Selling Prints

[Shadowman]

Interesting style, concepts, and back story.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF735u29OxQ

Outsourcing your print jobs should make it somewhat easy to price your prints, only problem is the a high cost of printing might limit your market due to high price tag.

[revi]

But is outsourcing your printing really that much more expensive? For a professional, I mean, who has to count his time as well: time spent printing can't be spent in hunting clients or taking photographs

[Shadowman]

But is outsourcing your printing really that much more expensive? For a professional, I mean, who has to count his time as well: time spent printing can't be spent in hunting clients or taking photographs

Hi Remco,

Depends on the printer used and size of the print, plus any mistakes I might make I would have to eat the costs. I found it interesting that the photographer in the video priced his prints to include any reprints he might have to do. I don't think the consumer should bear that costs unless the error was there own. I could use the formula from the link below to compare to outsourcing, I think Red River also has a cost of printing template on their website as well.

http://www.inksell.com/tip-printingcost.html

Red River link.

https://www.redrivercatalog.com/cost...-printing.html

[NorthernFocus]

Whether or not it's cost effective to outsource printing is like most things about photography... it depends. Most of us sell a few prints to supplement income or pay for our hobby. In that business model a printer likely doesn't represent a huge capital investment and/or we conveniently ignore it when analyzing the bottom line. Those selling fine art prints may need access to printers that cost thousands or tens of thousands of dollars. Unless they are hugely successful they likely can't justify the investment.

...any mistakes I might make I would have to eat the costs. I found it interesting that the photographer in the video priced his prints to include any reprints he might have to do. I don't think the consumer should bear that costs unless the error was there own....]

If photography is one's livelilhood, then whether or not it shows up as a line item on a spreadsheet, wasted ink, paper, etc, are added into pricing along with other overhead. Or the business is short lived. Hobby sellers have the convenience(if they so choose) of ignoring overhead costs when considering pricing.

[Shadowman]

Whether or not it's cost effective to outsource printing is like most things about photography... it depends. Most of us sell a few prints to supplement income or pay for our hobby. In that business model a printer likely doesn't represent a huge capital investment and/or we conveniently ignore it when analyzing the bottom line. Those selling fine art prints may need access to printers that cost thousands or tens of thousands of dollars. Unless they are hugely successful they likely can't justify the investment.


If photography is one's livelilhood, then whether or not it shows up as a line item on a spreadsheet, wasted ink, paper, etc, are added into pricing along with other overhead. Or the business is short lived. Hobby sellers have the convenience(if they so choose) of ignoring overhead costs when considering pricing.

Hi Dan,

Also, although it should be incorporated into the photographer's pricing template, the cost of replacing inks for a small format printer may only be $100max, for a large format printer around $500. Of course if only replacing one or two colors the outlay won't bite as much and another consideration would be cash outlays versus credit, sure it still adds up but credit might get you through the quarter and you might be able to rack up a few sales in a few days. One other thing to consider in the U.S. is distinguishing between hobby income versus for profit income.

[Manfred M]

All of the commercial photographers that I know outsource most of their printing. They have a specific commercial photo printer that they have worked with for years. The printer knows what they want and understands their instructions as to how to execute their prints. They all also have a decent photo printer at their studio that they can use for rush jobs; either the client is in a rush and needs the print "now" or the job came back from the printer with a problem and they don't have enough time to get a reprint done.

By the way, there will be a certain amount of wastage - misfeeds in the print, technical malfunction of the printer (smearing), goof ups, handling damages, etc. The commercial printer will have this wastage cost figured into their prices. If you print your own, its something one needs to do as well. If the client changes his or her mind about how the final image should look, that should be their cost, not yours. An example they want the print on a fine art paper after you deliver on your normal stock that had been previously agreed to.

The pricing model given is just as good (or bad) as anything else but it does not do a good job establishing what the IP value of the work is (i.e Intellectual Property). Most people would put a fairly low value on the IP of what you and I might turn out, but if you are a renowned photographer your name can be worth a lot more. If you hired a Joe McNally or Annie Leibovitz, the price just went up considerably.

[Shadowman]

All of the commercial photographers that I know outsource most of their printing. They have a specific commercial photo printer that they have worked with for years. The printer knows what they want and understands their instructions as to how to execute their prints. They all also have a decent photo printer at their studio that they can use for rush jobs; either the client is in a rush and needs the print "now" or the job came back from the printer with a problem and they don't have enough time to get a reprint done.

By the way, there will be a certain amount of wastage - misfeeds in the print, technical malfunction of the printer (smearing), goof ups, handling damages, etc. The commercial printer will have this wastage cost figured into their prices. If you print your own, its something one needs to do as well. If the client changes his or her mind about how the final image should look, that should be their cost, not yours. An example they want the print on a fine art paper after you deliver on your normal stock that had been previously agreed to.

The pricing model given is just as good (or bad) as anything else but it does not do a good job establishing what the IP value of the work is (i.e Intellectual Property). Most people would put a fairly low value on the IP of what you and I might turn out, but if you are a renowned photographer your name can be worth a lot more. If you hired a Joe McNally or Annie Leibovitz, the price just went up considerably.

Manfred,

Considering the estimated costs from the two links do you think the percentage used by the fellow in the video link is justified? I'll have to review the video again but I believe he based that on his own man hours as well as material costs. True he's the one doing the reprint but if the wastage was his fault and not the consumer then shouldn't that cost be an expense item and not a income driver? One other comment, I as a entrepreneur would never publicize my pricing strategy, I don't want my competitor to use it against me and definitely not my customer.

[Manfred M]

Manfred,

Considering the estimated costs from the two links do you think the percentage used by the fellow in the video link is justified? I'll have to review the video again but I believe he based that on his own man hours as well as material costs.

There are four different components that should go into figuring out ones costs:

1. Direct labour - that includes not just the photography time itself, but also getting to / from the site, time spent marketing ones work, editing, dealing with third party suppliers (printers) that are based on an hourly rate that you feel your time is worth.

2. Material costs - the consumables you use (ink), packaging materials, postage / courier charges, paper, image backup, fuel for the vehicle, airfare if you are flying somewhere, etc.

3. Indirect costs of the business that cannot be allocated to a specific job - rent, utilities, insurance, equipment repairs (including vehicle and photo gear), equipment depreciation (cameras and lenses do wear out and need to be replaced), taxes, etc.

4. Licensing of your IP to the client.

Once you have all that figured out, you need to figure out what your profit margin should be - add the four components and add a percentage markup to that. In general, that should be at least 50%. That's your gross profit. Any sales taxes collected for the various levels of government are added to that.

True he's the one doing the reprint but if the wastage was his fault and not the consumer then shouldn't that cost be an expense item and not a income driver?

It doesn't matter whose fault it is, it is still a cost to the photographer and needs to be absorbed somewhere. If you "blow" 1 out of 20 prints, you have to build 5% into your costs (material and labour) to cover for that. Otherwise you are effectively reducing your profit margins. I can 100% guarantee this is how any manufacturer or distributor does this.

[DavidPavlich]

My first real post and as a "printaholic", it's fitting. :-) I sell my prints, but as stated earlier, it's more about keeping me in ink, paper, and wood (I also make my own frames) than it is making a living. Being retired helps as well. It would take me a LONG time to actually pay for all of the investments, but I do it for the control, the fact that when I sell a print or three, I can come home and print the exact same thing over again and in any size that I choose. Well, up to 17" since I use an Epson P800.

Also, I'm not selling to seasoned artists or pixel peepers. Most of my customers are people that like different stuff and most probably never even heard of the Rule of Thirds or anything else in the photographer's lexicon.

And we can't leave out that printing is just plane fun! The cost of ink goes down measured per ML the bigger the cartridge used. My first printer was the ubiquitous Pro 100. 13ML cartridges for $16.95 US (OEM) or $1.30 per ML. My Epson uses 80ML cartridges at $54.95 US or about 69 cents per ML. I'm still on my first set of 80ML carts and have done a LOT of printing.

At any rate, home printing isn't for everyone, but for me, it's a joy to be able to control the whole process.

David

[Shadowman]

Hi David,

I know a few photographers who do one or the other, outsource or print themselves. Each has a large collection of prints for sale (at least two hundred) and each photographer sells their wares through different avenues; either online/art festivals or from store fronts/online. I'm currently using a seven ink system capable of A4 print size, have been looking at the P800 as an upgrade.

[joewatt]

I've never sold a photograph, alas, although I tried unsuccessfully through Etsy a few years ago. I'm curious as to how those of you who sell online do so. Through your own web site, or some other way?

[Shadowman]

I've been looking into smugmug and Fine Art America as potential sources for my images.

[joewatt]

Is 500px a viable option for this purpose? Or is it mainly a place to store photos?

[Shadowman]

Is 500px a viable option for this purpose? Or is it mainly a place to store photos?

File sharing only, I tbink mpix pro allows for printing.

[joewatt]

File sharing only, I tbink mpix pro allows for printing.

Mpix has done some excellent printing for me.