Another question on charging for photos

[90c4]

I shot a band on Wednesday and was just contacted by the manager and asked if I could provide full resolution photos. I typically respond with a price quote... but the tricky part is for this particular gig, when I asked for credentials and two free tickets to the sold-out show, they indicated that they "would love reference copies of the images," to which I responded "I'll definitely provide copies of the images".

I don't have a problem with giving them 800X533 copies, but is it wrong to come back to them and say that full resolution will cost them (and the tricky part is, how much)? My shots are much better than the shots of them on Getty, in my opinion, and I had shown them a gallery of 19 shots.

[René Damkot]

I might provide a free web gallery, but if a band wants to use images, they'll have to pay for them...

[narlus]

i would say 'reference copies' are not 'hi-res' copies...so i think they are in the clear for getting web-sized photos but not full-sized...

[RDKirk]

"reference copies" are linen-textured 4x6 prints with a watermark over them.

[90c4]

Thanks for the advice. I'll let you know if I'm able to eke any money out of them.

[Optiq]

Was there some sort of clear or implied agreement that you were getting unavailable tickets in exchange for supplying photographs? Seems so by what you wrote here.

Perhaps you should give them what you feel comfortable giving them for no payment but if the guy freaks out and says "we had a deal" I would just eat it and fork over the full res. That is unless you are sure this could never come back to bite you in the form of a negative recommendation.

[DDCSD]

I might provide a free web gallery, but if a band wants to use images, they'll have to pay for them...

i would say 'reference copies' are not 'hi-res' copies...so i think they are in the clear for getting web-sized photos but not full-sized...

"reference copies" are linen-textured 4x6 prints with a watermark over them.

Great advice, exactly as I would respond. I would provide a stand alone, credited myspace gallery (one photo of each band member, 500px on the long end) in exchange for the terms that you described.


Perhaps you should give them what you feel comfortable giving them for no payment but if the guy freaks out and says "we had a deal" I would just eat it and fork over the full res. That is unless you are sure this could never come back to bite you in the form of a negative recommendation.

The label guy will always do whatever they can to imply that there was a "deal". I agree that you don't want a negative endorsement, but you also don't want a reputation as a pushover.

[Optiq]

The label guy will always do whatever they can to imply that there was a "deal". I agree that you don't want a negative endorsement, but you also don't want a reputation as a pushover.

There appears to be an implied deal here and possibly some semantics. We might not have the whole half of the story! Of course you don't want to be known as a pushover. That's probably worse than a single, negative endorsement.

[DDCSD]

There appears to be an implied deal here and possibly some semantics. We might not have the whole half of the story! Of course you don't want to be known as a pushover. That's probably worse than a single, negative endorsement.

The only thing that would be implied is the photographer's right to his/her copyright. Now if the photographer signs that copyright away, we're arguing a moot point.

I agree that the semantics of the deal muddy the waters. While there may be no legal deal, there may be a moral one with the way that things were worded.

I'l go ahead an throw in the "I'm not a lawyer" disclaimer. I'll also toss in that any lawyer in their right mind is sleeping right now. ;)

[90c4]

The few sentences in the first post are basically the entirety of the conversation. I asked for credentials and a +1 (several months ago, before it was sold out), and they responded that I'm all set and that they'd love reference photos. I'll give them a call on Monday - too much subtlety gets lost via email.