Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/01/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: Doomed whatever
From: MEB at GoodPhotos.com (Michael Eric Berube)
Date: Sun Jan 23 09:19:40 2005

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 07:06:40 -0800 (PST), Bob quoth unto the boundless 
Ether...
>For the pro, digital lowers cost and increase profit, since you can
>still charge the client the same fee as you did during the film
>years.

I actually charge more for digital than I did for film. This is because for 
most pros, digital takes us FAR longer to deal with post production than 
film 
did. 

Consider, I work on my average wedding 15-20 hours in PS.CS to get ~300 or 
so 
images ready for public consumption. I then take the CDR or DVD to the lab 
and 
I also upload the job to DigiProofs.com for hosting. When the prints come 
back 
I put them into an album for the clients with the CDR. If I'm hired also to 
design a fine art collage album (like this: 
http://wwwGoodPhotos.com/FAalbum/ ) 
I have to put in at least 3 more days of work in PS.CS to design and order 
the 
album(s).

When I shot film, on the other hand, I'd take the film to the lab and pick 
up 
prints a week later and place them in an album with the negatives and I was 
done. All the post production was done by my lab. 2/3 of the process of 
photography was out of my hands.

I agree that in the long run, shooting digitally may be more profitable, 
probably, but it is far more time consuming and the main reason that I 
prefer 
it is that I now have complete control of the other 2/3 of the photographic 
process that I had given up when I could no longer afford the time to soup 
my 
own negs and print my own prints.

Carpe Luminem,
Michael Eric Berube
GoodPhotos.com 
AnotherMaine.com