Digital BW, The Print

Hello Tony, 
 
I was going to reply before but held off, however if you look through your analysis I think you will find that you have the maths wrong - you seem to be allowing $5 per print whilst his actual print prices are considerably higher than that, from 4 to 20 times from memory. Depending on the ratio of large to small prints sold that will make a significant difference to his bottom line.  
 
With regard to your sentiment I couldn't agree more as I suspect is the case for most, if not all, of the photographers I print for.  Whilst a few of my clients print volumes have held up, in some cases I have printed only one or two medium sized prints in the last year.  Needless to say the scanning work for those photographers has also dried up.  We are indeed living in tough times!
 
David Whistance 

________________________________
 From: Tony Sleep <TonySleep@...>
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, 19 February 2013, 11:48
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Photography That Doesn't Suck
  
 
   
 
On 19/02/2013 01:19, jimbo wrote:
> I didn't mean to upset or make you mad.. but your posture was odd for what
> I'm used too for who you say you are ok?

Jimbo, I'm not angry nor upset with you nor anyone else. Let me explain...

The OP had said he'd sold 30,000 prints in 12 years, which is a truly 
impressive number. I used to print and sell similar numbers back in 
darkroom days when prints were the standard medium of supply, or they 
wanted prints for reference, but nowadays buyers only want files. Not 
surprising as I work on commission, for repro. But like most pro's I have 
about a third as much paying work as I actually need, fees are stuck in 
the early 1990's, and the trouble with files is that they get stolen and 
orphaned and copyright abused. I've abandoned my public website since I 
did an audit of just 6 pics out of the 500 or so, and found infringing 
uses outnumbered legit, licensed use by 14:1. It's like trying to run a 
shop in a neighbourhood full of looters.

Anyhow, I've sold about a  dozen prints in the last 5 years. So anyone 
who's doing that well in the current environment is doing something 
interesting to me. As you say, adapt and survive. I'd love to be able to 
figure out some means to support more personal projects.

So I was interested enough to make some rough back of an envelope 
estimations based around my costs.

My own print pricing is very similar to the OP's but it's one thing if 
your business is based around commission fees and occasional stock sales, 
plus selling an occasional print.

It's a different proposition if print sales are the main source of revenue 
that must carry the whole cost of photography as well. And based on my 
costs, it was clear that even if I did somehow manage to sell similar 
numbers to the OP I still wouldn't make any money.

There are two possibilities at this point:
- Either the OP is using prices plucked from thin air in the hope things 
will work out well, but hasn't actually sat down and done any 
reality-checking with Excel. This is a tragically commonplace mistake.
- Or the OP has radically lower costs and makes a viable profit. Which is 
what he has subsequently said is the situation.

There is no more to it than that. There is a complete answer: it works for 
the OP, it can't work for me as my costs are as low as I can get them but 
still prohibitive.
-- 
Regards

Tony Sleep
http://tonysleep.co.uk/

   
         

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]