Showing photos privately online to Client

siobh123

Hi Guys

I am new to this photography game and I was hoping some nice experience people on here would be able to advise me an a couple of things.

I will be doing my first paid shoot in a couple of weeks - a surprise party. It will be an indoor event. I will be using a Canon 400D. When I have been a guest at events where there is a photographer present I notice they have more thank one camera. Why is this? Is one used as a back up in case the other one fails, or are they used with different lenses. Should I be using more than one camera.

Also after the event I want to be able to show my client all the pictures I have taken in order for her to select the images she wishes to purchase. I do not have a website yet so I will need to use another online tool. I will of course ensure that I have water marked the images first What ever tool I use must be private. Ideally I would like to just give my client a temporary url or something of that nature.

Any suggestions will be more than welcome.

Thanks in advance

toe_knee

Google drive or dropbox would work

pablo102

If you would have NAS (e.g. Synology) that would solve your problem.
Search for Synology Photo Station to see how it works and if that's suitable for you.

CabanSail

If you are being paid then you should carry spare equipment. You can use different bodies to switch easily between lenses.

Photobucket did have a facility where you can set a password to gain entry to an album. Have used that in the past.

As you are doing this as a paid job I assume you have sorted out your insurance?

Yanu

I have used online applications and websites to show my images to clients before but nothing works as well as going to meet the client and show the images on your laptop. At home they'll have too much time to think if they want the image or not. On the spot you'll make more sales.
Yes, you need two cameras, two lenses, two flashes and at least two of everything as a back up

magicbastarder

siobh123 wrote:

I am new to this photography game

siobh123 wrote:

I will be doing my first paid shoot in a couple of weeks

siobh123 wrote: »

Why is this? Is one used as a back up in case the other one fails, or are they used with different lenses. Should I be using more than one camera.

i'll try to be polite about this - your post above does not reassure me that you are ready to start charging for photography services yet. you're asking basic questions about professional practices, and if i am to take your comment above at being new to photography at face value, you'll be asking basic questions about photography too. lesser point, you're using a potentially nine year old entry level DSLR.
are you sure you're ready for this?

siobh123

I'm not offended at all. You are correct in what you are saying. I am very inexperienced and my questions are basic. Ill explain myself a bit better. I was a graphic designer for years and when the down turn hit the economy I had to leave it behind me and retrain in another skill.

I have always loved taking photos and really missed being creative. I have never charged before but I have done a number of shoots for different events (locally). However more and more people are commenting on my photos saying they love them and why don't I do it in the paid sense. Recently, I said Id test the waters, I put up my photos on a Facebook page and I have been inundated with emails from people wanting to book me.

Yes, I know my equipment is old and I know I'm asking basic questions but that fact of the matter is people like what I do. I think this is my opportunity and I can't walk away from it. I have a great eye and am will to work hard to learn the rest.

I'm really just looking for a bit of guidance from more experienced people who have made the leap I am trying to make.

All comments are welcome

siobh123

Thank you guys for all the helpful suggestions regarding the showing of images to the clients. I will try out each solution. The It is hard to know what is the best solution. Is it better to let the let the client view them alone or meet the client and go through all the images with them. The reason I wanted go the online route is because I thought if the client could view the images privately with their family and friends that they all might be more inclined to buy more or get extra copies.

As a rule would you give the client digital copies, printed images or both?

siobh123

Is the insurance to cover my equipment. If it is then yes

magicbastarder

he means public liability insurance, not to cover your kit, but to cover you.
your kit will *not* be covered under household insurance as you're using it for commercial work.

Paulw

siobh123 wrote: »

I'm really just looking for a bit of guidance from more experienced people who have made the leap I am trying to make.

Be prepared - check your equipment, and prepare for equipment failure. It happens everyone at some stage. That's why most would have 2 or 3 camera bodies. Have the right kit, right lenses, extra batteries, extra memory cards. Be prepared for card failures too.

Make sure you have your business side in order - camera insurance, PL insurance, PI insurance, etc.

Get your IT side right - processing images, displaying images, getting the client to view/select/buy images. Know what you are delivering and how you will deliver it.

Get your contracts right - for every job, have a contract. The contract should state what you are doing, what you are charging, what you will provide for the charge, and when you will complete the work.

For a photography business, taking photos is probably about 20% of your work.

magicbastarder

siobh123 wrote: »

Yes, I know my equipment is old and I know I'm asking basic questions but that fact of the matter is people like what I do. I think this is my opportunity and I can't walk away from it. I have a great eye and am will to work hard to learn the rest.

i'm deliberately playing devil's advocate here - what you said hasn't really assuaged concerns. people liking photos you put on facebook does not mean you're necessarily ready to shoot photos in an environment which you probably cannot control, where the lighting could be awful, with people you may not know (and who therefore may not be relaxed around you) - and you're placing yourself in a situation where factors outside your control may reduce your ability to get decent photos, resulting in an unhappy customer and reputational damage to you.

you are charging for your services, which implies a professional service. as paulw said, being a professional is a hell of a lot more than being able to take a good photo. the fact that you're worried about the presentation of the images in the way you've phrased it would imply it's more than just a 'sure throw me 50 quid and i'll take some photos for you' scenario.

siobh123

Thank you guys. That is very helpful information. Exactly what I need.

Any recommendations for good insurance companies to cover my needs.

siobh123

Hi Magicbastarder

Sounds like you know what you are talking about. How did you get started yourself.

eoglyn

siobh123 wrote: »

Thank you guys for all the helpful suggestions regarding the showing of images to the clients. I will try out each solution. The It is hard to know what is the best solution. Is it better to let the let the client view them alone or meet the client and go through all the images with them. The reason I wanted go the online route is because I thought if the client could view the images privately with their family and friends that they all might be more inclined to buy more or get extra copies.

As a rule would you give the client digital copies, printed images or both?

Charge flat fee, batch process and tweak where necessary, burn to cd or memory stick, deliver to client with short hand written note, end of.

Also upload images to facebook with your watermark - encourage people to share etc.

I'd say the likelihood of you selling individual images is low. I'd love to hear if i'm wrong on that.

People in this forum get antsy when they hear of a newbie selling their photos. I'd urge some caution, it's your decision though.

The biggest risk is to delivering good photos is not using flash correctly or getting the white balance all wrong.

Why does someone like this need PL insurance??? Genuinely curious, its not like there'll be wires to trip over or lightstands to fall on heads.

siobh123

Hi Eoglyn

That's a refreshing reply. Simple and to the point

Paulw

siobh123 wrote: »

Any recommendations for good insurance companies to cover my needs.

www.camerainsurance.ie best place to go.

eoglyn wrote: »

Why does someone like this need PL insurance??? Genuinely curious.

What if you drop your camera on someone's toe and break a toe? Someone trips and falls in to you and they hit their head on your camera. There are so many possible situations. Just because there are no cables doesn't mean there can't be an accident.

Also, many venues now require a copy of your PL insurance cert before they will allow you to work there.

PL is to cover you in case someone claims against you for an accident, injury, etc.
PI is needed in case you can't provide the goods to a client and they sue you or if they are unhappy with the quality of your work and sue you.

siobh123

Thank you Paulw for straightening that out. I will check out that site.

Cianmcliam

eoglyn wrote: »

Why does someone like this need PL insurance??? Genuinely curious, its not like there'll be wires to trip over or lightstands to fall on heads.

"OK everyone on the platform for the big group shot"
Creek. Crash. Agghhh!

siobh123

Noted

magicbastarder

siobh123 wrote: »

Hi Magicbastarder

Sounds like you know what you are talking about. How did you get started yourself.

oh, i'm certainly not a pro.

siobh123

How did you get started. Have you been doing it long. Any must know tips for a newbie??

eoglyn

Paulw wrote: »

www.camerainsurance.ie best place to go.



What if you drop your camera on someone's toe and break a toe? Someone trips and falls in to you and they hit their head on your camera. There are so many possible situations. Just because there are no cables doesn't mean there can't be an accident.

Also, many venues now require a copy of your PL insurance cert before they will allow you to work there.

PL is to cover you in case someone claims against you for an accident, injury, etc.
PI is needed in case you can't provide the goods to a client and they sue you or if they are unhappy with the quality of your work and sue you.

OK, good answer, thank you, for the sake of discussion, I'm going to be contrarian...

I'm generally fairly risk averse, but i'm not convinced that these risks high enough to justify the price of insurance... i guess like playing the lottery in reverse.

Would it be the most irresponsible thing for someone to take a paying job without it??

PL Insurance is quite often the first thing mentioned when someone like the OP mentions a paying gig. Like a lot of people on this forum, I've done quite a few non-paying gigs for organisations i'm involved with, that have included all of those risks, and haven't had PL insurance. Surely i'm just as liable for something going wrong. Am I a reckless maniac?

Also as part of these non-paying gigs I've worked in a few hotels and venues in Dublin and surrounding counties and no one from any venue has approached me re PL insurance - i don't look very different to a pro when working. Has anyone direct experience of a venue demanding this??

I'm not saying that someone who is regularly working shouldn't take out insurance to give themselves peace of mind, just questioning the need for it for an irregular uncle bob.

Also OP - i think camerainsurance.ie offer a boards.ie discount - worth mentioning it when looking for a quote

eoglyn

Cianmcliam wrote: »

"OK everyone on the platform for the big group shot"
Creek. Crash. Agghhh!

Moral Hazard

With insurance: climb that old ladder there and reach out for the apple on the tree, it'll make for a great photo ... reach more .... more...

Without insurance: Stay away from the DAMN tree.

Paulw

eoglyn wrote: »

OK, good answer, thank you, for the sake of discussion, I'm going to be contrarian...

I'm generally fairly risk averse, but i'm not convinced that these risks high enough to justify the price of insurance.

Would it be the most irresponsible thing for someone to take a paying job without it??

PL Insurance is quite often the first thing mentioned when someone like the OP mentions a paying gig. Like a lot of people on this forum, I've done quite a few non-paying gigs for organisations i'm involved with, that have included all of those risks, and haven't had PL insurance. Surely i'm just as liable for something going wrong. Am I a reckless maniac?

Also as part of these non-paying gigs I've worked in a few hotels and venues in Dublin and surrounding counties and no one from any venue has approached me re PL insurance - i don't look very different to a pro when working. Has anyone direct experience of a venue demanding this??

Someone breaks a leg and is out of work for a few weeks. They sue you and win. You are ordered by the court to pay thousands. Worth not having insurance?

You drop your camera on a child's head and cause them a severe injury. They are injured for life. Court awards hundreds of thousands in compensation. Worth not having insurance?

If you have no insurance, then you are personally liable for the full amount. How deep are your pockets? :rolleyes:

Most venues that host weddings ask for it. I've been asked for mine twice, and usually have a copy of it in my camera bag. Most wedding photographers can list venues that ask for it frequently, usually the big hotels. I don't do weddings, so it's seldom that issue for me, and the companies I do business for, for events, know I am insured and can prove it.

eoglyn

Nightmare scenarios indeed.

Ballpark, what price does PI and PL insurance run to, generally?? I assume its payable annually. Does the cost take into account turnover or activity??

magicbastarder

siobh123 wrote: »

How did you get started. Have you been doing it long. Any must know tips for a newbie??

i've been taking photos for about 20 years; one example of a difficult scenario i've come across is when i was taking photos for my sister's wedding, i was the nominated photographer; in the church, there were windows all the way around the building (except at the altar) about eight foot up; which basically meant that any shots in the church which didn't use the altar as a backdrop had a bright strip of light behind people's heads, so as a result, a lot of photo opportunities in the church didn't pan out. differing light sources can also be a bane - say when you've a venue with tungsten lighting from above but with natural lighting from the side, which complicates getting the colour balance right.

you should try to get access to the venue (possibly to another party environment) prior to the job to get a few test shots and see if you have any concerns like the above which a bit of experience or planning can help mitigate.

regarding my comment about it being an older camera - i usually very much side with the 'the camera is better than you are' (including myself in this), in that my limitations are more limiting than the camera's - but if you're depending on your camera for a paying job, a newer one which copes better in low light will prove to be a valuable asset, plus it looks better for the customer; they might not appreciate if they're paying a photographer who is using older/cheaper gear than they themselves might own.

what lenses do you have, and were you depending on flash, or do you usually shoot in natural light?

Balfey1972

eoglyn wrote: »

Nightmare scenarios indeed.

Ballpark, what price does PI and PL insurance run to, generally?? I assume its payable annually. Does the cost take into account turnover or activity??

Eoglyn they are extreme scenarios but they do happen. Not often mind you, like most business insurance it is a grudge purchase and alot of people are risk adverse. Problem is when it does happen and hindsight as everyone will tell you. Claims are on the increase across the board, in all areas of business.

PL cover also covers Third Party property damage. A case recently where the photographer in moving backwards taking the photos in the church knocked over a candle stand and it caused extensive damage to a stained glass window. Not cheap.

I know what it's like to pay insurance also. Not nice when the bill comes in and you think you are getting nothing for it. I was glad to have it when the bag was taken from the boot of my car back in Jan. Like most never thought that it would happen to me. But without it I certainly wouldn't have to been able to take a €10k plus hit and replace my kit.
The scarey part is when you sit down and total up everything that is in the bag and the cost to replace it.

The liability is piece of mind. PL only cover on it's own starts at €160 for the year and if incorporated into equipment policy it reduces down to €105. They are based on turnover but only increase if the turnover goes over €75k so the majority are covered at this level.

And as you said earlier mention boards and I can give a 20% discount on the equipment rates.

Alot of photographers do go without cover for their equipment and liability but alot of them do have it.

Wabbit Ears

Personally Id recommend trying zenfolio, Its free to start off and the secure gallery for clients is very good.

Balfey1972

Wabbit Ears wrote: »

Personally Id recommend trying zenfolio, Its free to start off and the secure gallery for clients is very good.

+1 for Zenfolio too

pullandbang

eoglyn wrote: »

Has anyone direct experience of a venue demanding this??

Short answer....Yes! Not only that, but it's getting more and more frequent.

Loire

pullandbang wrote: »

Short answer....Yes! Not only that, but it's getting more and more frequent.

I wouldn't know anything about the photography end, but I do know that more and more establishments are now required to have Health & Safety "Safety Statements" so this is probably where it's coming from.

Balfey1972

Loire wrote: »

I wouldn't know anything about the photography end, but I do know that more and more establishments are now required to have Health & Safety "Safety Statements" so this is probably where it's coming from.

It's more to do with the rise in claims and increased insurance costs in the hospitality and leisure area that premises have been instructed in alot of cases by their insurers and representative bodies such as Irish Hotel Federation to insist to get copies of insurances from any contractors using their facilities.

This has been from companies using the venues for meetings to people teaching classes, photographers etc.

Also any OPW sites also insisting on proof of insurance before wedding shots can be taken. There was a case last summer where the couple and photographer were not allowed into a site to take photos as the photographer did not have proof of cover.

Crazy stuff but unfortunately it is more and more the norm.

magicbastarder

i can understand the OPW approach; given there's commercial activity they're allowing on their sites for free, it's not too much to ask that insurance to cover any damage is catered for.