Less is more

When we bill clients for the work we do, for the most part more time means more revenue. But there are occasions when it makes plenty of sense to charge more for doing less — or so it would seem.

Here’s a thought. Being capable of shooting a cover-worthy portrait of a time-poor subject when you have literally just sixty-seconds to do so is a skill worth money.

It’s a routine editorial photographers know well: being given just the briefest of opportunities with some famous face, but needing to produce a result sufficiently remarkable for the front page nonetheless.

To do so they’ll have gotten there early, set up, determined lighting and taken test shots, and then checked and rechecked everything while they await their turn with the subject. The aim: all variables accounted for and risks mitigated so that their sixty second time-slot goes exactly to plan. Because they know they won’t be getting another one.

Of course while you may only have sixty seconds of actual face time, you’re not really doing any less work. It just seems that way to the subject who walks in and out in less time than it takes to boil a kettle. There lies the skill.

And the value of that skill is recognised by clients well beyond the editorial world. For example, if you know one thing about top-tier businesspeople, you know they have lots to do and no time to do it in. They’re “up early and to bed late” kinds of people. So time allocated to a photo shoot for, say, their annual report is to them time better spent doing something else.

And making it happen is easier said than done for the poor Communications Manager whose task that is. So when you can get that shoot completed in a matter of minutes instead of an hour, well guess whose life you’re making easier? (And guess who signs off on your invoices?)

So there you have it — charging more for doing less. Good luck selling it though.