the head. So, take a spin, laugh a little (ok, a lot!), but most importantly, learn a few lessons - the first one I'll suggest: 1) It takes actual talent to be a photographer, not any "Joe" can do it!
  
• Starting Over - As an Entrpreneur - Here is one more story that tells people that when they lose their job, being a freelance photographer is the solution. A few tips for the intrepid photographer who lost her PR agency job and decided to freelance - 1) Don't pose with an outdated film camera, and if you are going to, make it a Hasselblad and not a Mamiya 645 (yes, Mamiya fans, bring it on), 2) "faux borders" on images is so 2001, and 3) get a separate wedding site. Mixing commercial marketing and wedding work is not good for getting commercial work. You take a good picture Tarah, but your marketing plan needs some polishing - what did you learn at Mortar?

(Continued after the Jump)

• The Gravediggers of Photojournalism - Jahreszeiten publishing is using Stalinist tactics to try to force photographers to surrender a broad swath of photographers rights for next to no additional revenue while the "publisher Thomas Ganske professes to be a protector or champion of intellectual property rights. For instance, he was a prominent signatory of the so-called Heidelberg Appeal, according to which: “Authors and publishers reject all attempts and practices to undermine the fundamental intellectual property rights to literature, art and science, the fundamental right to freedom of research and teaching as well as freedom of the press and publication.” Hmmm, this sure sounds a lot like Conde Nast's attempts to secure, and I quote "All rights throughout the universe...". Where were all these photographers when ASMP and others were fighting the assinine Conde Nast(y) contracts? (Conde Nast Contact: Introduction, 5/26/08). There are over 3,000 signatures, which the publisher will laugh at unless they get an EP-like group to actually refuse to work under those conditions. That is, until the iStockphoto hobbyists, looking to get validated by being in these magazines, see Jahreszeiten as their own Mount Everest. Paging Seth Resnick and Paula Lerner....


• PDNPulse - Mrs. California Blames Photographer - I agree with Mrs. California - the photographer has released what really looks like outtakes that caught her either inbetween shots or otherwise affected by the wind. Further, since when do tasteful images of the human form raise legitimate objections? take a look back at the historical statues of nude women or famous paintings by all caliber of artists from the middle ages, where the nude female form was celebrated. Lastly, I am damn tired of people being chastised for their own personal opinions - especially when they are expressedly solicited. Her keeping her title is just, and just like I dislike celebrities using the Oscars for the espousing of anti-whatever sentiments when they should just be thanking people for their award, so too do I dislike it when someone hijacks an event for their own personal agenda. It doesn't help that he has no qualms about infringing on copyrights with reckless abandon (alledgedly), as detailed here.


• Alamy Mis-Steps - It seems that a bunch of Alamy contributors are (rightfully) upset about the agency mis-licensing RM photos at lowball rates to "preferred customers", with one person reporting a sale of $10 for an image that priced out at $600.00 using Alamy's own calculator. Seems something's afoot over at Alamy, and it might just be some smelly socks.

So, with all of the above feel free to fill the comments with all manner of opinion, just keep it civil, or you'll get deleted, and remember, my opinion or commentary doesn't have to match yours, but you should respect mine even if you don't agree with it, since you did choose to come here and read it of your own volition.

---

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.

[More: Full Post and Comments]

Answering the Phone 'After Hours'

It's 9pm on a Monday. My Office Manager and Post Production Manager, and intern have all been long gone. At 7pm, my phone rang. It seems a major public relations firm, which had originally thought they could just snap some photos of attendees at a Senate hearing with their office digital camera. Then, they scrambled for a last minute photographer. They got a photographer I knew was less than experienced on the assignment (I asked whom they got, and they told me), and the person on the other end of the phone was that PR firms' client, and she was very upset. I talked to her for about 20 minutes, and the assignment wasn't just the coverage of the hearing, it was also several portraits of people coming in from out of town for use in marketing and advertising, and while this photographer was less than experienced covering the hearing, he would have been out of his element completely in producing a quantity portraits that were advertising quality in several settings.

What to do?

(Continued after the Jump)

I opted first not to bad mouth the other photographer, bad karma. She tried to corner me into reassuring her she would get what she needed. I started outlining the logistics of the project, interspersing several general ideas about how I would have done it, and then I closed with - "with all those portraits, and the hearing, it will be a challenge for sure." I didn't want to lie, but I did want her to know it was not going to be smooth sailing. She felt as if she had no choice and was locked into the other photographer, and she asked how much I would have charged and I gave her a figure that was over twice what that photographer had quoted her. (I asked, and she told me.) She assured me that next time she would call me directly, and not farm out the photography request to her PR firm. The beauty of this is that not only would she have paid double what the other photographer quoted, but it is now reinforced in her eyes that I am a premium brand photographer (and thus, am billing at a premium rate.) I closed the conversation saying that I would be up fairly late this evening, and if she decided she really wanted me to take on the assignment, I would do what I could to make that happen, even on short notice.

Even though I would have like the assignment for tomorrow, it wasn't meant to be. Yet, at 7 o'clock at night, I was able to have a conversation with this prospective client, as if it was 2pm in the afternoon.

Returning to the 9 o'clock hour, my phone rings again. Before my caller ID delivers to me the name of the party calling, I say to myself "oh, nice, she's calling back. Guess I'm doing that project after all...", and then, up comes a very regular clients' number, and I say to myself "hmm, that's odd." (this all happened in about 2 rings). Answering the phone, it is another client, "Hi John, what are you doing answering the phone at this hour?" I respond "I am working on some paperwork and so on, but I am happy to be talking to you. What's up?" The client says "well, I am at an event the continues on tomorrow, and it was just mentioned that they want a photographer for a luncheon, are you available?" I respond "sure thing, I am happy to take care of that for you tomorrow, consider it done." He says, "it's really going to be about 10 minutes of work, but I know you have a minimum, so just bill me for that." I say "Yes, we do have a minimum that would apply, and I'll get that paperwork off to you in the morning, but we're all set for you, have a great evening." Now, this client can turn to his superiors on site there and say "I've just secured a photographer for you for tomorrow." They will look at him and be impressed and possibly even pay him a compliment or two about his ability to get things done so quickly, and he will garner cache akin to the hotel concierge who secures two orchestra tickets to the sold out performance at the city opera at the last minute. Thus, he looks good, I look good in his eyes because I was available and able to confirm for him, and, oh yeah, I have a paying assignment tomorrow.

As photographers, it is important to realize that we don't have hours, really. When you can answer the phone at 1am, with a cheery face, and acknowledge that you can be on hand at a 7:30am breakfast, because either A) they forgot to book a photographer, B) their photographer that was traveling with the group missed their flight/lost their luggage with the gear in it, or C) their photographer got sick and they just got the voicemail, you not only earned that assignment and the revenue that goes with it, but also a client who will stick with you in the future, or who is reaffirmed that you are their go-to person for their photography needs.

---

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.

[More: Full Post and Comments]

Photo and Negative Scanning: The ScanCafe Solution

Converting your analog images to digital is a time-consuming process. From first-hand experience, I can tell you how much time and energy it takes. Over the past decade, I have migrated all of my best images from analog to digital, and that process has been completed. It was completed at a huge economic cost in terms of real dollars spent paying in-house people to do it, as well as the economic cost of not having them scanned earlier.

I can't imagine how I would have felt if my images had been damaged in a flood or fire, and not scanned. Several psychology resources we looked at in thinking about the importance of analog conversions for the non-pro photographer, turned up top-of-mind items to take when being evacuated from an unsafe area, items like wedding or family photo albums. On news broadcasts where families are combing through their destroyed homes, time and time again, we see them finding a family photo, or photo album, and being so grateful that it survived.

For the family happy-snapper, and the seasoned professional, the film archives need conversion, and ScanCafe is at the forefront of providing the best service in preserving your memories, or your pro archives.

(Continued after the Jump)

I remember a business like Nancy Scans, about a decade ago, would charge $40+ for scans, and that was a deal. I compared the costs of staffing an in-house position against outsourcing it just a few years ago, and for medium format, outsourcing was the best solution, and in-house, I thought, was the best for 35mm, but I can report that that determination is questionable now that I look back at the end costs.

One of the things that the out-source service I was using, JaincoTech, was doing, was keywording and caption transfer from slide mount to metadata. ScanCafe does not do that, at least not on their website of pro scanning options. But here's the huge difference - I was paying $5 (and up) per scan there, and ScanCafe is doing scans at $0.24, which includes color correction, scratch/dust removal, and even minor damage to the image. Money Magazine said they were the “Best quality and cheapest…The best scanning service.” (article here). Don't have a negative? At $0.27 per print, they'll scan those too. How did I learn about this, and become more comfortable with them? My friend and colleague David Hume Kennerly is on their advisory board, and turned me on to them.

So, imagine you're a wedding photographer right now with 20 rolls of 35mm film from a wedding and you want them scanned for your archives or website. Assuming an average of 35 images per roll, for $168 you can have all of them scanned. Now, here's a great option for revenue generation. Why not contact ALL your past brides, and offer to deliver to them all the images you shot on CD from the film you never turned over, for, say, $300? Not only will you turn a tidy profit, but that gives you the entree to offer family portrait or children's/pets portraits to them during your conversation. Since the bride has likely ordered every print she'd ever hang around the house or give as a gift, there's little extra revenue from that film now.

Whether it's photo scanning, slide scanning, or negative scanning, ScanCafe looks to be a great solution. Further, for those extremely challenging black & white scanning issues, they can handle that too. I will be meeting with their CEO, Sam Allen, this week to ask him more about his service, so if you have questions, or they don't have a service you want, e-mail me or post in the comments below what you'd like to know, and I will put those questions to him.

---

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.

[More: Full Post and Comments]

Book Scanning Technology

Ever wonder how it's possible to digitize books by the thousands? Who's turning all those pages? Well, wonder no more, as here's the answer - a neat little contraption with two Canon EOS cameras, and a vacuum that automatically turns the page after a high resolution image is made of each page.

We recently had the opportunity to see the digitization in action - the same process that Google is using in their project. These are custom-made units, and the connectivity is amazing. The operator is simply on hand to trigger the page capture (buttons, on the left of the console, slightly visible in this image), and swap the books. Everything else is automated. With a room full of these devices, it's no wonder the process of digitizing all the worlds' books is almost half-way complete!

(Continued after the Jump)

At left, note the black piece covering the right page. That is the vacuum, which has is about to turn the page, from right to left. Watching the vaccum in action, once it gets past the peak point, and begins to decend to the left, it releases the vaccum, and the page naturally falls down. The vaccum moves out of the line of sight of both Canon cameras, and both facing pages are captured, and then the vacuum moves back into position to make the next pair of images.

A closer look at the lens choice, shows a 24-70mm f2.8 L series lens being chosen. This would make sense, allowing the operator to make adjustments when books got larger, or smaller. The ports in use are clearly the shutter release, the USB, and the power adapter. In this closeup, the lens appears to be set at or near the 70mm mark, and the lens is also set to MF (manual focus).

This device allows for books of all ages (and even levels of fagility, if watching the delicate vaccum in action is any indication) to be digitized very quickly. New Scientist seems to be suggesting (Google sees infrared in plan to scan world's books, April 4, 2009) that scanning these books is taking too long, but that didn't look like a slow process to me, I was amazed at the speed of these machines. NPR wrote about Google's Patent application, in The Secret Of Google's Book Scanning Machine Revealed (4/30/09), but, as with all USPTO applications, the line illustrations leave a little to be desired.

Back in 2004, Information Today wrote - Google and Research Libraries Launch Massive Digitization Project , (12/20/04), about the process, and Googles plans, but to see it in action, is amazing. I was watching as books far and away out of copyright were digitized. This is in contrast to the lawsuit filed against Google, and, as reported in the Washington Post - Google Settles Publishers' Lawsuit Over Book Offerings (Washington Post, October 28, 2008), but which, as reported just last week (Google Battles For ‘Opt-Out’ Extension To Deadline In Book Lawsuit, 4/29/09),

"Internet search giant Google has requested before a judge a two month extension to a deadline for authors and publishers to opt out of a settlement to a legal battle over its intention to develop the world’s largest digital library, the Associated Free Press accounted. Google’s decision was prompted after a group of authors and their heirs asked the US District Court judge hearing the case to give a four month extension to the already effective May 5 deadline so that the “enormously complex” settlement could receive the time it was due for study."

So, the discourse continues - now with a few more visuals for you to contemplate.

---

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.

[More: Full Post and Comments]

Get the DAM Book!

Get 'em while they're hot! Peter Krogh's The DAM Book, Second Edition is now out!

Peter's First Edition is great, and I strongly recommended it in my book. Now, he's updated it (the First Edition was from 2005!) and he includes all sorts of pointers for the latest Lightroom and Photoshop workflow solutions. It's the best and only real book that provides solutions and throughly thought out ways of thinking for the individual photographer's digital asset management needs.

There's not much more to say today, than "do not pass go. Do not collect $200. Simply spend your $31.49 and order this book now."

(Comments, if any, after the Jump)

---

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.

[More: Full Post and Comments]

Pete Souza - Recording History - A CBS Profile

Below is a nice piece on Pete and the work he is doing documenting history in the making.

(Comments, if any, after the Jump)

---

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.

[More: Full Post and Comments]

Is The Amateur Really A Threat to the Pro?

Consider the photographer who has an unlimited amount of time to accomplish an image. Or, the student, who has a week or two to complete an assignment on, say, lighting a bowl of fruit. Or, the hobbyist photographer, who stumbles upon a great image. Are these photographers a threat to the photographer who works on assignment?

(Continued after the Jump)

I submit that they are not, in almost all cases. Judy Hermann, over at the ASMP Strictly Business blog wrote a few days ago - A Walk in Your Client's Shoes - and noted, in part, "If it was your job on the line, what would you need to see, what would you need to hear, what would you need to know to feel safe hiring a particular photographer?"

A track record of success is one of the key elements that a prospective client is looking for. Sometimes, a client is looking for multiple jobs for the same client in a portfolio over a period of time - say, a campaign. This suggests continuity and consistency that they can depend upon. Sometimes, a client will see your coverage of a significant event, and determine that if you were hired (i.e. depended upon) to cover *that* event for someone, surely you could cover X event that your prospective client needs you for. And sometimes, not seeing just sample work on a website, but clips and covers is a demonstration that you can deliver on time and with a high degree of certainty.

When you are a student, you might shoot the assignment three or four times, realizing you missed a critical issue each time, and then, finally got it right. The hobbyist photographer can take thousands of images of the sunset, their kids, and so on and, based upon the laws of statistics, eventually get an amazing shot. Sometimes, they simultaneously stumble into *how* to make that image, and thus repeat it. Usually, however, they don't. Einstein once famously said "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

No one has to say "he's a professional accountant", or, "she's a professional doctor." Merriam-Webster sets forth the use of the word "professional" - "participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs {a professional golfer}", thus, "professional photographer" needs the modifier "professional" in front of it. As does "professional surfer", "professional volleyball player," and, yes "professional bass fisherman."

Journalist Samuel Friedman wrote, in the CBS News piece - Outside Voices: Samuel Freedman On The Difference Between The Amateur And The Pro:

To treat an amateur as equally credible as a professional, to congratulate the wannabe with the title “journalist,” is only to further erode the line between raw material and finished product. For those people who believe that editorial gate-keeping is a form of censorship, if not mind control, then I suppose the absence of any mediating intelligence is considered a good thing.

Rob Haggart, over at A Photo Editor, defined professional by quoting a Mario Batali, in writing that the difference between an "amazing amateur chef and a professional chef is the ability to make that perfect meal 100 times in a row." Thus, the counter to Einstein's insanity definition, is the definition of "professional" that I will put forth here. The definition of professional is "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting similar results."

How many times a month can a magazines' photo editor commission an assignment and get nothing usable back before their job is on the line? Once? Twice? If twice every other month a shoot was unusable, their judgement would be called into question and in short order they would lose their job. How about the advertising job, where the photographer can't deliver while the ad agency rep and their client are both on set, and the shoot fizzles because of the photographers' inability to deliver?

The challenge for the photo editor, art buyer, and so on, is to separate the wheat from the chaff, the professional who can deliver, from the amateur who has a nice portfolio, but can't be counted on with a high degree of certainty to produce. The problem arises, when the prospective client is not comparing apples to apples, but the professional and the amateur, as if they are interchangeable. It's one thing when the art buyer is looking at a stock image - it either is good enough, or it's not. It either meets their needs, or it doesn't.

However, when it comes to assigning work, commissioning it, or otherwise asking for images of non-repeating, or not-re-shootable work, getting a professional who can deliver, means the amateur will lose out. When the amateur doesn't lose out, a risk greater than gambling in Las Vegas is undertaken, and the commissioning party is betting their job. Over time, those who fail to discern the differences between the amateur and the professional, become the chaff to their "wheaty" brethren who survive in their field.

---

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.

[More: Full Post and Comments]

I Do Solemnly Swear: Photographs of the 2009 Inauguration

Wednesday, April 29th, is a pretty cool day. It's the day that the Smithsonian opens their exhibit - I Do Solemnly Swear: Photographs of the 2009 Inauguration - featuring the photography produced for the official inaugural book. The Smithsonian touts the exhibit thusly:

This exhibition features approximately 50 framed color and black-and-white photographs printed by Kodak, highlighting the week-long events surrounding the historic Presidential Inauguration of Barack Obama. Included in the exhibition are photographs by both professional and amateur photographers who recorded events surrounding the peaceful American transfer of power. The photographs on view include selections from the National Museum of American History's new acquisition of 2009 inaugural photographs by leading photojournalists, including David Hume Kennerly, Bob McNeely and Karen Ballard.

The full list of photographers who participated in the book is:

(Continued after the Jump)

David Hume Kennerly - Producer and Photographer	Bob McNeely - Producer and Photographer	Matthew Naythons - Producer and Photographer
Thomas K. Walker - Creative Director and Photographer	Karen Ballard - Photographer	Andre Chung - Photographer
Daniel Cima - Photographer	Anne Day - Photographer	Hector Emanuel - Photographer
John Francis Ficara - Photographer	Gil Garcetti - Photographer	John Harrington - Photographer
Sam Kittner - Photographer	Pete Marovich - Photographer	Greg Mathieson - Photographer
Paul Morse - Photographer	Daniel Rosenbaum - Photographer	Mark Sennet - Photographer
Pete Souza - Photographer	Bruce Talamon - Photographer	Clarence Williams - Photographer

The exhibit opens today, Wednesday, and runs through July 12th, 2009. One name you might note up there is yours truly, and it was an honor to be a part of the team.

---

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.

[More: Full Post and Comments]

Lotsa Little Things Are Actually Really Big Deals

While we have been swamped to the far ends of our bandwidth here at Photo Business News, lots has been happening. Just because we've not been commenting daily, does not mean we haven't been paying attention.

The magazine world is turning upside down. Video is becoming stills, and ad revenues are slashing frequencies of publication. While it's cool to see Esquire innovating like that, we predicted the Red Camera would do just this just over a year ago - One more nail in the coffin (3/18/07), with sports being in the cross-hairs. Now that a COVER was done, doing inside pieces are now demonstrably a piece of cake, and events (yes, that means sports, for sure) that are regularly covered by TV will find red cameras being used to allow for you to be able to choose the best moment in time.

The world of Search Engine Optimization has, for photographers, exploded. Previously, SEO was limited to people who just knew how to optimize websites. liveBooks has made white-hat SEO a cornerstone of their website offering, and they are, by far and away, the best of the photographer-centric website providers to do SEO. Blake Discher has been traveling the country for ASMP for some time, doing his presentation - Is Your Web Site Making You Money?, and recently, PhotoShelter threw the doors wide open, with a Free SEO Toolkit, took on website designers when it comes to SEO, in their piece - Is Your Web Designer Full of Crap?, taked about the importance of page titles, and even went into the importance of URL legibility, in Make Your URL's Like Your Photos: Beautiful. If people actually read what they were writing, and actually acted upon the information, they would be kicking ass and taking names on website positioning on Google. Now, Seth Resnick, who is probably just as insane when it comes to web optimization and SEO as I am, has jumped (back) into the game, with a program at the end of next month through his seminar on search engine optimization in Miami. Seth has been doing SEO as long as I have, and he knows his stuff. The key to learning from him is to figure out a way to shift his speeding-Ferrari mind down to like first gear with the clutch not fully engaged so that you can understand what he's talking about. If you go, bring a tape recorder, because you'll learn about 10% while listening to him live, and 10% more the next time you listen, and so on. Seth comprehends SEO like few other people I know.

Meanwhile, the good folks (and an advertiser here at PBN) have just released FotoQuote Pro version 6, that include 86 New Pricing Categories, including 35 Video Stock Footage Categories, and over 30 Dedicated Web Usages as well. If you know these folks, they're the real deal and they know what they're talking about when it comes to pricing, and the coach feature for each usage is really really insightful.

(Comments, if any, after the Jump)

---

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.

[More: Full Post and Comments]

Price Negotiations

If you consider that anyone who is trying to lower the price you are asking is an "enemy", then, the old adage that applies is "know thy enemy."

I am not talking here about people who have not clearly spelled out an assignment, and you are thusly over-estimating it, or people who are trying to work you into their budget, but instead, I am talking about people who are looking to cut your fees to keep money in their pockets. While I don't see clients as enemies at all, I do need to understand their perspective when estimating a job, and also, have them understand mine. Knowing what a client is thinking is helpful in coming to a satisfactory solution for everyone.

But let's get one thing straight - people who price shop will always want a lower price, and studies have shown are far less loyal to you, and far more loyal to the bottom line.

(Continued after the Jump)

Over at The Consumerist, today's piece is titled "Do You Haggle", and they outline the perspective of the person doing the negotiating. So, I thought I'd do a counter to that (what they wrote is in italics), from the sellers' standpoint:

1. Never ever let the salesperson take over your shopping experience when you're buying expensive items, or when the store offers a certain discount. You must control the bargaining process.

Often a client does not know what goes into that price. A shoot fee, and then licensing? 'I thought I owned it', or 'what is this post-production charge, what do you need to do to the photos, I thought you didn't have to fix your photos?" These, and many others, are a part of educating the client on the value your images have.

2. Know that the posted price for a big ticket item can be brought down. This is especially the case now, in these difficult times.

Yes, you may be willing to negotiate in these tough times, but if your rate is $2,500 for an assignment, and you accept $1,800, it is likely you'll never get that $2,500 figure from that client when times improve. Be sure to "take away" something from the shoot. Say, shooting fewer images/set-ups, using a single person for hair and makeup/stylist, or limiting the rights package a bit more.

3. Never ever let them know that you really want something.

This is the true power of "no." When you tell the propective client, in a nice way, that you can't do it, if they really want you, they'll now want you more. If they see you as a commodity, then they may move on. So be it. You want clients that really want you.

4. Force yourself to leave if the merchant doesn't give you a lower price.

The contrary to this is "stick to your price. Thank the client for considering you, and tell them that you look forward to the opportunity to work together in the future, when price and budget are not such an issue. Further, let them know that if something goes wrong with the lower-priced photographer, you'll try to help them out with a re-shoot, if you can."

5. Remember, you are the client, you have money in your checking account which the seller desperately wants.

Yes, they are the client, and they called you. When you as the photographer are, in fact, desperate, you will do foolish things, so don't ever be, or even come across as, desperate. When the propective client becomes the client (i.e. has signed the contract) then, of course, do everything you can to make them happy.

REMEMBER: photography, no matter what anyone tries to tell you, is NOT a commodity.

---

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.

[More: Full Post and Comments]