- Messages
- 2,217
- Name
- Iain
- Edit My Images
- No
RugbyEegad, what sort of sport is that.........?
RugbyEegad, what sort of sport is that.........?
Totally no idea stu , as stated apart from rspb membership and a couple of visits to gigrin my shooting is as found in situ , it seems from the general response that more than a few peeps are willing to pay to get the shots they think they want , I think your example of paying to shoot owls from a public spot is along the lines of what I mean .. I’m now in my 70’s and over that time span have been involved with various hobbies through the years ,and the one thing that I have noticed is that every time a hobby matures it gets taken over by those that can see a way to make a fast buck out of it ,that eventually leads to a elite of the more money you throw at it is best , and the starters get pushed to the wayside . This is the danger point I now feel that wildlife photography is at . Where conservationist groups who are always money hungry are being approached with offers that can’t be refused , but pricing out the grass roots supporters that initially helped them to grow .. it also gets to the point where no longer shooting wildlife but tame trained tame animals or birds that come in at a set feed timeJeff,i've nowt against paid for hides. At this time no huge great interest in this form of wildlife image making either,so i've never used paid for and no experience of what folks pay.
I was told that a few years back someone was charging £90 a day to stand in a public road and photograph SEO. This came from the lady whose family own the actual land, where the owls were hunting. So this type of thing has been going on a while.
Jeff what do you think is a fair price,should merit be given to hides run for example by a pro with serious knowledge,is the species available the biggest factor in how a day in a hide is priced ?
I'm quite curious to know what folks feel is a fair price . Oh and how that price relates to species. I heard £150 a day for a kingy hide also years back, I was shocked at the time but realise I have no idea what a "standard" day rate might be. It might be deemed fantastic value or horrendous.
cheers
stu
Not going to slate you, but just point out that not everyone who does photography has all the time in the world to spend on it. If you work five days a week, have a family, have other commitments... You may only be getting a few hours a week to do your photography, and there's no guarantee they're going to be the best hours. I can't count the numbers of times that the light has been fantastic during the week when I'm at work, then come the weekend it's dull and overcast; in a similar vein, when I used to have longer commutes, there's no chance I'd want to get home at 8pm, still have my 'evening stuff' to do before I sleep and then get up at half four the next morning so I can get the best of the light.Probably going to get slated here, but those prices are for people too lazy to do their own research and
show some patience
I've spent hours in the local reserve, sometimes to see very little except the most common birds I could see
in the garden.
You can't guarantee anything where wildlife is concerned you just have to be patient and hope something
turns up.
Now you know how the pros feel when you guys wander in and tell us that it's fine to photograph stuff for free (when what is being talked about should be a paid job).
Photography costs money. Providing the setting for decent photographs and the subjects costs money. It's a fairly basic formula.
? care to explain in English so most of us (or at least me) can understand.All fair and wide words, until you get into fire straits of agencies paying out peanuts, and direct licenses way down because they can get it cheaper from crapperstock. Magazines want it all free and everything is so f***ed up that the whole game is like Airbnb for kingfishers catering to overpaid dentists and taking away from everyone else.
Are you friends with Eric Cantona?All fair and wide words, until you get into fire straits of agencies paying out peanuts, and direct licenses way down because they can get it cheaper from crapperstock. Magazines want it all free and everything is so f***ed up that the whole game is like Airbnb for kingfishers catering to overpaid dentists and taking away from everyone else.
For red kites there are villages in the Cotswolds where you can see them quite easily.Like many others, I personally prefer to get all of my shots genuinely 'in the wild'. I spend day's in my hide waiting for my subject to turn up and strike the right pose for me.
Having said that, I am visiting the UK next month for a few days and have booked my space at Gigrin Farm, to ensure that I am almost guaranteed to get some decent shots of the Red Kites. I'm only in that area for a few hours, so don't have the time to shoot 'naturally'. - Now, I already know, that I will feel as though I have cheated and every time I look at those shots, it will be on my mind. BUT, at least I will have some shots.
Hopefully, I might also get some 'natural' shots whilst travelling through the area, but that can't be guaranteed.
I guess that all of these 'pay' locations have their place in the market, for many different reasons!
That is a lot of money.I totally agree with you.
There is a kingfisher hide, they charge 150 quid!
I wouldn't mind paying a fair price but not silly money.
Where are these places?The deer workshops get me, paying somebody to photograph in a walled / gated park which you can do for free..!
? care to explain in English so most of us (or at least me) can understand.
I'm one of those with nothing against paid hides, I've used paid 3 times in the last 2 years but I think the thread isn't about that. Even so, it's not easy, it still takes hours and there are no guarantees, but that's an aside.
A buddy of mine runs a few set ups, long story short, it's quite obvious about his passion for wildlife and still keeping it short, the kingfisher population is now much stonger in that area than it would've been. It''s not just kingfishers either. Again though, this is an aside but worthy of a mention.
One thing I feel is overlooked and one that really grinds my gears when paid hides get slated is the fact that some people are unfortunate enough to have disabilities, which means they can't climb up hill and down dale, people who can only access wildlife through hides and some of the operators are now now begining to provide disabled access to some hides. It's still not practical to provide this at some hides due to location of course but it's nice to see this aspect being addressed, at least in part.
A point I'd like to make though, there really is nothing like going out and getting your own, putting the time in, researching, spending hours in the wild, often days, which become weeks, weeks become months (or I'm just no good at it), maybe even setting up your own hide nearby to an active spot. Last Sunday as an example was an epic day for me. I've been working with kingfishers locally and it's taken me over 2 years to find a site they regularly use, it has become a bit of an obssession. Here's the killer though, the buggers have decided to nest there, this week, which means that as I'm not in possession of a Schedule 1 licence, I can't be anywhere near the nest. Well, correction, (I know, I've been looking into Sched 1 all this week), I can be near it, anybody can as long as you don't cause disturbance, but trust me, they are kingfishers, they will be disturbed, so I'm trumped. It's £5000 fine or 6 months in prison and instant confiscation of my gear if I'm caught. It's not worth it. More importantly though, it's the species that matters and I would never do anything to compromise them, period! So with that in mind, the fines etc don't matter, because I won't be caught, beacuse I won't be there whilst they are nesting. The buzz I got last week was incredible, my very own kingfisher site, which was going to be kept top secret but I can't and won't go there until they've finished nesting, so probably August/September onwards.
My point? It's a great feeling to find your own and I won't give up, sometimes, you just have to bide your time and it's free (gear aside). 'My' site is quite remote, will soon be covered in dense brambles and should be left in peace and will be if I have naything to do with it. However, if I fancy the notion, I would use my buddies' hides again in the meantime and I wouldn't mind giving him something for his trouble, within reason, I've seen the work that goes in. I can always sit in my own hide too, that is free (now) but I'm yet to see a kingfisher on my feeders.
Back to the thread, the prices vary wildly, from £3-£4 for a red kite feeding station or RSPB hide at a reserve for example, to the hundreds even. I have a figure in my head that I would never go over and it's below £100 but now and again, I will pay, just as a treat, in the knowledge that the wildlife, at least at the places I go to, will be benefitting too.
Like many others, I personally prefer to get all of my shots genuinely 'in the wild'. I spend day's in my hide waiting for my subject to turn up and strike the right pose for me.
Having said that, I am visiting the UK next month for a few days and have booked my space at Gigrin Farm, to ensure that I am almost guaranteed to get some decent shots of the Red Kites. I'm only in that area for a few hours, so don't have the time to shoot 'naturally'. - Now, I already know, that I will feel as though I have cheated and every time I look at those shots, it will be on my mind. BUT, at least I will have some shots.
Hopefully, I might also get some 'natural' shots whilst travelling through the area, but that can't be guaranteed.
I guess that all of these 'pay' locations have their place in the market, for many different reasons!
That is a lot of money.
Their property, their right to allow access as they wish.
Maybe the reverse is true? That photographers have had free access to areas that cost their owners to upkeep, for too long?
My perspective as a camera club judge is a little different, in that I see images taken at paid events all the time now, and many are truly brilliant, but if someone has taught a bird/animal to come to a certain spot, then positioned a hide in the best place, tidied the background and is giving advice too on how to shoot it.... its NOT your photo - its cheating - IMHO that is - so moaning about the cost is crazy when you've already spent many thousands of £s on the gear to do it
RSPB membership is £48 per annum so if a non member visits more than once a month and pays their £4 per visit, the charity are better off.
Someone earlier on in the thread mentioned paying £4 to the RSPB for using a hide. If there are any bird photographers out there who are not already members of the RSPB they should have their kit confiscated!
I used to be sceptical about the RSPB having worked for them in the past but they do SO MUCH for wildlife conservation it should be a criminal offence for anyone interested in birds not to be a member......
That is an interesting perspective. How can you tell if the photographer has used a paid set-up? There are obvious ones like the osprey hide at Aviemore (Is it Rothiemurchus?). You do see quite a few images that are obviously taken at baited set-ups but how do you know that it's not the photographers own? The images that really bug me are the ones taken at "mirror pools" but there again they could be the photographers own.
That is a lot more reasonable where is it?Each to their own I guess.
It's taken me a year and five sites to find a kingfisher but I am more than happy as finding widlife gives me great feeling.
I know about a Buzzard hide where the owner charges £30 and I am more than happy to pay it as to me it's a reasonable charge.
Members have posted some good reasons for using paid hides and as pointed out, it's ideal for disabled people.
RSPB membership is £48 per annum so if a non member visits more than once a month and pays their £4 per visit, the charity are better off.
That's a minimum. There are RSPB staff who say that membership fees are flexible "so how about £12?" They mean a month not a quarter! Their reserves have targets for number of visits and number of memberships obtained. Just one of the reasons why I...........(bites tongue and remembers previous post......).
Their reserves have targets for number of visits and number of memberships obtained. Just one of the reasons why I...........(bites tongue and remembers previous post......).
I find that very interesting - but unsurprising for a business like RSPB.
My perspective as a camera club judge is a little different, in that I see images taken at paid events all the time now, and many are truly brilliant, but if someone has taught a bird/animal to come to a certain spot, then positioned a hide in the best place, tidied the background and is giving advice too on how to shoot it.... its NOT your photo
Interesting view from the aspect of "your"
If it were a copyright discussion it would be "your" but in this particular aspect/perspective NOT YOUR. I assume this is because the lines are blurred between WILDlife and TRAINEDANIMALlife photography?
Rules of competition should cover this off i suspect.
This has moved from my original post ,I’m not against paid hides per se , they have been around for a long time and generally do a good job , but certain individuals are starting to do block bookings of some of them and charging exorbitant fees in the process sometimes double or treble what a individual would pay .. but as with everything it takes all sorts and I do see that if your working that it might be a way forward. Seems like the old adage is true thars gold in dem der hills
There was a recent "scandal" where a prize winner in the Hamdan International Photography Award staged the photo.Interesting point!
Probably most professional wildlife photographers AND filmakers use baited hides at some point. It would fascinating to know some of the techniques they use. We'd probably be surprised......
But amateurs and professionals using paid-for baited hides do throw up some interesting dilemmas.
Now I can understand this point. I’ve notice previously and again this year with quite a few part time photographers booking up hides to run their own workshops. To be honest it doesn’t bother me that much now because there are two possible outcomes. Either it’s going to be a big success for them or a big failure. To be honest most of the places aren’t that difficult to find out about (and the price) yourself so you if you don’t want the tuition then it’s pretty pointless booking on them just to get access. The likelihood is everyone will work this out in the future and it will fail to bring in the numbers unless you are very well known.This has moved from my original post ,I’m not against paid hides per se , they have been around for a long time and generally do a good job , but certain individuals are starting to do block bookings of some of them and charging exorbitant fees in the process sometimes double or treble what a individual would pay .. but as with everything it takes all sorts and I do see that if your working that it might be a way forward. Seems like the old adage is true thars gold in dem der hills
Interesting view from the aspect of "your"
If it were a copyright discussion it would be "your" but in this particular aspect/perspective NOT YOUR. I assume this is because the lines are blurred between WILDlife and TRAINEDANIMALlife photography?
Rules of competition should cover this off i suspect.
Bradgate, Richmond, Tatton, Woburn and BushyWhere are these places?
Fantastic post. It must be really frustrating to find that all your carefully made plans come to nought when the kingfishers decide to go and nest on your hide's doorstep. But if you've seen them there regularly on a long-term basis and there's suitable habitat maybe it shouldn't be that much of a surprise?
Maybe there will be a bit of a grey area once the young fledge but are not yet independent. They will probably still use the area but you stand far less chance of actually disturbing them. I'm not recommending that but it might be worth a thought.
I doubt any hides that do 2 hour slots are full in that way every hour of the day of every week. It’s likely they are empty majority of the time especially when there are only certain peak periods of activity with many wildlife species.as I keep trying to point out its not the established businesses that are the problem its the get rich quick merchants , I suppose supply and demand come into it but there's no way that I would pay a couple of hundred quid or more to take ospreys diving , or £50 for a couple of hours . if you take it that hide will be in use 10 hours a day 7 days a week that works out at around £1750 a week x 2 . even if that's pushing the limit and its rounded down to £1500 x 2 thats still 3k + a week and thats with only two people using the hide bet that gets expanded fairly quickly .. even taking initial costs for a wooden building into account the building will have paid for itself in a couple of weeks then its all profit