PITA tax based on artwork quality?

Create a Post
jim_p

jim_p

SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer
Joined
Apr 8, 2007
Posts
2,151
Loc
Natick, MA
I just dealt with a dozen pieces that an artist wanted scanned to CD and archived for possible future printing. I've worked with this artist before, and his pieces are a real PITA to work with. See, he's a pastel artist and he produces the FAINTEST durned pastels I've EVER seen. I mean, it's almost like he shows the crayon to the paper and nothing more. They're a real bear to scan due to the low contrast, and even tougher to stitch together the larger pieces.

So, is it fair to levy a PITA tax based on the quality of the artwork? "Your barely-there pastels require extra labor on our part, so 20% more from now on"?
 
Sure. It's really not even a PITA tax because it is just the nature of what you have to work with.

A real PITA tax is based on the customer's bad attitude.
 
jim_p said:
So, is it fair to levy a PITA tax based on the quality of the artwork?
Click to expand...

It is "fair" for any business owner to levy any additional pricing they see fit to compensate for any additional work involved.

Hey, it's your business - set your prices based on your situation. It's no one else's business how each owner sets their own prices. (In my opinion, anyway.)
 
I wouldn't consider this as a PITA charge really. Just added labor charge because it takes longer and is more difficult. Just as you would prize an oversized job, you add in extra labor as well. Not sure if you should add a percentage. I would base it on hourly rate.
 
EllenAtHowards said:
I thought you were talking about an Ugly Fee. Occasionally we will levy one of those...
Click to expand...



TooFunny.gif

​
 
OMG ELLEN!!!!!! I was thinking the SAME thing!!!!!! Especially that stuff that comes in .....velvet painting stretched over some kind of 3rd rate cardboard.........ick......:vomit: I just got done with one of those........................:icon9:
 
We have it as an UAC (ugly art charge). That is completely different than a PITA.

Then there are "special fit" clients who get charged "special fitting" regardless of the project because they are "special."
 
Ylva said:
I wouldn't consider this as a PITA charge really. Just added labor charge because it takes longer and is more difficult. Just as you would prize an oversized job, you add in extra labor as well. Not sure if you should add a percentage. I would base it on hourly rate.
Click to expand...

I agree. I offer photo restoration, scanning, and enlargement services to my customers. All are charged on a time basis. Print charges are based on print media and ink costs.

(BTW, the idea of charging an "Ugly Fee" just cracks me up! :D )
 
Ron L said:
Ellen, Is the ugly charge based on the appearance of the art, or the appearance of the customer?
Click to expand...

Hehehehe... a new charge!

No, it is definitely for the Ugly Art. But, on the other hand, they don't pay us to like it; they pay us to frame it. Good thing, too, because if we were required to like it as well, it would definitely cost more!
 
If one is framing a badly taken photo, can one make a double surcharge if the people are ugly too?
 
I had a good laugh about this today, when a new customer placed an order to have 6 such pieces framed. Each one of them freakishly ugly.
 
Create a Post
Back
Top