Shooting digital is more expensive than shooting film, so why do some people do it for less?
There is an increasingly common misconception that digital photography has no cost per frame. When images were made using film clients understood that film, processing, proofing, printing, scans and Polaroids would all be appearing on their invoice. With a reusable memory card and delivery by electronic means it is therefore some people’s conclusion that these production costs have been negated.
To help clients and some photographers (who work for low rates) see through this myth it seems necessary to explain some elements of the wider picture:
1. Capital costs - When a photographer bought a professional film camera this was a seriously long-term investment, lenses would be added and spare bodies would follow but these cameras were going to be around for a long time. Until I moved to digital I still regularly used cameras that I had owned for 10 to 20 years. Improvements in imaging technology were made in film emulsions and every photographer benefited from this each time they bought a roll of the latest type, which was paid for by the client. Today with digital cameras we all have to stay ahead of the curve by buying into better sensor technology, meaning expensive new cameras are now bought at regular intervals.
2. Processing costs - Creating a digital image from a RAW file requires equipment and software both of which, unlike the equipment in a darkroom, require constant upgrading. To be clear here I’m not talking about the variety of retouching, CGI or post-production that may be required (after all the photographer may not be doing this in-house), I’m talking about getting from your camera to a proof; download, storage, some basic adjustments and corrections to enable upload for preview.
3. Delivery costs - Just because you don’t courier a transparency any more it doesn’t mean there are no delivery costs. Broadband connections, FTP sites and the equipment to use them all involve expense.
4. Storage costs - Paper storage pages for negatives or transparencies (which the client had already paid for) have been replaced by hard drives, DVDs and server space (which the photographer is now expected to pay for).
I believe that there is a very clear need for education here because these costs must end up on our invoices. Whether included in rates or as a separate fee, clients and new photographers (who are often far too keen to discount) need to be aware of the unavoidable cost of digital imaging. Everyone appreciates the benefits in turnaround but many more need to understand the economics yet I see these issues getting very little exposure.
By Stephen P., Commercial Photographer from the UK
for Commercial Photography LinkedIn group.
My Blog | Facebook Fan page | My Website | My ModelMayhem
No comments:
Post a Comment