What should I charge?

[AMurrell]

Have now found out I have a meeting with the photo editor at a local paper, with a view to possibly shooting Southern League Premier Division matches for them for the coming football season. I want these pics to be publsihed in order to gain 15 paid publsihed pics in order to apply for my football league licence.
To gain the pics, I would take a reduced price, as long as they were published with credit, and some form of payment. But am unsure on what to charge.
Any comments relating to any part of this issue welcome, and needed!

[dahis]

"To gain the pics, I would take a reduced price, as long as they were published with credit, and some form of payment"

Do this and you will really annoy a lot of people who you will need on your side in the future.

DO NOT EVEN CONSIDER IT :evil:

[AMurrell]

how would it annoy a lot of people?
I emailed the person involved saying this, and I have a meeting coming out of it?..

[gmen]

Aaron!

Please don't undercut the other photographers in your area. That is very damaging to the profession as a whole.

---- Gavin

[liza]

The paper will usually tell you what they pay. The two newspapers I've dealt with had established rates they pay stringers, and unfortunately, it wasn't much.

Good luck with your meeting. :)

[dahis]

A freelance tog gets say £80-£100 to cover a game.

Papers always looking out for a cheap pic, however low the quality.

You ondercut to get a league licence. Next time a paper need a freelance they will not pay the higher rate. Hence you annoy other togs.

Papers will not care. Whatever they can get on the cheap is their attitude.

When you want to do matches for the going rate then the papers will only offer you a lower rate. You cut your nose to spite your face.

Other people have tried this approach and ended up being totally snubbed/ignored by working full time togs.

Bottom line is, you offer lower rate, you will always be on that lower rate and other togs will be forced into taking lower rates from that paper.

Again, DO NOT UNDERCUT just to get in there

[gmen]

A freelance tog gets say £80-£100 to cover a game.

Papers always looking out for a cheap pic, however low the quality.

You ondercut to get a league licence. Next time a paper need a freelance they will not pay the higher rate. Hence you annoy other togs.

Papers will not care. Whatever they can get on the cheap is their attitude.

When you want to do matches for the going rate then the papers will only offer you a lower rate. You cut your nose to spite your face.

Other people have tried this approach and ended up being totally snubbed/ignored by working full time togs.

Bottom line is, you offer lower rate, you will always be on that lower rate and other togs will be forced into taking lower rates from that paper.

Again, DO NOT UNDERCUT just to get in thereAbsolutely. Bear in mind we have mouths to feed! I've experienced under-cutting this summer already and it wasn't a pleasant experience for any of the parties concerned.

Also, getting your own FL licence isn't an easy route to making money. To make cash, you'll still need to get commissioned work (which means you won't need a licence anyway) and/or you'll need regular outlets for your stock images. It takes time and experience to build those contacts.

---- Gavin

[KIPAX]

A decent paper has a set rate.. I had no idea of rates ..Mine made me an offer. I checked on here and everyone said that was about the correct rate per match £75.. I think the area was taken into consideration :). (Mines now changed to a set monthly rate which is far better for me)

Also. If your going to the game on the papers licence then they wont go towards your 15 because the licence holder owns the copyright.

[DarrenL]

Where abouts are you based Aaron?

In order to gain the football licence you need to be shooting for your self (freelance) and not under commision. You also need to keep copies of invoices, payment advices and newspaper copies.

If your pictures are worth publishing, they are worth paying for at the usual full price. It may be tempting to reduce your price but you are not doing yourself or anyone else in the industry any good.

Darren

[gmen]

If your pictures are worth publishing, they are worth paying for at the usual full price. It may be tempting to reduce your price but you are not doing yourself or anyone else in the industry any good.Yep. It's in your own long term interests to start as you mean to continue, not to mention the damage it does to the local market rates.

Aaron: Please, please, please don't do a crazy deal just to get the 15 images. It simply isn't worth it. Sadly photographers selling themselves short and under-cutting others to get 'exposure' is becoming a bit of a theme at the moment... and the industry is pretty fragile as it is. :rolleyes:

I'm sure you've posted before that you want to make a career for yourself as a photographer. So, get your business head on and think it through before you go to your meeting. The only way to make it a career is to make it pay... and that means making it pay from day one.

---- Gavin

[jpwone]

If you want to do this full time then you need to think about how much you need to earn and what your cost base is. If you start off working for nothing/credit/big discount at what point do you put up your prices? How do you get the editor that last week was paying you £20 for an image to now pay you £100?

The following link is a response I did to someone else recently.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=316802&page=2

The bottom line is that everybody wants you to shoot for nothing or next to nothing and as soon as you decide that you cannot afford to subsidise their business and try to get a rate that reflects a true value they will let the next budding sports photographer thats been pestering them have a go for a credit.

One of my local papers refuses absolutely to ever pay for an image. They are perfectly happy to print anything they can get so long as it did not cost them a bean. Another local paper has offered me £35 per match and then only when they cannot cover with their own people. Neither paper gets my images.

You want to shoot at a higher level and get paid then spend a season shooting every game you can. Put together a web portfolio of your best images and email and phone every agency. They are there when you look hard enough. If your stuff is good enough you wont need a licence as you will be shooting for the agency and getting a proper rate. Sell them cheap now and the agencies wont want to know.

[workingtog]

Aaron, you are leaving a wake of destruction in your path.
First of you annoy the hell out of an official club tog by blagging his vest at a playoff final. Thus effectively reducing his earning potential because he then could`nt gain access to the winners dressing room.

Now you are risking annoying pro`s by being willing to undercut them to get pics used.

It`s not the best way to make friends and influence people.

Carry on like this and you might as well walk around with a bell dangling from your neck if you know what I mean.

I also assume that if £75 is the going rate for a match, then £15 would be far to low a price then to cover a game?

[DarrenL]

I'll just add, if you do approach an agency, you need to make sure that you can deliver them images without fail. With your current kit I'd be concerned as you have no backups. The last thing you want to do is get off on a bad footing with a big agency because your equipment let you down. You might not get a 2nd chance with them.

It's fustrating, but slow and steady wins the race :)

Darren

[Tall_Paul_2000]

Have now found out I have a meeting with the photo editor at a local paper, with a view to possibly shooting Southern League Premier Division matches for them for the coming football season. I want these pics to be publsihed in order to gain 15 paid publsihed pics in order to apply for my football league licence.

To gain the pics, I would take a reduced price, as long as they were published with credit, and some form of payment. But am unsure on what to charge.

Any comments relating to any part of this issue welcome, and needed!

NO!!!!

Its simple as that really. I have read this thread and am now verging on whiplash from nodding in agreement with everything that Gavin, Dave and Darren (and others whose names I don't know...sorry!) have said.

I was in a similar position to you just over 6 months ago. I had similar meetings to the one you have set up. The difference is, not for a moment did I consider undercutting people who, ultimately, I wanted to work alongside. I walked away from the first 2 meetings I had since they expected work for free.

If you look at my website you'll see the level I'm shooting at 6 months later - as a result of sticking to my guns (and I hope by also being ok with a camera in my hand!) :lol:

Photographers are a pretty friendly bunch. However I have seen first hand up here how hostile they can be to people who cross them. And they're like elephants too.....they never forget! I've heard stories about people who upset people years ago and papers still won't use their work now.

The approach you are taking will ultimately identify yourself as someone who is cheap. Regardless of whether your pics are good or not you will then struggle to command the market rate as you have settled for a lower payment.

The comment that "workingtog" made about blagging a vest is somewhat worrying too - I hope, with respect to workingtog, that its innaccurate.

Breaking into the paid ranks isn't easy - there are some pretty talented people out there who you will compete against. However if your pictures are strong enough then you will be able to command market rate for them.

Just make sure you think about what you are doing and how it affects people whilst you're trying to break into the paid ranks, a small amount of consideration now will possibly reap rewards further down the line.

Off at a tangent, I'd be interested to see some of your work posted on here.

Hope this helps - I would add though, please please please do not undercut people...........especially given your location of Norfolk. I can think of at least one person who has replied in this post who is from that neck(ish) of the woods!

[dahis]

Tall_paul_2000, this was posted in a thread a few weeks ago. It refers to the Blackpool v Yeovil League 1 play off final at Wembley.

Managed to get in ok yesterday. Great day, and because of a mix up, i was the official photographer! and am absolutely gutted because i missed the chance to shoot the dressing room celebrations post match.
Will post description of day tomorrow, along with pictures (if allowed)
__________________
by Aaron Murrell
I Own:
Canon 350D, Canon 18-55mm Lens, Canon 75-300mm f4.5-5-6 Lens, 58mm Polarising Filter, Backpack, Laptop.
Hope to be a press or sports photographer soon

Read into it what you may in relation to workingtog's above post

[KIPAX]

Any comments relating to any part of this issue welcome, and needed!

This is now turning into a bit of a witch hunt .. Not what POTN is all about is it...

[workingtog]

"Sadly photographers selling themselves short and under-cutting others to get 'exposure' is becoming a bit of a theme at the moment... and the industry is pretty fragile as it is. "

Not a witch hunt, a cap fits wear it situation.

It's pros telling amateurs not to mess things up for pros

(Should be common sense really shouldn't it?)

[gmen]

This is now turning into a bit of a witch hunt .. Not what POTN is all about is it...There is a huge sense of frustration Kipax and I think this frustration is perfectly understandable.

There are already a number of threads here addressing the issue of what to charge - invariably including the simple advice not to undercut the market.

For example, a search brings up IndyJeff's comprehensive thread that deals with a number of the issues: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=61210

I am sure that 'What to Charge' threads crop up on other forums as well - and the same advice is given: Don't work for free.... don't undercut... value your work... it's in all of our interests to work to support the market rather than to erode it further.

Even on your website you have the following statement:

"Media and Publications: Media such as Papers, Magazines, Books etc can all apply for the original images. I will require credit to www.kipax,com and a free copy of the publication."

Rightly or wrongly, the implication is that you will work for a credit and a free copy. That may not be what you mean... but that's how it reads. If publications read it, where does that leave the rest of us who are making a living in the profession? If an 'aspiring' tog like Aaron reads it, what is he to think? I hope you see where I'm coming from.

EDIT: Of course, the practices of under-cutting, squeezing prices and working free for exposure aren't confined to photography... but I think that as photographers we still have an opportunity to educate the 'newbies' and to work together to maintain fair pricing.

Yours in frustration!

---- Gavin

[redbar]

I don’t want to steal AMurell thread, but I have a story which may be of interest.

I will try and keep it brief.

I ended up photographing my local two teams, one in the Ryman League North and the other in Essex Senior League (ESL)

In Previous years Ryman League club would have the odd picture in the local paper whilst the ESL team very few little if any.

I sent my pics into the local paper and my pictures were used near enough every week throughout the season. I was told that my pics were of a “good” quality and should apply to the paper as a freelancer at the end of the season and that I had a great chance of being employed. You know what, the paper just used the fact that they were getting some pics for free and I don’t think they had any intention of offering me a Freelance role. I have told them that should they want any further pictures they will have to pay at the going rate.

My pictures were used by both clubs also, match day progs and club web sites . And that is really what I want to do as I am a big FAN of my local two teams.

My intention of providing pics to the local paper were two-fold. Adding some colour to the black and white and dull reports and hence giving the clubs some exposure and exposure for myself if I am being frank.

I would NEVER intentionally step on any toes and I hope that I haven’t in the past season. Whether the local paper stopped sending a photographer to the game as a result of my actions I cant tell as the Ryman club have been on freefall from the conference south and very little exposure the last two season. The ESL team as I recall have had very little exposure in the local press the last 18 years of supporting them.

Maybe events overtook me, as I thought I was doing good for the clubs, but I really should have thought things through a bit more, and I regret that immensely.

However, my lesson has been learnt.

I have learnt the hard way, and that there is a structure and form that sports photographers should be adhering to, and the livlihood of he "pros" should not be compromised by the likes of me who have been doing it for 5 minutes.I hope I am not sounding as a hypocrite and understand what I am trying to say. I do ramble.

[Tall_Paul_2000]

Tony,

I would agree with you - however as Gavin rightly says, this is one of the most talked about "non-photography" subjects with regards to Sports photography...........slow to learn or otherwise, to post that you're intending to undercut people is rather a large misjudgement given that people's views on that are fairly well documented here already.

We've all been there Tony and I do agree that help and guidance is the main thing that is needed. The posts have been strongly worded, I would suspect, in response to the wording of the OP. However all do have advice in there - even if it does verge on the strong side!!

The other issue is that we've not see any of the OP's work and its difficult to offer advice when you have no idea at what level they operate at. Its well and good offering advice on how to sell photos in the first place, however if that person's work isn't good enough, surely its also only fair to tell them to hang fire and improve their work before contacting the paper. In contrast if he's awesome, then its only fair to dig out Getty's contact details!

Hope this makes sense - I do agree that we should be offering advice etc - however I also think that its also appropriate that people should voice their frustrations and concerns. Hopefully by reading the strength of some of these comments, Aaron and any other aspiring togs, will realise how unacceptable under-cutting is.

[gmen]

The other issue is that we've not see any of the OP's work and its difficult to offer advice when you have no idea at what level they operate at. Its well and good offering advice on how to sell photos in the first place, however if that person's work isn't good enough, surely its also only fair to tell them to hang fire and improve their work before contacting the paper. In conrast if he's awesome, then its only fair to dig out Getty's contact details!Paul... there's a link to some images in Aaron's profile:

http://www.aaron-murrell.fotopic.net/

---- Gavin

[KIPAX]

gmen i didnt say he was right.. I said its a witch hunt.. people are attacking him instead of helping him see the right way.

as for your comments about me :)

1) i have NEVER submitted a picture to a paper on spec.. EVER ..

2) the website notice is for the majority of pictures I do that are matches with just me there.. no one else. feel free to go find other matches... I said the majority..

3) I supply pics to my local paper at the going rate.. my team, my town, my paper

4) Other than my local I ahve maybe 4 or 5 things published elsewhere over a 6 yr period... sheesh are you that insecure?

I dont like seeing any poster attacked for asking for help.. if you want to now attack me for having that view as you seem to then feel free... its only a messageboard :) :)

Yours in Accrington..

Addy on bit... I ahve the greatest respect for you and your work gavin.. for the help you ahve given me and others... I just dont like seeing people picked on... thats all :)

[gmen]

Kipax...

If you look back at Aaron's original post, he says:

"To gain the pics, I would take a reduced price, as long as they were published with credit, and some form of payment"

It's that statement in particular that has (I think understandably) inspired the subsequent heated reaction. If the question had been something like:

"I've arranged a meeting with a picture editor. Please would the pros give me some advice on how to approach this and what should I be looking to charge?"'

...I'm sure he would have recieved some sound pricing advice both on and off the board.

As for my 'comments' about you, I simply drew attention to the statement on your site and how it could be interpreted by different parties. It was not meant as an 'attack' on you... nor do I feel 'insecure' btw ;) although my lens hood is a bit wobbly.

I think this thread is invaluable and I'm sure it will be linked to frequently in the future.

Yours in a car park in Shenfield.

---- Gavin

[Tall_Paul_2000]

Gavin - this penchant of yours for car parks is getting disturbing.

Although I'm starting to think that its something to do with your part of the world....was down there last Friday and found myself lost not far from Old Lought's hockey ground....and low and behold where did I end up. In a car park! In fact, half expected to find you there! :lol:

[Tall_Paul_2000]

Oh and yes, I agree with your comments about the OP.

[gmen]

Gavin - this penchant of yours for car parks is getting disturbing.

Although I'm starting to think that its something to do with your part of the world....was down there last Friday and found myself lost not far from Old Lought's hockey ground....and low and behold where did I end up. In a car park! In fact, half expected to find you there! :lol:Paul...

I've spent many hours in the car park at Luxborough Lane! It's one of the peachier ones.

Currently rain is interrupting play at the cricket, so I'm back in the car sorting the handful of action pics out :lol:

---- Gavin

[Tall_Paul_2000]

Paul...

I've spent many hours in the car park at Luxborough Lane! It's one of the peachier ones.

Currently rain is interrupting play at the cricket, so I'm back in the car sorting the handful of action pics out :lol:

---- Gavin

Action pics? I assume you mean ducks paddling and people snorkelling around the outfield?

[gmen]

Action pics? I assume you mean ducks paddling and people snorkelling around the outfield?Can't find any ducks :lol:... should have brought one along!

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/wet.jpg

---- Gavin

[dahis]

There are ducks there.

That batsman was out for a duck :lol:

[AMurrell]

Thanks for all your comments, the good and the bad ones.
Hopefully, this reply should clear up a few problems that you all have.
I would be covering Kings Lynn away matches for the main paper, and this is NOT currently covered by them, only the home matches are.
I now realise that these would probably not count towards my licence. Could someone suggest what to do to gain pics which would count.
I now realise that reduced price would undercut photographers, but not so much here because the pics are not currently covered. Even so, I will go for the standard rate.
I know what is required equipment wise to be big in sports and football photography. Currently though, my budget won't stretch so far to the big glass with 1d mark 2s or 3s, so I should be able to get a Canon 1D mark 1 with a sigma 70-200mm f2.8 lens, and if i work enough overtime, a Canon 1D with a Sigma 300mm f2.8 lens. I do own more gear than what I currently list, but it is a nikon d1h, and I didn't list it and I didn't deem it of much interest because these are Canon photography forums. However, I haven't ever posted pics that I have taken with my nikon. and it is only a temp body till I get my new canons.
I didn't 'blag' the offical photographers bib, if you view this thread: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=324866 you can quite clearly see that I posted this before I went to Wembley, and I didn't even know then that I was going to be pitchside, let alone the official photographer. It was a mistake on behalf of the football league, not mine.
Comments to further these issues are welcome, and if you have any more problems, comments, I will answer them

[joetothphoto]

Aaron,

You have asked many of us for advice before and I know myself and others have given you some sound advice. The one key thing about being a good sports/news photographer is also being a good businessman. Taking any sort of cut rate will only hurt you in the long run. The East Anglia area is small enough and if you involve yourself in these sorts of business practices people will find out quickly. People do talkin press rooms and the last thing you want to do is get a bad name for yourself. Hopefully you take this advice seriously.

Joe

[workingtog]

I didn't 'blag' the offical photographers bib, if you view this thread: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=324866 you can quite clearly see that I posted this before I went to Wembley, and I didn't even know then that I was going to be pitchside, let alone the official photographer. It was a mistake on behalf of the football league, not mine.

Sixth reply to your post.

You knew you were not the official photographer, you knew the official photographer was there and you still kept the official photographers bib.

Knowing the official photographer was there, you should have done the right thing and had a word with him and sorted it out.

You wonder why there is a problem?

[DarrenL]

Aaron,

In answer to your question regarding 'what pics count'.

From what I've read and been told (by other togs) the only images that count are images when you are shooting freelance for your self and not for an outlet.

It appears that to gain the licence you have to put in a huge amount of unpaid freelance work. I think this is to discourage a lot of people applying. However if a tog was shooting for free, they would not be submitting invoices so you would thankfully never get a licence. Maybe Dataco had this is mind as well.

There are more requirements as well

1. All 12 images just have been taken in a 1 year period. This figure varies with the level you are shooting at. Each level of football has a new licence. Premership licence is almost impossible. Something like 30 images in nationals only. Local papers don't count any more.

2. You must have a certain amount of Public Liability insurance (a must for any photographer regardless of if you are shooting for your licence). This value varies with the level of footie. Starts at £2m and goes over £5m for Prem/ International

3. All the images must be backed up by Invoices, payment advices (from the paper) and cuttings. Also a must for the TAX man,

However, if you are shooting for a publication or agency, they already have a licence so you will be shooting under theirs.

I'm considering trying for mine again as I fell short last year on the # of images published that counted and I covered maybe 25 games last season. That's alot of hours when you are not being paid as you are shooting freelance.

However I’m doubting it’s worth to be honest. Sure I’d like to have it, but just because you have a licence, there is no guarantee that it will take you anywhere. Just because you have a licence it’s not a skelton key to all stadiums, you still have to apply in writing (fax) before any game like every paper and agency and if there are 20 togs who have any outlet and you that doesn’t and there are only have 20 spaces guess who they will choose?

I’ve read there are only 30 Premership licences in the UK and that includes all the nationals and agencies!

Darren

[KIPAX]

I sent Aaron a PM last week (no response?) I advised him and now advise anyone with the same asperations.. To phone Derek Johnston at dataco.Most of the advice given here is correct regarding a licence.. But far better to hear it from the man himself.. yes he is stern and brusk and he doesn't take prisoners. he can be hard to deal with.. But if you listen to what he has to say he is very helpfull and will give you direction.. I phoned him a few months ago and it was probably the best call I ever made on the subject.. I asked him all about it and he not only answered but gave good advice.. he understands tha catch 22 we are all in ie need to sell pics to get a licence. need a licence to sell pics :)

darren.. you say you doubt if going for a licence is worth it.. I gave up ages ago :) i would rather be the only photographer on a cold tueday night taking pics that will be appreciated than taking exactly the same picture as 20 other togs... Not saying others are wrong.. but for me personally as someone who doesn't deal with papers other than my local.. I aint going down that rd.

Aaron.. read my PM .. give the guy a call :)

[redbar]

Just touching on Tony and Darren posts.

Could you guys clear up a point or two.

If as in my case I were asked by my local newspaper to cover a ryman league south club, and they duly paid would this count towards attaining a Football league license.

Taking a step further, if I were asked by my local newspaper to cover the same team 15 times and was paid etc, would I then be in a position to apply for a license? Am i being naive/overlooking something?

What level of football will count towards attaining a football league license. For example, my local team plays in the Essex Senior League do the same rules apply as above.

What is Dataco?

[DarrenL]

Redbar, it sounds like you would be shooting under commision, this would not count towards your licence.

Are you being paid to attend and supply images? Or are you being asked to attend games with out pay and send images in to them for review. If they are used they will pay you the standard rate?

Data co is the body/company/group who control the licences.

Non league football counts towards a football league licence.

As KIPAX, said, DJ at Dataco is the man in the know. I'm just repeating what I know, I bet it's all changed recently knowing my luck :D

Darren

[KIPAX]

All football ACTION shots count. but must be sold at the going rate and to recognised media. If the paper has a licence then the copyright is with the paper and not you. therefore you arn't allowed to sell them. For example I go under my clubs licence to league games.. the club hold the copyright and none of mine go towards a licence because they are not mine to sell. I could just as easy go under the papers licence.. long as it is short. Still wouldn't be mine to sell.

It's going to be difficult for anyone to sell 15 images at a decent rate to recognised media from none league footy.. it's possible yes.. winning the pools is possible as well :)

Heres an option.
A few photographers get together ...lets say 6 or 8 of you (You don't have to be in the same area.. probably better if your all spread about)... You call yourselves XYZ photography. 6/8 of you then get 15 pictures published between you (far easier) and XYZ photography then applies for the licence rather than an individual. You all get to use that licence as photographers for XYZ .... I wouldn't be interested in something like that. But with the amount of people on here trying to get a licence you could get 15 or 20 togs together :)

Something to look into eh chaps ? :)

BTW It's not as simple as it sounds.. I am airing the concept not the how to :)

[ozzie289]

YOU CANNOT GROUP TOGETHER TO GET A LICENSE. TRUST ME ON THAT ONE!

[KIPAX]

So what are agencies if not a group of photographers getting access under XYZ agency name? I am not disputing what you say.. Just asking :)

[AMurrell]

workintog, i did have a word with both Phill Heywood, who is the Blackpool Official photographer, and another guy who directed the photographers onto and off pitch before and after game, to try and get the bib handed over. He said sorry, but there was nothing he could do with regards to swapping the bibs over. I would have gladly done it if the opportunity had arisen, but he said it was too late doing anything about it, and it would have to be left (i first found out i was the official photographer at 2.40pm!!)
yes, i knew he was already covering the game, but surely there is no harm in having two photographers?? Are you telling me you would have turned down the opportunity of shooting at wembley??
kipax, have replied to your pm

[Tall_Paul_2000]

YOU CANNOT GROUP TOGETHER TO GET A LICENSE. TRUST ME ON THAT ONE!

Spot on - I asked DJ that one when I spoke to him earlier in the year.

[KIPAX]

OK it was just an idea lads :) :)

So what's to stop someone starting there own agency? whats involved there?

[AMurrell]

thats something i would love to do. not sure how to go about it though

[Tall_Paul_2000]

Might work - but from what I have heard with that your FA Dataco application is only as strong as your best tog.......

[AMurrell]

how much would it cost to set up do you reckon?

[DarrenL]

What a mini agency? It would be like setting up a business, it would not make sense in my eyes.

I know they say working in the photography industry is 80% business and 20% shooting but it seems a huge amount of work.

Darren

[Tall_Paul_2000]

Well technically its pretty cheap to set up a website and then an online sales platform such as digitalrailroad would cost you around 40-50 quid a month in total.

However assuming you did this, what would you do with the pictures, who would you sell to? Why should they use your images opposed to anyone else's?

How would you get licencing etc with no proven track record of national or regional paper usage of your own? As i said before in an earlier post, an agency application to the fa is only as good as your best tog, so if you haven't got the work behind you apply as a freelancer you can probably guess the outcome if you apply as an agency.

Most people who set small agencies up these days are ex agency or newspaper staff togs who have already been there and done it and will have existing relationships with all the picture editors on the nationals. Even then, a lot of papers will reach for pa, getty, action images before looking at anything that will come from other sources.

If you're looking for a way around licensing by applying as an agency then you're probably going down the wrong route,...its easier and cheaper to set yourself up as a freelance. And as i said before, behind every small agency is a pretty awesome tog.

Hope this helps and sorry for being doom and gloom!

[gmen]

thats something i would love to do. not sure how to go about it thoughAaron. I think that statement speaks for itself.

With all due respect, you are trying to run before you can walk. Just ask yourself a few questions for starters...


How many commissioned shoots have you carried out?
How many paid images have you had published, i.e. do you have a big pile of tearsheets you can use as evidence to back up your applications for accreditation and licencing?
How many editors do you have good relationships with?
What depth and variety does your portfolio have?


As Darren said earlier, slow and steady wins the race.


Build strong relationships with your clients and your fellow photographers. This takes time - it does NOT happen overnight.
Remain professional at all times.
Obtain the going rate for your images. This will help pay your bills and will also go some way to maintaining the overall market at a viable level.
Work hard on your portfolio. Have your work critiqued by your peers.
Make yourself available for a variety of jobs from your commissioning editors - challenge yourself and build your technical know-how and experience. Never be satisfied. Learn something from EACH and EVERY shoot.
Study the business aspect of the profession in detail. Be prepared to do administration and carry out marketing as well as shooting. The business side can take up a significant proportion of your time.


...and so on...

A few years down the line you'll be in a much stronger position. You may even look back on the advice you've been given in this thread and be grateful for some of it. ;) I certainly hope so.

---- Gavin

[redbar]

Thanks Gavin, that makes absolute total sense to me. Couldnt be clearer.

[ozzie289]

Reality check!!!

The Football License puts you on the official licensed list. You then apply for each game you want to attend usually by fax.
You apply each year for a new license, so that means you have to get the required number of images each season.
It`s not just a one off exercise. You need to do it every season.
The license does not mean automatic entry to all games. That is up to the individual clubs. So dont think you`ll just waltz into Man Utd v Liverpool.
Or any Man Utd game for that matter, same goes for Liverpool.
A Prem lge license is NOT also a license to print money.
Fancy your chances at a big prem game?
You could be just one of maybe 70 photographers there.
The papers may receive up to 3000 images from 1 game. Big games even more.
At the FA Cup Final there were 100 photographers signed in.
At Chelsea v Liverpool Champions Lge semi final, there were 94.
You are up against the VERY BEST photographers around.
These guys are not wannabees. They are hardened pro`s. They know what they are doing and they are bloody good at it. And I mean bloody good.
To be brutal, their photography is on a different level to the average image posted on here.
Take a look at the getty site.
Think you can match that standard, day in day out? I know a lot of you have the opinion - oh, yeah, I could do that blah blah blah.
sorry but - No you can`t!
Because, quite simply if you could and you wanted to be at prem games, you would be... simple as.
Plus - the papers will have their own staffers at big games. If not staffers then commissioned photographers.
The big 3 agencies and others will be there.
Some agencies have retainers with the papers - So you will have to have something special for them to use your image.
There is a lot of talk on this site and others by people living in cloud cuckoo land! A lot of people think that what getty, AI and Reuters snappers do is easy peasy. You have no idea.
You have to be consistant. Your images have to be top class. You have to get the relevant images. That means goals and celebrations plus any major incidents such as red card tackles etc.
You have to meet deadlines. In some games that means getting images out after 10 mins. So you now have to wire images back to the office AND take pictures at the same time.
You will be expected to send maybe 30 live images from a game with incidents.... and then after the game supplement those images with more action shots, stock images, portraits etc etc etc.

Hope that helps!

[gmen]

I think a lot of the discussion here about the FL Licence has got far more to do with getting access to matches than actually making a living from photography. The 'glamour' of being there and all that jazz.

The very fact this thread started off with the idea of taking a reduced rate just to get 15 published pics... and later continued with an idea of a group of togs 'clubbing' together as some sort of ad-hoc collective to get a licence... goes a long way to proving that point.

If it's just about access then forget it. The sidelines are crowded enough as it is.

Further to Ozzie's comments above, even if you take the Premiership out of the equation and cover the Championship or below, you're still up against it. Yep, there are less togs at games but, in turn, there are significantly less pages devoted to the games in the press. So don't think it makes it any easier.

---- Gavin

[jpwone]

Got to agree with the voices of experience here. Gmen, Ozzie289, Tall_Paul and the others have walked the walk and are doing what some of you dream of doing. There are no short-cuts. You either do it right from day one or you don't do it at all. Those guys standing on the sidelines with the big white lenses did not get asked to do it just because they had a big white lens. Most have many years of shooting sports and have worked their way up from assisting on small town provincial papers to larger city papers and eventually to a national or a national agency.

Twelve months ago I was getting back into sports photography and 4 years ago photography in general. A long break of many years and whilst the fundamentals of photography are the same the equipment has changed and the business requirements and photographic standards are as high now as they have ever been. To put my comments in some sort of context I worked for Reuters and AP in the 80s and early 90s. I was not a photographer (my role was a senior manager) but worked alongside and with people who set the highest editorial standards and enjoyed the pure rush of not only being the first with a story but also being the first with a story that was accurate. Unless you have seen how a busy news desk works you really cannot begin to imagine the energy that flies. A busy news desk has a pulse. The editor has a structure to cover the planned news (coverage of known events) and the unexpected. The point here is that when an editor commissions a photographer to get an image there can be no ifs or buts (he/she does not have the time to listen to an excuse). You have to deliver first time and every time and to a standard that can be published and sold.

Start at a level which represents your starting level. There are thousands of Sunday League clubs that would love to have a regular photographer cover their games. Cover them until your skills are sufficient to move up a level. At the lower Sunday League level the images are gap fillers for the local papers and they will not pay well (if at all) but you will be able to get the first stage of a relationship going with the local editors and without upsetting the local pro's. Once you have cut your teeth and can produce images in any conditions of a standard that can be used then ask the editors to keep you in mind next time they need a game or event covering.

A license will not make you a better photographer. If you cannot get a saleable image from your local team then you sure as hell wont get one in the higher leagues. The craft is the same, its the business and deadlines that change once you move up. Unless you are young enough to really enjoy the buzz of ftping images at half time and another load at full time after driving a couple of hundred miles and then finding the nearest parking is a bus ride away and you have a ton of kit and then driving home in the middle of the night knowing that you need to be at the airport at 7 the next morning with all your kit prepped then stick to a local team and enjoy it.

Anyhow, back to topic. What should you charge? What will your local market stand and what are your images worth and how much does it cost you to produce them? Do those bits of research first and then you will have a much better idea of what to charge.

[AMurrell]

Great comments everyone. They have really helped.
With regards to my new equipment, a know I need a couple of 2.8's. I am on way to some big glass, because of lots of overtime with my current job coming my way and I was thinking of a Sigma 300mm f2.8 and a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 both of Canon 1D Mark 1s. Recommended or not?
Thanks

[tim]

I would listen to Ozzie. I think you need to get some experience before you try to get into the big leagues, you have to have proven yourself capable of doing things up with the best in the world day in day out. You can probably start to learn with your current equipment. There's probably a reason the pros all have big white lenses. 1Dmk1 is an old old camera. Someone just about to buy equipment probably has years of work to get themselves to where they need to be, though I would love for you to prove me wrong. Just my $0.02, and hopefully a reality check.

[DarrenL]

Aaron,

For equipment advice it's worth asking in the Canon EF forum as you will get a larger amount of responses. However I use 1D's and whilst they are fine for most things the lack of resolution and high noise at above 1000 is a killer for anything other than news print. Some of the big agencies use there photographers images in magazines, books, billboard marketing campaigns.

Build your equipment up yes, but still don’t get ahead of your self. Ask others that are already at the level you want to be shooting at to comment on your portfolio. They make sound harsh but not as harsh as a photo editor will be if you stuffed meeting a deadline.

Darren

[Incomplete Pete]

I think that the best thing for you to do would be to work as an assistant for a pro photographer. It's how I started out and I learnt in the ins and outs of the world of sports photography, in particular shooting football. Judging by your threads, you're pretty ambitious, but you've got to start out on a much lower rung, maybe shooting school sports and selling prints to parents etc.. You can't go straight into Formula 1 and Premiership football!

Doing that will hopefully give you a good education in working well as a professional photographer, not just producing and supplying the images, but running a good business.

Argh! Why am I saying these things, another photographer to feed will cost the rest of us! lol

[workingtog]

A decent paper has a set rate.. I had no idea of rates ..Mine made me an offer. I checked on here and everyone said that was about the correct rate per match £75.. I think the area was taken into consideration :). (Mines now changed to a set monthly rate which is far better for me)

Also. If your going to the game on the papers licence then they wont go towards your 15 because the licence holder owns the copyright.

Didn't you used to be paid £15 to cover an Accrington Stanley game by the Lancashire Evening Telegraph, and give free pics to the Accrington Observer?

Tut Tut Tut. Now I wonder why rates are so low on local papers when wanabe's give them prints dirt cheap or even worse, for free.