Time to play

The Christmas week is always a quiet time and after I have polished off the remnants of the turkey - I soon get bored. I took the opportunity, as a hardened Nikon user, to play with the Canon 5D mk2. After the usual first hour or so of trying to find all the right levers and knobs, I ventured out. Below are the results I achieved after the first couple of  hours play :)

It was an interesting experience and I liked the feel of the camera and in particular the quality of the glass (Canon 24-105mm F4) but the results of the chip left me a little disappointed. I found the images to clinical and precise in feel (for me) and I have to say the Nikon chips render a more film like image - which is my preference. Over the next couple of days, I intend to have a play with the camera under studio conditions and examine how reacts in a typical portrait scenario.

Have a 'Happy and Prosperous New Year'

Richard
www.richardsouthall.co.uk
www.emphasis.biz

All images copyright - Richard Southall

I want to become a professional photographer! (pt 1)

This a cry I often hear from keen and enthusiastic new-comers to the profession. While I welcome all new entrants to the profession, I do offer a few words of caution as people tend to confuse their passion with 'hard headed' business decisions. A wrong mistake (or two) could cost you dearly and severely dampen the love you have for this subject.

Up to about 20 years ago, there was almost a structured career path that most pros could follow to achieve their career objectives. This usually started, as in my case with several years at college/uni, followed by a couple of years assisting several photographers prior to making the final jump. This route proved extremely effective and led to the creation of several generations of prominent photographers. The balance of structured study (key-skills and  technical theory) followed by several years of assisting (intense problem solving) led to well prepared, and industry focused new snappers. But with the demise of the larger studios and reduction of budgets, the assisting element has gradually diminished (particularly outside London).

In many ways the loss of assisting experience has greatly impacted on the industry, with a lot of the lighting and technical knowledge not now being passed on to the newer generations. Also with the gradual loss of assisting experience - awareness of the industry and its networking opportunities, are no longer so readily available.

For all newcomers, there are a serious of profound choices to be made and these can be critical to their success. Do you still consider education as option or do attempt to enter the industry directly using your existing knowledge base and self-directed professional development (strong motivation is essential for this course)?

Structured education still has a lot of value but careful research and selection of courses will reap you the greatest return. The cost of education, over the last 3 years, has risen tremendously, and the majority of 2012 entry courses will cost £9,000 per annum. Things you should consider, as well as the structure of the course, are:

  - is the course actually about commercial/advertising photography?
  - what links does the course have to industry?
  - what have ex-students achieved over the last 10 years?
  - who are the tutors on the course - are they still practicing pros  (there is no point being taught by
    an academic who has never worked in a commercial studio)?
  - does the course have a business studies element (teach Beyond the lens)?
  - is the course affiliated/validated to/by any major professional organisations (BIPP/AOP)?
  - have you visited their 'end of year shows' and do you rate the images produced?
  - have you spoken to any current students on your visit to the academic establishment (they will
    soon tell you if it is 'any cop')?

Successful completion of a course, which meets the aforementioned criteria, is no guarantee of success but it will at least assist you in the process. For those who really want work as a full-time practitioner in this field, the qualification itself is not worth the paper it is written on but the time (3 years usually) invested in the course is priceless. In those years, you should produce the basic structure of your working folio which will enable you to attract commissions. This folio should contain 12-15 images which should shout out to potential customers who you are and what you can achieve for them. The folio should really contain no coursework produced images but rather the self-initiated ones which really truly reflect your abilities and creative thinking. Coursework based folios tend to suffer from a 'repetitive look' which reflects the universal nature of course assignments regardless of where the student has studied.

I was always perplexed as a tutor as to why students are so reticent about shooting images - surely if your on a photography course, you should have no excuse to distract you from your principle passion but most students only seemed capable of producing  images for their assignments (and for many this a struggle). Your time at study is a golden opportunity which you will not happen again - free access to studio space and equipment and more importantly, time to play. Please, if you decided on this route, use every opportunity that is given to you (it won't happen again).

I have previously mentioned assisting, so I will dwell too much further on it. But I would like to state again I feel it is an extremely valuable resource for a young (be experience not age) photographer. You will learn more in a week with a good snapper than you learn in 3 years at an academic establishment (provided you already have a good understanding of the key skills). There are few assisting opportunities out there so persistence is key to success.  Draw up a list of the top 20 photographers you want to work for and then contact them (starting at the one you want most). Don't email/write to them - photographers are illiterate for the most part (apart from reading bank statements and checking customers cheques) and they won't respond. You need to ring them and then keep ringing them. Eventually they we will agree to see you or get a restraining order against you. Persistence will pay off but it takes perseverance -  most give up after the first batch of emails. Remember 90% of commercial photographers were assistants themselves, so they know exactly what you are going through.

Also speak to the AOP, as they readily support assistants in their career development and their transience to working as a pro. Photoassist is another useful resource.

For those who are now ready to 'make the jump' - you really need to put your 'business head' on and put your heart away. You have to be brutally honest with yourself because this industry is a great leveller. You firstly need to consider how motivated you are to becoming a photographer. Do YOU have a firm faith in your creative abilities and a good grounding in technical skills and common-sense (only YOU can answer this).

You really need to live, eat and sleep this as otherwise it won't work. You will need to dedicate every waking hour to this for at least the next 5 years and you'll need that 'itch' to push you through the hard times. Also I cannot stress the impact it will have on your family life - photography is a cruel mistress and there are plenty of ex-photography partners and bitter 'photography widows/ers' who will regale you with stories of cancelled holidays, essential camera buys and missed family events.

If you are still convinced this is the way forward for you, then you will start to have looking at the   following:

  - business plan
  - marketing strategies
  - Copyright/Usage 
  - USP
  - finance
  - folio/book
  - resources

These I will cover in my next 'rant'. Have a great Christmas :)

Richard
www.emphasis.biz
www.richardsouthall.co.uk

Weekend Warriors - Destroying the Photography Industry?

Over the last couple of days, I have read several indignant pieces in the trade press and on-line forums by the so-called 'weekend-warriors'. These are part-time photographers who make an additional income by charging for their photographic services usually through weddings and social photography. Their anger has been stirred by a few professional photographers who have dared to raise the issue of regulating the industry.

It is something I have long toyed over but have been reticent to make a firm decision one way or the other. But after reading a letter by Stuart Taylor in the December issue of Professional Photographer, I feel I must respond. Yes the industry must be regulated! We have failed to regulate ourselves successfully and we are paying the costs in a catastrophic way!

I welcome competition from any newcomer to the industry and I feel potentially that both clients and myself benefit from the fresh challenges and new creative bars, which are raised,  by their entry. However, I want a level playing field and so do my compatriots. Over the last 10 years, photography has become far more accessible and affordable to new entrants and there is a perception (spread by some magazine editors of photo mags) that there are easy pickings to be made.

Stuart Taylor, in his rant against regulation and professional photographers, hit the nail on the head - "he often produces images of professional quality"- I am sorry but you need to produce professional quality images and service all of the time, not when you feel like it or capable of it. The most important word in professional photography is 'Consistency'. Clients don't mind if you consistently brilliant, good or average, as long as they know what they are going to get - they don't like nasty surprises. He then goes on to talk about buying expensive glass- any Muppet can do that as long as their bank manager bank-rolls them to do it. What I want is that these 'weekend-warriors' are bound to the same restraints and costs that we professional photographers are.

The things I would like to see through regulation are:

- They have Public Liability Insurance
- They have Professional Indemnity Insurance
- Provide Employers  Liability Insurance to anyone who helps them undertake a commission (2nd photographer/assistant)
- They are registered and declared their part-time earnings to the Inland Revenue
- Are they paying type 3/4 national insurance contributions
- Registered for VAT if their earnings are above the threshold
- Have they notified their car insurers of the secondary occupation
- Have they notified their landlords/mortgage company/council that part of their abode is being used for a part-time business and that they are complying and paying the additional monies due.
- Have given guarantees to their clients about safe, long term data storage solutions of their commissioned images
- Produced and provided COSHH risk assessments of how they work safely and their affect on others in a public environment.
- Have the requisite health and safety equipment if required
- Have all their electrical equipment (lighting, chargers, computers etc.) annually PAT tested
- Stated policy on copyright and licencing of images produced
- Regular Enhanced CRB checks (would you want anyone near your young children without one?)

If they complied with the above, I will happily compete against them. Please note, I have not asked for any regulation of creative input! I know that I am more than competent in this area to compete successfully. What I am tired of, is of people saying that these idiots will soon go out of business and you won't have to worry about them. The trouble is that they are only replaced by more. I feel it is about time the professional trade organisations stood up and stated what they expected what as minimum core standard of a professional (part-time or otherwise), seek the appropriate legislation and then seek to  monitor/certify/enforce that all practitioners comply. My God, even gas fitters, accountants and solicitors have achieved this!

I certainly can't image members of the public objecting to knowing that they are hiring a responsible, licenced and insured photographer. And I would happily pay a couple of thousand to prove I met these standards (if meant the idiots were driven out of the industry once and for all).

So Mr Taylor and Professional Photographer magazine, if you do read this, please take these comments on board - all we hardened and bitter Pros want is a level playing field (Please come back Grant Scott - the magazine has really taken a real nose dive since you left).

Richard
www.emphasis.biz
www.richardsouthall.co.uk

That's outrageous! Photographers shouldn't charge that much.....

So why does it cost so much to hire a 'professional photographer'?Are we making loads of money and deliberately thrusting outrageous charges on unsuspecting clients and individuals? Even fellow colleagues, in the creative industries, seem to have little understanding of our costs and out-goings. So I have decided to shed some light a little on our industry and hopefully make potential customers a little more understanding.

The average income in the creative industries (excluding photographers) in 2009 was £30,550.
Average Photography related  income (2009) - £24,150
Average freelance photographer income (2009) - £18,821
29% of freelancers made a profit (before drawings) of between £1-10K
16% of freelancers made no profit (before drawings)

The initial figures for 2011 look even bleaker with the average photographers salary now hovering around £12,500 (source - Salary Tracker).


Now please remember the average salaried wage in the country is £23,244 per year. So why do photographers appear to earn so little yet are charging day rates of between £400 to £2k a day? The simple fact are our costs, which have risen exponentially over the last ten years. A couple of years ago, with a fellow colleague Nick Goode,  we looked at the typical costs of running a photographic business outside of London, both as a studio facility and freelancer working from home and from those figures deduced the day rates that should be charged:

Studio Photographer	Per Year
Rent on 700 sq ft studio and ancillary offices	16,000
Rates	2,400
Electricity	800
Water	400
New Equipment purchase, replacement of old etc	5,000
Stationery and postage	500
Portfolio and advertising	3,500
Insurance – Studio and equipment	1,200
Pension Fund	2,700
Burglar Alarm maintenance	250
Air Conditioner	200
Redecoration of studio	500
Telephone and answering service	2,100
Two staff: assistant and secretary/stylist	24,000
Staff meals, including clients	3,000
Car leasing and insurance	4,800
Petrol and servicing	3,000
Foreign location travel insurances	400
Cabs and messenger service	2,000
Parking tickets	200
Carnets	80
Initial Towel laundry service	240
Account’s fees an other services	1,200
Bank charges on average balance of £20,000 expenses owed by clients	3,000
Total	69,600
Typical Working days per year (2009): 150 Amount needed to be earned per day	464

 

A studio photographer would typical have set-up/equipment costs of £37,750 which would include cameras, lighting, kitchen, sound system, office equipment, software, tools, backgrounds, sundry props, burglar alarm, data storage and phone system.

 

Location Photographer	Per year
Part-time assistant	4,000
Rates	1,000
Electricity	600
New equipment and replacement of old	4,500
Stationery and postage	500
Advertising and portfolio	3,500
Insurance – equipment and public liability etc	750
Telephone & answering service	1,800
Part time secretarial assistance (wife/partner)	6,000
Vehicle Leasing	4,800
Petrol and servicing for 28,000 miles p.a.	3,500
Travel insurance for foreign locations etc	600
Cabs and courier service	900
Parking tickets	250
Carnets. Visas etc,	400
Accountants fees etc	900
Total	34,000
Typical Working days per year (2009): 150 Expenses per day worked	226

A location/freelance photographer would typically have set-up costs of £32,250 which would include cameras, lighting, office equipment, software, tools, sundry props and security systems.


Now we have our base figures of £464 (studio photographer) and £226 (location photographer), we must consider how much they should earn in the way of drawings from their business. Given that the majority of real photographers have undertaken a substantial amount of training prior to their commencement of practicing (3-5 years at college/uni followed by 2/3 years as an assistant), it would not be unreasonable for them to expect to at least earn the average wage.

So lets divide £23,244 by 150 (typical amount of days worked/chargeable in 2009) = £154.96

If we now add this to our existing figures we get:

Studio Photographer - £464 + £154 = £618 (must earn in gross profit per day)
Location Photographer - £226 + £154 = £380 (must earn in gross profit per day)

So as you can see, the photographer is left no real options but to charge a realistic rate to cover his out-goings and also survive. The other thing that should be noted is that the amount of days chargeable, since 2009, has been greatly reduced - and is now around 75 days per year (1.5 days a week).

So when you are berating your photographer and trying to beat his costs down further, please try to be a little more understanding :)


Yours,

Richard
www.emphasis.biz
www.richardsouthall.co.uk

Ps
All figures for photographers' costings were produced in 2009, most costs have risen between 15-75% since this exercise was undertaken. A range of 15 photographers were used to compile this info - from industrial to portrait/social photographers. Industry figures - Skillset 2009

'I can't afford a professional photographer' - are clients lying to themselves?

Over the last few days, I have had some quite interesting and poignant conversations with several fellow professional photographers. These guys are specialists within their own fields whether it be fashion, cars, PR or architectural (me) but we have all been confronted recently by potentially new clients with the same cry 'we can't afford that? or 'it's just a photo - anyone can do that!'

It got thinking about how the industry and how clients perceive us has changed over the last 20 years. Also the ways in which our images are used and utilised by our clients. I think, until about 10 years ago, we were regarded as a vital link in the chain for a client to communicate their new service or product to market but this perception seems to have been somehow eroded by the introduction of digital imaging and web2.0.

I hear the arguments about photography has now become 'easier' with acceptable technical result produced by most compact cameras but nowhere recently do I hear about  the creative input of the photographer. With the growth of the digital economy, I have seen the decline of the traditional areas where my imaging has been used - brochures, ads,  journals, data sheets etc. But this has more compensated for with the growth on-line publishing and advertising. Now it is comparatively easy to distribute and view images of new products and services.

Which leads me to the point I began with, surely since people can easily access your relevant marketing materials (websites etc) or those of your competitors, surely having the best images on-line would give you the edge over your competitor and which will hopefully enable you to win that potential enquiry. Lets face it, we have all done it, once we have 'googled' a specific requirement and looked at a couple of result sites, we have nearly always have decided on a potential supplier before even speaking to them.

So why skimp on decent images that sell your service - what is this going to say to a potential client who is considering spending £2-3million or more on a project with you (either your poor pics will say your products or services are 'crap' or I don't really care how you perceive me as I don't care myself). So when you are considering spending £500/600 on servicing your BMW/Audi etc or installing new plotted plants around the office at £1000, could this money have been better spent on how people perceive you.

As one of my colleagues put it, he had been replaced by the 16yr old daughter of the chairman of major company who had bought her a £600 camera for Xmas. The chairman then couldn't understand the negative reaction of American multi-national who viewed the resulting catalogue/website and their subsequent withdrawl of their  custom.

So please think long and hard about how you want people to perceive you before selecting/commissioning the images you want to use - it could be a very dangerous false economy if you make the wrong choice..............

Richard
www.emphasis.biz
www.richardsouthall.co.uk

Genting Club - Derby

Images from this week's shoot at the  new Genting Casino concept venue, in Derby. Many thanks to all the the staff, in particular Nikki, who made this a really enjoyable shoot.

All images copyright - Richard Southall

Richard
www.emphasis.biz
www.richardsouthall.co.uk