How do you incorporate and recoup film costs in your workflow?

Hi

I have asked this question at photo.net from the other way round and my answers were mostly "you gotta charge for post-processing, storage etc" which is was not really my point, so I'll try here.

What I am trying to grasp is the best way of charging clients when you use film in your workflow. Lets take the following example (the prices are just figures - don't take them literally - they can obviously vary):

You are hired to photograph an event. You choose Kodak Portra NC which costs you, say £5 a roll. You shoot 5 rolls so that's £25 for the film for that shoot. You then send it off for developing, at, say, £5 a roll for dev and some 6x4 proofs. A further £25. For easy deployment to the web to show your client you pay an extra £3 or £4 to have 'standard' quality images burnt to CD from the negatives too so there's another £15 for the shoot. So thats £65 before you've even started that you have to recoup before breaking even.

I realise clients are not generally concerned as to HOW you get the image - they are concerned with the quality of the finished product and how much it costs them.

When I asked this at photo.net I got comments about the prices used in the example, and the fact that with digital your running costs are higher but I don't see a one off payment for a disk or something as a major issue.

So my question is this - how do you incorporate the price of your film and how do you pass that onto the client without them complaining or realising? Using the above example, if I were asked for a quote, and I said "Well, I'll need 5 rolls of film so for that and development that will be £65 then my fees are £XXX on top and prints are £XX each.". When you compare that to digital, they won't hear "...5 rolls of film" - just "My fees are £XXX" and if I don't mention the price of the film at all, then my prices are just comparatively higher than my digital competition.

I love shooting film, and I feel more confident that my results will be better for the client when shooting film, but I'm unsure how to pass this cost onto the client without losing customers so wondered how you guys do it?

Ted

Maybe add a 'materials' fee to the bill?

Your estimated costs for the film, processing, etc. represent the base of your fee structure, then you add what you'd like to get for your time, and that's the number you quote. I wouldn't disclose the film costs to the client, unless they are specifically asking for film work, and even then, only if they're asking for something extraordinary.
I expect that itemizing the film costs and disclosing those, could put you at a disadvantage with folks working digitally, even though their base costs may well be similar if you consider that they have much higher equipment costs to amortize with each paid project.

IMHO.

Kind of off topic, but how do you guys incorporate your equipment costs into the bill?

Why do you have to justify yourself to someone? You just say, this is what I charge for this amount of images, prints, CD/web, etc, and you incorporate your time/experience fee in that stated total. They should not be asking how much it costs YOU to do what you do. They are buying your service and products, not making it for themselves. Just to let you know, I bought just prints service from a wedding photographer about 6 years ago, 120 images, coverage of ceremony, posed faux-cake-cutting, maybe an hour of reception shots of the people at the tables, and that was around £300-£400 without any web or scan or anything, photographer using 35mm film.

For commercial work I typically I charge a day rate for my time. Film, processing or any other expense are added to the invoice as part of the job. This has been standard since I started shooting professionally about 20 years ago. Trying to do it any other way is asinine. You can't be expected to have a flat fee for expenses, because expenses vary with the job. You aren't competing with digital, and cost wise as far as a price shopper goes, and the myriad of morons who cater to them while they wait for their "big break", you can't anyway. If your clients are price shoppers, you need new clients anyway. For portraits, the sitting fee covers my time and film expenses, and prints are charged for ala carte. Any special expenses (props, locations, etc.) are agreed upon and charged for.

In the UK it's fairly normal to charge a fee per hour and then material & processing costs on top of that - with a markup usually x2. Sometimes you give the customer an all in price based on those fees etc without giving a break-down.

Looking at costs from different perspective I've often commissioned work from other photographers, and always get film/processing at cost,in effect only paying the photographer fee. I've also done that at a wedding, being given the films by the photographer when he leaves, and in fact I've done the reverse for a photographer friend, he gave me film, I shot his wedding & handed the film back. However thats not the norm.

The major problem now is people don't like paying anything as nearly everyone has a reasonable Digital camera so it's harder getting a decent fee & profit.

Ian

You should not make a difference in cost of material between film-based and digital client work. I don't, but I charge more when the target quality has to be higher (larger prints...) and then I use film.
At the end of the story, the investment in cost of material of digital vs. film will equalize: film hardware tends to have a longer lifespan than digital tools.

If you explicitely add film & processing cost to the clients' invoice/bill, they might think they become owner of the films... which is never the case with my work.

JBrunner said:

For portraits, the sitting fee covers my time and film expenses, and prints are charged for ala carte.

Click to expand...

Ditto here.

G

JBrunner said:

For commercial work I typically I charge a day rate for my time. Film, processing or any other expense are added to the invoice as part of the job. This has been standard since I started shooting professionally about 20 years ago. Trying to do it any other way is asinine. You can't be expected to have a flat fee for expenses, because expenses vary with the job. You aren't competing with digital, and cost wise as far as a price shopper goes, and the myriad of morons who cater to them while they wait for their "big break", you can't anyway. If your clients are price shoppers, you need new clients anyway. For portraits, the sitting fee covers my time and film expenses, and prints are charged for ala carte. Any special expenses (props, locations, etc.) are agreed upon and charged for.

Click to expand...

what he said ...

JBrunner said:

For commercial work I typically I charge a day rate for my time. Film, processing or any other expense are added to the invoice as part of the job. This has been standard since I started shooting professionally about 20 years ago. Trying to do it any other way is asinine. You can't be expected to have a flat fee for expenses, because expenses vary with the job. You aren't competing with digital, and cost wise as far as a price shopper goes, and the myriad of morons who cater to them while they wait for their "big break", you can't anyway. If your clients are price shoppers, you need new clients anyway. For portraits, the sitting fee covers my time and film expenses, and prints are charged for ala carte. Any special expenses (props, locations, etc.) are agreed upon and charged for.

Click to expand...

When I routinely hired photographers for a magazine, my expectation was a day rate (which was too low, I'll confess), plus expenses which included film and processing, and travel. Within reason, I let photographer's pad the expenses because our day rate was so low.

Another magazine I worked for had longer assignments, and we would set a budget which included the film/processing, and travel expenses as well as the day rates.. often, say five days. In those cases, we wanted to keep within the budget for that month's issue, but still always made sure expenses were covered.

If I were still a photo editor, I think those film/processing costs would be about the same and just called "post-production" or some such, as the photographer is doing a lot of what a lab used to do. Still the same expenses, really...

Not that day rates have moved up much...

Expenses come off the front end of a job: film, lab, equipment rental. They write it off.
Therefore, I give them an itemized list when I bid, and they either give me an advance, or include remuneration when the job is done.

There has been an argument about whether you pad the bill for film, to recoup the actual costs of having it on hand. That is fair only if you DO keep it on hand, and a rip off if you don't.

You cover your equipment costs by amortizing your ownership, and that may or may not be included in your day rate. If you lease your gear, your costs are reflected in your day rate. This is pretty basic stuff. Check out the website for ASMP, and check your local tax regulations to see how it works for you.

The way your client won't jib over expenses is to get it all clear in writing - in the contract - before you begin. If you think you have to hide something, either the client isn't doing his part, or you aren't doing yours !

Make it all transparent. That is what being a professional is about. Granny said, "If you always tell the truth, you never have to remember what you said to anybody."

AND the contract ALWAYS reminds the client they are only licensing the use of certain images under specific conditions.



( SUZANNE ! DAY RATES: Unchanged Since 1965 )

.

I can add only a small bit of insight to what J, Suzanne, and Don have said (those describe pretty accurately the method I've always used).

I buy the film at discount and bill it at list. I make the proofs, prints, etc. myself and charge what the best custom lab around would charge for them. Client pays for every mile driven, parking meters, bridge tolls, airplanes, cabs, everything. If the job involves models, etc. all fees are passed through, including meals, motels, etc. Receipts are provided for all billed expenses and everything is itemized. I'd not accept a job from anyone who expects to own the pictures outright and I make sure everyone knows that. A lawyer friend read a contract I wrote (which got ME paid when others got stiffed) and told me I'd have made a FINE lawyer.

Dayrates for magazines are typically (at least in my experience) advanced against use. That is, a certain amount of publication is anticipated and paid for in advance. If you don't meet that anticipated amount, the publication eats it, but one wouldn't want that to be the norm. Publication in excess of the amount prepaid arrives as if by magic when the print hits the stands.

I have not had difficulty in porting this across to all manner of clients outside of the magazine world. Buyers in the commercial world usually have experience with this. I don't think this is much different from what they expect, if at all. Nobody's ever complained. At least, not complained twice.

I've been enjoying NOT billing for some time now, though! Not billing, and not shooting for clients! WOW!! Photography can be fun!

Bowz.... not shooting pro can be fun, and the pony enjoys the rest !

df cardwell said:

Bowz.... not shooting pro can be fun, and the pony enjoys the rest !

Click to expand...

Right on Bro!!

I itemized one shoot for the musician's union, and found it to be too much of a hassle for me, and too complicated for the people reading the bill and writing the check. After that, the times I have used film on hire, I just incorporated the estimated materials and lab costs into the quote. I did not itemize materials and lab fees on an invoice. Either way, it is easier and cheaper than digital...just not faster, which is what people really want, even if it costs more. People I have worked for have never wanted film or prints, either; just digital files. To tell you the truth, working for money is quite a hassle to me. I guess I am just not made for it.

I would also think to the two levers used in management: the financial lever and the operational one. They can explain how the competition might offer lower prices, and also help you to get financially competitive in a changing business environment.
Please google and wiki for details.

Usually, the publisher comes up with a proposition : that is the subject for a book, the amount of pictures, the dead line and the budget. To take ore to leave.
I have 'done' book's that hardly left me with a brake even, but I liked the subject and the people to work with, and this is of higher value than money, but a lot harder to make a living of!

I stopped counting 'tomato's' like a grocer, I just try to keep the expenses in control, but quality comes always first!
I only do the counting at the end of the year, just checking if it was worth it, and to see how much taxes I will have to pay...

Philippe

Basically day rate, expenses and an "x" factor for how and where the image is to be used.

The day rate is what I charge to turn up and do the job. Included in this figure are all the costs that it takes for me to work, so my equipment replacement costs are factored in here, office and studio costs, my wages, health insurance etc.

Expenses are what it costs me to do the job. I determine whether the job requires digital or film depending on intended usage, so the customer does not have a say in this. Film, developing and processing is all marked up at 100%. A lot of my clients don't want me to process the digital images because their graphics guys will do that, but if I'm to do it I'll either contract it out if its a big job and charge the client, or I'll do it myself and bill the client for my time.

The "x" factor is basically if the image is to be used for a global add for 1 year that will cost more than say a shot appearing as part of an editorial in a small regional magazine. If the client wants to buy out my rights, doesn't happen very often, then that figure will also come under the x factor.

JBrunner said:

For commercial work I typically I charge a day rate for my time. Film, processing or any other expense are added to the invoice as part of the job. This has been standard since I started shooting professionally about 20 years ago. Trying to do it any other way is asinine. You can't be expected to have a flat fee for expenses, because expenses vary with the job. You aren't competing with digital, and cost wise as far as a price shopper goes, and the myriad of morons who cater to them while they wait for their "big break", you can't anyway. If your clients are price shoppers, you need new clients anyway. For portraits, the sitting fee covers my time and film expenses, and prints are charged for ala carte. Any special expenses (props, locations, etc.) are agreed upon and charged for.

Click to expand...

In any such service business, there are two components to your charge - a set-up fee for the costs associated with being prepared to accomplish the work and a charge for deliverables. Think about getting business cards printed. There is a charge for typesetting etc and then a charge for quantity. That is why buying 1000 business cards is not much more than buying 100.

But Jason really hits the nail on the head - if your customers are looking for you to justify each and every line item, then you need better customers. Good customers understand the value your bring to them and pay accordingly. They don't care about how you carry out the job.

Many businesses wind up or limp along as the walking dead because they have chosen their customers poorly.

OK - so lots of interesting views here.

So taking the example I started the thread with, is the general consensus as follows :

Film (aka 'expenses', 'post-processing', 'materials') costs you £65 to buy and develop, but then you mark it up at around 100% so cost to the client is around £120
Daily rate - £XXX (lets say £200 for arguments sake)

So, quote might be £120 + £200 = £320

Is that about right?

Ted

ted_smith said:

OK - so lots of interesting views here.

So taking the example I started the thread with, is the general consensus as follows :

Film (aka 'expenses', 'post-processing', 'materials') costs you £65 to buy and develop, but then you mark it up at around 100% so cost to the client is around £120
Daily rate - £XXX (lets say £200 for arguments sake)

So, quote might be £120 + £200 = £320

Is that about right?

Ted

Click to expand...

My quote would be (numbers for numbers sake) "$400/day+expenses"

I won't estimate film and processing before hand unless the job is a well defined one, with a client I am familiar with. Even then, there is a disclaimer that it is an estimate, not a quote.

Ted I'd have thought that key to this is to research what the local or even not so local pros charge. If you then cost out what you need to charge to make a fair remuneration(I.e. one that satisfies you) you'll know what margins, if any, you have to play with. If the clients are even in the loosest sense of the word "acquaintances" they'll expect a lower quote. If they are commercial strangers they'll still expect a lower quote to give you the business, especially if you're the new kid on the block, but not giving a lower quote doesn't leave any aftermath adversely affecting the relationship at least.

I'd especially check that none of your rivals have special access to, wholly own or partly own a mini-lab as well. To compete in those circumstances must be nigh impossible unless such a person demands very high fees. It's what I'd be up against in my locality but no problems because I'd rather eat my own entrails than attempt to set myself up as a commercial photographer.

Who dares wins of course. I just don't dare.

Best of luck

pentaxuser

Charge a rate (daily, hourly, weekly, etcc) plus expenses (materials, travel, etc...) plus mark up (optional). As JB mentions, quote the rate, estimate the expenses. This is common practice and generally accepted too.

Regards, Art.

my estimates usually have a full breakdown
labor / field
film/processing
printing
office
travel / mileage
rental ( if i need to rent a generator )

the client always wants to compare apples with apples ..
i know people who just have a number they send for a bid, no breakdown.
while i am sure this works for them, i would rather my clients
see what they are paying for .. instead of imagining whatever they might
be imagining happens .. whether it be with a d-cam or with a f-cam.
film and processing costs don't amount to much in the end anyways ..
d-prints (post processing, scan optimization, burn fee ...
or whatever they add on for the hours spent staring at the screen and clicking )
costs more in the end then prints in the dark ...
d-cam-stuff ends up being more expensive then f-cam stuff anyways ...
so i wouldn't worry much about saying how much your film and processing might cost
they are getting a bargain with a film shooter!

bravo, john

beyond gettting the job,
you need to have a career.
Frost wrote, "...Nothing gold can stay."
Typical New Englander.
The challenge is to build a life in photography, not a job or two.