I am thinking of adding an associate photographer to my business for 2008 and beyond, and I'm just curious about the process.

I guess my main question has to do with the structure of the business. Is the associate an independent contractor or an employee? Also, do they provide their own equipment and insurance?

I really appreciate any insight into this process that you anyone is willing to share.

Thanks!

I would also like to know about this and have a few questions to add.

Do you give your assoc. a set amt of $ for each wedding? Do you charge the same when you book your assoc. as you do when you shoot it? If not, how do you reason that to your client? ("She's not as good as me, so you get a discount?!")

I think that's it....I may come back with more.

anyone, anyone?????

I'd love to hear thoughts on this as well, so I am bumping it up to the top!

Thanks!

No prob...although it looks like you had already taken care of it!

I shoot as an associate.. I can shed a little of my thoughts. ( I will ask Jim to chime in as well)


im 1099 contractor

I have 100% own gear


IMO there are several ways to approach this, but I feel our model is working fairly well. I think the key is finding someone that you can completely trust representing you.. the other stuff will follow


Jim trusts me and knows that his clients are my clients and I will do WHATEVER it takes.

I am more than fairly compensated. This sounds weird, but Jim knows that someone else isn't going to steal me and him have to find a shooter for 30+ weddings in 4 months

My profit model is based on the package.. I grow with the biz and as my referral and price range grows, i benefit

I agree to NOT book a single wedding on my own.

I have NO plans to shoot as an associate for him until I can make it on my own

Jim and I REALLY respect each other, and see eye to eye on several things in work ethic etc

Thanks for the info. Few follow up questions if you don't mind.

What is Jim's website? I just want to see how he plugs the associate angle.

Do you take care of post production too? In other words, do you just shoot and burn and his studio does the rest, or do you babysit the wedding from a-z?

Do you own the images or does Jim? If you do, are you able to use them on your own website/portfolio, even though you don't solicit weddings on your own?

Thanks!!!!!

we have a production staff that handles the production for all of us. Jim will dive in when need be, but that is for rare situations. as to owning the images, I have a website but it only promotes my photography throught the studio. I'm not sure of how to address this because if a potential photographer had that need they would not be a good fit for us

sorry forgot http://jimkennedyphotographers.com

please excuse my previous post as I am on the treo..

That is interesting...he has a link to basically a separate website for you. Did you design that site or did Jim? Cool studio by the looks of it.

PS--this is off topic, but why does the logo bleed through all the white text on the blurb about you and elsewhere? It's kinda hard to read...is that on purpose or a mistake?

Sorry...couple more questions Eric:

do you guys feel that you each have a completely different POV, but one that complements Jim's style? or does he want completely different types of shooters for his clients to choose from? (hope that is not an obvious question...)

does Jim shoot too? is his fee higher? if so, by what percentage? don't need exact figures, just percentages would be great

Is Jim a member of OSP? I'd love to pick his brain too.

By the way--I know I already said this, but GORGEOUS studio!! Congrats to you all!

G

At f8studio, operate as sort of a cooperative. There are three photographers and we each have our own busines identity - income, bookkeeping, taxes, expenses, etc. Ideally, each weekend, the three of us will shoot three weddings. I only deal with my own clients and my clients only deal with me. I don't know who Kym and Gary's clients are.

We share studio expenses and advertising. We promote the same studio name - f8studio. Our quality, style, philosophy, and pricing are similar.

We make joint decisions in order to maintain a consistency on vendors, products, workflow, etc.

It's not the most orthodox system but we like it.

Huy

I just hired 2 photographers to work as 1099 contractors and will shoot as associates. I am paying $21/hour for the first year, and after quality and experience are proven over time, will also give them a percentage of each print sale if they took the image.

The goal is to get them trained using my style and techniques until they feel comfortable maybe doing a wedding on their own (as a team of 2), and will then pay them per project or wedding, so that I can double book. It's an investment that will help me to double my profits as a business in 2 years.

Eric:

That storefront is amazing. Are those LCD or Plasma screens mounted to display images?

Hmmm...my accountant said I can't by the hour if they are independent contractors. If you pay by the hour, they are considered employees and all the headache with that???????

Uh, just figure out how many hours they'll probably work, estimate the wage and offer that as a total. That's what I do for corporate work.

Your accountant doesn't have to pay these people.

Might be a state rule, but I'm sure it isn't federally mandated. My husband worked for over a year full time as an IC by the hour, with paid overtime, for a company that has literally thousands of people on terms just like his.

Just my .02 worth, I always assumed that you charge less to add an associate/second photographer to a package because all they're doing is shooting, not processing. Seeing all the different ways this can be managed is really interesting.

5 plasmas, 3 mac minis running hi res slide-shows. (the window ones are mounted back to back so you can see the same slide-show inside and out) Then one inside the studio for consultations.. you can see it on the far left of the studio shot






It is a Blu-Domain template



Mine or the studio one? BTW the studio one just re-launched 4days ago and might need some tweaks **EDIT** I just went back and saw that.. looks like something changed because it wasnt doing it the other day, thanks for the heads up

We don't really pitch it that way, the pitch is that the same process happens to everyones images (i.e. same edits, albums, PS etc) kind-of the opposite of your question, BUT that isn't to say that strengths that match client's needs aren't stressed in consultations



I think he personally shot 115 last year and i think the total we all shot was 240 (i could be off, Jim can confirm)




Yes he is.. I sent a link to this topic, he should chime in soon.. Also he is teaching a master class at WPPI on Tue & Wed morning, I WOULDN'T miss it if you are there




Do they go out to their own weddings? If soI could see that being very challenging to sustain an associate business and shooting staff at that rate.

BTW what is this craziness with attachments!! haha that is the first time ive seen them actually have images associated with them. THAT IS GREAT!!@!@ lol

My guys have photography experience, but are new to the wedding scene for the most part, so no..... do not shoot on their own. Once they have trained for the year with me and I feel their quality/experience is where it needs to be (and I still trust them), we will begin to have them shoot some of our lower end weddings and work their way up. It's sort of a step by step process that will take time, but I feel will eventually pay off when we can double book certain days throughout the year. Once they are shooting their own events, I'm sure they would be paid based on a percentage of the package itself.

The business takes care of the advertising, client relations, post processing, print orders, and album design, so this all taken into consideration

I would consider that an assistant of a seccond shooter. In my mind an associate is someone who runs the show

I'm really confused here.....

I'm a business owner and photographer..... If I'm paying someone to assist me, they are the contracted associate photographer or employee

I understand your point, but the industry refers to associate photographers as someone else they would send out under their name to shoot an entire wedding... it is just an industry term that is probably not the best choice of words.

Matt--you are listing them in this post as "employees"--that is not what 1099 are for from what I understand. Could be semantics though...maybe we are just using the wrong words and not communicating??? From what I was told by my accountant, and "employee" by definition requires a W-2 form, an "independent contractor/consultant" uses a 1099????

But Eric is right--associate photographer does not equal assistant. An associate photographer is a photographer that shoots weddings under the heading of your studio. They run the show like Eric says. An assitant usually does not to much if any shooting, and they just assist you during the the shoot/post production etc. These terms are malleable to a degree of course, but they are apples and oranges--both in the industry and for the purposes of this thread.

Whew. Hope that clarifies instead of kicking up more mud!



G

Gotcha.... probaby my wording is off then

In a nutshell, I a full-time professional photographer (left my fulltime job last year

As the business owner and main photographer, I have contracted 2 guys that will work as contractors under 1099's, etc. Sorry for the confusion and not using correct terminoligy!

So I guess they are still considered "associate photographers" then, right!?

Call them whatever you like. It's YOUR company

Now you're gettin' it!

This is MY thread though! hehehe. just kidding.




are they shooting? or assisting? I feel like I'm beating a dead horse right now...or going insane...choose one.

I'm not picking on you Matt--really! (well, I kind of am). But seriously, $21 an hour for an "associate photographer?" My assistant makes more than that, and all she does is haul gear and load film.

Bump for an interesting topic. Hi Geneve!

In regards to what I decide to pay my associates, I'm not sure it's wise to brag that you pay people more to do less than I have decided to. Since you're picking on me (sorta), I'll play back a little.....

As a rhetorical question, who's the smarter business person - the one who pays more and gets less, or the one that pays a bit less and gets a lot more (and still has happy employees)??? I have a pretty good plan in place to where my guys will certainly begin to make big bucks, however they first have to prove themselves while they are in training mode. If I start throwing them huge bucks up front, then their expectations for more will only come sooner. I run a smart business and a tight ship to keep my profits flowing. I too, am a full-time professional photographer, and feel that a job that's a lot of fun and pays $21/hour is extremely respectable..... afterall, how many millions of people in the world make half that if you really think about it? It took me a lot of years and blood, sweat, and tears to get to a six-figure salary, so why should it not be the same for anyone else?

P.S. I take some slight offense to your post, and since you've decided to comment on what I decide to pay, I'm curious as to what you pay your folks? Also, what market are you in?

PDN had an excellent article on this a couple years ago - I'll try to find the issue at home, and maybe I can link to it if it's online somewhere.

Some ideas:
- Our associate is being trained by us, and we trust her fully to shoot how we shoot and offer excellent customer service/quality. She uses her own equipment, but we help her out with ours as well if we're not using it - this doesn't affect her rate of pay or anything like that - i figure if we're not using it, why shouldn't she? We have assured that she is fully covered by our insurance, etc, even when she is shooting without our equipment, which is a benefit for her since she doesn't have to get personal insurance.
- LOTS of training, bringing the assoc. as a second shooter/apprentice on 20-30 shoots is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL if this person is representing your name. Pay this person well during this time - you're putting this time into them and you want them to stay with you. Besides, they will be making you money later. LOTS of constructive feedback and encouragement!
- we pay her via percentage ie) we take 40 per cent of the package price (... 70 per cent if we handle post, which is frequent.) Basically, she uses our name/brand/reputation to get work. She also gets a 10 per cent commission on album orders. Since she is excellent, we may re-neogtiate this, offer an hourly shooting rate on top.
- be sure to have your associate sign a 2-year non-compete agreement within the areas you market to.
- limited copyright on images produced under your name (we have agreed to release full copyright to her after 2 years)
- she is a contractor (but i have no idea how this works since our bookkeeper handles payroll!)

It's interesting to hear how everyone is running their business, and very helpful. I'm not judging at all here, but just a question......

Did you say, you give yoru associates 40% of the job??? Is that if they shoot it all by themself, or even if they are shooting with you? I guess my thoughts are, that's a large junk of your income going out the door, considering you are still taking care of the advertising and general costs of running the business, right?

Just curious... again, not judging.... I find this all interesting and am only trying to learn from what others are doing with the associate stuff

Nope. I'd be off shooting another wedding, while the associate photog is shooting the "overflow" wedding on the same day. They hire their own assistant, cover own costs, associated with the shoot (gas, film, etc). It's a pretty easy 40 per cent take for us - we really don't do anything except set up the client with the associate photographer for the initial meeting.

If someone is shooting with us (what i would term a "second shooter" rather than an "associate" - I don't really know what the proper terminolgy is - as was discussed above haha) I would pay a flat rate of $500.

Gotcha...thanks for clarifying! That sounds like a pretty good deal, I guess the trick is, like you said getting the photographer to the point where you trust their work!

Hey guys.

I have an associate photographer that has been with me for about a year.

Jeff and I work very well together. He hopes to have his own studio one day, but for now he assists for many commercial photogs in town and I am his only "wedding photographer" that he works with. Jeff and I are unique in that he HATES weddings, however, he digs pretty girls and loves getting technical. I feel so fortunate to have found him

Ok, from the business side of it...

Jeff gets a 1099 and is paid a flat fee (we started out at $150/day, now we have worked up to $200 and he does get other perks working with me such as use of gear, my studio and if he wanted to come in and process I would give him a portion of print sales, but he has no interest in that). It works for us.

I have toyed with the idea of bringing someone on board full-time to share responsibility in the studio, but honestly, I have branded myself as this business I don't think people would be receptive to another photographer taking the lead at times...I'll slowly creep that one in.

I am lucky that Jeff is who he is and we know each other so well as professionals (I swear he knows what type of shot I am looking for before I do). If you do find an associate pray that he/she is not so green with equipment that they require babysitting. I let a few people study under me over the summer and it worked OK, but it was really annoying for me to have to stop and explain every little detail...with Jeff I tell him what stop I want to shoot at, what lighting ratio and he sets the lights up while I shoot the bride and groom leaving in the limo. He really is just great....Jeff and Jennifer! We are branded as a "team", although people think we are married. If we were married we wouldn't get along so well cause I can get bossy during stressful situations:)

You can see on my wedding site that I have placed a small amount of text about Jeff Jeffries. I sell him when selling myself. The fact that we have been together for so long makes brides feel like we are strong shooters and honestly, we are. I am lost without him and hope he never gets that studio! )

Good luck...you might consider getting a dedicated assistant first and working them in as an associate. It is your reputation on the line.
Attached is a pic of Jeff. Girls he is single!!

Jenny

After reading some posts I thought I might add that Jeff does go out and shoot under my name when I have leagues, swim teams, etc. (hate that stuff, but it pays the bills). He does not shoot weddings under my name as the business is "me", but if I was unable to shoot a wedding, he would be the one sent to cover.

J

I'm new here and I'm still in school for photography, but I have thoughts on the topic:

Think of the way a medium to large law firm operates. A law firm has Partners, Associates and Paralegals (plus a bunch of others, but this is going to be convoluted enough!) They each have a unique roll in serving the firm's customers, and making the firm more profitable.

Partners: People commonly refer to the owners of a law firm as being the partners. It is very prestigious for a lawyer to become a partner of his or her law firm. Partners are usually the most experienced lawyers in a firm and, consequently, they charge the highest fees. They may be paid a salary, but the real reward for being a partner is that owns a share of the "owners equity" line on the balance sheet.
Associates: Lawyers who are employed by a firm but who are not owners are usually called associates. Generally, associates can be very good lawyers but they typically have less experience than the partners of the firm. Although it varies from firm to firm, associates may have to work for perhaps three to ten years before they are considered for partnership. Given their experience, associates tend to bill at lower rates than partners do. An Associates' pay is usually based on the number hours that they can bill to clients each month.
Paralegals: A paralegal is someone who has legal training but who is not a lawyer. Paralegals can serve a very important role in a law firm by providing critical support to lawyers when they are working on cases. They are able to work under the supervision of a lawyer on the detail work that has to be done on every case but that cannot justify the high billing rates of a lawyer. Paralegals typically bill at rates that are probably half of what a lawyer charges.


So a photo studio could set up a similar business model

The owner(s) of the studio are like the partners. They own and run the business. They do the marketing, deal with accountants, payroll, hire production staff, and they might shoot a few jobs... The owner may pay herself a wage, but the owner's real reward is the owner's equity line of the balance sheet.
Associate Photographers are like the associate lawyers. They could be as talented as the owner, but may not want or be ready to run a business. They works under the banner of the studio, but are allowed to work independently. Associates are paid well because they help the studio owner be more profitable.
Assistants are like the paralegals. Assistants have photographic training but they aren't ready or able to take a client by themself, so they work under the supervision of an associate. They provide critical support to the associate when the associate is on a job.

As I see it, this could be a great business model for a studio. The owner could have 4 Associates and 4 assistants (plus a production staff) and have the ability to shoot 5 weddings every Saturday. Since many of the expenses of the wedding photography business don't vary with the scale of the business, it could be very profitable.

I guess this is the kind of answer you get from a guys who drops out of business school, and goes back to school for photography!

-Beau

Beau....

Great stuff - thanks for the clarificaton!

I still think it comes down to the associate photographer vs the assistant thing. I don't know any associate photographers who would work for $21 an hour. As an assistant (no shooting) that is a very decent salary, but as a shooter, it's far below average...even for a newbie.

I'll answer your question though (not the rhetorical one...hehehe). I pay my seconds $500 a day, primaries $1500 a day; and assistants $200 a day. Average day is 7 hours, but the day ranges from 4-10 hours. So on some days, depending on the role, they are making $20 (assistant)-$150 (primary) an hour; but most days A LOT more ($28-$215). I'm in a small market too--I'm 1 hour outside Boston (very different market) and the average wedding around here tops out at $2500-3500.

I didn't mean to offend...really. This is about dialogue and learning.

Anyone else care to chime in? Or is this topic dying a slow death...

Geneve....

Thanks for your response.... and no offense taken anymore, I'm over it

I guess my next question for you (and it's probably not a public one), is even at a $3500 wedding (which I also charge by the way in a large market), do you afford to keep your profits flowing, when you are paying your help so much? I mean, paying someone as help $1500 a day??? that's what some inexperienced wedding photographers charge to shoot the wedding in many cases.

I have this amazing program (which I'll be happy to show you sometime) that breaks down specific information about each and every event or wedding we shoot. I can easily sort in any which direction which is really cool, but the thing I pay most attention to is the profit dollars for each even, and the profit percentage, which is really what it's all about if you want to grow your business, right? I'm currently averaging about 85% profit which I think is really good, and feel good knowing that I'm not just charging big bucks, but keeping them in my bank account when it's all said and done too. Keep in mind, this does not include me paying myself for those figures, so if it did, would be far off from that.

I know that having a 2nd photographer and paying them is the cost of doing business, however I just can't see giving a person that kind of money to help me on a one day wedding. Afterall, I take care of the client meetings, the thousands and thousands of dollars in equipment and advertising, and post even ordering filling, and album design, etc etc etc..... it's just not a fair ratio in my opinion.

Now...... when a photographer (assistant or whatever you want to call them) begins shooting weddings themselves, when I can double book and shoot something else, I would have no problem paying that person as high as 50% (maybe even more depending on the wedding), as I feel they would totally deserve that kind of pay. As for now though, while they have not really done anything yet (zero experience), there is in my opinion, no reason to go crazy just yet.

Paying well is important to keep good people, I realize, however again the assistant needs to make just as much of a committment if he/she wants to learn and grow with the business. I was a district manager for a fortune 500 company for about 8 years before retirning to run my photography business fulltime, so I guess I'm a little tougher and more of a tight ass on things since I constantly look at the bottom line.

Either way, I'm not saying one's right over the other... just interesting to hear different perspectives. I hate to see you for lack of a better word, "pissing" all your hard earned income to an assistant, when the truth is you probably would have a dozen people raise their hands jsu for the opportunity to shoot with you or do it for half of that price.

Anyway... let me know your thoughts.... no hard feelings on the earlier post, I must have been having a bad day, sorry

Matt

i have a little bit of experience in your market matt, and to be honest $500 a day for a second shooter for around 7 hours is probably a bit higher than market rate even here in manhattan. i dont know too many second shooters in the city that even make that for the occasional job. now if a photographer can give a bunch of work and the person is making a big commitment i have heard of numbers that high, but i think even for NYC the going rate is probably closer to $350 or $400 for a full day of second shooting. i have to believe in much smaller markets the numbers are probably smaller as well.

i know for me i pay my second shooter $350 a day flat rate. i think that's pretty well in line for the market for the occasional second shooter job. my rates are also 5k-10k, so i cant really imagine paying someone $500 a day and charging a lot less.... i mean the second shooter is only shooting! i think we'd all agree that the actual shooting is only a tiny part of what we give our clients.

by the way matt, i have a wedding at the hall of springs in may i also had lunch with the coordinator over at the sagamore a couple weeks ago, so im in your area sometimes.

Luke,
Do you pay that rate and allow the second shooter to use images from your event?
I pay less and allow use of images from my event.

yes i definitely allow her to use images from the events we've shot together. it's a pretty relaxed vibe between us, because she knows i take care of her when it comes to putting her portfolio together and getting her business started.... but she also knows that when i shoot a wedding that i plan on submitting to publications or to market with, that wedding just stays with me. it's not really about a concrete policy, more about just trying to help each other out and do the right thing. half of her website is made up of images that she's shot for me, and ive even given her references to potential clients, but she does a good job for me, is reliable, and keeps the images she's shot at really nice weddings on the DL since i am going to market with those.

but yes she does use a lot of images and i really do try and help with whatever i can. i had a couple people really help me out a ton when i was in her place and i hope i can do the same now that the roles are reversed.

No doubt, I cannot imagine not allowing seconds to use their images from my events. Though like you stated....it is all about the relationship you bulid with your second shooters. Taking care of each other, and not taking advantage.

Back to the associate issue. The concept worries me. I do not want someone else at a wedding without me, representing my name. If the person is so talented and professional, why are they not working for themselves?

I really like the photographer cooperative though!!!

i didnt like the associate photographer idea for a while, and more so when i first started out (that might have been just because i was so overwhelmed starting the business though!), but ive warmed up to it so much over the past year or so that i think that might be a direction that i look to take the business in within the next several years. if so i will have to spend some major time and resources developing a business plan for it, but i certainly think it's worth looking into for many people who want to make their money soley off of photography.

jim kennedy is one person who i haven't had the chance to meet yet, well actually we did for all of about 10 minutes over a year ago at a party in NYC, but he's a guy who i think we all have a lot to learn from when it comes to a large studio front type business. i look forward to conversations in the future with him.

You sound like me--I turn so much business away and would love to be able to give that business to shooters under my umbrella (because also, frankly, my favorite colleagues in the area are almost always already booked as well--there is a shortage of great shooters in this area).

It's the reason I started this post--want to hear how everyone does it I guess. It is overwhelming sometimes just to run my day-to-day, but I think ultimately adding associates is a win-win-win (me, them, brides!).

Let me say that first of all I RARELY hire seconds, but when I do I only want the best and my very short list of seconds commands $500. I find that any less is not worth their time and effort. I am sure there is a list of assistants turned seconds out there that might work for less, but that is not my interest.

There is a post on DWF about this too and the going rate seems to be around $500 for an experienced second. Honestly, I am not sure if I would second for less...depends on the scenario (if it was a friend in a pinch, different story).

Here is another thought to the whole second shooter idea: unless that person and you are in a total synergy type situation, I find that I just don't use the seconds images. I feel that a second during the ceremony can be amazing...but only if they are shooting the right things. But beyond that, tough call as to how much I really ever need one.

Now I do LOVE the idea of two photographers though--both as primaries basically sharing the business rather than just being a second/primary shooter. That is something my business partner Raluca and I have explored. It would jump us into the very high end range, but it could be an amazing service for brides.

Hey Matt,

No hard feelings then or now--honestly! I knew you were just being frustrated over the terminology. I get that.

But let me speak to your question, and I have no problem answering it on the forums. I only hire a primary to COVER THE WEDDING BY THEMSELVES. This would be an outsourced wedding. For instance: I am going to be 9 months pregnant this June. I of course had weddings booked way before I got pregnant, and had to offer these brides some choices. I have hired PRIMARIES to shoot those weddings at the day rate of $1500. They are taking on an incredible responsibility. All I'm doing is the post production/album design (well, that's a lot, but frankly it's the easy part as we all know).

So of course I wouldn't hire primaries at every wedding--I AM THE PRIMARY 99% of the time!! Make sense?

I also rarley hire SECOND SHOOTERS. Frankly, I don't need one. There is always that time during the ceremony & formals when I wish I had one, but otherwise, I find (like I said above) that I rarely need or even want a second. It's just an option in my packages that most brides don't take advantage of. But if a bride ever did want one, the rate would be $500 and would be added to the package, of course.

However, I do have an ASSISTANT at almost every wedding. And for this I pay a day rate of $200 for an experienced one who can also shoot if absolutely need be, less for a sherpa.

I do get where you are coming from, I still just think that we are talking apples and oranges here...I'm either not making myself crystal clear, or we are just using the wrong terminology. I actually don't think that having a second shooter is in fact the cost of doing business (like you state). I think having an assistant is, but not a second.

SO one more time to sum up where I stand:

Primary: whole kit and kaboodle. 100% responsibility for the entire event. Top Chef. $1500.

Second: a shooter that acts as a secondary for the entire event (does not assist). Not as much responsibility as the primary, but more than an assistant. Could shoot the entire event if something happened to primary. Line Cook or sous chef. $500.

Assistant: someone to load film, haul gear (and a lot more of course--and invaluable to a degree... ). Almost no responsibility for the coverage of the event. Would not be a substitute for primary or even secondary. Dish washer. $100-200
depending on experience.

All three roles are important to the event though.

Thanks Matt! I'm glad you have put lots of thought into running your biz! You are on the right track for sure.

Talk soon,

Geneve