FROM THE EDITOR...
PERCEIVED VALUE
T
here is a term used in sales and marketing called “Perceived Value”
- it refers to how much the parties involved in a transaction think the
item, or service in question is really worth. Here’s an example:
On November 12th of last year,
Jackson Pollock’s “Number 16”
sold for $32,645,000.00 at Christie’s,
New York.
Dave Stabley
Editor / Publisher
This work of art was created by an
8 year old and has a street value of
$0.00.
Why is the Pollock worth so much and the 8 year old’s work worth nothing (except to the parents, of course)?
Perceived Value. Both pieces of abstract art are roughly the same size, both are beautiful, colorful, and very
dramatic, but the Pollock piece is highly sought after because the art world has declared it to be a masterpiece,
and therefore highly collectible - which is to say, very valuable! The 8 year old’s painting has not been given
the same recognition, and consequently is not in demand, so has no intrinsic value.
So what does all this have to do with collaborative photography?
In a collaborative photographic arrangement, since neither photographer nor model has to pay for the services
of the other, there can be a tendency, either consciously, or sub-consciously, for the parties to believe that
since it didn’t cost anything...it has no REAL value! nothing could be further from the truth. In actuality, each
could be getting thousands of dollars worth of products and/or services without spending a dime.
From the photographer’s perspective
You need a model, or models, to help you create a vision you can only see in your mind’s eye at the moment.
You “could” hire one (or more), and pay the going hourly rate, but that can get very expensive. The downside
of doing it this way is that if the shots don’t come out the way you had hoped, you wasted your money. If you
can’t sell the images for whatever reason, again you are out the money. The upside is, if you have laid out
your cash to hire the model(s), psychologically these shots may seem to have far more worth to you. Chances
are, you will exert considerably more effort to sell them, or have them published than if you got the services
of the model(s) for free.
Another alternative is to do a “Trade For” shoot. Here, the model invests his/her time and effort into your
project and gets “something of value” in return. It can be digital files, prints, a combination of the two, or the
parties agree to share in the proceeds of any sales that may be generated from this “collaboration”. This is a
wonderful way to complete the project when you are on a tight budget, or have no budget at all. However, as
mentioned before, since no money is exchanged, be cautious not to fall into the trap of thinking it has no value.
Photographers, if you are asking a model to do a TF, it is important that either YOU provide the outfits necessary,
or be happy shooting in whatever the model may already have. If the model is comfortable doing his/her own
makeup and/or hair, and you are pleased with the result, fine. If not, it is incumbent on you to provide the
service for them. Models, if YOU are asking for the TF, those responsibilities fall on you, not the photographer.
6
NM CliQ Magazine | October 2015