Blind Bid: Stills on Motion

WWYQ? (What would you quote?)

Earlier this week, I proposed a blind bid exercise in which I offered a client brief, and you gave me your numbers. This went out on my Instagram Stories and, within 24 hours, yielded 19 results from 5 countries. Super interesting!

So the brief was this:

Stills on Motion: One-day shoot (10 hrs), 20 unretouched images. OTS shooting style using motion lights as main source, integrated with motion schedule.

Client will provide: production 2nd AD for stills team, casting, talent fee, location costs, catering, wardrobe, props, styling, insurance, retouching.

Licensing: One year: All media in US, worldwide use for internet, digital.

As you can see from the graph below, there was a $48,697 spread!

It’s probably better to ignore the average number because the massive $50,000 outlier (from a major city in the UK) is pushing the average quite high relative to the median number (mid-way point). In fact, eight respondents (42%) fall between $6,000 and $8,000, so that may be a good indicator of where this type of job should land.

Well… WWYQ?

And for perspective from an agency producer… keep reading.

LOL

Despite the frequency of quotes in the $7000 range, like everything in this industry, there is no standard approach to quoting this job. Here is a collection of further thoughts from commentators:

• $7500 “feels like on the higher end of what I could actually get”.

• “Once it was $10,000 for me and assist, once it was $2500” (mid-sized American city).

• “1500 is a typical client budget in [large-sized American city] but have gotten as much as $4500”.

• Another commentator noted that usually these requests come from production companies and are looking to spend $1200 - $1500.

• Size of client and “budget vibes” were also mentioned as mitigating factors.

The second-highest respondent ($21,550, major US city) included extensive production: supplemental lighting, multiple days for digitech, assistants, and production coordination, plus processing and hard drive fees. When I double-checked, their response was insightful: “They almost always end up wanting a separate setup or give a stills shot list that has shots outside the motion sets so we bid supplemental lighting”.

In a similar sentiment, our Singaporean respondent ($12,500) noted that in their experience, motion and stills “even from the same angle, don’t effectively work for the campaign from the same lighting plan, or contrast, or specs, and there is a constant need to [adjust for] the needs of the photographer, the DOP, and the director”. Furthermore “Competitors frequently come in at a tenth of the quote”.

Hired gun vs. usage

This exercise prompted a couple of conversations that framed the request as a “hired gun, piggybacking on a video production” scenario that calls into question the appropriateness of licensing fees. Another quote: “We are no longer in a world where commercial photographers are bidding against commercial photographers. We are bidding against content creators, and we never know which approach the client expects. It was one thing to chastise new photographers for bidding too low ten years ago. But now, the traditional approach and pricing are, more often than not, rejected out of hand.”

What do you think? Is usage still relevant when the DOP and Director standing next to you aren’t getting those additional fees? Is it better to raise your day rate and throw in blanket rights (not copyright, never copyright)?

Agency Perspective: Realistically in this day and age…

And an agency stills producer also offered a response and some good perspective on exactly this question. 🙏

It seems fitting that they have the last word.

This was fun. And interesting. Let’s do it again. What do you think of the answers here? How would you quote this?

If you have a quote/brief that you’d like me to share, send it along. And don’t forget to do the 2026 State of the Photo Industry Survey so I can do more deep data dives. Time is running out to have your say: State of the Photo Industry Survey