In article ,
ospam (Rosspilot) wrote:


Time is time. Money is money. They are neither synonymous nor
interchangeable.



Always a fixed fee for a shoot? Never charge by the hour?

I personally do not because I do not believe in the entire concept of charging
by the hour for creative or intellectual work. But that begs the question.

My clients are not paying for "time". They are paying for the work created
during that time. Most don't care how long it takes.

Time is NOT money.



You've never had to pay a plumber, who took smoking breaks while still
on the clock, as you stand there realizing each minute is costing you
more.

I understand what you are saying ... and from your viewpoint it comes
from years of charging usuage fees, which have nothing to do with your
time and labor, but of value to the customer.

But to those of us that shoot other types of projects, that are not
images per se, our time becomes a big factor in how we develop a
budget/proposal.

I shoot video as well, for example. I am going to charge more for a
project that reqires 2 days of on-location production that a project
that can be shot in 1 day (time = money)

If I can edit that video in 10 hours it will certainly cost less to the
client, than a project that requires 40 hours of editing (less time =
less money).

Next time you need your AP mechanic to work on your plane ... ask for a
fixed quote since you don't believe in the 'time=money' idea. He may
well give you a quote this way, but it will be high, and you will pay
more, since he will (in his mind) figure the worst case scenario
'time/wise' in figuring his labor charge.

TBO .... definitley a time = money issue


Edward