Student Photographer Looking for Help

[MotionlessMemories]

Hey everyone. Sorry it has been awhile since I have replied. I got really busy with other stuff. But I have made many changes to the site and would like some fresh opinions. I know I haven't changed everything that people have suggested but I have made some significant changes.

Also another question I have would be pricing. I know most of you have been in the photo business for several years and have a good understanding of what is a good price is. I have a feeling my prices might be to high, but maybe not. If anyone has any opinions and that please let me know.

Thanks everyone for your time. I really appriciate it.

Alex

[MotionlessMemories]

Also does anyone have thoughts or opinions on watermarking photos? I can't decide if I should. And if I do decided to I don't know how to.

Thanks

[Peter Ryan]

Hi Alex,

My view on pricing is - have a look on the web (e-bay or the like) and see what others are selling unframed prints for to a size and quality you think matches yours. If you are going to frame them then add on the retail cost of a frame and mount board (as this is what they will have to do). And then add a margin for the framing, this is a special photo not a print you can buy anywhere, etc. The trick if you continue is to get the cost down not the selling price up to make a profit. Cost control is everything.

I do not sell limited edition prints but tell the buyer I sell at a price that everyone can enjoy. It is important that you do not undercut and destroy the market for professionals but be realistic. I would prefer to sell three prints than wait and try and sell one for the limited edition price.

It will also depend upon where you are selling. At markets nobody comes with $350 for a print but they will pay up to $150 (depending upon size).

I do not watermark prints, the buyer wants to get a clear view of what he purchases not your name but I do sign my name on the mount board or on the canvass (like a painter) if I am selling canvass prints but in a silver ink that does not stand out.

I hope this helps.

[Colin Southern]

Also does anyone have thoughts or opinions on watermarking photos? I can't decide if I should. And if I do decided to I don't know how to.

Thanks

Hi Alex,

Yes - I have thoughts on watermarking!

On the downside, they usually ruin an image for everyone; but on the upside, actually, there really isn't an upside.

That might sound a little generalised - flippant perhaps - but I'm very serious. Usually people put them in a corner of the image, and unfortunately, this draws the eye to the watermark instead of leading it into the image. To make matters worse, people also often make them a very light colour. And what do they accomplish? Legally you don't need to watermark an image to assert copyright - also - it doesn't stop people copying your images (and yes, it's happened to me) - and furthermore, if someone wants to, it's a pretty trivial matter to remove them anyway, so they really don't achieve anything other than a theoretical slight discouragement and (no offence intended), but are any of our images so compelling that we really need to "protect" them like this? (I don't know about your work, but I have quite reasonable resolutions of ALL my commercial landscape images - unwatermarked - on my website. Yes, they've been lifted on occasions (take a look at "River and Rocks" here and then "Riwaka Rapids on my site), but to date, it hasn't taken any money out of my pocket, so I'm not losing any sleep over it).

PS: Guess what comes in at #2 on Photo Editing Offences ...

[Shadowman]

Hi Alex,

Yes - I have thoughts on watermarking!

On the downside, they usually ruin an image for everyone; but on the upside, actually, there really isn't an upside.

That might sound a little generalised - flippant perhaps - but I'm very serious. Usually people put them in a corner of the image, and unfortunately, this draws the eye to the watermark instead of leading it into the image. To make matters worse, people also often make them a very light colour. And what do they accomplish? Legally you don't need to watermark an image to assert copyright - also - it doesn't stop people copying your images (and yes, it's happened to me) - and furthermore, if someone wants to, it's a pretty trivial matter to remove them anyway, so they really don't achieve anything other than a theoretical slight discouragement and (no offence intended), but are any of our images so compelling that we really need to "protect" them like this? (I don't know about your work, but I have quite reasonable resolutions of ALL my commercial landscape images - unwatermarked - on my website. Yes, they've been lifted on occasions (take a look at "River and Rocks" here and then "Riwaka Rapids on my site), but to date, it hasn't taken any money out of my pocket, so I'm not losing any sleep over it).

PS: Guess what comes in at #2 on Photo Editing Offences ...

And I was planning to do #46, a triptych in HDR #5 but never got around to completing it. Now I am even more inspired to finish it.

[MixedHerbs]

I also use SmugMug and am pleased with it. I looked at your website and thought there was something not quite right. I think your photographs are fine. However, I think the versions you uploaded are too small and do not do your skills justice.

For example, display any page on your site and click on the larger photograph on the right. The photograph is re-displayed the same size. Look at the top of the screen, you are only given the option to display "S"mall or "M"edium.

Now look at http://mixedherbs.smugmug.com/Unusua...50020469_mHJyM

Click on a cabbage photograph, then click the larger photograph on the right. This time you will see at the top of the screen more size options. Choose "O" for the hell of it.

Peter.

PS. What kit are you using?

[MotionlessMemories]

Thanks everyone for responding. I really had no idea on watermarking. But I agree with everything that was mentioned.

Also Peter, the reason I have it set to small is because someone either in this forum or the other forum I use recommended it for reasons I cant remember off the top of my head. But you think I should go to Original? Also I use a Cannon T1i kit. I love it. Bought it from Costco and it came with the 18-55 IS lens an the 55-250 IS lens plus a bag and 4 Gig memory card. It is a great camera.

Thanks again for all the advice.

Alex

[MixedHerbs]

I see you have tweaked your website. That's better.

Peter.

[Colin Southern]

the reason I have it set to small is because someone either in this forum or the other forum I use recommended it for reasons I cant remember off the top of my head.

I like to post images at 900 x 600 for 1:1.5 aspect ratio; it does take up a bit more space (typically 1/2 MB), but at least it gives a good amount of detail.

Out of interest, a friend once setup a website with the idea of selling photos. He stuck to a very low resolution and stuck a watermark across the middle. To my knowledge, not a single photo was ever stolen ...

... or sold.

[MotionlessMemories]

Thank you so much again. I have deleted some photos that I thought were duplicated. So now the better ones can stand out more. I still feel like there is something missing or not as good as it could be so I created a short survey to try and narrow down the areas that need work. If you could please take it and maybe pass it on to others you refer the site to that would be great. The survey can be located at this link http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB22BSZCZTVCQ/
or by clicking the motionlessmemories logo on the top of my homepage.

Thanks again,
Alex