Are Clients Balking At Paying Film/Processing Costs?

Alan Browne wrote:
OTOH, for a large formal wedding portrait (40" x 25") a LF film shot
will produce a superior result in most cases.

I could see billing something like this as an "extra", but I would
still expect it to be one overall quote, and not broken down into
processing, materials, etc. As a customer I have not a care in the
world about it other than the final product and the final cost.

"george" wrote

I've always known "NRE" to stand for "non-recurring engineering" costs.
That doesn't make sense here. So, what does NRE mean?

Non-Recurring Expenses?

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/index.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com

george wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...

Most businesses want a "turnkey" result with a list of what is included
that meets their needs. This may include one price for setups and NRE


I've always known "NRE" to stand for "non-recurring engineering" costs.
That doesn't make sense here. So, what does NRE mean?

Non recurring expense (the usual term is "engineering").

In setting up a wedding photo set, there are non recurring expenses
(time, film, rentals, etc.)

Recurring expenses are the prints, etc.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

TheDave© wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
OTOH, for a large formal wedding portrait (40" x 25") a LF film shot
will produce a superior result in most cases.


I could see billing something like this as an "extra", but I would
still expect it to be one overall quote, and not broken down into
processing, materials, etc. As a customer I have not a care in the
world about it other than the final product and the final cost.

I didn't imply that everything should be broken down, quite the opposite.
The other point is that a customer might select package "A" at $1000 and
then request prints that are beyond the package offering. So the quote
would like:
Package A $1,000
Extra prints: $ 200
Portrait $ 350
Total whatever

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

TheDave© wrote:
jeremy wrote:
Now that so many pros have migrated to digital workflow, are clients
balking at paying film and processing costs to those professional
photographers that continue to shoot on film?

Do you even itemize those line items separately, or just present one
combined bill?

Take, for example, weddings: do the digital guys mention the
advantage of not having to charge for film? I would think that could
be a selling point in situations where large numbers of images are
captured.

If I were a client, I would balk at separate processing costs,
absolutely. It wouldn't matter if it were 1967 or 2007. It's all part
of the overall process. Separate line items like that make me feel
like the photographer was being dishonest by quoting me a low price
just to get the business then padded their profit by adding extras
after-the-fact. As a customer, it would make me feel lied to... taken
advantage of. Quote me a price and be done with it.

Wouldn't it depend on whether the itemized bill == the quoted cost?

I.E. I quote $XXXX.xx for the job and then hand over an invoice that
breaks it out as:
Photographers time
+ materials
+ processing
+ this
+ that
= $XXXX.xx

What's your beef?

TheDave© wrote:
george wrote:
"TheDave)" wrote in message
jeremy wrote:
Now that so many pros have migrated to digital workflow, are
clients balking at paying film and processing costs to those
professional photographers that continue to shoot on film?

Do you even itemize those line items separately, or just present
one combined bill?

Take, for example, weddings: do the digital guys mention the
advantage of not having to charge for film? I would think that
could be a selling point in situations where large numbers of
images are captured.
If I were a client, I would balk at separate processing costs,
absolutely. It wouldn't matter if it were 1967 or 2007. It's all
part of the overall process. Separate line items like that make me
feel like the photographer was being dishonest by quoting me a low
price just to get the business then padded their profit by adding
extras after-the-fact. As a customer, it would make me feel lied
to... taken advantage of. Quote me a price and be done with it.

This is just my attitude, however, and is a general attitude. It's
not restricted to just photography.
Must be rough for you looking at the cellphone bill, the landline
phone bill, the cable tv bill, etc., etc., etc. But I DO agree with
you. Can you imagine how it'd be if you bought your groceries and
then saw separate line items for building rent, merchandise
transportation, loss due to spoilage, utilities, and labor costs
added on. Many businesses have a business model that is the height
of arrogance.

Phone bills, etc., generally add taxes and government-imposed fees, and
while I still don't "like" it, it's easier to understand why they're
listed separately. I did get into a lengthy discuission with my phone
company customer service rep one day because I was questioning many of
the items (many of which were named identically on the bill) and she
either couldn't or wouldn't tell me what they were for.

There was a big debate awhile back on an eBay newsgroup over what
constituted "handling" in shipping & handling and what the customer
should pay extra for. It was surprising to me how many sellers thought
customers should be billed for gas and time to the post office, etc.,
when justifying high shipping costs. I thought most overhead should be
priced into the item itself and not added at the end, and used an
example similar to yours that most stores do it this way.


FWIW, "Handling" is getting the item off the shelf, placing it in the
box, padding as necessary, sealing the box, filling out the paperwork,
labeling for UPS (or whatever carrier), contacting the carrier to pickup
or taking it to the carrier's drop-off. It includes the cost of the
shipping materials and the time the shipper has to take to prepare it
for shipment. Handling is the cost of getting the product to the common
carrier.

PLUS PROFIT, never doubt that.

What the carrier actually charges to bring it to you is "shipping".

Handling may also cover any difference between what's quoted to you for
shipping and what it actually costs the shipper. Based on rate tables
and estimated weight of the package, they guess-timate UPS is going to
charge them $6.00 to bring it to you.

When they get the bill from UPS it's actually $6.75 ... that extra $0.75
should come out of "handling".

Generally they're lumped together, and handling charges shouldn't rise
quite as much per piece from an order, i.e. an order with 3 separate
items in one box shouldn't have any increase in handling, although there
might be a small increase if multiple boxes were required, but it
wouldn't double for 2 boxes or triple for 3.

Shipping OTOH, will increase based on the number and weight of cartons
shipped.

Skip wrote:

Digital has more advantages than that.


So does film, but that wasn't the question asked.

george wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
Most businesses want a "turnkey" result with a list of what is included
that meets their needs. This may include one price for setups and NRE

I've always known "NRE" to stand for "non-recurring engineering" costs.
That doesn't make sense here. So, what does NRE mean?

Non-recurring expense, i.e. something that you only have the cost of one
time, like the time you use up doing the client's shoot. You wouldn't
have to repeat the shoot every time the client requested additional prints.

"Pudentame" wrote in message
...
TheDave© wrote:
jeremy wrote:
Now that so many pros have migrated to digital workflow, are clients
balking at paying film and processing costs to those professional
photographers that continue to shoot on film?

Do you even itemize those line items separately, or just present one
combined bill?

Take, for example, weddings: do the digital guys mention the
advantage of not having to charge for film? I would think that could
be a selling point in situations where large numbers of images are
captured.

If I were a client, I would balk at separate processing costs,
absolutely. It wouldn't matter if it were 1967 or 2007. It's all part
of the overall process. Separate line items like that make me feel
like the photographer was being dishonest by quoting me a low price
just to get the business then padded their profit by adding extras
after-the-fact. As a customer, it would make me feel lied to... taken
advantage of. Quote me a price and be done with it.

Wouldn't it depend on whether the itemized bill == the quoted cost?

I.E. I quote $XXXX.xx for the job and then hand over an invoice that
breaks it out as:
Photographers time
+ materials
+ processing
+ this
+ that
= $XXXX.xx

What's your beef?

I can see where this would be useful if you sold the items
separately....That is, one charge for being there and taking the photos, and
then other charges for the amount of further work done....The number of 8 x
10's and etc......There may be some who just want the digitized images, or
the film (if you use film) and nothing else....They want to build their own
"Wedding Book" over time......

TheDave© wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
OTOH, for a large formal wedding portrait (40" x 25") a LF film shot
will produce a superior result in most cases.

I could see billing something like this as an "extra", but I would
still expect it to be one overall quote, and not broken down into
processing, materials, etc. As a customer I have not a care in the
world about it other than the final product and the final cost.

Those extras are not part of the original package. They're additional
items you sell the client when they come in to view "proofs" and choose
the items they want in their package.

They get everything their contract calls for with no additional cost.

Example: the package includes a wedding album - 50 images or so,
professionally printed and bound (contracted out - cheaper than
physically manufacturing it in house).

You've shot 300 or more images for them to choose from. They choose the
50 they like best for their album.

BUT, while you've got them there, your chance to actually make a profit
comes from being able to "upsell" them.

Maybe that's by getting them to changing their order into a 100 image
album, or by purchasing other goodies like that 40" x 25" gallery wrap
or framed portrait.

Today it's done with a comfortable sitting environment and digital
projection. Have the image ready to go & have the frame on a stand ready
to place where the projection will sit right inside the opening.

And it doesn't end with them deciding to take those 50 or 100 images.
Sometime later, they may be back and want additional photographs that
were among the 200 or so they passed over the first time.

Or maybe there's pictures of Uncle Joe at the reception and the bride
can't stand Uncle Joe. He was only there because he's Aunt Mildred's
husband ... but Aunt Mildred DOES want to buy those pictures of Uncle
Joe at the reception.

How easy the sale is depends on your market. If you're doing a lot of
$3000 - $5000 country club weddings it's a lot easier to upsell that
$500+ gallery wrap than if you're into the budget weddings (less than
$1000).

Meantime, the happy couple get what they (or the bride's father)
contracted for, and your invoice should show that, then break out any
extras they subsequently decided to add to the order.

Generally, I'd show it as:

"Premium Package"
X hours Photographers time (and materials) - period, lump sum
Itemized package consisting of
1 album of 50 images,
5 - 8x10,
25 - 5x7,
web site for 1 year
... whatever is in the package they signed for - lump sum
Travel & lodging, if applicable - as stated in contract

*THEN* come itemized additions -
Y additional hours @ rate - IF Photographers time beyond package.
Upgrade album to 100 images,
Additional 16x20 wedding gown portrait, framed
25x40 gallery wrap (for the bride's parents)
Anything else additional you can sell them AFTER the shoot ...

If they don't want to buy any extras, there's no additional itemized
charges.

This much for film, that much for film processing, another cost for
printing doesn't appear as an itemized item. They're part of the charge
for time [stated] and materials [implied; allowed for in rate for time].

The other thing to consider is your philosophy on when to bill for
additional time. The one wedding photographer I'm familiar with doesn't
bill anything additional unless it runs several hours over ... anything
that requires him to reschedule his flight home or might interfere with
him making another shoot (also shoots commercial contracts for magazines).

But he's averaging $10K a pop for the weddings he shoots & doesn't shoot
all that many, and who complains anyway if the client ends up keeping
you over in Tahiti (at the client's expense) a couple days extra.