Organizing Group Photoshoot

[TheQuestion]

all hot air fromthe biggest troll on cs to use an excuse to go back to slamming people for his own amusement. it was good to see you get hammered for the very same trivial points u used to go after people for even though yes i agree some of what went on was very childish. all and all it was good to see you take the same medicine that you urself always dished out on people here. some had hoped that this would lead to an awakening for you to but judging from what is written here and your latest slams it seems that once again you can't teach an old dog new tricks.:thumbsd:

 

[TheQuestion]

I am retiring in 2 mins ..... A good organised shoot is tough, arent it ? lots of responsibilities to ensure GOOD images :sweat: .... some just dun bother

wa why retire?! disillusioned coz that last one dell thru? pity to see u go.:cry:

 

[ModelShooterz]

Hmm, I guess you are right, it is a possible measure to deter one time disappearing fly by night operations. Perhaps when I organised shoots, I wasn't gearing so much towards doing it as a business and making a fast buck so much as for the sake of organising shoots per se.

I do have an alternative suggestion, if the idea is to deter fast buck disappearing organisers. How about having it such where say, we pay S$195 for a total of, X shoots, as you have averaged it. Ie, for S$195, an organiser can either have unlimited shoots in 3 months, or X shoots without an expiry date.

Doing 2 shoots per weekend means every Sat/Sun being occupied - not every organiser is that die hard to do it every week.

In that way, there is no pressure of timeline to organise within a certain period, yet you can also solve the one/two then fly kite organiesrs. In fact, you may then have, say, an organiser who organises X shoots over a longer period of time, and may, in fact have greater staying power than an organiser who organises a flurry within 3 months and then disappears after that.

For me personally, I don't mind if you raise the subscription prices; but having a subscription model not timed towards an expiry date but a certain number of shoots, may work better for me - not sure if it also works for the others.

Thanks for voicing your thoughts so that I can become aware of why the one-time model was removed.

Hmmm interesting to hear that the subscription is a "bar to entry".

We see it as a "bar to entry" for those that are out to make fast buck by organising one/two shoots and then disappearing, and the aim of the long-term (read: potentially higher cost) subscription is to ensure that only those with long-term approach will want to sign up.

This phrase "However, the current system would mean that such frequencies are no longer viable as it would not be sufficient to pay for the subscription. I've also heard other organisers say that they need to organise so and so number and rush towards the end, just so as to achieve the break even point." is kind of a misnomer.

A good businessperson will have taken into account all costs involved -- in this case, subscription cost, model costs (estimated or within a range), logistics cost, etc -- and worked out how many shoots and participants per shoot is required to break-even and then onwards to being profitable. Not rocket science.

A subscription cost of S$195 for 3 months, assuming 2 shoots per weekend (total 12 weekends) breaks down to only S$8.12 per shoot. Cheaper than taking a taxi to the shoot.

Now, if an organiser pitches his/her shoot at a higher level (more exclusive, less frequency, higher cost per participant) at say 2 shoots per month, the cost of the subscription is hardly a major factor in the total cost involved.

Ok, that was kind of a long-winded post to say that we will not be bringing back the one-time subscription anytime soon - in fact, after calculating the potential profits being raked in by the organisers, I think its time for an increase in the subscription, don't you think? Thanks for making me work out the numbers.

 

[sprintist]

Hmm, I guess you are right, it is a possible measure to deter one time disappearing fly by night operations. Perhaps when I organised shoots, I wasn't gearing so much towards doing it as a business and making a fast buck so much as for the sake of organising shoots per se.

I do have an alternative suggestion, if the idea is to deter fast buck disappearing organisers. How about having it such where say, we pay S$195 for a total of, X shoots, as you have averaged it. Ie, for S$195, an organiser can either have unlimited shoots in 3 months, or X shoots without an expiry date.

Doing 2 shoots per weekend means every Sat/Sun being occupied - not every organiser is that die hard to do it every week.

In that way, there is no pressure of timeline to organise within a certain period, yet you can also solve the one/two then fly kite organiesrs. In fact, you may then have, say, an organiser who organises X shoots over a longer period of time, and may, in fact have greater staying power than an organiser who organises a flurry within 3 months and then disappears after that.

For me personally, I don't mind if you raise the subscription prices; but having a subscription model not timed towards an expiry date but a certain number of shoots, may work better for me - not sure if it also works for the others.

Thanks for voicing your thoughts so that I can become aware of why the one-time model was removed.

imo i think you have somehow self answered your suggestion, with that kind of subscription, one can still dilly dally no?

its like i pay for sch fees for that amount i go to class whenever i feel like it and deduct off on credit. there's no pressure to perform still i guess just my thoughts

 

[ModelShooterz]

I'm not sure I see how does less frequent shoots equals to having no pressure to "perform".

In fact, won't having too many shoots result in a possibility of quality dropping?

Performance of an organiser is not decided by the number of shoots he organises, but the quality of each shoot. Using your school analogy, do you think handing in 10 assignments in 1 month will result in better quality, or 10 assignments in 10 months?

imo i think you have somehow self answered your suggestion, with that kind of subscription, one can still dilly dally no?

its like i pay for sch fees for that amount i go to class whenever i feel like it and deduct off on credit. there's no pressure to perform still i guess just my thoughts

 

[sprintist]

I'm not sure I see how does less frequent shoots equals to having no pressure to "perform".

In fact, won't having too many shoots result in a possibility of quality dropping?

Performance of an organiser is not decided by the number of shoots he organises, but the quality of each shoot. Using your school analogy, do you think handing in 10 assignments in 1 month will result in better quality, or 10 assignments in 10 months?

if there's no hurry for organisers to perform, they become scarce. i think if there is not enough organisers organising, models themselves will be more pro active to earn their money, why go through a middleman whom they have to rely on their availability with no assurance when?

i'v got to rush a few project in my semester now i think if its 10 for 10, i will slack and do last minute too, 10 in the last month. :bsmilie: having many projects now in a single semester is pressuring which forces us to act, why not

 

[zac08]

if there's no hurry for organisers to perform, they become scarce. i think if there is not enough organisers organising, models themselves will be more pro active to earn their money, why go through a middleman whom they have to rely on their availability with no assurance when?

i'v got to rush a few project in my semester now i think if its 10 for 10, i will slack and do last minute too, 10 in the last month. :bsmilie: having many projects now in a single semester is pressuring which forces us to act, why not

Quality over Quantity...

I think I'd rather go for Quality. Right now there may be quantity, but is there actually good quality out of it?? :sweat:

 

[Deadpoet]

The removal of one time organizer access is unfair. If I were to organize a shoot, one shoot, for whatever reason, I wont be able to have access even if I were a great organizer or not out for a fast buck. If a fast buck was the problem, raise the one time fee to say, $30, or even $50.

Anyway, does not concern me, since I am retired.

 

[plsoong]

Hi DP,

although i don't know you at all, i agree WHOLEheartedly with your sentiments.

I remember many years ago, when i first organized a small party shoot for then a girl who was the winner of Cleo fresh face or something (those were the days that even a contact with CLEO would mean so much!!!!), i tried very hard to make it possible for many of the CSers to take home some real proper images (at least not "flesh driven"!). I was naive, thinking that i could help provide at least this group an insight into some form of fashion/portraiture driven pictures.

To my surprise, i had to try to fulfill so much demands and wants (most of it were just utterly ridiculous) that it was literally madness and nobody really cared during the shoot whether the angles were good, whether the model wanted to do something else. i remembered that the MUA was being very professional and touched up everytime it was necessary...... - to the impatience of most of the photographers....

In the end that experience during that short stint made me thrash all future plans of organizing model shoots.

it also resulted in making the relationship between the model and me rough. I was asked where in the world and why did i select these supposed "photographers" who were acting more like desperate cheezy perverts.......
:hung:

 

[ModelShooterz]

You do realise that there are so many logical fallacies in your arguments that I do not know where to begin?

Scarce? Models waiting? Slack? Oh gee.

First, note that the CS world revolves around more than one organiser, hence there's no scarcity.

Second, I doubt that a model has contracted herself to one particular organiser to organise shoots for her X times over 1 month.

Third, if you wish to bring your slacking cum being forced student mentality into the picture, I suggest you don't even consider organising shoots - that is something not for you. Slack until the last minute? I never heard of such student principles being applied to a photoshoot.

I think you need more exposure before commenting.

if there's no hurry for organisers to perform, they become scarce. i think if there is not enough organisers organising, models themselves will be more pro active to earn their money, why go through a middleman whom they have to rely on their availability with no assurance when?

i'v got to rush a few project in my semester now i think if its 10 for 10, i will slack and do last minute too, 10 in the last month. :bsmilie: having many projects now in a single semester is pressuring which forces us to act, why not

 

[Jemapela]

As a photographer also dificult, more or less do the same.

Think of a theme
Work out models look, logistics, location, containment plan alternatives in case rain
Get model communicate on terms and compensation
Keep getting models if terms not reached or models don't reply
Align a timing for photog and models to shoot
Worse model not up to standard or expectation
...or hell moller never turn up on shoot day or handphone put on radio silence



Why some GWCs got so many photos in their portfolio?
Coz attend GWCs group shoot one time 4x models each moller can capture 10 or so decent shoots post process can post in the blog or personal photo sites already. :bsmilie:

I so very agree!!! It's really quite easy and cheap to quantitatively (not necessarily qualitatively) expand a portfolio quickly by attending a group shoot. Every Tom, Dick and Harry with a DSLR soon becomes an "experienced" portrait photographer... ehh... I'm not sure really.

 

[shiruikage]

I so very agree!!! It's really quite easy and cheap to quantitatively (not necessarily qualitatively) expand a portfolio quickly by attending a group shoot. Every Tom, Dick and Harry with a DSLR soon becomes an "experienced" portrait photographer... ehh... I'm not sure really.

well...at least the can become (one hopes) better photographers by shooting alot ( i mean alot) more leh? like seniors like to say, practice practice and more practice.

but i thing i don understand ar...think of a theme...liarliar, can explain abit ar?

Originally Posted by liarliar

As a photographer also dificult, more or less do the same.

Think of a theme
Work out models look, logistics, location, containment plan alternatives in case rain
Get model communicate on terms and compensation
Keep getting models if terms not reached or models don't reply
Align a timing for photog and models to shoot
Worse model not up to standard or expectation
...or hell moller never turn up on shoot day or handphone put on radio silence

 

[sprintist]

You do realise that there are so many logical fallacies in your arguments that I do not know where to begin?

Scarce? Models waiting? Slack? Oh gee.

First, note that the CS world revolves around more than one organiser, hence there's no scarcity.

Second, I doubt that a model has contracted herself to one particular organiser to organise shoots for her X times over 1 month.

Third, if you wish to bring your slacking cum being forced student mentality into the picture, I suggest you don't even consider organising shoots - that is something not for you. Slack until the last minute? I never heard of such student principles being applied to a photoshoot.

I think you need more exposure before commenting.

haha why not scarce? if all organisers take their time wouldnt be the shoots be scarce as compared to the current numbers right now which are already filling up. if organisers dont appear to meet the demand, i am saying models can/may/will come out to organise a group shoot for themselves or market themselves more competitively. having a few organised shoot a month = lesser exposure for models on an overall basis

no i never thought of being an organiser and never will so thats fine

i'm of cos not referring to something like a masters programme that can do at last minute, if everything is taken over a long time span how much 100% can you put in the 10months honestly?? can every month be a 100% or better, more? you can't because you suggested this knowing you have other commitments, you have to just seat down and work your brains FIRST, its not an all out strategy either. dont take the analogy so literally, think more humanly

there can always be way to have 'inhouse' combined services from mua and models alike, maybe when better contracted its easier to work things out, and i guess one has to be more of a dedicated full time weekend warrior for such shoots not forgetting ample time in the weekday to work things out or the weekend before. if those effort can't be met why come up with a pay per subscription knowing you can't deliver in a specified amount of time?

otherwise will the IR be ready in a planned time for example? they cannot think that when they feel like building and have enough resources at any one time then they continue on an on off basis. can't be. they have already worked out what they need, who they need, how much time they need before submitting their bid for the project. sama sama

 

[nemesis32]

Hmmm interesting to hear that the subscription is a "bar to entry".

We see it as a "bar to entry" for those that are out to make fast buck by organising one/two shoots and then disappearing, and the aim of the long-term (read: potentially higher cost) subscription is to ensure that only those with long-term approach will want to sign up.

This phrase "However, the current system would mean that such frequencies are no longer viable as it would not be sufficient to pay for the subscription. I've also heard other organisers say that they need to organise so and so number and rush towards the end, just so as to achieve the break even point." is kind of a misnomer.

A good businessperson will have taken into account all costs involved -- in this case, subscription cost, model costs (estimated or within a range), logistics cost, etc -- and worked out how many shoots and participants per shoot is required to break-even and then onwards to being profitable. Not rocket science.

A subscription cost of S$195 for 3 months, assuming 2 shoots per weekend (total 12 weekends) breaks down to only S$8.12 per shoot. Cheaper than taking a taxi to the shoot.

Now, if an organiser pitches his/her shoot at a higher level (more exclusive, less frequency, higher cost per participant) at say 2 shoots per month, the cost of the subscription is hardly a major factor in the total cost involved.

Ok, that was kind of a long-winded post to say that we will not be bringing back the one-time subscription anytime soon - in fact, after calculating the potential profits being raked in by the organisers, I think its time for an increase in the subscription, don't you think? Thanks for making me work out the numbers.

Why don't you have an option for a trial subscription? maybe like $10/shoot (which is higher than the 8.13 figure that you obtained). For some organisers, they may only want to organise once a month or even once a quarter maybe due to work committment, or simply having a high standard (rather have 1 good shoot than 10 average shoot). As DP and others have pointed out, a well-planned, well executed shoot takes a long time to plan and since most organisers are not full time, why not consider a trial or per usage basis?

 

[ModelShooterz]

To further enhance this idea, I think people may be amenable to a no-expiry date stored value system - ie buy 10 shoots for S$X.

This will solve the mischief of the "one hit fly by night" operation - con and run - which Darren has highlighted and yet not suffer the disadvantages of the time-based system.

Why don't you have an option for a trial subscription? maybe like $10/shoot (which is higher than the 8.13 figure that you obtained). For some organisers, they may only want to organise once a month or even once a quarter maybe due to work committment, or simply having a high standard (rather have 1 good shoot than 10 average shoot). As DP and others have pointed out, a well-planned, well executed shoot takes a long time to plan and since most organisers are not full time, why not consider a trial or per usage basis?

 

[Deadpoet]

haha why not scarce? if all organisers take their time wouldnt be the shoots be scarce
.......

they have already worked out what they need, who they need, how much time they need before submitting their bid for the project. sama sama

Are you sure you fully understand what you are saying?

First of all, you were arguing that, time based subscription is good because it forces organizers to organize more shoots per time period. If we go to pay as you go, then organizers will take too long to organize and therefore, there will be fewer shoots.

Our current problem with mass number of CMI shoots being organized is exactly that. There are 12 weekends per 90 days. Cost is $195 per 90 days. The more shoots you organized, the cost per shoot is lower. If you organize 12 shoots, once a week, your cost is about $16.25 per shoot, less if you do it more then once a week. On the other hand, if you are only organized 1 shoot a month, then the cost is a prohibited $65 per shoot, and much higher if you do it less than once a month.

Your argument is, we should not let those in to organize if they only want to organize only now and then, not on a full time level. Most of us photographers have a day job. Organizing takes a lot of time, which is scarce. By setting the cost hurdle so high, many who has good ideas but cannot commit the time every week, will merely give up organizing here on CS. Rest assure, if they want to organize, there are many other avenues, but CS is locked out because of cost.

The risk is not the $65 per shoot cost per se, it can be factored into the cost. However, it is the fact that a time based subscription forces them to organize at least once a month to achieve a $65 cost. What if, after one paid for a subscription, after 2 months and 2 shoots, due to many unforeseen circumstance, no shoots were organized in the 3rd month, then suddenly the cost per shoot jumped to $97.50, or what if, after the first month, no time to organize anymore, the full cost of the $195 must be absorb by that one organized shoot.

It does not make sense. ModelShooterz used to organize about once a month or a bit less. Many of the best organizers organized at the same frequency and less. The $196 is therefore a prohibited hurdle.

This is what I propose. Reopen the pay as you go option. Charge a higher fee, say $50. An organizer will simply have to factor in the $50 when organizing, and not have to worry about how to amortize the remainder of the 90 days subscription. Right now, the organizer must load the entire $195 into the first shoot jsut to be on the safe side. That is prohibitive.

Now, what were you talking about regarding model organizing themselves and the IR?? I thought models had been organizing themselves for a while. Now, the IR, I am really lost there.

One more point, in responding to Darren’s post, that the time based subscription is to weed out the hit and run fly by night organizers. In some way, CS had been successful in that respect, but the consequences is simple, it forces organizers to organize more shoots and resulting in much lower quality shoots, and it barred photographers who want to promote the art from organize on an occasional basis.

 

[shiruikage]

risking flaming, allow me my say.

darren could have a valid reason for the time based subscription. let's say CS allows pay as u organize format, and some fly by nite operator come and fleece ppl in just one shoot, wat would the cheated participants say about CS's vetting policy of letting in cheaters?

granted it may not happen lar...but one never knows...

time based subscription could be the cure for this...

anotehr method that i would suggest is offer pay per use, but with deposits. ie: u pay a deposit to organize a shoot, after the shot, and no one complains of being cheated (to deter the cheaters), the deposits are refunded less the pay per use fees...would that help?

 

[AhV]

Are you sure you fully understand what you are saying?

First of all, you were arguing that, time based subscription is good because it forces organizers to organize more shoots per time period. If we go to pay as you go, then organizers will take too long to organize and therefore, there will be fewer shoots.

Our current problem with mass number of CMI shoots being organized is exactly that. There are 12 weekends per 90 days. Cost is $195 per 90 days. The more shoots you organized, the cost per shoot is lower. If you organize 12 shoots, once a week, your cost is about $16.25 per shoot, less if you do it more then once a week. On the other hand, if you are only organized 1 shoot a month, then the cost is a prohibited $65 per shoot, and much higher if you do it less than once a month.

Your argument is, we should not let those in to organize if they only want to organize only now and then, not on a full time level. Most of us photographers have a day job. Organizing takes a lot of time, which is scarce. By setting the cost hurdle so high, many who has good ideas but cannot commit the time every week, will merely give up organizing here on CS. Rest assure, if they want to organize, there are many other avenues, but CS is locked out because of cost.

The risk is not the $65 per shoot cost per se, it can be factored into the cost. However, it is the fact that a time based subscription forces them to organize at least once a month to achieve a $65 cost. What if, after one paid for a subscription, after 2 months and 2 shoots, due to many unforeseen circumstance, no shoots were organized in the 3rd month, then suddenly the cost per shoot jumped to $97.50, or what if, after the first month, no time to organize anymore, the full cost of the $195 must be absorb by that one organized shoot.

It does not make sense. ModelShooterz used to organize about once a month or a bit less. Many of the best organizers organized at the same frequency and less. The $196 is therefore a prohibited hurdle.

This is what I propose. Reopen the pay as you go option. Charge a higher fee, say $50. An organizer will simply have to factor in the $50 when organizing, and not have to worry about how to amortize the remainder of the 90 days subscription. Right now, the organizer must load the entire $195 into the first shoot jsut to be on the safe side. That is prohibitive.

Now, what were you talking about regarding model organizing themselves and the IR?? I thought models had been organizing themselves for a while. Now, the IR, I am really lost there.

One more point, in responding to Darren’s post, that the time based subscription is to weed out the hit and run fly by night organizers. In some way, CS had been successful in that respect, but the consequences is simple, it forces organizers to organize more shoots and resulting in much lower quality shoots, and it barred photographers who want to promote the art from organize on an occasional basis.

we could not ve said it better

 

[alinkinyourlife]

Are you sure you fully understand what you are saying?

First of all, you were arguing that, time based subscription is good because it forces organizers to organize more shoots per time period. If we go to pay as you go, then organizers will take too long to organize and therefore, there will be fewer shoots.

Our current problem with mass number of CMI shoots being organized is exactly that. There are 12 weekends per 90 days. Cost is $195 per 90 days. The more shoots you organized, the cost per shoot is lower. If you organize 12 shoots, once a week, your cost is about $16.25 per shoot, less if you do it more then once a week. On the other hand, if you are only organized 1 shoot a month, then the cost is a prohibited $65 per shoot, and much higher if you do it less than once a month.

Your argument is, we should not let those in to organize if they only want to organize only now and then, not on a full time level. Most of us photographers have a day job. Organizing takes a lot of time, which is scarce. By setting the cost hurdle so high, many who has good ideas but cannot commit the time every week, will merely give up organizing here on CS. Rest assure, if they want to organize, there are many other avenues, but CS is locked out because of cost.

The risk is not the $65 per shoot cost per se, it can be factored into the cost. However, it is the fact that a time based subscription forces them to organize at least once a month to achieve a $65 cost. What if, after one paid for a subscription, after 2 months and 2 shoots, due to many unforeseen circumstance, no shoots were organized in the 3rd month, then suddenly the cost per shoot jumped to $97.50, or what if, after the first month, no time to organize anymore, the full cost of the $195 must be absorb by that one organized shoot.

It does not make sense. ModelShooterz used to organize about once a month or a bit less. Many of the best organizers organized at the same frequency and less. The $196 is therefore a prohibited hurdle.

This is what I propose. Reopen the pay as you go option. Charge a higher fee, say $50. An organizer will simply have to factor in the $50 when organizing, and not have to worry about how to amortize the remainder of the 90 days subscription. Right now, the organizer must load the entire $195 into the first shoot jsut to be on the safe side. That is prohibitive.

Now, what were you talking about regarding model organizing themselves and the IR?? I thought models had been organizing themselves for a while. Now, the IR, I am really lost there.

One more point, in responding to Darren’s post, that the time based subscription is to weed out the hit and run fly by night organizers. In some way, CS had been successful in that respect, but the consequences is simple, it forces organizers to organize more shoots and resulting in much lower quality shoots, and it barred photographers who want to promote the art from organize on an occasional basis.

Agreed.:thumbsup:

 

[ModelShooterz]

There's no need to be afraid of being flamed, we are just having a civil discussion.

The reason to deter fly by night operators is sound, and we could work towards a model that would deter them as opposed to time based. Your idea of a deposit may work as well, in conjuction or in alternative to my idea of a stored value package system with no time expiry.

At the end of the day, it is about balancing the evils with the possible goods. I have personally heard of stories where even on the time-based system, still result in conducting of shady operations and result in accusations of cheating which remain unresolved even today.

Hence, there is no perfect system to prevent cheats - my only request is not to deter legitimate people just because of the cheaters, and the cheaters will find some way around it anyway.

risking flaming, allow me my say.

darren could have a valid reason for the time based subscription. let's say CS allows pay as u organize format, and some fly by nite operator come and fleece ppl in just one shoot, wat would the cheated participants say about CS's vetting policy of letting in cheaters?

granted it may not happen lar...but one never knows...

time based subscription could be the cure for this...

anotehr method that i would suggest is offer pay per use, but with deposits. ie: u pay a deposit to organize a shoot, after the shot, and no one complains of being cheated (to deter the cheaters), the deposits are refunded less the pay per use fees...would that help?