Yes, you read that right, up to ISO 204800—that is practically shooting in the dark.

Now my current camera is definitely out of date. I shoot with a D300, which was outstanding 5 years ago, but when the ISO goes above 800 gets really, really grainy.  It is also only a ¾ frame, which means I don’t get the full advantage from the lenses I like to shoot best.  All this leads you to believe that I am ready to sign up for the D4 as well.  Well, not so fast—I actually am not planning on buying it because I don’t believe my photography skills will make use of it.  I never have been one to go out and purchase the latest technology just because it is the latest, and that is especially true with camera equipment. When I get to the point where the equipment gets in the way of what I want to do, it is time to get new equipment.  I have reached that point with my current camera body so, don’t get me wrong, I am going to get a new camera, and soon, but am waiting for the D800.

The D800 shares a lot of the technology found in the D4, but things like a solid, nearly watertight magnesium frame are not that big a deal for me.  I don’t shoot a lot of pro sports events so the ability to shoot a sustained 11 frames per second is interesting, but not what I need.  The low light capability is something I want, and guess what?  The D800 will have close to that. Besides with the money I save, I can also buy that 14-24 lens I still want for shooting more landscapes.

Cameras are an extremely personal choice, and there is no right answer.  It is a tool, albeit a powerful one, which helps you hopefully capture the vision you have in your head. Don’t be swayed by hype, but match your needs versus the range of capabilities the manufacturers are building.

Let’s talk about the easiest measure of value – time.  The most visible time is that spent at the ceremony and the reception.  Let’s call that six hours.  How about photographing the bride and groom as they’re preparing for the ceremony.  That can take a couple of hours.  Is the photographer at the rehearsal?  Another four.  The total now is 12.  If the photographer uses a second shooter (I always do), it doubles to 24.  But, since most people want lots of photos on this important day, and family and friends have traveled to be at the event, we shoot photos of them and detail shots between the other parts of the event.  The last wedding we shot was about 30 hours of work (15 each).

At this point, most customers stop counting your hours, but you aren’t done counting time, yet.  Post-processing images is even more time-consuming.  Have you ever tried to review more than 3,000 photos, so you can narrow it down to a few hundred?  Once you have the picks chosen, you need to go into light editing.  One little blemish on the bride needs to be fixed on every photo before she ever sees it.  Once the couple picks their choices from the several hundred, I put time into making sure the photos are all look their best, retouching anything needed.  The post-processing time for our last wedding was 40 hours, making a total of 70 hours.  If you use a price spread of $500-$5,000, that works out to a little over $7 an hour at the low end and as high as $71.  You’ll pay more than $ 71 per hour for your auto mechanic.

But, wait, we haven’t delivered a single photo to the client.  Most of the packages my friend showed me included an album for the couple and smaller ones for the parents.  Since many of the younger generation don’t really have much use for paper products these days, we include an option to receive the photos on an Ipad.  These products cost hundreds of dollars.

Both Mark and I always use a second shooter when we photograph a wedding.  This allows you to photograph the same event from different points of view.  Your second shooter can help with lighting and add to the richness and variety of the couple’s photos of their special day.  Here’s the thing, though – you have to pay your second shooter.

If you try to shoot a wedding with a low-end SLR, the flash pops up, and the kit lens that came with it, you will quickly realize that you are about to disappoint the couple with the results of your efforts.  Weddings require better and more equipment.  These will add to the photographer’s expenses; expenses we will want to, eventually, recoup.

I haven’t mentioned taxes, business licenses, training, or the intangible of paying for experience and skill.  You get the idea.  I don’t think most people understand all that goes into the price for wedding photography.  This lack of knowledge can cause couples to undervalue the work of the photographer they hire.  And some new photographers undervalue themselves because of the lure of some extra weekend money. Both sides of this equation run the risk of serious disappointment.

The bottom line is people will pay whatever they decide is proper for wedding photography.  Photographers who shoot weddings will charge what they think is a fair price for their efforts.  But, both should understand all the components of how that price is calculated.

I don’t know which photographer my co-worker will choose, but, hopefully, he will pick someone who can give his son and new daughter-in-law photos that match their memories, at a fair price.

Let’s wander a little further down the road.  You are working at your job, and you like to eat and live in a house.  You aren’t ready to chuck it all and rely on your photographs to support your lifestyle.  But you want to make a little money, on the side, to pay for new gear.  How do you know what to charge?

One of the easiest ways to set your price is to look at what others are charging.  You can find out the information by looking at their prices on their websites, in galleries, or simply asking them.  This approach will keep you from unintentionally under-pricing your work.  You don’t want to come across as the low-rate photographer because that will ensure you receive lots of low-rate offers.  You can look at the quality of work that is selling and make a comparison with your work.  You can be objective about the quality of your work, right?  Sounds simple.

Well, major disadvantages to this approach is the challenge to match your customers’ expectations and understanding price realism.  The range of prices out there is very broad.  An easy place to see the range is the cost of wedding photography.  I’ve met wedding photographers charging $500 and photographers who start at $25,000 – that’s a big range!  My expectations would be very different from the two ends of this spectrum.

You shouldn’t use another photographer’s price list as your sole basis unless you understand how he arrived at his prices.  He may be pricing in his studio (do you have one?); 30 years experience as a wedding photographer (does your experience compare?); and include services in his contract that you never even considered.

You should be able to explain to your accountant exactly what factors you use to arrive at your prices.  Price comparisons have a place in that judgement, but they are only part of the equation.  I have a spreadsheet that allows me to make changes as different specific factors change.  This allows me to change my printing factor when my lab raises print rates, separate from what I charge for my labor, and separate from shipping charges, and separate from all my other factors.  All the factors add up to the rates I charge.  This allows me to consistently price my work and make specific adjustments as needed.  I don’t second guess myself when someone wants to pay less.  I don’t get annoyed or insulted.  I simply reply, “No sale.”  Because I took the time to work out and research my costs, I feel comfortable with my prices.  You may use a different system, but any consistent method beats guessing.

In the end, you have to decide what your price will be when you decide to sell an image or provide some photographic services.  Each step along the this continuum from free to fully-paid, professional photography services gets more complicated.  One size does not fit all.

Since this blog isn’t about being a full-time, professional photographer, I’ll stop here, at making a little money to support your habit.  There are many books and articles about the business of photography.  I’ve read dozens over the years, and many of them contradict each other.  If you want to support yourself in this business, you should take the time to work out your plan; hire a good accountant and lawyer; and research the opportunities and hazards of such a move.   And, just in case I wasn’t clear, you should do all this long before you hang out a shingle as a professional photographer.  Most professional photographers don’t fail because they lack talent; they fail because they are unprepared to run a profitable business.

There are a few things to think about when it comes to selling or giving away your images.  You have to determine which course you want to take.  But be careful that you are fairly consistent.  You don’t want to sell to some friends and give them away freely to others.  Remember, too, that if you start giving images away, people will usually resist if you change your mind down the road and want to charge for your work.  Let’s go through the spectrum of choices.

Everybody likes free stuff.  What the heck, you’re thrilled someone noticed, and it really doesn’t cost that much, right?  Right.  You can order an 11×14 on very nice paper, with a coating for about $10 from online labs.  Both Mark and I like Mpix.  They do consistently good work; have a large variety of quality products; and ship them to you quickly, in a flat box that prevents damage.  Surely, you can afford $15-20 (depending on shipping method) for Aunt Martha or your BFF.  It will make a lovely gift.  You’ll both be happy.

If the photo is for someone whose birthday is six months away and a little lower on your friend list, you may decide to give it to them for your costs.  You tell this friend, Frank, (who still hasn’t returned your croquet set from the neighborhood party) the price is $20.  That’s what you pay Mpix, so what’s wrong with that?  You aren’t making any money on the photo.

Well, Frank may counter that Walgreens will print it for $6 in about an hour.  It’s starting to get complicated….  I don’t like the paper that Walgreens uses, and their staff may be great folks, but they don’t get paid to professionally print photos.  I would take a bet that Walgreens doesn’t use the same high-grade equipment that Mpix uses.

You can see where this is going.  By now, you’re remembering how expensive your camera and lenses are.  You’ve been working hard to master that equipment, and you spent an hour or two playing with your expensive post-processing software getting that photo to look perfect.  Suddenly, giving away this photo is getting much less attractive.

I zoomed through the continuum from giving your photos away for nothing to a dawning that free photos aren’t free of expenses.   It will probably take you a little longer to settle this issue for yourself.  Only you can determine what, if anything, you are going to charge for your images.  I frequently give away photos, so I’m not saying you should never give them away.  I am saying you should factor in all your time and effort when you try to put a value on your work.

If you have any aspirations of making money with your camera, you need to think of the business end of this photography thing.  Next week, we will look at some ways to develop a formula for your pricing if you want to make money or, at least, break even.  When you have settled this issue in your mind, you’ll be able to put it aside and get back to the fun.

Mark and I are both music junkies.  We tote IPods with enough tracks to listen 24 hours a day, seven days a week, for more than a month before you start to repeat any songs.  Yeah, that’s a little ridiculous….  I even used to play around with several instruments, on weekends with friends.  So, naturally, we like to shoot photos while we’re listening to the jam session, and we both contributed to the text and photos in this blog.

Neither of us have ever shot a big name concert – that takes hard-to-obtain passes.  At a big name concert, you usually get in place for three songs, in the pits jostling with other photographers, and no flash or, if you’re really lucky, backstage.  It is a daunting task to get anything that stands out, but the request list is always long.  There are several musicians whose concerts might be worth this chaos.

We shoot small shows and jam sessions, consisting mostly of acts that we or our friends know.  There is a rich tradition of bluegrass and eclectic folk music here in northern Virginia, and we’ve been known to partake.  There are many local places here to enjoy these and other music genres.  Almost all of the artists are approachable and are happy to let you shoot and sign model releases, especially if you send them pictures.  Several of them have used our pictures, with photo credits, on their band sites or their Facebook/Myspace pages.  Mark even did a CD cover for one band.  As musicians never have any money, this is a good trade.  Sometimes you can even trade digital images for digital music.

It is tough to get the richness and depth their music conveys onto an image.  Lots of times, the poses are just, well, repetitive.  Microphones obstruct the faces and instruments; weird and bad lighting is the norm; and you have to be careful not to antagonize the audience as you move around to get a better angle.  We both try to catch the musicians’ expressions as they really get into their music.  This usually nets you the best shots but means you will spend most of the concert with the camera stuck to your face.

Make sure you know the rules before you start snapping.  If you talk to the management and artists before the show, you will have a much easier time.  Many venues and musicians frown on flash use during a set.  Talk to the venue manager and the artist, so you don’t interfere with what they are trying to do.   It won’t help your reputation as a photographer if you get tossed out of the show. 

Outdoor concerts are the easiest because you usually have lots of light and more room to move around.  Since these tend to be smaller concerts, the rules are often less onerous.  The picture on the left is from the Kerrville Folk Festival, in Texas.  This is Don Gibson and Jim Ringer at the 1980 show where I met Townes Van Zandt and Nancy Griffith.  The shots in the center and on the right are the Woodshedders at the Leesburg, Va., courthouse concert, in 2008.  Microphones everywhere!

If you do this enough, you get a better feel for when to shoot the shots.  The next shot is from the Bangkok Blues in Falls Church, Va., a blues club with great Thai food.  We know the former owner and always get friendly support when we take shots there.  Even though there is another microphone, the lighting was awful, and Ace from the band, Jubal Kane, was wearing a weird purple suit, this is one of my favorite shots.  No flash; no tripod; long lens (70-200, f2.8); and Ace really wailing on his blues harp.  Great band!

Mark got a good one at the Watermelon Park Festival, in Round Hill, Va., of Melissa Wright on the mandolin.  She plays with the Acoustic Burgoo, and they even remark at her laughing at the end of songs.

Mark had a jam session at his house while I was off – working hard – on my photography in Aruba and Curacao.  This is good portrait, from that night in November, of Ken “Harney” Harnage.

Finally, I shot the last image at our favorite wine bar, The Iron Bridge Wine Company, just a couple of weeks ago.  This was the first time Tina Hughes played at the IBWC, and we had made previous arrangements with her and management to shoot a couple of shots.  I didn’t want to shoot too many because it’s a cozy environment, and I had to use flash to get anything of use.  I shot exactly 15 frames (a new low count for me).  Mark held the flash outside the bar and pointed it through the window, while I triggered it from our seat at the bar.  It’s a standard shot, but she likes it and that always makes it a good shot.