I am an amateur photographer. I would be willing to pay to get my pictures post-processed. If I were to walk into your hypothetical business I would want to know what I would get for my money.
I would be willing to pay more for more features. As a consumer at this point, and not photography, I would be less concerned with the fact that there would be a "board of editors" and more concerned with how far I can make my dollar stretch.
I think the best thing for you would be to figure out how much it would cost you.... figure in time, price of software(if a purchase is required), labors hours and etc. Create a business model and see what the minimum that you can charge is, and go from there.
Also, one cool thing about catering to photographers is the whole life of their business depends on the finished product....which is the prints. I am sure you will have some room to play as far how much you can charge depending upon what your finished product looks like.

One more thing!!

"If your the BEST at what you do....then you can charge whatever you want and people will pay" - my grandmother

My grandmother owns a high end custom metal shop. She came here from Cuba with nothing, and created her dream from scratch! That quote I gave you, she lives by......

I hope this helps!

As a person who spends a lot of time retouching photos for stock photography. I think there is a lot more work that goes into it than people really understand. $2 a photo may sound good for the person getting the photos retouched, but there is no way that I would ever process 50 images for $100 that's just nuts! I guess if there is nothing wrong with them and you just need a batch adjustment of sharpening and saturation or noise reduction or something, perhaps but that is almost never the case. Usually there is some dust removal and generally there is major burning and dodging and countless other adjustments that need to be made. If you want quality work done and expect to make some money off these photos, I would pay a minimum of $5 an image for retouching, the price per image model is not something most photoshop people would really go with, I would base it on a time frame price per hour. $2 a photo a person would be making less than minimum wage if they needed a fair amount of retouching, I guess it would be fine for only minor adjustments but if it was only minor you could od it yourself. Consider taking a course in photoshop, you'd be amazed at what you can accomplish on your own with just a basic understanding of the most used tools.

I am not sure what you are asking here, it seems you want a "team of editors" to edit the same images and then you pick which version you like the best? I think if you find one person who knows photoshop well which there are tons of you would only need to work with one person. the cost of paying 5 people to work on your image doesn't make sense. There are some online services where you upload your images and they work on them and send them back, but I have generally only heard bad thing about this method. You could also try www.elance.com where you post how much you are willing to pay and people can bid on your project and can outbid each other bringing the cost down. you didn't give much in for about what the subject matter is, as the other person stated working with human models will require quit a bit more touch up than just shooting some standard product photography with consistenly good lighting.

Sorry it's hard to just pull a number out, if you are looking to keep costs low you can put a posting on craigs list that you are looking for a photography student to hire part time, maybe pay them $12/hr to work on your images. but if you are going for super quality it seems that most people already have their pricing structure in place.

Well, I'd say it should depend on the reputation of the certain group of editors. If I knew that they really do very well then I'd be willing to spend generously.

You shouldn't go cheap with it depending on the situation, but have it be around 1 to 5 dollars per photo. If you took great pictures, they will not need much editing so keep that in mind.

I regularly pay $2 per photo for a minimum batch of 50 images to be completed in 3 days.

I inspect each photo after it is processed. If there is anything that I don't like about it after it is completed, I send it back for a no-charge redo.

However, the answer to your question lies more in the application / genre of your photos, the actual work required and your time frame.

If you're a human model photographer who requires a significant number of cosmetic retouches, these will cost a lot more (in time and money) than a simple batch of background edits on a physical product.

The underlying problem for retouching services is that they are often hard to justify. Every photographer thinks that their photos only require minor retouches and almost every photographer thinks that they are a graphic artist. As a result, proving to potential customers that your services will increase their business is important. That can be very difficult.

I hope that this helps you out!

That largely depends on:

1) How many images I need to have retouched
2) The portfolio of the retoucher
3) The purpose of the photographs

If the images are going into an ad campaign with a $100,000 budget, I might be willing to spend a few thousand for a single image.

If the images are all spec work destined for iStockPhoto, it might be closer to $2/image.

in my opinion ,u should not pay so much in it ,u can do it by yourself ,there is so much softwear that can help u do it like photoshop is useful for u
good luck for u

If you are able to provide bulk (batch) processing services the best advice is to find other editors in your area and be competitive but don't undersell your craft or it will reduce everyone's livelihood. Let the quality of your work put you above the rest, not your "low low prices". I like the idea of choosing the best result from a group of edits. Great idea.

I don't like paying hourly because I don't want to pay for someone's education so finding someone that knows what they're doing is important. Some edits take longer than others so a bulk rate is a good way to balance that out.

But for specific edits, especially for commercial work, $35/hr is expected out here. But the work has to be flawless. I can't afford to pay even the going rate for amateur work. I'm an amateur when it comes to editing. I don't feel right charging anyone for the crap edits I can do even if they look good because I know all I used was Picasa 3 and a few clicks. 99% of all my photos are unedited. My goal as a photographer is to take the right image in-camera, no editing required. But commercial images always get a pixel by pixel inspection/correction.

So skin texture has to be retained, no blur masking, and the colors natural - no whitening of the eyes so much they look like milk bowls, edges of the image intact, no missing hair that shouldn't be. Top notch work.

If you're using a lot of tricks and shortcuts, bulk processing prices is fair. Discounts for larger quantities. Everyone deserves to earn what their worth so find clients that can afford you and don't skimp on the quality. Repeat business and word of mouth advertising is the goal, right?

Are you talking about having a digital image improved via Photoshop, i.e. edited, not processed?

Depending on where you live, Photoshop editors are in hgih demand and command a good salary. When my husband was talking about interning with a big studio in St. Louis, they were offering him $25 per hour as an intern!

Actually determining an average price per RAW image edited is nearly impossible to estimate because we have no idea of the quality of your work. The better the base photograph, the less work it will require and the less expensive it will be. The poorer quality the base image, the more it will cost. And, Photoshop and other editing programs cannot work miracles---the principle of garbage in = garbage out still applies.