I'm a professional photographer, and have been for some 28 years. I thought my reputation was no longer worth anything, but was pleasantly surprised to hear that art directors at advertising agencies in my area still hold me in high regard, far higher than I thought.
Would that they should send me paying jobs, though.
At any rate, I really want out of the business, which is why I started my website last year.
When I realized that the website would take longer to get paying subscribers, I picked up on a comment made from an assistant at an up-and-coming photo studio here in town. They had talked about hiring someone like me, someone with a proven record and contacts and reputation, to help boost their sales.
So far, so good. Early this year I sat down with the owner and everyone else who had the power to make decisions. They were hot to have me on staff. Very hot.
My offer was as follows: I would shoot for them for $500 a day. I proposed a standard rate for day-shooters who have little or no reputation at all. To put all this in perspective, I had been charging anywhere from four to ten times that much a day for my work when I was on my own.
What I asked for in exchange was a guarantee of five work days a month, whether they could sell me or not.
The reason I asked for so much less was that I expected their sales force--five sales reps--to be able to bring in work for me. In the interim, I wanted to continue to pursue my website.
Well, the marketplace has its own sets of rules. There's been practically no work for any studio in town for a couple of months. And almost no work for me.
The owner is concerned that he's paying me for not working. I can't blame him. He called it "welfare," and I certainly can't argue that point.
In the meantime, though, I've been cranking out new photos to attract new business, working on new looks that will attract even more business, and doing everything else I can to help this process move forward. The reaction to my new styles of photography have been overwhelming positive, to the point where the owners are thinking of spending the most money on marketing me, and putting their "established" photographers second.
Yesterday the owners and I had a lunch meeting about the lack of work. Their proposal was that I would not get a guaranteed $2500 a month. Instead, they set a new price structure: I will be paid $250 a day for creating portfolio photographs to bring in new business, and continue to be paid $500 a day for paying jobs. In other words, I would need to spend nearly every day creating new photos during what is typically a dead time of year, and hope that there are some paying jobs as well. Doing new photos is easy; coming up with the ideas takes time (ask Oleg).
After walking out of that meeting, though, I just had the feeling that I'd under-priced myself. That I'd agreed to terms that, if everything works out well, I'll be getting far less than the no-name photographer who just shows up and shoots, and then goes home: no thought, no input, no creativety, no research required for him.
Today I found out that the studio's main assistant is making more than I am. Granted, he's working more hours, but he doesn't have the name recognition, the ability to bring in new business, or the ability to bring in jobs with the kind of budgets that I can. On top of that, he's a neophyte when it comes to professional photography. He's twenty years my younger, but I suspect he'll never reach my level.
When it comes to negotiating business deals, I could screw up a free cup of coffee. Given what I've mentioned above, did I do a really bad job? And, if so, how could I improve it in the future?
BTW, I don't like to mention specific dollar amounts, but in this case it seemed necessary. If I told you the dollar amounts that the "big guns" in Chicago, NYC, LA, Atlanta, Portland, and Seattle were making, you'd probably all rush out and try to become photograpahers.
Thanks for any and all opinions.
