Been offered a photo job opprtunity

jonneymendoza

Hi all. i am purely just a Hobbies and while out doing my 100 strangers project http://www.flickr.com/photos/josh1408/sets/72157629897447438/with/7270441772/ some woman approached me and asked if i can do a photo shoot of some trainers that her shop will be selling.

i told her that i am no pro and still learning but she insisted and gave me her number. i also did take a shot of her for my project as well(not posted yet).

I don't think i will go for it for a few reasons:

1. i don't have the right tools for the job. i only have one strobe, no umbrellas or reflectors, and no blank canvas for possible background(unless they want a natural looking shot and not one done in a studio)

2. i don't think i have enough experience and skills yet to do studio work(see my Flickr, its mostly street/architecture shots with a couple landscape ones.)

Am i right in denying this wonderful opportunity or should i go for it? Or, should i ask more questions about location, type of shot they want etc etc?

As a complete noob, do i do it for free? if not? how much would u pay a amateur to do "product" shots such as trainers/footwear?

AnCatDubh

do you want to work as a paid photographer?

if yes, then this is a break and you should take every break you get.

so long as the individual is aware of whatever limitations you may have then I don't see a difficulty with it assuming when you get to see what they are looking for that you don't scream foooooooook. Normally where there will be a problem is where you come across as knowing exactly what you are doing and then makes a dogs dinner of it.

If the person knows that you are amateur and has reasonably grounded expectations that you are ok with, then go for it.

if yes to the opening question, then yes charge. If you are only starting then you could agree a fee based on seeing the end result (obviously, if they don't like the end result then they don't pay but your conscience will be clear). Kinda make sure you get a sense that the individual is genuine if agreeing such a deal. Only hand over watermarked proofs and on payment hand over the full thing.

Remember you are liable to pay tax on whatever earnings (yeah, even as a once off job though it may turn into others) - assuming you are in the tax net at the moment. Eitherways you are required to account for it even if not in the tax net if I understand it correctly.

If you were interested in trying it out, then g'wan. It won't hurt and worst case scenario is that you might lose some time which you will be chalking up to experience in any event. So, nothing to lose i'd think.

jonneymendoza

If i have to pay tax then does that mean i have to setup a business account etc.

i would not mind doing it as a "part time" job to earn a bit extra on the sides but i would not completely give up my day job for photography.

Great advice though thanks!

OldGoat

You'll be supprised at the amount of product photoraphy accessories you have laying around the house, or can buy for smallchange. Sheets for backdrops, an off camera flash and a homemade reflector, a popup laundry basket. A couple of reading lamps will do if you colour correct the RAW files.

Spend this evening researching/working on the shot and THEN decide if you can do the shoot.

It's not like she asked you to photograph cutglass and jewelery.

Fujiguy

Go for it is my advice, i have offered free portraits to try and learn and gain experience to no avail, so would jump on any opportunity like this, its rare!

If I was you I'd not decide to go for it or not yet, and first just email her and ask her if she could possibly send on a photo from a Google search that'd look something like what she wants to achieve.

If it's a complicated studio photo that you don't think you can do, pass on the job and leave it be.

If it's a shot that looks fairly straight-forward and you think you can do it; go for it.


If this is the first time you're being offered work, then it's obviously going to be exciting, but try to be objective about what they want and what you can give them.


If you make a mess of your first job, it can be very difficult to recover from (even if you do take the time to spell out to them that you're not a pro, etc.). Think it through, and certainly don't do it for free (there are certain things I can understand doing for free, but product photography isn't one of them). With regards to payment, I'd figure out how long you think it'll take you (remember - you'll need to post-process, these, too) and work out an hourly fee you'd like to get.

uck51js9zml2yt

If you're a PAYE worker you just need to inform revenue of your earnings and they will make the adjustment.make sure you invoice her

jonneymendoza

OldGoat wrote: »

You'll be supprised at the amount of product photoraphy accessories you have laying around the house, or can buy for smallchange. Sheets for backdrops, an off camera flash and a homemade reflector, a popup laundry basket. A couple of reading lamps will do if you colour correct the RAW files.

Spend this evening researching/working on the shot and THEN decide if you can do the shoot.

It's not like she asked you to photograph cutglass and jewelery.

cheers. this is my lame attempted at product shots when i was practising off camera flash using two remote triggers i got off ebay a couple of months ago


IMG_8238 by jonneymendoza, on Flickr


IMG_8232.jpg by jonneymendoza, on Flickr


How to attract the sexy ladies by jonneymendoza, on Flickr

Fujiguy wrote: »

Go for it is my advice, i have offered free portraits to try and learn and gain experience to no avail, so would jump on any opportunity like this, its rare!

Deleted User wrote: »

If I was you I'd not decide to go for it or not yet, and first just email her and ask her if she could possibly send on a photo from a Google search that'd look something like what she wants to achieve.

If it's a complicated studio photo that you don't think you can do, pass on the job and leave it be.

If it's a shot that looks fairly straight-forward and you think you can do it; go for it.


If this is the first time you're being offered work, then it's obviously going to be exciting, but try to be objective about what they want and what you can give them.


If you make a mess of your first job, it can be very difficult to recover from (even if you do take the time to spell out to them that you're not a pro, etc.). Think it through, and certainly don't do it for free (there are certain things I can understand doing for free, but product photography isn't one of them). With regards to payment, I'd figure out how long you think it'll take you (remember - you'll need to post-process, these, too) and work out an hourly fee you'd like to get.

Cheers thanks for that. just got the go ahead from the missus and she is very encouraging. anything involves me potentially getting more ££ and she will be happy lol

Harlee Clever Tapestry wrote: »

If you're a PAYE worker you just need to inform revenue of your earnings and they will make the adjustment.make sure you invoice her

I see ok. I am not clued up with taxes and what not but is their not a limit on how much you get taxed and be accounted for NI as well?

Gear below that i have:

Canon 400d gripped
70-200f2.8 mk2
tamron 17-50 f2.8
50mm f1.8
430exII

swingking

looking at your flickr set - 100 strangers - you have some really good photos so you really should do this. The experience would be very beneficial to you. Best of luck

jonneymendoza

ahh thanks mate! really appreciate it.

AnCatDubh

jonneymendoza wrote: »

I see ok. I am not clued up with taxes and what not but is their not a limit on how much you get taxed and be accounted for NI as well?

NI ?

jonneymendoza

AnCatDubh wrote: »

jonneymendoza wrote: »

I see ok. I am not clued up with taxes and what not but is their not a limit on how much you get taxed and be accounted for NI as well?

NI ?

National insurance

pete4130

A perfect stranger approached you to do work for them, purely on the basis you had a big camera around your neck, without seeing any of your work previously. It's obvious this person doesn't really know or have an in depth understanding of photography.

This might result in her being shocked when you charge her and how much you want to charge her. More than likely she'll have the "sure your only pushing a button and giving me the pictures off the memory card" attitude.

By all means go for it. Worst case scenario for you is that it pushed you, you put your hand to something different, new, did your research and come out the end of it with some more knowledge and experience.

The chances are you won't be 100% happy with your results. The chances are, her seeming to be so clueless will be delighted with whatever you give her at the end of it.

If for whatever reason she isn't happy with the results, then that is her issue for walking up to a stranger on the street asking them to do work for her. It can't come back negatively on you other than not being asked by her to shoot photos for you again. Take the opportunity and see what happens. Prep by researching other images, trying to emulate them.

Lightstands and brollys can be bought on amazon for €30 a set if you want them and radio triggers are probably about the same for a cheap set. A bed sheet works as a backdrop. It can all be done on shoe string budget.

Studios look more menacing than they really are. The simplest set up is 2 strobes, one master, one slave to kill harsh shadows.

sebphoto

I wouldn't do this if I were you. Everything is easy if you know how to do it.
Get some experience first, practice at home or rent a studio for few hours and you'll see the difference.
As pete4130 says: you won't be 100% happy with your results.

Golden rule - don't do any job for free and without proper contract.

dinneenp

Hi,
Why not do it? Explain up front what you've mentioned. If she's not happy with them she can ask a pro then. you'll have gained a new experience, shooting 'under pressure'.
You have one life, try new things.

These are some photos I took of some new trainers I bought a while back. I know they are not profesional looking but I enjoyed taking them, without flash or anything.

http://www.photoblog.ie/2011/07/23/a-d-i-d-a-s-run-run-run-run-run-run-run-run/

http://www.photoblog.ie/2012/05/05/and-i-would-walk-500-miles/

http://www.photoblog.ie/2012/05/12/pumped-up-kicks/

Cheers,
Pa.

ScumLord

jonneymendoza wrote: »

1. i don't have the right tools for the job. i only have one strobe, no umbrellas or reflectors, and no blank canvas for possible background(unless they want a natural looking shot and not one done in a studio)

You don't need any of those things. Trainers can have an urban background. They'll look perfect next to concrete, timber floors and just about anything because their part of just about any environment they won't look out of place anywhere. That allows you to shot outside in the sun light. The only reason you'd need to have the studio is if your shooting a load of different products and you want them to fit in with the look of the site or you've a something specific you want to achieve.

If you have photoshop you can cut out the trainers and have the picture look perfectly acceptable. It's a more long winded way of doing things getting photoshop so involved but on one off pictures it's not that big a deal. Although I'm more comfortable in photoshop than I am behind the camera so I may be slightly biased there.

2. i don't think i have enough experience and skills yet to do studio work(see my Flickr, its mostly street/architecture shots with a couple landscape ones.)

All the more reason to do it.

As a complete noob, do i do it for free? if not? how much would u pay a amateur to do "product" shots such as trainers/footwear?

That's where haggling may come in, but as it's an experience in it's own right I think you should take the value of that experience into consideration.

ScumLord

ScumLord wrote: »

All the more reason to do it.

Well now hang on. Admitting you don't have experience/knowledge to do a job isn't "all the more reason to do it".


Who, me? Why, I've never photographed a person before in my life, but I'll happily take on a job doing your corporate portraits!


If you can't do something then you learn it until you're more comfortable. Practice alone or with friends or as part of a group. You don't put your hand up and say "I don't think I can do this" and still walk into the job anyway.

It's this kind of attitude that's encouraging people to not bother learning or ultimately giving a sh*t about the work they produce for people. There was a thread in the workshop subforum a while ago about a photographer who took on job in a nightclub doing their social photos, but quite clearly hadn't got the equipment or knowledge to do it properly.



Now, I'm not having a go at the OP here. I've no idea what his photos are like or if he'll do a great or terrible job, but I don't agree with encouraging people to do work they admit they don't think they can do.

Yes, there are always jobs you do when you're making it up as you go along and hoping for the best (usually the first time you do a certain type of event or such and aren't fully sure of the way it works), and yes there are times you take a few risks and hope it goes well, and maybe I'm alone and may come across like an asshole here, but you take such risks knowing that you're able to adjust or adapt on the fly and, at the very least, have an idea of what the person who has hired you is expecting from you.


In this particular case, as I already said, I'd just get in touch and find out what it is exactly they want in their photos. People are saying urban backgrounds and such can look well for runners, and that's true, but it doesn't help you if they want a plain black background with their store logo imposed on it for their website. You need to find out what it is they want and work from there (of course make suggestions along the way, but ultimately you're working for them, so it's what they want that matters).



Doing a great first job can lead to more work, and can become a nice earner and a great way to pass time. Doing a bad first job can do irreparable damage to your reputation (and photography is a word of mouth business).


This forum is full of people willing to give advice and help. Find out what it is the person wants and come back and you'll get lots of advice. Work on your approach and practice, practice, practice (and as these are product shots of a common item, you have no excuse not to).

I wish you the best of luck if you go for it OP (but do make sure you charge).

jonneymendoza

cheers mate thanks

ScumLord

Deleted User wrote: »

Well now hang on. Admitting you don't have experience/knowledge to do a job isn't "all the more reason to do it".


Who, me? Why, I've never photographed a person before in my life, but I'll happily take on a job doing your corporate portraits!


If you can't do something then you learn it until you're more comfortable. Practice alone or with friends or as part of a group. You don't put your hand up and say "I don't think I can do this" and still walk into the job anyway.

If this was a more professional setup I'd agree with you that he shouldn't have a stab at it but this woman approached him in the street and I'd imagine she's got fairly low expectations and just wants a picture for the site done cheaply. It could be a learning experience for both of them, she could learn that if she wants it done right she has to put the money and effort into getting the right photographer. Some people need to learn these things the hard way.

It's this kind of attitude that's encouraging people to not bother learning or ultimately giving a sh*t about the work they produce for people.

I never said not to learn, I said this would be a learning experience. Dealing with people is sometimes half the job and you can't do that in your bedroom.

There was a thread in the workshop subforum a while ago about a photographer who took on job in a nightclub doing their social photos, but quite clearly hadn't got the equipment or knowledge to do it properly.

That's very difficult yes, but I do believe learning the hard way is often the best way. You don't make those kind of mistakes twice. It may not be the nicest way to learn but they're lessons that get permanently stuck in your head.


That's just my take on it, I know where your coming from and can't really argue with you but the OP, by his own admission isn't a pro and has little reputation to lose. If he does this job and never does another days work as a photographer he'll be no worse off than if he didn't do it.

I can kind of see where you're coming from, Scumlord, but a lot of the time the 'have a go photographers' aren't very good, and this doesn't always give the person the impression that "you have to pay to get a good photographer".

In my experience, it gives more of a "sure I could that myself" thought process and invariably hurts the photography profession as a whole as the person just starts taking their own pictures.


Either way, it doesn't really relate too heavily to this particular instance, as, with enough Googling, product shots can be done against a random white wall with a flash gun, and I'm sure our OP will be okay on the day.

Hugh_C

Just do it.

sebphoto

Hugh_C wrote: »

Just do it.

Nike

Reoil

Frig paying tax - for a one-off job of a few quid, I doubt you're going to land yourself in prison. Somebody gave me £60 for shooting a christening. Am I going to give the government 20% of that? Feck off.

Reoil

Don't get me wrong - I'm not encouraging tax evasion - I pay tax from my full time job. I'm just saying that, anything I make in my spare time above and beyond that, I take to be my own pocket money.

DaireQuinlan

Reoil wrote: »

Frig paying tax - for a one-off job of a few quid, I doubt you're going to land yourself in prison. Somebody gave me £60 for shooting a christening. Am I going to give the government 20% of that? Feck off.

Top tip: If you ARE planning on a spot of tax evasion, don't announce it on a public forum :rolleyes:

Reoil

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Top tip: If you ARE planning on a spot of tax evasion, don't announce it on a public forum :rolleyes:

Reoil wrote: »

Don't get me wrong - I'm not encouraging tax evasion - I pay tax from my full time job. I'm just saying that, anything I make in my spare time above and beyond that, I take to be my own pocket money.

magicbastarder

20%?
i wish my marginal rate was 20%.

jonneymendoza

magicbastarder wrote: »

20%?
i wish my marginal rate was 20%.

mines 40% and i had a similar debate on another forum where i said i would not pay tax man for one off jobs but if it was a frequent part time thing i would

AnCatDubh

Sorry, but not paying taxes, apart from committing an offence in law, is one of the many things that gives amateur photographers a bad name within the photographic industry and justifiably so.

If you are deciding not to pay taxes, you are picking up income that someone who pays their taxes like a professional photographer would be due, and denying society a source of income which it has a democratically appointed call upon.

By all means do work for free if you wish and have no tax liability, but if earning an income then your civic duty obliges you to declare the income as may be appropriate. It is not a difficult thing to do - Just build your tax liability into the cost of providing the service. Simples.

If its worth doing, then its worth doing right.

jonneymendoza

AnCatDubh wrote: »

Sorry, but not paying taxes, apart from committing an offence in law, is one of the many things that gives amateur photographers a bad name within the photographic industry and justifiably so.

If you are deciding not to pay taxes, you are picking up income that someone who pays their taxes like a professional photographer would be due, and denying society a source of income which it has a democratically appointed call upon.

By all means do work for free if you wish and have no tax liability, but if earning an income then your civic duty obliges you to declare the income as may be appropriate. It is not a difficult thing to do - Just build your tax liability into the cost of providing the service. Simples.

If its worth doing, then its worth doing right.

so then i will charge 1k-£800 for a job then. no point charging anything less then that or else u might as well do it for bloody free.

problem is, many clients would be put off with high fee's especially from a part time tog.

Fact is, its not tax invasion people who put a bad name on photographers, its the lazy people who dont work a single minute in there life and get a council house under their roof, food for free etc etc all paid by US HONEST tax payers.

DaireQuinlan

jonneymendoza wrote: »

Fact is, its not tax invasion people who put a bad name on photographers, its the lazy people who dont work a single minute in there life and get a council house under their roof, food for free

I don't understand. Perhaps you could explain in more depth how "lazy people who dont (sic) work a single minute in there (sic) life and get a council house under their roof, food for free" are putting a "bad name on photographers" ?

all paid by US HONEST tax payers.

Not two posts after you've declared your intentions to evade tax if the opportunity ever comes around. Oh the ironing

magicbastarder

what's tax invasion anyway?

jonneymendoza

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

I don't understand. Perhaps you could explain in more depth how "lazy people who dont (sic) work a single minute in there (sic) life and get a council house under their roof, food for free" are putting a "bad name on photographers" ?


Not two posts after you've declared your intentions to evade tax if the opportunity ever comes around. Oh the ironing

Basically i dont know about in ireland but in the UK. there are a lot of people who live in a council estate for free and on benefits and that is where a lot of our tax goes too.

My point is that in the UK its those people who are making a joke of our tax more then toggers who are invading tax.

Last i heard you dont go to jail/punished for so called "intentions" if commit the crime and get caught then its all fair and dandy

AnCatDubh

I'm honestly not having a go at you and respect your right to your opinion on this but I personally think its misplaced.....

jonneymendoza wrote: »

so then i will charge 1k-£800 for a job then. no point charging anything less then that or else u might as well do it for bloody free.

Lets assume your approach is it will take you a days work in total and if your time (as currently in a paid employment) is worth €200 nett per day (this assume probably 90-100k job a year) and you want to be compensated in line with that (allowing for the detail that your photography work may not be to a standard of which your many years main employment yields the €200 nett per day but c'est le vie).

Then the job price is simply €200 plus about €130 = €330 in total of which you then give your 40% back to the revenue. You may have expenses to deduct or whatever - ok, its a blunt example. Nett = €200 to you.

A job taking a day producing decent work for €330 should be a cost which the business can bear. Bear in mind they simply will deduct it against their end of year profit anyways.

problem is, many clients would be put off with high fee's especially from a part time tog.

I'll give you that however that isn't your problem. You'll win some, you'll lose some. With your civic obligations, you are better letting those walk that would rather a 'cash'/below the counter/brown envelope deal which will have you at variance to the laws of the state.

Fact is, its not tax invasion people who put a bad name on photographers, its the lazy people who dont work a single minute in there life and get a council house under their roof, food for free etc etc all paid by US HONEST tax payers.

You may have misunderstood what I was saying, people in council houses with free food, etc... have nothing to do with photographers getting a bad name. Perhaps they are a cost on the state but we live in such a state and whether we like it or not, we are in a caring society. Argue this or not, its off topic from what is being discussed here.

My point about being responsible for amateurs having a bad name within the industry was that an amateur comes along and does a photo job as per above example;

Option (a) Amateur charges €200 in cash deal.
Option (b) A Photographer who relies on such work for their living proposes to charge €330

Decision by the business - Amateur gets the work and they pay €200 cash.

Now, the photographer relying on such work for their living actually takes nothing more than the amateur for their personal gain (assuming same tax bands, etc..). Both end up with €200 for their work.

So, within the industry amateurs appear to be looked upon with scorn not because they are better or worse photographers ( while a full time photographer may claim this to be so, I think we all realise an amateur may be better/or not than the full time photographer depending on who they are), but because there may not be a level playing pitch.

That said, I am certainly not generalising photographers in business to be squeaky clean. Perish the thought. Many may be. Some mightn't and perhaps conduct the same €200 "special" but that's an entirely different argument and it is what absolutely sends me into hysterics when we have individuals arriving on forum here and other places claiming that amateurs are ruining the industry. I think their greatest enemy in such regard is not the amateur but those within their industry itself that flout the laws.

By the way, I'm not suggesting that if an amateur wants to do the job for €200 and pays their tax out of that of €80 (40%) or thereabouts leaving them ~€120 and then they scoup the job ahead of the full time photographer charging €330 that there is anything wrong with that. That's fair competition and a level playing pitch and everyone wins (except the €330 hopeful).

Finally, what's the harm, sure it happens every day, you can strike a cash deal with anyone these days, and if no one knows sure we'll all be grand. Who loses in all of this?

US HONEST tax payers

or more appropriately every citizen of the state, and arguably honest tax payers like yourself lose more as in the greater scheme of things, and on aggregate, it costs these individuals more to fund the state including the provision of council houses and free food to individuals as you've described it.

Again, I appreciate what you are saying and your excitement at the potential of getting into some work in this area, and not wanting to scare off your first client, but evasion is not acceptable in a civic society.

jonneymendoza

i'd probably go and charge around £500 for a days job if i was to pay taxes. at least i will get 250-300 in my pocket for a days work

ScumLord

AnCatDubh wrote: »

Option (a) Amateur charges €200 in cash deal.
Option (b) A Photographer who relies on such work for their living proposes to charge €330

Decision by the business - Amateur gets the work and they pay €200 cash.

That business is going to run into problems down the road when the accountant goes through the books. Whatever about amateurs getting a bit of extra cash a business can't do those kind of things.

For the most part cash in hand is between friends or two private citizens and I've no problem with that kind of work. The government and law is a complete shambles and giving them money is like throwing it in the fire.

Hugh_C

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Oh the ironing

Is that somewhere between silvery and goldy?

dinneenp

You cut your neighbours garden, fix their laptop or photograph a wedding and get paid- of course legally everyone of the above is obliged to pay tax on their earnings.

I photographed a friends wedding last week, will declare the tax on it.