During a recent night out, I was asked the question: "What do you do for a living?" It was the perfect opportunity to practice being excited about my work, so I launched into my story. This was followed up with a question that often comes up in these conversations: “Why would someone hire you to fly around the world when they could save time and money hiring a local photographer?”
The question could have been rephrased: “Everyone is a photographer these days. Why should I pay your fee?”
Architectural photography has proven to me that house buyers are willing to pay a premium for additonal features, like a great view.
Could I ask you to do some basic calculations with me? How much money would you need per year to cover your living costs, your business expenses, and to leave a little extra to build your business? In the UK, it is roughly £60,000 ($77,000).
How many shoots can you realistically handle per year, assuming you’re involved in the entire process from pre-production to delivery? Is 50 per year a reasonable number? That means you need to be making £1,200 ($1,538) as a minimum per shoot just to make it as a “somewhat successful” business.
I did this calculation to determine a price to charge my architectural clients. During the fee negotiation process, one of my clients told me that my fee was almost the entire fee he was charging for his design. Why should he give up most of his income simply for photography? I caved and offered him a cheaper option (half the fee for half the time), but it got me worried about the state of the photography market. If my minimum fee requirement was significantly more than what my clients could afford, how sustainable is my business?
I found the answers to these questions in an episode of the Tim Ferris Show. For those of you not familiar with the Tim Ferris Show, it is a long-form interview podcast where the host, Tim Ferris, interviews world class performers across a variety of disciplines to tease out common practices that can be applied to any discipline. I've learned more about the photography business from the Tim Ferris show than from any book or course about the photography business.
Nandos core business is selling chicken meals, yet through the interior architecture of their restaurants, they appeal to an audience who love design and want a unique experience.
The episode that spoke to my questions was an interview with Seth Godin. Seth is a leading expert on the topic of marketing as well as being a phenomenal communicator. He did a similar interview on the Chase Jarvis Live podcast. Both podcast episodes bring out principles from Seth’s latest book, “This is Marketing.” The episodes cover principles like making your service for the smallest viable audience. Just that concept alone was worth listening to the episodes.
A friend of mine did this shoot for a business called Hefthd that repairs antique axes. They're doing a great job of providing a service to their smallest viable market. Photo is by Dale Reubin: www.dalereubin.com.
Any photographer who is trying to find an audience for their work should listen to the podcast episodes. At the very least, it will challenge you to think about the practices you've always been doing that you've assumed to be useful. Personally, I changed my entire business focus.
What a crazy aggressive response to a thoughtful article... he never said he just discovered it, clearly, he knows his costs, as he is explaining to the reader how one would go about it, and what he did when launching his business. Any bit of research into him shows that he is a seemingly accomplished international architectural & travel photographer, so I think he knows his business just fine.
What specifically is naive?
Thanks for the clarification Elliot.
Dana, the purpose of including that CDB was to illustrate the problem in my industry - i.e. the CDB seemed greater than the fee I was able to charge.
That’s something that the podcast touches on and was one of the reasons for me sharing it.
Yes, you're right, Dana; indeed, you stated the bleeding obvious, apparently, for no other reason than to appear superior and condescending.
However, since you raised the subject, working as a professional photographer has little to do with the quality of the practitioner's images; which is why there are so many professionals who are poor, derivative, or cliched photographers.
Interesting portfolio.
"Personally, I changed my entire business focus" ... I feel like this is where the article starts. What did you change? You ended the article right at the climax.
The purpose of this article was to share what I believe is a brilliant and useful podcast episode. I've changed the focus on my business to what focus on my smallest viable market, based on what is unique to my business. I'd love for readers to apply the information in the podcast to their own business.
Learning through the podcast you've changed the focus (the work you'll take on), to your smallest viable market. Im assuming this distills down to the known costs of doing business. Perhaps other criteria? How do you address the startup of any business where one's CDB is only hypothetical and not absolute. It may take a few years for the business to grow well enough to be self-sustaining. Your reputation must be established before youll get the gigs.
Agreed. One of the principles that Tim actually mentions is to use the pricing structure, full price or free. You don't cheapen yourself to undercut or to get more work, but you specifically target free shoots based on your ideal type of client. So for me, if I want to be known as the photographer who shoots luxary homes, I first need to shoot some luxary homes. In this situaiton, I would look for the "perfect" home and offer a free shoot.
If you want to be in the luxury market, first you have to spell it correctly... #justsayin
Sheez, that was a shocking typo - I should be flogged for that one.
Fair enough, but what you saw wasn’t my site, it was an example I gave typing in a hurry on my phone. Personally, I don’t market myself as a luxury house photographer - it was just an example.
I'm not trying to rag on you, but it's not an article, it's just a plug. If a newspaper ran an "article" that said "go watch the news, they had a great story there" would it be an article? Or is it an ad for Tim Ferris' show? It's ironic that the reason you fear for the future of photography is the same reason journalists fear for the future of journalism. If everyone is a photographer, then everyone is also a writer, as is illustrated by your "article."
It seems the majority of Fstoppers articles now are just plugs for content on other platforms. Without adding content or insight it's no better than a Facebook or Twitter feed. What I was trying to get at is that you actually have a story, about how Tim's show changed how you do business. That's really interesting and I'm sure lots of photographers and creatives would love to hear how you used the information to improve your business. What they don't want to hear is "it did great things for me, but I won't tell you how. Go listen to it and figure it out for yourself." In which case why did you bother writing about it? Most of your audience is already subscribed to the Tim Ferris show or have read his book.
Please try to take this constructively.
You're completely right, it is not an article, its a repost of something that I think is valuable. Tim, Seth and Chase don't know me - they've never heard of me. I chose to share this podcast because I genuinely think it is useful.
Regarding your second paragraph, I hear you. This was like finding an interesting (and free) video tutorial. I wanted to share it ASAP - I believe there is enough useful content in the episode to warrant sharing.
I would like to know how you came to the conclusion that the majority of F-Stopper readers subscribe to the Tim Ferris show though?
I'm more than happy to take constructive critism and I appreciate your thoughts. You've actually addressed the article, unlike comment 1.
"it is not an article, it's a repost of something that I think is valuable" - There's an abundance of super successful business masters like Tim Ferris and Chase Jarvis who have hours upon hours of great free advice and tips. There are millions of free/ affordable tutorials, webinars, workshops etc. We have phenomenal advice coming at us from everywhere at all times from all platforms, all channels, all feeds. But you rarely hear from photographers like you and I who can specifically point to one of these influencers and say "I did such and such and it actually made me a better photographer/business owner." Tim Ferris might have a great show, but you're the one who actually translated the information into real-world use, and benefited. That's so much more interesting than the podcast itself. That is the story. The podcast is just a source, I can listen to it later if I have time and if your story is compelling enough.
"I would like to know how you came to the conclusion that the majority of F-Stopper readers subscribe to the Tim Ferris show though?" - NYT best selling author with one of the most successful business podcasts of all time, featured on Chase Jarvis' channel many times.
Again, I mostly agree with you. However, it is also a bit like saying, there is a ton of useful, free information on Youtube, but it usually takes someone pointing out a specific video before I make the effort of watching it. For me personally, if I hadn't heard this podcast, I would appreciate an F-Stoppers repost of it recommending that I listen to it.
I too expect that everyone listens to the Tim Ferris show, but when I ask people, 100% of the time, they have no idea who he is. Once someone told me that their husband is a fan. I must have asked at least 50 people. Even with Chase Jarvis - I stopped listening to him for awhile until he interviewed a guest that I was interested in. It took someone reposting that interview for me to listen to him again.
To sumarise, I get what you're saying and agree that an article of how I've applied the principles would have been interesting and useful. However, I still believe that simply reposting the podcast will be of benefit to someone. Agreed?
We can totally agree on that point!
Everyone can cook and serve themselves their own food at their own table. So why pay for a meal at a restaurant?
Funny you should mention cooking - the podcast uses Noma as an example.
Bad analogy - some people realize they are not good at cooking, or have no desire to cook after working all day. Then you have to consider how many people are going to be at the table...
So what you are essentially saying is that not enough photographers realize they are not good at photography?
Totally agree with you. We do it because we love it. But we also need to pay bills.
I wish you all the best in following your dream!
In the eternal words of Shia LeBouf "Just do it!"
I thought that was Nike.
It was nike first, but shia lebouf became a meme for a while because of the video he released in front of a green screen shouting "just do it"
Pretty entertaining stuff.
"Why would someone hire you to fly around the world when they could save time and money hiring a local photographer?”
The question could have been rephrased: “Everyone is a photographer these days. Why should I pay your fee?”
That's not the same question at all! If a corporate, wedding or agency wants shots in Greece then it's cost effective to hire a Greek photographer rather than fly a photographer out.
How about if I rephrased it, "Everyone is a photographer these days. Why should I pay your fee if I can get it cheaper elsewhere?". In other words, what do you offer over the local guy that would make me pay a premium? This is the question that the podcast answers for me.
It depends on what you’re looking for as a customer. My clients need consistency and reliability. They know with 100% certainty what they’ll get from me. Paying the extra airfare is a small additional cost relative to the overall fee.
I agree with Howling Basset. The "article" took the question that the author fielded during his night out, thoroughly twisted it, and used it to force a segue to plug the podcast. I, for one, would have appreciated a more in-depth look at the value, from a business standpoint, of hiring photographers to go around the world instead of using local talent.
Presumably, a photographer based, for example, in Tangier would have a more intimate knowledge of that city, contacts with more local people and officials, access to more interesting locations when lighting is prime, and familiarity with local permitting and regulations to name several advantages.
I can see how you think that was the question, however, as I was the person being questioned, I can very much confirm that I was being asked “why would they pay extra to fly you there instead of using a local photographer?”
The question could have been rephrased: “Everyone is a photographer these days. Why should I pay your fee?”
Nope, that was not what she asked. She stated why hire you and not a local photographer.
Who is the she you mention? If it is Howling Basset, she specifically mentions it being more cost effective. If you meant the person that asked me the original question, he wanted to know why someone would pay the extra fee to fly me over.
Its a question of cost.
Damn, we got some grouches in the comments today. This is a FREE website full of daily content. It would be impossible for Fstoppers to make nothing but original content at the volume which they post. They'd have to start charging for the articles in order to pay the writers enough to take the time to do it.
So yea, a lot of the stuff on this site is sharing content that's already out there. And I am ok with it because there's so much of it out there that I am frequently not aware of it all. This podcast is a specific example. I have heard of Tim Ferriss once or twice but never checked out his work. This little anecdote as encouraged me to give him a listen.
I would love it though as a follow up if the writer could elaborate further on how he used Tim's advice to reshape his business model. I think it would be useful to see the tangible changes made and if he ever found a good retort to the condescending question he was asked.
Thanks for the contribution Christian. I would love it if you let me know if you found anything useful or thought prevoking from listening to the interview with Seth Godin.
Regarding an article on the subject, here is my commitment to you. In a few months time, once I've had a chance to assess the effectiveness of the changes I've made, I'll write a followup article detailing the changes I've made and whether or not they were effective.
Just a quibble: because Fstopper benefits from affiliate and product sales, this site isn't totally free.
Is that Peter McKinnon polishing that axe? :-)
I had to google Petter McKinnon. They could be doppelgängers.
And so we come back to the conversation about self-employed versus staff photographers. My job is not disappearing any time soon!
I’m not sure I follow Laz. Care to elaborate?
Oh, there was an earlier discussion on an article about whether or not one should be a self-employed photographer or look to be a staff photographer for a company/institution. I am the latter, but have been the former, and will never go back for the reasons you mentioned in your article.
To be a staff photographer sounds like a dream job!