Mall photographer charges $99 per digital file!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by 223rem, Dec 14, 2005.

  1. 223rem

    223rem Guest

    I was checking out a shopping mall portrait studio, and I was very
    surprised to hear that they use Olympus and that they charge $99
    per RAW/jpeg file (they 'renounce the copyright' for the files
    they sell).

    A hundred dollars for a lousy digital photo?! And no professional cameras?
    Are these guys for real?
    223rem, Dec 14, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. 223rem

    Charles Guest

    Are people paying it? If so, why didn't you get the idea first?
    Charles, Dec 14, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. 223rem

    223rem Guest

    Charles wrote:

    I doubt that many people ask for the RAW files. And I'm not a professional
    223rem, Dec 14, 2005
  4. 223rem

    Paul Guest

    Depends on the photo.
    Paul, Dec 14, 2005
  5. Which Olympus camera? The E-1 is a pro camera.
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, Dec 14, 2005
  6. 223rem

    Darrell Guest

    What is your definition of a Professional photographer?

    What is your defintion of a professional camera??
    Darrell, Dec 14, 2005
  7. 223rem

    Tesco News Guest


    So that is their price, if you want the goods, pay the price.

    That is still fairly modest. There is a photographer who has a Studio in a
    near-by shopping centre (Mall). His price for a Framed 15 x 12 Colour Print
    is £500 ($750 ?).

    There seem to be enough people willing to pay that, to keep him in the
    lifestyle to which he has become acustomed.

    Roy G
    Tesco News, Dec 14, 2005
  8. 223rem

    Skip M Guest

    Sounds like GlamourShots. My daughter worked for them for about 2 days.
    They used an Oly E-10, at least they did a year and a half ago...
    Skip M, Dec 15, 2005
  9. 223rem

    HornBlower Guest

    The $99 price is probably 99% for getting the copyrights to the image, the
    rest is for the image itself. The fact that for that small amount of money
    they are willing to turn over the RAW file as well as the copyrights to it
    indicates it is a steal.

    Look at stock photo companies, you can pay a lot more for an image and still
    not get the RAW file or own the copyrights to it.
    HornBlower, Dec 15, 2005
  10. 223rem

    Anabella M. Guest

    Agree, more power to him, ...and more $$$ money $$$ too!
    He wouldn't be in business unless people were paying hi price.

    Cheer$, Anabella M.

    Anabella M.'s better to have loved and lost
    than to have never seen "Lost in Space"!
    --Kelly Bundy
    Anabella M., Dec 15, 2005
  11. 223rem

    eawckyegcy Guest

    HornBlower top posts:
    Yeah, but no stock house will hold "mall photographer" images in their
    databases -- they want to rent their stuff out, don'tchaknow, not hold
    on to worthless imagery -- so what is your point?
    eawckyegcy, Dec 15, 2005
  12. 223rem

    Bolshoy Huy Guest

    "His price for a Framed 15 x 12 Colour Print
    is £500 ($750 ?). "

    unheard of!
    I've heard $750 for an entire wedding, but for a single photos!?
    Bolshoy Huy, Dec 15, 2005
  13. 223rem

    223rem Guest

    What's the value of the copyright for a photo only a family member
    would ever be interested in? It surely isnt 99 dollars!
    223rem, Dec 15, 2005
  14. 223rem

    223rem Guest

    That's right! Very good!
    223rem, Dec 15, 2005
  15. Well to YOU it could easily be worth $99. My son just got pictures
    taken at his school, normal school pictures, and they turned out very
    good...I asked the photographer if I could get a digital copy of the
    file, so I could get my own enlargements, make a mug for the
    grand-parents, etc...his response was that it was $350 for the digital
    file (I'm sure it wasn't a raw file, just a full-size (6.3MP, as he was
    shooting a *ist Pentax camera) jpg image).

    His prices weren't high for the actual pictures, but I guess to let the
    digital file go, they wanted a chunk of change...I would have expected
    it if he charged alot for the prints, but a full package of like 24
    wallets, 2 5x7's, 2 8x10's, etc...was about $20, so he certainly wasn't
    ripping anyone off there...

    Basically the photographer has to weigh any possible sales to you for
    reprints, versus him giving you the 'negative' and then no more sales
    to you at all...$99 honestly sounds pretty cheap and if it was a good
    picture of my family I'd pay it in a beats scanning a
    print and trying to replicate them that way...been there done
    that...and it sucks.
    fj40rockcrawler, Dec 15, 2005
  16. 223rem

    Pete D Guest

    Nor is the guy in the mall, he is just a scammer.
    Pete D, Dec 15, 2005
  17. 223rem

    Skip M Guest

    That's why she quit. A) she couldn't stomach being a part of such a rip
    off, B) she had access to better equipment at home, but they wouldn't let
    her use any of it and C) they cared nothing for the client, only in keeping
    to a formula, including outfit changes, whether the client wanted them or
    not. Those, and they paid the photographer a ridiculously low wage. She
    walked halfway through her second day, the first being her training day...
    Skip M, Dec 15, 2005
  18. 223rem

    GTO Guest

    Only $99. How can this guy make a living?

    Since when do we need to use professional gears that cost 10k or more to
    make great pictures? Since when is it too much asked to charge money for
    one's work? Since when is it written that a photographer needs to give away
    his negatives for less than a double-digit amount? - No way, this guy needs
    to either increase his price or his quality of work isn't much worth.

    GTO, Dec 15, 2005
  19. 223rem

    c Guest

    I don't quite understand why people are saying this guy is a rip off artist.
    If he has a product that people are willing to buy at his advertised price,
    what is the big deal? I thought that was the basic concept behind free
    enterprise in the civilized world. Seeing what people pay for wedding
    photos, graduation photos, etc., this sounds cheap. It's amazing to me how
    people will criticize his equipment, and his pricing. It really sounds to me
    like there is a lot of envy green going around.

    c, Dec 15, 2005
  20. 223rem

    Charles Self Guest

    Why not raw with Pentax? My *istD shoots raw, as well as TIFF and JPEG.
    Charles Self, Dec 15, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.