This question came from a struggling portrait photographer in Ann Arbor, MI.

My customers mostly buy small prints, mainly 5x7 and 4x6. I'm having a hard time getting them to buy 8x10s.  What am I doing wrong?

When I got this question I already knew the answer. I asked the tog what she charged and her answer confirmed my suspicions:  $50 for 8x10,  $25 for 5x7 and $15 for 4x6.

The reason this tog is struggling is because her print pricing is designed to sell small prints!  Why spend $50 for an 8x10 when you can spend the same amount and get two 5x7s?

In marketing there's a term we call "climbing the ladder".  To sell bigger, you've got to make your clients climb the ladder. If the ladder is too steep, they won't climb.

This means that the larger print should be just a little bit more expensive than the smaller print, making the smaller print seem like not such a good deal (the corollary being that the larger print seems like a great deal).

So if you charge $50 for an 8x10, try charging something like $40 for a 5x7 and $30 for a 4x6. Why buy a 4x6 if a 5x7 is just a bit more? And while you're at it, why not just spend $10 more and get the 8x10?  That's what "climbing the ladder" is all about.

I take this concept a step further with my own pricing. I make the price differential between my 5x7 and 8x10 really small. How small?  Try zero!

I simply charge one flat price for any size print 8x10 or smaller.  My clients choose the size based on their needs, not based on price. In other words, I never make anything less than my full 8x10 price. Problem solved.

We'll be discussing this and many more sales, marketing and pricing topics at my February 27 "Building a Profitable Portrait Business" workshop in Seattle.

because every post needs an image:

Laurence Kim Workshops

Building a Profitable Portrait Business - February 27 - Seattle WA:  2 seats left

Location Lighting 101 - March 20 - Vancouver BC

The Paul C Buff Parabolic Light Modification System (PLM) is basically a giant umbrella softbox.

It comes in umbrella diameters of 75", 55" and 42".  I have the 55" model.  This thing is big. Really big.

There are 2 models: white translucent and silver.  Get the silver model, it has a much higher efficiency rating and will thus put out more light than the white translucent. By putting the white diffusion sheet over the umbrella it essentially creates a giant softbox.

Better still, since it's configured as an umbrella, it's a snap to set up.

As you can see, even the 55" is huge. It can be used with any brand of flash, even with a speedlight. (correction: might not fit Elinchrom, which uses a proprietary 7mm shaft diameter)

What's the benefit of such a big umbrella-box?

• The bigger the light source, the softer the light. Now softer doesn't always mean better - sometimes you want a harder light. But if you're looking for that big, soft, gorgeous, wrap around light you need a big light like this.

• The bigger light source can cover a bigger subject. You can light cars with this thing.

• It will make nice big, round catch-lights in your subject's eyes

Here are a few quick snaps in the front yard, taken at 2pm. Canon 30D w/17-55mm f2.8 EFS, ISO 100, f6.3, 1/250 sec. This metering knocked down the ambient by about 3 stops.

Look at how this giant light source wraps around Theresa!

Now here's the best part.  The cost?  $80.  That may not seem ultra-cheap to you, but consider the alternatives. The comparable modifiers from Elinchrom and Profoto run $1,100 and $1,485 respectively. That's 12x-15x the price of the Paul C Buff product!  Remember, you can use the PLM system with any brand of flash.

So here's another quiz question. You know me by now so the answer is obvious.  What will make a bigger difference to your images, the $80 PLM or an $8,000 1DsMkwhatever?

Laurence Kim Workshops

Location Lighting 101, Jan 23, Seattle WA:  sold out!

Building a Profitable Portrait Business, Feb 27, Seattle WA: seats available

Location Lighting 101, March 20, Vancouver BC: seats available

I'm honored to have one of my wedding images published in the current issue of Newsweek!

This is the issue:  Jan 18, 2010

Here's my image - unfortunately uncredited:

How it happened:  I blogged this wedding about a year ago. A photo editor from Photo District News saw my blog post and asked to interview me and publish the photos on the PDN magazine and website.  I blogged about this here.

A Newsweek photo editor saw my images on PDN and kept me in mind for an upcoming article on gay marriage. Then they contacted me for some images and voila - I'm in Newsweek!

Since the image is uncredited, it doesn't really do much for me in terms of exposure, but it still is a nice feeling!

Laurence Kim Workshops

Location Lighting 101

Jan 23, Seattle WA:  Sold Out!

March 20, Vancouver BC:  seats available

Building a Profitable Portrait Business

Feb 27, Seattle WA:  seats available

There are 2 types of actions that I use - "workflow" actions and "stylistic" actions.  I consider workflow actions to be tools that help speed up the workflow process.  An example would be Kevin Kubota's Magic Sharp action, which gets run on practically every single one of my images. Other examples are actions that I've created to resize images, add my watermark, etc.

Then there's the stylistic actions.  These are actions used to add a mood, a feeling, a "look". That's what this post is about.

If there's one thing that drives me nuts is the overuse of these actions. I've seen lots of weddings and portrait sessions posted on blogs with a seemingly random use of stylistic actions running full blast on every image. It's getting ridiculous. If aliens are out there monitoring our blogs they'd think our planet is full of orange people.

If you were this bride and groom, for example, which image would you want to look at for the next 50 years? The natural processing or the heavily action-ized one?

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-action.  In fact, I've been invited by Kevin Kubota to be an affiliate of his and I also recommend the Totally Rad Actions.  

What I'm saying is this: Don't use a stylistic action randomly - use it to enhance a stylistic feeling you're trying to achieve for that particular image. And please tone it down - there's no law saying you have to run an action at full strength!

Here's an example of how I use stylistic actions. I'm running Kubota KevX Process Combo at 50% opacity on the right hand image. It adds pop and color to the image and enhances the blues without going over the top. I'm showing it to you @ 50% so you clearly see the effect of the action but in real life I'd probably run it closer to 30%.

Here's another example of how I might use a stylistic action. The action here is Technicolor Dream World from TRA1. The image on the left is the original, center is TDW @100% and the right image is TDW @ 40%. More isn't always better. By all means use your actions, but use as little as you can to get the desired result.

Think of these actions as you would your makeup (for you gals).  A little makeup - expertly applied - can enhance your looks while too much could make you look like a rodeo clown.

I'll be doing a lot more posts in the future on what actions I use and how I use them. But the message for today is this: go easy on them there actions!

Laurence Kim Workshops

What's the one piece of gear you really couldn't do without?

I get this question every once in a while. Although I write occasionally about gear, I'm not really a gear head. I still shoot with Canon 5D and 30D cameras - a half-decade old technology.  

I've also written quite often how the gear doesn't really matter, it's understanding what to do with it that counts. There's not a single piece of gear that I have that I couldn't do without.

Despite all of that, I must admit there is one piece of gear that having to do without would leave me crying in my shoes - my 70-200 f2.8L IS lens.

This lens, (and the Nikon equivalent, the new 70-200 f2.8VR II, which I understand is quite excellent) is the King of lenses. I usually do portrait shoots with just this single lens. I can shoot an entire wedding with just 2 lenses, this one and my 35mm prime.

What makes this lens so great?

• It's absolutely tack sharp. Just about as sharp as any of my primes.

• The image stabilization works great. I've taken sharp images from the back of a dim church hand-held at 1/50 while racked out to 200mm.

• It's a magic beauty lens. People just look better in images taken with it.

• It provides tremendous subject-background separation.

• You can have it both ways:  stop down to f5.6-6.3 from 60 feet away and you've got a 9' depth of field - enough to get nearly any size group in focus - while at the same time still blurring the background beautifully and creating lots of subject-background separation.    

• It's currently out-of-fashion (a big plus in my view!). Every photographer out there is obsessed with shooting with fast wide primes. Read any photography forum and there are dozens of posts about how togs have sold their 70-200, or they only use it for the ceremony then put it away.

Sure you can get cool looks with those wide primes, but let's face facts. At the end of the day, my clients will look much prettier than theirs will, and that's what keeps my clients (and my wallet) happy.

Anything not so great about this lens?

• It's big and heavy. Boo-hoo. Go to the gym.

• It costs $1,750.  Expensive, but worth every penny.

Compared to the 135 f2L:  The 135L is a stop faster and of course, much smaller and lighter. Shots taken wide open provide so much separation that they almost have a 3-D quality about them. It's a fantastic lens. But in the end, the versatile range combined with the image stabilization of the 70-200 wins out.

Compared to the 70-200 f4L IS:  This is also a great lens. Smaller, lighter and cheaper, but every bit as sharp. If you can't afford the 2.8, then buy this lens. Then when you're ready for the 2.8, you can sell it for nearly as much as you paid for it.

The 70-200 @145mm with a Canon 20D. It's a magic beauty lens!

Location Lighting 101 Workshop

1/23/10, Seattle, WA: sold out

3/20/10, Vancouver, BC: seats available

----------------------------

Building a Profitable Portrait Business

2/27/10, Seattle, WA:  seats available

---------------------------

Laurence Kim Workshops