Seeking Advice

[rssfhs]

Hello everyone. I am not a professional photographer, but I just received an email from a publishing firm in Eastern Europe which wants to use one of my photos (taken with a digital rebel) in a calendar they put out and they want to know my price.

My question is should I tell them they can use it for free if they give me credit, since I am not a professional, or should I try and get a few dollars out of the deal, since they will presumably be making money on it too?

If I do charge them then does that change my status to semi-pro, or can I still consider myself an amateur? Also, what would be an acceptable price to ask?

Any thoughts on this matter will be highly appreciated

[rssfhs]

Here is the photo in question:

[Longwatcher]

Nice picture,

Unless it is a charity organization, you should always get at least a little bit if they are going to be making money off your picture.

And technically yes it will change your status to semi-pro, but if it is a one-time event, that really doesn't count if you don't want it too. If you do want it to count then by all means take the credit.

As to how much, not my category so can't say what the value of a calendar shot is worth.

Just my opinion,

[Jon, The Elder]

Free advice is worth what you pay for it !
Anyway, I would judge the size of the company what they do, etc.
Ask your contact what they normally do. If they offer money - take it. If they do not- then ask for credits on the shot and what possibilities there are for further work. Keep it businesslike but friendly. Either way it is a good shot and you will get "published", and that could be worth something down the road.

Luck to ya' - Jon Ferguson

[mobilestudio1]

Just my two cents worth . . .

I would advise that you never give away your work.
This company could like you work so much that next year they might want you to shoot the entire calendar. If you give your work away for free this year, they'll probably expect the same next year . . . or at the most, offer you a very little money - well under what your time, gear, processing, etc, is worth.

Getting "published" without compensation isn't all it's cracked up to be, and if you ever do plan on going-pro or "semi-pro" as you mentioned, doing so will only hurt you in the long run. If someone likes your work and wants it for their own purposes they should pay for it. No one would walk into your house and say "I really like your TV...can I have it?" ;)

You should always regard your work as something of value - or no one else will.

As far as pricing goes, corporate calendars isn't something I could price for you from experience, but there are many web sites out there that can. Google for some professional photographer associations and you'll see a lot of "guidelines" that can help you. If you do eventually go pro or start doing more freelance work, I know a lot of photographers that rave about FotoQuote (http://www.photoquote.com).

Hope this helps. And again, it's just my two cents.
Best of luck with whatever you decide to do and congratulations on the photo and the offer!!! :)

Lisa

[IndyJeff]

My question is should I tell them they can use it for free if they give me credit, since I am not a professional,

What has not being a professional have to do with it? Of course you should get paid. If you want to do it for credit, fine but don't ever expect to get paid by that company. Next year they call you up and say, "Hey we saw 4 images on your web site that we like. Can we use them if we give you credit like last year?" Whatcha gonna say? "Ahhh how about paying me this year? The going rate is fine." Their reply, "Ok kid, well get back with ya next week." But next week never comes.

On pricing you need to find out how many copies will be printed. Will it be a national distribution, continental, or international? What sizes will the calendars be printed?
The more they distribute, the larger the print, the more you charge.

This would also be a good time to feel them out for what they are looking for in years to come. Landscapes? People? Action? Floral? Wildlife? Get an idea of what they want and shoot it when you can and submit.

Calendar companies are notorious for finding someone they like and using them year after year. It is a hard line to break into.
If they get comfortable with you they might call you up and say, "Hey do you have any shots of Daisy's or Daffodils with kids in the shot? How about someone fishing in a stream? etc etc.

If you let them use it just for a photo credit, your not doing anyone any good, especially yourself. Well not anyone but the publisher who makes more money because they don't have to pay you. You think they will lower the wholesale price because they didn't have to pay you?

Think about it!

Good luck

[rssfhs]

What has not being a professional have to do with it? Of course you should get paid.

Well, I am a professional musician, and to be honest, what little they would pay is not going to make such a difference in my finances. To me, the mere fact that someone would want to put my photo on a calander is in itself plenty of satisfaction. Of course making more money is always nice, but I'm concerened they will turn me down if I ask too much. If anyone could give me an idea of a reasonable price to ask it would be very helpful.

[Mills]

You should absolutely be paid for the image. They will profit from your picture. Even if you feel you are not a pro, you can not allow your work to go unrewarded. I had the same experience and sold the image. Never looked back. You do not want to miss the feeling of depositing that check either.

[pcasciola]

I don't know. I only do this on the side, and I don't mind giving away my work from time to time. I look at it this way. If you give out some of your work for free, it gets your name out there, more people get to see what you are capable of, and as long as you don't let anyone take advantage of this, I don't see the harm in it. Especially if you can get your web address or email in the credit somehow.

[Avalonthas]

either give it to them for free or charge a small amount, get ur name out there, tell them to send you a few copies, use it as an example of ur work, and keep shooting. Up to you wether u want the money or not.

[w10d]

Well, I am a professional musician, and to be honest, what little they would pay is not going to make such a difference in my finances. To me, the mere fact that someone would want to put my photo on a calander is in itself plenty of satisfaction. Of course making more money is always nice, but I'm concerened they will turn me down if I ask too much. If anyone could give me an idea of a reasonable price to ask it would be very helpful.

Before anyone can suggest a reasonable price you'll need to give a little more info: Is the calander to be sold, is it a marketing tool, what territories will it be distributed in, etc. Could be a local charity fundraiser, multinational marketing tool, a calander sold worldwide, or a givaway by a Prague plumber.

As for giving it away for a credit, I just can't understand that - if it's a small scale Eastern European freebee do you expect to get any benefit from the credit?? If the credit has any value, the calender will have been high profile enough for them to be paying you. Personally I don't think you need to have your name on a calander to feel good about your pictures. Get a fee or forget about it.

[w10d]

Forget what I actually meant to say....

Have a look at this link to get some idea of prices - bear in mind that this is based on the US market, rather than Eastern Europe:

http://photographersindex.com/stockprice.htm

[charlesu]

Never turn down money. Never.

[Deckyon]

Get paid for it. Just because you make a little for taking some photos, this does not (in my opinion) make you a professional photographer. To clarify - a professional photographer makes his/her living from photography. I have sold almost $1000 in prints to individuals over the last year. I am still only an amateur as photography is not my main source if income. Getting paid for the shot above will not change your status unless you quit your day job to do photography real time.

Do not set a prescident early. Always charge for a photo unless the company has a contract for you. Always have paperwork for them if they do want to buy. There are plenty of places to download and customize forms for copyright, model releases and contract work.

Great photo, by the way.

[RichardtheSane]

Also, and I think this i rather important... whatever is agreed get it in writing.

If you take credit and a number of copies of the publication - make sure you are happy with the location and size of the credit and the number of copies. Again... in writing.

If you accept payment of a given amount, make sure you have in writing when you require payment and how much. I would suggest you request payment before they even go to print!

[IndyJeff]

You know what? I give up. Everybody should give away their pics so they can see their name in a photo credit. It is cool and besides everybody will see your name in the photo credit and think "wow he is a professional".
So nobody should charge for a photo, just give it away. Besides it is not how everyone makes a living so we all have our regular jobs to fall back on don't we?

[defordphoto]

Well, I am a professional musician, and to be honest, what little they would pay is not going to make such a difference in my finances. To me, the mere fact that someone would want to put my photo on a calander is in itself plenty of satisfaction. Of course making more money is always nice, but I'm concerened they will turn me down if I ask too much. If anyone could give me an idea of a reasonable price to ask it would be very helpful.

You price your photos on how large a print and how many they are selling. Never, ever, EVER, EVER give away your photos. For a guide, try here: http://photographersindex.com/price-adv-calc.htm

If you give your photos away for free, then the next time they will expect it for free. It doesn't matter if you plan on making a living of it or not. THEY asked a price. They DO NOT expect to get it for free. ALONG with the price, ask for proper credit. These people know the routine. They will expect you to ask for credit.

[vwpilot]

Credits mean absolutely CRAP!! Dont give it away for a credit, it will do you no good whatsoever. You dont get work or "noticed" due to a photo credit. You also dont get any respect for being a good photographer when you have free photos published. You get respect when you get photos published that were paid for at the going rate.

Its a good photo, but think of this. How much credibility does it give your photo if they are not wililng to pay for it? Feeling good about getting a photo published when you gave it away for free is not something to feel good about. Basically you can feel good that it was "good enough" that they would take it and make money off of it without giving you a cent. Basically, you are the best of the folks that have photos that no one thinks are good enough to pay for.

Now, I'm not saying that specifically about your shot, its a damn good shot and I would be proud of it. Proud enough of it that you should feel that it is worth something a lot more than FREE.

You should feel much better about your photo by posting it here and having everyone tell you that it is good enough to get money for, then you will feel about having it in some calendar in eastern Europe that no one around here will ever see and those that do will care less about your name.

Find out the details of how its being used and i would be happy to run it through FotoQuote and give you an idea of its worth. But KNOW its worth something and dont sell yourself short.

Making money on it is not the big deal behind it, you obviously make an ok living in other ways. But the fact that it IS worth something means that you should have enough respect for your work as to not simply give it away.

[Persian-Rice]

I'm getting sick of people giving their photos away for free. If you are into photography and give your photos away for free, then you are doing photography nothing but harm.

The excuse that you want to make a name is absolute bull****! Im sorry that I have to say that , but it is. I showed up into the business a month and ahalf ago without ever having a single picture printed or credited to me. After some cold calls and some crafty written letters I grossed about $700 in my first month, this is my second month and I am already well into the triple digits and been paid to cover a professional even for quite a nice amount as well.

Get paid, if you don't, not only are you being a sucker, but you are hurting photography as a whole, every single one counts. If you are giving it away for free, it means its worth norhing, do you think your picture and effort is worth nothing? If so, I am looking for an assistant who wants to work for free.

Sorry but I am getting pissed at people giving and condoning the "giving away" of photographs. Every board I goto there are tons people talking about how they gave their stuff away for free and got lousy credit. You should get paid and get credit.

[JAZZ D.P.G.]

Get paid.

Your camera, lens and equipment is a significant investment. The time spent learning photography is an investment. Get a return on your investment.

If it is a charity, get the money anyways. If it is a charity you want to support, donate the money back, for a proper reciept.

It is very good picture. You worked hard to get it.

Get the money.

[Deckyon]

I'm getting sick of people giving their photos away for free. If you are into photography and give your photos away for free, then you are doing photography nothing but harm.

Not true. You are doing PAID photographers nothing but harm. Every photo taken helps photography, even in the smallest amount, and you will never stop people from giving away their photographs. It is their photo to do with what they want.

I am NOT, however, condoning that people, who are asked to submit a print for <fill in reason/publication> that they give it for nothing. Now, if someone submits a photo for <fill in reason/publication> and there is no prior mention by <fill in reason/publication> of payment, then so be it.

I have not given my work away, nor have I gone out of my way to sell anything either. I put my work online for viewing on my website, or I print it out for display at a gallery or event.

I do not agree with the blanket statement that giving photos away hurts photography.

[pcasciola]

I am a professional computer programmer by trade. Does this mean that free software is hurting the computer software industry as well? I don't think so. I think it helps, and pushes the professionals to put out better work, whether it be computer software, or photography. If you're a mediocre pro photographer whose work is being bettered by an amateur or someone who is just into photography as a hobby, then maybe you need to improve your work.

[w10d]

I am a professional computer programmer by trade. Does this mean that free software is hurting the computer software industry as well? I don't think so.

There's no comparison between the two. Imagine you work for Microsoft full time. Along comes a photographer & says to your boss "I can do his job, & as computing is just a hobby for me I'll do it for no pay two & a half days a week, just as long as I get my name in the splash screen credits!" You come in to work & find your salary cut in half.

Sounds harmless?

[pcasciola]

There's no comparison between the two.No comparison? It's almost EXACTLY the same scenario. Many hobbyist computer programmers write freeware that makes it harder for pros to create and sell software, because they are willing to do it for free, or for the occassional $5-10 donation via Paypal. If someone writes a piece of software for free that does the same thing that mine does, guess what, I either put out a better product or I get fired.

Take DVD Shrink as an example. It will rip, compress and burn a DVD-R, and it's completely free, written by someone in their spare time just for fun. How are the "professionals" at 321Studios that wrote DVD X Copy supposed to compete with that, especially in this case where they have a somewhat inferior product? The only way is by putting a better product. If a professional in any field is good enough at what he does, a hobbyist is not going to be able to produce nearly the same quality level. But if he's not that good...........

[IndyJeff]

I am a professional computer programmer by trade. Does this mean that free software is hurting the computer software industry as well? I don't think so. I think it helps, and pushes the professionals to put out better work, whether it be computer software, or photography. If you're a mediocre pro photographer whose work is being bettered by an amateur or someone who is just into photography as a hobby, then maybe you need to improve your work.


Phil there is no comparison between the two fields. Not eveyone can program and certainly not without some sort of schooling but, just about anybody can take a photograph. What happens, or I should say IS happening to the photography industry is that more and more people are getting high end digital cameras. Unlike the good old days of film, there is no investment per job. Sure you have a major expense for the camera but, if you shoot enough it will pay for itself in less than a year, compared to film cameras. Imagine how many rolls of film were used at the superbowl 5 years ago. I'll bet that no one on here shot that much film in a year, and that was just one day of shooting.
The Indianapolis Motor Speedway's photography staff used to shoot nearly 1500 rolls in a month. Send a PM to Kong and ask him how many rolls of film he used in a month at IMS? I'll bet he went thru 100 by himself. Now that they are digital, think about how much money they saved.
Now days you buy a high end digital and go out shooting. Instantly you can see if you got it right or not. In the film days you go out and shoot 5 rolls of film at $7-9 a roll, add another $10 for developing, your looking at around $85 and what if they are all crap?

Now as to free software, yes there is a lot of it out there. Also I have taken advantage of free software and downloaded a program. When I begin to use it I found out while it will do what they say, the purchased program has more functions than the free version.

Still when you give away images, you are telling people "here this has no value so you can have it." Personally, I think my work has value, and people will pay for that value.

[pcasciola]

Ok, I see your point. It's definitely not as easy to program a computer as it is to take a technically decent picture with a decent dSLR, but not everyone has the artistic ability that many pro photographers have, so I still don't think the good pros have anything to worry about.

I still think there are some similarities though, because just like digital cameras are making it easier to take photographs, changes in software development are also happening. The Internet is to software development what digital is to professional photography. It is far easier for one guy who just writes programs on the side to quickly put together a program like DVD Shrink, which 10 years ago would have taken a staff of 10 people about 6-12 months to write.

OFF TOPIC: Speaking of Indy, I really miss going there for the 500. Every time I see your name and avatar it reminds me of the great times we had there. I went every single year from when I was 11 years old in 1976 in the days of Johnny Rutherford, A.J. Foyt and Al Unser Sr., up until 5-6 years ago when I couldn't take the IRL crap anymore. I went back a couple of times since, but it wasn't the same. I was a huge Mario & Michael Andretti fan (you probably really hate me now :)), and I'll always remember that one year when Michael was running away with it (was it 1992?), but his car died with about 10 laps to go.

[vwpilot]

I think a big difference between the software and photo comparison is time.

With good photo skills I can go out for a couple of hours on a weekend and get the same photos that a pro can get.

But no matter how good of a programmer I am, I'm not going to write the equal to Photoshop on a weekend of dead time or a few hours a couple nights a week. Where as Adobe can take all its paid guys and have them working on it 40 hours a week, thereby producing a better product.

And in the case of software, no reason they should not be making money either. Bottom line is if you produce something that someone wants, then they should get paid for it and they should not be afraid to ask.

[pcasciola]

But no matter how good of a programmer I am, I'm not going to write the equal to Photoshop on a weekend of dead time or a few hours a couple nights a week.Ok, I was beginning to agree with the differences somewhat, but come on...Photoshop?!?!?!? That's a little bit of an extreme example, no? That's like me saying in my spare time, there is no way I can produce a portfolio as good as Ansel Adams' lifes work. Well of course not!!! :)

[IndyJeff]

Phil that was indeed 1992 when Michael fell off the pace at the end. Al Unser Jr went on to his first win. It was a $4 part that broke on Andretti's car.

I was against the IRL at first but thought I would give it a chance. So far I have really enjoyed it. The racing is much better, closer and more competitive than it was under CART. The last 10 years have seen more people on race day that were a legitimate threat to win than I can ever remember.

The reasoning that there are no big names there doesn't fly. Mario, AJ, Big Al, all came to Indy as nobodies. The Indy 500 made them big names. One thing that is different today than it was back in the good old USAC days, they could run the Daytona 500 and then the Indy 500 and maybe even be competing on the F-1 circuit. Back in the 50's guys used to build their Indy cars in the garage in homes around the Speedway and roll it over on opening day to try and qualify it.
Alas, those days are gone. As with every other sport money has taken over. You commit to one series and run it, full time.
Look at Helio Castroneves, he won back to back races. Big Al did it back in 71 & 72 and it had been a long time since anyone had done it when Al did.

One of my favorite drivers is Buddy Rice. His dad told him when he was younger, about high school or so, he had to make a choice. Be a race driver or play baseball. Dude was an all star shortstop. Robbie Buhl another of my favorites and a friend, was an All-American LaCrosse player in college.
It is a whole different gender of athlete that becomes a race driver today.

If you watch the IRL and realize that the good old days of Foyt, Andretti, Unser's and Mears are gone in the history books, you will see racing that is close, competitive and exciting. When was the last time you saw two of the old timers running over 200mph side by side for 8 laps running for first? That happened at Texas two years ago between Helio and Hornish and it is almost a guarentee at everyother track each race.

There were reasons the IRL was needed, things that went on behind the scenes that needed to be stopped or reigned in. TG did what he had to do to save the sport. Granted in the short term it hurt it but, it is making a comeback and if it continued unchecked under CART, personally I think it would have been dead by now. How is CART doing these days? Yep, it is dead and it's successor is code blue.

Sorry for the thread hijack. I didn't mean for this to be that long, LOL

[pcasciola]

Yeah, but with USAC and CART Indy was more about technological advancements, similar in a way to F1. That's what made it interesting. Not just the big names. The big names splitting from the no names is what hurt both series, and losing the #1 race. Now it seems more like some spec series or Nascar, which I really don't care for even though I'm a big race fan. Ok, it wasn't so great when Penske had Mercedes build an engine specifically for the Indy 500, around that loophole in the rules for pushrod engines, but come on, how cool was that?!?!?!

I think the only reason CART is dead is because Tony George split it up. I think without the split, CART/Champ Car/whatever, would be stronger than the IRL is today. I barely watch either anymore. Sure Nascar makes the most money, but it doesn't always have to be about the most money, does it? Look how great F1 is, and that's with one driver winning 90% of the races, and 4 passes per race if you're lucky enough to catch them.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, w10d, don't give away that picture, what are you nuts? :lol:

[Persian-Rice]

Might as well contribute to the hijacking.

F1 isnt doing that well, and its ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. Teams are disgruntled, Jordan left, Bernie is forcing Stoddart out, BMW, Renault, Honda, Toyota and Mercedes, want to leave F1 and start the GPWC, Ferrari is being a little bitch, one day saying GPWC then signing with Bernie the next. Then you have Max Mosley who keeps wiping his butt with the rulebooks and making thing even more confusing and expensive.

F1 is the richest motorsports enterprise/per team, But the teams are unhappy, fans are unhappy, Bernie is unhappy, the banks are unhappy, hosts are unhappy. F1 is a really angry sport ATM.
At least Ferrari is not the fastest on the grid, for the moment. My team, Renault, just smoked a hole in ever car on the grid. Even the mighty Mercedes/Mclaren, the team everyone thought would be fastest was bad. Only Renault came through with all the expectations on them.

F1 has turned into a soap opera. I am going to the Molson Indy this year with paddock and pit passes, but I am only going because I can get good shots, seriously, even though I think openwheel is the best motorsport followed closely by Rally, it is becoming a mess.

P.S. Jeff, you are right, they will never get it.

[tim]

The arguments in this thread are interesting, and have re-enforced my position of always charging for photos. The only time I won't charge is if I arrange the shoot with someone to gain experience, in which case their time and my time cancel each other out and we both walk away happy.

I took a series of photos (http://www.mrwild.co.nz/Proofs/VivianStreetFire_6Mar05/index.html) of a fire a few days ago, and one of the fire fighters wants to buy that full set of 20 photos. I honestly don't know what to charge him. I already made a bit of spare change selling one photo to the newspaper, and I don't need the money, but like you say don't give away your work. You all know the cost of printing, costs of time, and costs of equipment, so what sort of margin would you suggest I charge? $1 per photo? $5 per photo? If I charge too much he'll walk away or print the low res versions on the net.

[w10d]

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, w10d, don't give away that picture, what are you nuts? :lol:

Can you explain that? Are you saying the original poster should give away this picture for a credit?


Elsewhere you SEEM to be saying that if people give away their pictures it will drive pro photographers to take better ones. Is that your point?

If it is then please explain how a pro is going to take a better picture of the classic 'waterfall in fall' than the example at the beginning of this thread. I've been 'into' photography a long time & I can't remember seeing one that was much better. So why would any company be willing to pay for one when this one's up for grabs in exchange for a credit.

[w10d]

one of the fire fighters wants to buy that full set of 20 photos. I honestly don't know what to charge him. I already made a bit of spare change selling one photo to the newspaper, and I don't need the money, but like you say don't give away your work. You all know the cost of printing, costs of time, and costs of equipment, so what sort of margin would you suggest I charge? $1 per photo? $5 per photo? If I charge too much he'll walk away or print the low res versions on the net.

I'd consider the issue of usage here: The paper sells by printing news & your pictures were news - it's right they should be paying to use them. The fire fighter probably just wants a cool set of pictures of him doing his job - & let's face it, his job has given you a subject & a sale! Personally I'd give him a set at cost, possibly add a little for your time as the whole station might want a set when they see his :)

Great pics BTW

[tim]

I'd consider the issue of usage here: The paper sells by printing news & your pictures were news - it's right they should be paying to use them. The fire fighter probably just wants a cool set of pictures of him doing his job - & let's face it, his job has given you a subject & a sale! Personally I'd give him a set at cost, possibly add a little for your time as the whole station might want a set when they see his :)

Great pics BTW

Thanks w10d. If everyone wants a set that'd take a bit of time! My photography tutor said a similar thing to you, give him to them at or near cost. I think i'll do that, thanks :)

[PhotosGuy]

Personally I'd give him a set at cost, possibly add a little for your time as the whole station might want a set when they see his Me, too. ANd I'd ask him to call me next time he has a good run! ;-)