PFRE is the original online resource for real estate and interior photographers. Since 2006, it has been a community hub where like-minded professionals from around the world gather to share information with a common goal of improving their work and advancing their business. With thousands of articles, covering hundreds of topics, PFRE offers the most robust collection of educational material in our field. The history of real estate photography has been documented within these pages.
All Articles


The Render Flames tool in Photoshop is a very powerful and dynamic tool that lets you add fire in just a few steps where there otherwise wasn't one in your photo. In this video, I demonstrate step by step how you can have Photoshop render a fire into a ...



The PFRE Community Forum is an online resource for discussing the art and business of Real Estate and Interior Photography.
Join The Discussion


View Now


For over a decade, photographers from around the world have participated in PFRE’s monthly photography contests, culminating in the year-end crowning of PFRE’s Photographer of the Year. With a new theme each month and commentary offered by some of the finest real estate & interior photographers anywhere, these contests offer a fun, competitive environment with rich learning opportunities. 

Contest Rules


View / Submit


View Archive


PFRE’s Annual Conference in Las Vegas provides real estate and interior photographers from around the world an opportunity to meet on an annual basis, to learn, share best practices and make connections. Many of the leading names in our field are selected to speak on topics aimed at improving our craft and advancing our business. It’s a comfortable, relaxed environment that is fun, easy to get to, and affordable.


PFRE Conference 2020

Registration not open yet
App Store

Latest News

PFRE Virtual Conference 2020 Announcement: Presenter Line Up Part 2 of 2

*Early bird tickets go on sale September 28th* Here are the remaining ...

PFRE Virtual Conference 2020 Announcement: Presenter Line Up Part 1 of 2

We're a few short months away from the PFRE Virtual Conference 2020 an ...

Reader Poll: Which Topics Should Be Covered at the 2020 PFRE Virtual Conference?

Planning is well underway for the 2020 PFRE Virtual Conference and we' ...

PFRE Conference 2020 Announcement

As many of you know, last year we hosted the first-ever PFRE Conferenc ...



The PFRE podcast is focused on having meaningful conversations with world-class photographers, business professionals and industry leaders, with the goal to inform and inspire.
All Podcasts

Coming Soon...



PFRE prides itself on the depth and breadth of the information and professional development resources it makes available to our community. Our goal is to help real estate and interior photographers be successful while bringing the community together and elevating the industry as a whole.


Coming Soon...

Peggy in Tampa Gets Coverage Via PFRE Directory

Published: 16/02/2011
By: larry

Just 5 weeks ago I added real estate photographer Peggy Taylor in Tampa Bay, FL to the PFRE real estate photographer directory because she is one of the top users with over 80 active tours.

This last weekend Peggy told me her site and marketing was being featured on and they had found her site from via the PFRE real estate photographer Directory.

For beginning real estate photographers I think it is worth while taking a look at what Peggy is doing right:

  1. Peggy's has a good looking site with a excellent portfolio of quality images.
  2. Her site has a strong marketing message mixed in with great images.
  3. She has an excellent set of demonstration before and after images that demonstrate to agents what her image editing can do for an image. This demonstrates why Peggy's images will look better than agent images.
  4. Peggy has a great map on her site that shows all the listings she has shot with links to tours of each home. This is impressive for a new customer to see all the homes Peggy has shot.
  5. For a small additional charge she provides a PDF flyer or brochure for the homes she has shot.
  6. She bundles a tour with every home she shoots.

It looks to me that Peggy is doing a great job of marketing both herself and her customers homes. Congratulations Peggy!

37 comments on “Peggy in Tampa Gets Coverage Via PFRE Directory”

  1. Nice images...but how is she making any money at $100 per house? Seems like a lot of work for not enough money to do editing work like that.

    unless there's some secret i dont know about :p

  2. That would be $99 minus the $8, minus the gas, minus investment in equipment..... If there is a secret, please share. Maybe Peggy is really good and fast at photoshop... Many agents just won't pay more. This is somewhat dependent on the local economy and asking price of the home. The point is to grow the business and move up to shooting more expensive properties for agents that can and are willing to pay more. Additional income can be made doing brochures and other realted activities. Layering fees can help...

  3. Agree on the price - seems very low.

    That aside, I like the site and how Peggy is marketing her service however I have a critique (unless I'm missing the point)
    Why have a before edit / after edit shot? It just tells me she did a bad lighting job in the first place. Why don't her images look (close at least) to the after shot from camera?
    Unless Peggy is offering a service to improve existing images that the client created but if so, it's not clear from the website.

    Don't get me wrong, Peggy has a lot of nice images on her site.

  4. On top of that, she is shooting 5k-7k sq ft houses for $134?!? Please tell me how you make ANYTHING at that pricepoint. Giving Peggy the benefit of the doubt, she is still going to have 2 hours minimum tied up in travel and shooting alone. Judging from her website, she has great images, but they are not necessarily achieved "in camera" based on the boasting of her editing skills. Figure at least 1 hour in post (again I am being extremely conservative on that..) and another hour just for "dealing with the agent" in phone calls, ftp/CD delivery of images and uploading to the tour site..

    $134 - $8 for the tour, - $10 for gas (that only gets you 2.5 gallons these days) and another $10 for taxes (assuming some creative deductions at years end) leaves $106... This is before we figure other expenses like business liability insurance, the other costs of transportation, phone, internet, etc being amortized in to each jobs' true cost. If that is $5k a year (again prob a lowball number, just an iphone, internet connection at home and some marketing materials like biz cards and printed flyers will cost you $2000 per yr alone) divided by the 80 active tours she has comes to $62.50 PER gig! I will assume she shoots more than 80 per year, but it does say she includes a tour with each shoot.. Without looking at her site way more than I care, lets say she does shoot 200 homes per year. its STILL $25 per gig.

    By GENEROUS estimates, she is netting $81 per gig on a MONSTER sized house.. probably closer to $50 per gig on smaller houses.. $81 by 4 hours= $20.25 per hour.. Not bad if you could do 100+ houses a week... Im guessing two houses a day is probably the max she does, and thats not 5 or 6 days a week either...

    Unless there is some secret potion involved, I cant see how this makes her more than $2k a month for A LOT of work.. For $24k a year, I will wait tables or bartend part time so I can enjoy my life instead of working my tail off to stay behind the pack and stressed out..

  5. @malia : either way, you take the time to do it yourself (less gigs per week) or you farm it out, even at India prices, and she is still making WAY less than $100 per house, Less than $75 probably. I just dont see it as viable either way. Maybe she has a part time job on the weekends to pay the bills, does high end kids portraits @ $1000 a session multiple times a month and this is "busy work", who knows.. I would LOVE for her to post up how this actually works in the long run. I could see 6 months or so before reality hits and the checking account is empty, but it looks like the housing bubble all over again imho..

  6. I was also concerned about her pricing. I asked her to checkin here if she has some time today.

  7. I have to agree about the pricing issue. The only way she could make up for it is Volume. If I shoot one house a day at $99 I would be making money but I would also be working myself to death. If I slow down the number of home shoots I do and concentrate on quality and customer service you can charge more. I am making more now charging what I do per tour and doing less work then charging less per tour and doing more work to compensate. I also notice the quality of clients change too with the price point you set. On a house that well sell for $250k the agent is going to make a few thousand bucks on it once it closes. They can afford to pay double what she is charging for photographs and they would still be walking away with a big chunk of change for selling the house. It his the hardest part of the job to value yourself and demand to be paid what you are worth.

  8. I agree with the comments on pricing and the amount of time and expense she says she puts in for that, but she may be exaggerating the amount time she puts in for marketing purposes. It is easy to just sell something primarily on price. Much harder to sell on the merits. However, nothing wrong with competing primarily on price, if you can be super efficient at what you do.

  9. To me a green colored text is just a sign of being amateurish. Her pics are fine, but the green text, overblown Fastpix-logo (with a green text) and her almost invisible Peggy Taylor, photographer -text just doesn't look as professional as her pics. If she's trying to make the text jump out of the body, well, guess she's just done it.

  10. Peggy! You have some beautiful images on your site. Why the slave wages? You can do much better!

  11. Y'all are all very right about my pricing. It is way out of line. When I started this business 2 years ago I was a rank amateur and I had no idea what to charge and I started way too low. I have gradually increased the amount of processing and skill that I put into my work but haven't proportionately increased my prices. I have recently increased my pricing but it is still too low. Although most of the homes I shoot are not $99, I still need to boost my prices. I plan to wait a few months before I raise them again. Part of my problem is that I don't know what my competitors are charging so I don't know how high I can go. Yes, I know the website is kind of cheesy but it gets my message across. I get my clients from referrals so they only go to my website to see my prices and photos. Thanks to all for your comments and thanks so much to Larry for spotlighting me!

  12. Very nice, Peggy, as your neighbor 70 miles away in Orlando. Pricing is a major frustration, and unfortunately it represents the market. And yes, gradually trying to increase it. To determine pricing, I researched others listed on the photographer directory on this site, plus Google search from Jacksonville down to Ft Lauderdale. I may have missed you though. That is also where I got the idea for the dual tier pricing with premium for magazine publication. Also, the local MLS (MFRMLS) has a screaming deal on Visual tours - $2 individual tour or $5/mo unlimited tours - so I did the surcharge to provide the additional photos. If the low priced freelancer (check Craigslist -Services) were not bad enough, you have that firm over in Tampa that tried to recruit me as a photographer to shoot their $110 visual tours they host - and of course pay me peanuts.

    While some noted the extra processing to clean up the examples, I thought just the opposite. You took a great picture as usual in RAW...then messed it up to create a "before". Please tell us that is what you did. I've thought of doing something similar but am hesitant to use the same photo for fear it would reflect on me. We have all seen the MLS bloopers - and a copyright violation to use them - nothing prohibits you from re-creating from you cell phone or old P&S camera and labeling it as a re-creation. Then showing the better composition and lighting. About the only time I would use the same photo would be to illustrate a post such as sky replacement, or this time of year, heug masking to turn the winter brown grass green.

  13. LOL! LarryG, actually the "before" photos are either the -2 from my bracketed shots or the ambient to get the view...I don't remember now.... You probably missed my pricing because I have only had my website up for a very few months...probably not even 6 months.... Yes, I started out working for peanuts for that company as well. That's how I got interested in this biz.... When the MLS started the $2 tours, I began working for myself and charging too little. It has nuclear mushroomed since then. Probably due to my ridiculous pricing. I will correct that this year!

  14. If every architectural photographer started working for $100 per day, we would have a minimum wage career overnight. I was shooting homes for $1800 each just three years ago. I stopped real estate imagery because the market was flooded by lower ballers and anyone and everyone with a camera. Keep in mind that ten years ago, a commercial photographer would easily fetch $15-30k per day! Now we are at a hundred bucks? If a realtor sells a $1,000,000 home, they bank $45,000. I think they can afford at least $3500 on marketing. Peggy states that her business has "nuclear mushroomed"? Start selling Ferraris for $100 and see if you can sell any. As the saying goes, if you find yourself extremely busy and landing every job, you are probably priced far too low. I hope this person realizes that there are other photographers whom have families and mortgages based on their freelance income levels. How can anyone compete with rates such as these? Sad.

  15. Peggy, I respectfully disagree. I have tried to discuss pricing with you for some time now and have told you exactly what I, and others in our market, are charging...still have the old emails if you don't remember but this has been an issue for quite some time now. Not only that, you are marketing to clients and agents of people you asked questions to, learned from and taking clients away with this ridiculous pricing. Your pricing and it's impact on others and the market have been made clear to you for a while now.

  16. I don't know if I should be happy that someone seems to be "making it" in a new photography business (a lot of work for little payoff, though) , or absolutely disgusted that this is the growing paradigm professional photographers must compete in. This is why organizations such as ASMP need to reach out in more areas to educate the value of our work. Anyone taking out student loans to study photography in college needs to know that they will be up against photographer's like Peggy. Nothing against Peggy, as this is a free market and photography rates are not standardized, but it's a shame that she seems to be giving quality work away - perhaps naively - it makes it that much harder for others to make a decent living.
    I'm not bashing Peggy, her images are very good. I'm just dismayed at the amount of work she is doing for the peanuts she is being paid.

  17. Dane, you're wrong on almost every count, mate. A photographer like Peggy is pursuing a different business model than the one you're remembering, and they can't be compared on an apples-to-apples basis. Most RE photography is a volume-based model, and most shoot multiple units per day. The overhead, training, and equipment costs are extremely low relative to traditional interiors photography. $100/shoot is still unsustainably low, unless there is a subsidy of some sort in the household budget.

    You were likely pushed out of the real estate photography market because you were over-delivering. It would be like trying to sell Lamborghini's to people who only wanted a Chevy station wagon. As soon photographers arrived on the scene who could supply "good enough" photography at a lower rate, of course your clients fled. Markets change; you either adapt, or get left behind.

    No real estate agent in the US nets $45K on a $1M listing. At the very best possible scenario, they're going to gross 3%, likely less. That gets split with a broker, before any out-of-pocket expenses are subtracted (like photography).

    You've got to understand the industry you're trying to penetrate!

  18. Scott, Thank you for the education. I truly appreciate your insight. I also trust that you understand I was the Creative Director for Unique Homes magazine as well as it's sisters publications for almost five years. Sold in over 80 countries, Unique Homes is basically a glamouros 350 page color classified magazine of the world's most expensive properties. In other words, high end real estate. Pick up a copy at Barnes and Nobles and look at the imagery. When I left that magazine, I went directly to my client contact list and began shooting realty photography. My imagery was solid and I was paid well for it. (and the walls were even straight) As I said, my rate range was $1200-1800 per home. At that time, delivering the best was the norm and the demand. It would take me a day to shoot the property, not one hour.

    In today's "pro shmo" anyone-with-a-camera world, people don't even use tripods let alone deliver straight walls. Sure, I could grab a hand held camera and walk into a house and shoot the place in 12 minutes as good or better than most anyone. So if I did four houses an hour x's $100, that would be $400 an hour or $3200 a day! Fantastic. Only problem is, the realty world's definition of "good enough" for an image ranges between a cell phone pik and a pik shot with a camera. Everything else is a variable, especially the price.

    There's someone in Tampa shooting realty for $58.00 per home, and a virtual tour online company looking for shooters for $25.00 per house, though they charge their realtor clients $1800 for the priveledge. How would you like to start shooting for $20 bucks a home, because that's where this is headed my friend, very soon. Word will be getting out that anyone with a camera can make $20/hr. That's better than Walmart and McDonalds combined at an hourly rate.

    Is the art of photography being lessened to a minimum wage way of making a living for most anybody? Yes indeed.

    I don't have a personal vendetta with any particular person. I do have the right to stand up for my industry and try to educate people. If someone is shooting ten shots for $100.00, that's ten bucks a shot which is far LESS than any royalty free image I have in stock libraries. And I don't even have to leave my couch to profit from a stock shot. I am guessing the gas to get there is free? Do they have business insurance in case a $2000 vase gets broken?

    Shoot away and charge what you wish. I will concentrate on trying to understand the industry I have been trying to penetrate since 1985. thanks for the insight.

  19. Dana, it is nice to have your perspective on this here. However, you are still talking apples and oranges somewhat: photography for the bulk of the midrange properties versus photography for high-end properties. I think the problem for someone like you is not so much at the real luxury end, where I think there is still decent money to be made per job in some markets, but with the more attractive lower-high-end and the upper-midrange properties in the more desirable areas, which in the past might still have gone to someone like you and are now often being shot by people with amateur skills and equipment for peanuts. But the free market is what it is, and I think it just goes to show that a lot of real estate agents are really not concerned with the art of photography. I think more of them should be, because I think that kind of quality helps listings, and listing agents, to stand out more from the competition (at least for certain kinds of properties and markets), but it can be very hard to sell to people who are primarily focused on price and convenience rather than high quality.

  20. I agree David 100%. I don't expect a realtor with a $300k listing will shell out $1800 for a shoot. However, I do think they can afford $500. $100 is giving away the farm. After expenses, its encroaching upon minimum wage. In my opinion, if I rifled through a ten image shoot and produced focused, properly exposed images, that contained straight walls, I could do it in 2-3hrs. max. ANY professional service, from a locksmith to the Maytag repair man charge $100 Per hour. That means i would have to make $200-300 min.

    The other part of this situation is this: These so called real estate photographers soon locate a friend with a new hair salon and shoot that. The images end up in the hands of the interior designer and architect. And before long, my ten year architect client is now getting $4k worth of images shot by someone else for a hundred bucks. How many times has that happened to me in the past two years? DOZENS.

    I see other architectural photographers with prestigious well known studios dropping like flies in this economy while hundred dollar wizards excel.

    Yes it is a free society. Even in a free society, anyone with a calculator can figure out how many shoots they have to do to make $4,000. I have to do one or two, not forty.

  21. Dane, I don't think we're really disagreeing at the core of this thing. $100 is too low, there's no doubt about it. But I still think you're failing to recognize that there are different markets out there - and not every photographer is (or should be) pursuing the one you're in. There's money to be made, and plenty of it, in the low end of the real estate market. I know lots of photographers who gross six figures annually shooting nothing but real estate, at rates below $500/house.

    Are you telling me that your architect and ID clients were satisfied with the photos they got from the $100 photographers? Seriously? If so, one of two things is happening: you're over-charging for your work, or the other photographer is producing $4000 sets of images for $100. Frankly, I don't believe either of those scenarios.

    Peggy is a perfectly competent real estate photographer, but she's not ready to shoot for ID Magazine, and she'd be the first to say so, I think. If your clients can be woo'd away from you by a third-tier startup photographer with a prosumer SLR, then I'd say the problem is with you, not with them.

    I think my core message here is this: Markets Change. If you can't change with them, you wither and die. This is not unique to photography in any way -- just ask any graphic designer, musician, or restaurant. Heck, even our own interior design and architecture clients have the same problem. You can go online and "design" your own kitchen for why pay an interior designer, right? Of course, there are a million reasons why, but the fact remains that there is (and always was) a market segment that will be satisfied with mediocrity. That's why Walmart flourishes, even when Nordstroms is right across the street. Two vendors, serving two markets. No one is twisting the client's arm to go with one or the other -- clients tend to self-select what they want, and what they can afford.

  22. Look, I didn't set out to ruin the photography industry. Two years ago I didn't even own a DSL and I knew nothing about photography. This thing has just kind of creeped up on me because I started shooting tours for my husband and then his broker and so on until I finally got sort of good at it. I appreciate all of the comments about pricing though and I will adjust my prices this year. And thanks Scott.

  23. Scott, I think we are mostly in agreement but I don't think you are quite getting all of what I am saying. As I said previous, I don't have "an issue" with any one particular person with a camera. I am simply stating what is going on in my industry. "If you can’t change with them, you wither and die" Exactly. Just like the stock image industry is dying and companies are dropping like flies. The reason? Getty and Corbis started pushing's where images can be had for a penny. Not much profit there. Ten years ago I fetched $7000 for a single image usage. My royalty report now has listings such as $0.73 cents profit.

    As I also said previous, I do not expect a realtor with a $125k listing to pay $1800 for photos. I fetch $350 per shot for singles and $500+ per home for multiples. I think $100 per hour, including $100 per hour for computer time is valid. I do not see anyone including myself driving to a small home, shooting it, driving home, editing the images, burning a disc (for a charge), and delivering the images, in ONE HOUR. Its not possible

    How about some simple math - if Photographer "Smith" wants to make $80k this year shooting realty, at a rate of $100 per home, my math says that's 800 homes to shoot. WHO SHOOTS 800 homes in a year? How will they make six figures? They will not. But they will hurt the industry, and if someone say that I don't understand this industry that I have been in for 25 years, and they support low ball rates, they are part of the problem, not the solution.

    You and Me are both competing with people shooting architecture for $100 and $50. Next we will be competing with a rate of a twenty dollar bill. And our income will be a hundred bucks a day.

    Three years ago my biggest client was L'Oreal USA. We traveled over 150,000 miles per year shooting their retail stores all over the planet. My rate was over $2k per day. They phone me one day and say they found a new photographer, "unless I can match their new rate of $250 per day". I was not willing to take a nine hour flight to Argentina, work a 19 hour day, take another nine hour flight home, and then do four hours of editing, and deliver the images to Miami, all for $250. That's not even $80 per day. But guess what, someone else got the job for $250 and I never heard from them again after a six year relationship. In the past two years, this has happened to me dozens of times.

    I have had this same exact argument with others in my town whom are shooting for too low. Only to find out that they are bidding on my commercial client jobs as well. I made well into six figures per year for five years until last year. I barely scraped by under $100k. My salary is now a quarter of what it was two years ago. The economy has made some impact but even worse is the new competition.

    People who are new to the arena are bidding jobs far far far below market value. This is ruining the industry and becoming the norm. Your job and mine are both in jeopardy because of it. If you don't believe me, call up one of Peggy's clients and ask them if you can shoot for them for $150. I am sure they will tell you they have someone already who is a lot cheaper at $100. And, if Peggy thinks her wonderful client list is going to openly embrace her new rate of $200, she has a new lesson to learn as well.

  24. Dane, I think you're talking to someone my posts above - I've said multiple times that I think $100 is too low. I'm not interested in re-visiting that topic, other than to say that each photographer has to set their own CODB and establish rates accordingly. I've seen too many happy successful photographers who charged seemingly low rates (that horrified other photographers who didn't understand the business model) to even worry about this stuff anymore.

    No, I think the main difference between our positions is that you believe you're competing against those folks -- and I find that absurd. L'Oreal is not stupid. They know what a good photograph looks like. If you think for a second that the average Craigslist GWAC can seriously produce, consistently, images that stand up to work by a serious, experienced pro, then you're not paying attention. That's patently absurd.

    It's equally absurd to believe that anyone was purchasing plane tickets, hotels, meals, etc etc and shooting for $250. At the least, expenses were added to that. It's disingenous for you to imply otherwise, and causes you to lose credibility. There's no question that day rates have fallen, but as I said above - if your clients are equally satisfied with the work put out by a start-up, inexperienced, essentially ignorant photographer.....then what does that say about your work and it's value? Do you really believe that clients can't tell the difference? I don't. But if yours can't tell the difference between your images and Joe Schmo-Pro --- then what conclusion can you possibly draw from that?

    You're only competing against those people if you choose to.

  25. Scott, I was speaking to you. I did lose the L'Oréal account to s $250 per day shooter, plus expenses. I have lost many clients to similar scenarios. And yes, the $200 shooter us OUR competition. shows my work. Cheers.

  26. Peggy you still didnt explain how you made this business model work for two years so far.. Im guessing by the mention of your husband, that he is paying the bills and this just hasnt gone too far in the negative for him to raise an eyebrow...

    I dont think that people giving their work away is so much the problem as is people DO NOT learn a lesson from giving their work away.. We all gave stuff out too cheap when we first started, but it didnt take too long for the empty checking account and non-existent free time to provide a reality check. As long as people like Peggy dont have to "go broke" doing what they are doing, they will NEVER change.

  27. To Dane,

    Like Peggy, a lot of what you say does not sound good. While Peggy may be growing into her new profession, need some guidance and OPEN to it, you sound like you are dying out of yours. If, you were so fortunate to get the fees you claim, then why did you not see the wisdom of flexibility with your fees to a least stay in the game?

    To be honest, it sounds like your biggest problem is your with your outlook on this situation. Take a deep breath and try to take a different approach, what you're doing now is not working. Is it?

    Something you might consider is what I learned in 1969 from a non-com while serving in Nam. Our situation was tense and uncertain, most wanted to hunker down and ride it out, but Sgt Peterson stood up and put it simply. "We can stay here, do nothing and let them over run us or we can take the fight to them and determine our own destiny" After that night, I never let anyone determine my future.

    To put it simply, counter what ever it is you feel threaten by.

    Good luck


  28. This is such an interesting topic!!!

    In my area, I'm not the cheapest but also not the most expensive. I believe the value I deliver is rated at approx $250 to 300 per shoot but due to the market around here, we are only charging $119 per shoot. What I do have in return is volume. We do approx 100 tours per month and still growing very rapidly. When I first started out (at the same price as I am today) about 1 year ago, I started on my own and used Photoshop for everything.... it took hours! It wasn't worth the $ per hour when you considered the post production + all the web work... I was ready to quit.

    So after some research, I found a company that does all the stitching for the 360s and all the back-end web work for us for a $30 fee = I'm left with $89 in my pocket. Shoots in town take me approx 35-45min +travel time of 15min or so and another 15-30min for post (with my new processes). All in all, 1.5 hours per shoot. I don't use Photoshop anymore and automated a lot of the processes using other programs. All of our walls are straight but we don't do any HDR but photos are of good quality with proper sharpness and exposure levels. Our clients are really thrilled with the quality we deliver! The other thing that gets our clients excited is the platform we offer which delivers MANY marketing tools for the agents to use and WOW their clients with. We are strong in our area because of our customer service, the quality of photographs we deliver and our platform with all the bells and whistles. It's a combination of the 3. All in all, our tours look great... but I do have to admit that our photography is not quite at the standard of Scott Hargis or others on this site that I have seen.... that' for sure. But again, overall, we get amazing reviews.

    At a 100 tours per month we do a total of 1200 tours per year. I now have 2 photographers under me which I pay $50 to $60 per shoot. They are happy because all they do is take pics, work on them using the techniques and automation I discovered and upload them. They go to sleep and never have to worry about anything.... great part time hours with decent pay when you add it up at the end of the week. If i were to pocket the whole $89 after tour fees, I would make $106,800 per year. With the additional help I get with my two photographers, considering I take on half the jobs + make $20 to $30 on every tour they do to cover marketing, accounting and other expenses, I gross in the 60k to 70k. But as mentioned we are still growing rapidly and expect to hit the 200 to 300 tours/month mark in the next couple of years.

    This is a whole different business model than what others on the blog are used to... I know. Around here is someone came out with pictures for $300 per tour, no one would hire them. Agents here are cheap and will settle with lower quality or DIY pics just to skip the fees.
    Sometimes it gets hectic but overall I enjoy the repeat business and a lot of our agents use us for every listing they get.

    Any thoughts from anyone on this business model??? I do plan on raising my rates in the next little while to $129-$139. Larger homes we do for $149 at this present time.

  29. Fantastic site you have here but I was curious about if you knew of any user discussion forums that cover the same topics talked about in this article? I'd really love to be a part of online community where I can get responses from other experienced people that share the same interest. If you have any recommendations, please let me know. Appreciate it!

  30. I did a quick search for "Real Estate Photography Tampa" and this site came up. I read all the posts and as a business person it doesn't surprise me that the $100 or $250/day photographers with a good digital camera are getting the gigs. How can it honestly surprise anyone? No business person cares about your photography being a "art". That's just the nature of business. Business people like realtors see photography just like inspectors, appraisers, or any other service vendor. Your photography service is a tool to sell the house. Most realtors I know actually shoot their own photos on a handheld camera or phone. And I do know a lot of realtors. I'm not one myself though; I'm a business person. So, just like shopping around for the best priced locksmith, the realtors out there are looking for the lowest cost photographer with acceptable photos. And, those realtors don't care if you make money or not; they want to make the most money THEY can off of their marketing efforts. This situation is no different than the industrial revolution. Machines made it more efficient and cost-effective to eliminate human workers and put in automated systems. We see this pattern over and over in industry after industry. Also, most of the photographers that shoot photos for $100-250, etc aren't likely looking for a $100,000/yr career. Most of them probably transitioned out of low-end jobs and earning $100-250/day for a few hours is a serious improvement. It's simply a matter of leveraging technology to create a lifestyle improvement for their own situations. I doubt very seriously than anyone at that price-point is thinking about photography as an "art" or the industry as a whole. They're thinking about making money day-to-day. And personally I say good for them! If that price-point makes them happy, pays their bills and gives them fulfillment then hey, more power to them. I wish I could live on $100/day myself.

  31. WOW! I have my 1st paid photography job tomorrow morning, shooting a $1.8M house for a realtor on Tierra Verde -- After reading all these posts I am now going to ask her what SHE thinks is a fair price to pay for my services and take what ever she offers, now that I am more confused than ever, and have no idea what to charge 🙂 All I am doing is looking for a little post retirement supplemental income, and I just hope this job parlays into a few other opportunities. We'll see.....

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *