Magazine wants my pictures on their website/ad

[dollei]

Hey guys, here's the story:

So during spring break I was bored and had nothing to do and made a thread on the local Lexus forum asking if anyone wanted pictures taken of their car. Some people agreed and a few cars showed up for the shoot. I didn't charge them anything, it was merely for experience (I chose to do it during 11am when the sun was bright and out) of working in difficult lighting situations.

There was a white car out there and that's the one who I guess submitted the low res photos to an auto website. The Admins of the website then emailed him asking if he can take the watermarks off about six photos and use them for their website or ad. The owner of the car emailed me and asked, to which I said no unless they are willing to pay up and credit me as the photographer. I didn't get anything back for about a week and a half and I just received an email now saying they're willing to leave the watermark on for "media exposure" but still want the high res files of the ~six photos.

What should I do? This is the first time someone has asked for my work to be published and I've always been a hobbyist and never got paid for anything (mostly only did family shots and shots of my ex). I don't want to start off giving people free stuff, though the exposure is nice, but then again I don't want to be taken advantage of. Thanks guys! And here are some of the photos in question:

1
http://img686.imageshack.us/img686/8192/28884050.jpg

2
http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/4176/75186401.jpg

3
http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/2875/26716517.jpg

4
http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/1064/91866932.jpg

5
http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/9162/60872727.jpg

[LBaldwin]

No pay - no pictures. IT is just that simple. Stick by your guns, bylines and "Exposure" aren't worth a whit. You can't pay your rent, buy new gear or eat at Wendys with a byline.

Pay up or no pictures. You had it right to start with.

[JeN1707]

The shots are rightfully yours and you OWN them. Let them pay for your pictures if they want it.

[nduralt]

If they are truly interested in your photos they'll cough up some money for them.

[SnapLocally.com]

Damn straight- there's no value in publicity:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE

[verb1]

I don't have a problem giving people pictures if they're for personal use. However, if it's for a magazine or a for-profit website, they need to pay, trade services, or otherwise compensate you for your work.

[zelseman]

Its been said once, and it will be said again. If they are paying writers, editors, ect, then they can pay for photos. Stick to your guns. Exposure is nonexistant in this case. If you give in, youre shooting yourself and every other photographer in the area in the foot.

And....sick shots.

[Clueless163]

also keep in mind, I think it would be fair to give the guy with the car in question a cut for using his car. I would do it anyways...

[dollei]

Hm...thanks a lot for the advice guys! I'll update this periodically. Hopefully all goes well.

[MJPhotos24]

I'd rather lose a "gig" than be taken advantage of just because someone wants to use my photos.

Every editor is taught to ask for the photos for free and to trade a byline (or credit) for usage. The answer is always no! Pay me or don't get to use the photos, very simple. Unless it's a charity that is helping out the needy then they pay up or get nothing. If it's nothing so be it, why would you want to be involved with a company that takes advantage of you when they are making PROFIT from your work?

[LBaldwin]

Any of those images with just a bit of PP would make a great double truck for any car mag, and they know it. Remember that magazines would NEVER publish an image that makes them look bad. The comp is just too stiff.

The one of the front of the car should garner at least $750 to 1k for a double truck. In case you don't know a double us a horizontal two page shot SI uses them all the time for the first 3 or 4 pages inside the mag.

[Joser]

nice shots man, i love the 2nd one, how much would you ask for?

[tehshocker]

Awesome shots, no pay no photos like mentioned above. Only time I give "free" photos is for non-profits and fund raising events, and even then I request to be listed as one of the sponsors and have all my images credited back to me.

stick to your guns

[Shawn_BS]

I love that youtube link, ive seen it before and its so true!!!

[dollei]

Thanks again for your help guys. Here's an update:

I just got an email from the guy saying that they're willing to pay for the photos, but is asking how much I want to charge individually, and for all of them. I really have no idea how much people normally charge, what do you guys think is a reasonable amount?

[Csae]

also keep in mind, I think it would be fair to give the guy with the car in question a cut for using his car. I would do it anyways...

+1 that statement.

Ask them what they plan on doing with the pictures, centerfolds, front page, etc. Will they be editing the photos? Give them a discount if they keep your watermark, make sure you are stated as the photographer no matter what though.

Don't give all rights either, give them the right to publish the photos in their magazine, and websites, not to resale them. (Difference being they could then go out and make money off your photos by selling them to other magazines/agencys/etc.)

And since this is early for you, give them a good price. And give the guy with the car a cut ;)

Lets say he helped you out for an hour, i'd give him maybe 100$, and depending on how long i spend on the photos, i'd ask doubble or triple my normal rate for something like a commercial magazine.

So if you spend, say, 2 hours shooting, 2 hours editing, thats 4 hours, you want 20$/h? freelancing = 2x, so 40$/h. commercial = 2x. 80$/h. 320$+100$(For the guy) would be my very first starting point, i'd probably rough it out at 500$. Mind you, thats just based on your experience, as a business owner, and a photographer, i'd definitely charge more then a plumber. No offense. Front page? Oh hello! Daddy needs new flashes :)

Stuff like how big the magazine is, how many issues, etc, all come into play, but another guy on here said 7oo to 1ooo for a single picture, so you can see how prices may vary.

Chances are they already have a budget for these type of photos, and if you're anywhere near the ballpark, they'll either take you right away (you were under the ballpark) or will tell you their budget (you were over).

That being said, they may be used to other joe's giving their pictures away for peanuts and expect a quote of 100$ from you for all rights. Which is, ludicrous, but it happens alot more often nowadays. :(

[LBaldwin]

First, no discounts. Discounts are for old customers who do lots of business with you, not new clients who initially wanted the shots for free. For the owner use prints with your logo, and make sure he knows that you are providing them for his usage only.

Dollei,

First let me say well done done for sticking to your guns for payment for good art. In the editorial world size, usage and circulation are what matters. As they get closer to deadline, The more thay want your images. In this case they cannot use stock. Fotoquote is the best way to determine pricing for these images.

Don't worry about what it took you to get the shots - as far as hourly rates are concerned - you shot these on spec.

I would send them a quote on a per image basis something like this, on a per image basis.

1/4 page = $350 for one time north american rights
1/2 page = $500 for one time north america rights
Full page = $750 same rights
Double truck TBD

Web only $350.00 for one years usage no larger than 1024x768, must include logo
Web and print can be combined with 20% reduction, on a per image basis.

Now this is critical - go over to editorial photographer http://www.editorialphoto.com/
to learn more about how to do this.

You can increase or reduce this pricing for magazines that have limited circulation. I would think that these are little high for the subject, but LRM used to pay me quite well for stories I did for them.

The one issue we have not addressed is payment. Many rags want to pay after publication. Once you send them your contract (from the EP website lol) you need to understand that many magazines will pay 30-60 days after publication, regardless of what your contract says. It just happens that way.

So here is what you need;

1. Get copies of contracts from the EP website - send them your contract, do not use theirs. Do not send any images (except low rez for mockup) until you have a signed and returned copy.

2. Exactly which images they want and what usage they actually need vs all rights..

3. Name, physical address and direct contact info of the photo editor, or magazine editor. That way you get your contract signed by a person that is legally allowed to speak for the magazine.

Do a little research on the magazine itself, how long has it been around, circulation numbers, is it a weekly monthly, quarterly etc. Also get an advertising price list from them. If they charge 10k for a full page ad you see why it is a ripoff to provide FREE images so they can charge others 10k?

If you need more help drop me a PM.

[PhotosGuy]

and use them for their website or ad. I'm wondering why they need high res files? Is that an ad for their website, or for something else like Lexus? And is it a website ad, or a print ad?

Besides $s, you might consider an ad of your own on their site in partial payment.

[tomd]

I recommend to be consistent on your dialogue: stating the agreement/contract is for "licensing" not for selling of the photos. There is a big difference in rights.

[thebishopp]

I'm wondering why they need high res files? Is that an ad for their website, or for something else like Lexus? And is it a website ad, or a print ad?

Besides $s, you might consider an ad of your own on their site in partial payment.

+1

This could be worth it's weight in gold. Car photographer advertising in a car magazine which also has published his photos. Might be able to drum up a lot of business from others wanting their cars photographed and possibly showcased in that mag. Find out what they charge for ad space and negotiate accordingly.

[JacobPhoto]

I think you guys have way too much faith in this magazine giving him business.... lol.

I've been shooting for a national magazine for 4+ years now, and it's only gotten me 1 or 2 paying jobs, and those jobs were more because of my original contacts than from the magazine itself. People don't usually give 2 looks at watermarks or bylines in a magazine, and if they do, they usually don't go out of their way to send work to that photographer.

Also, the pay of the magazine will completely be dictated by their circulation and their advertising rates. Find out how much a full-page ad runs for in that magazine. Ask for the price people pay, not the rate card price. That will help you get an understanding of what you should make per feature....

[dollei]

Thanks for all the help guys. I really appreciate it. Here's a link to their website so you can get an idea what they're all about: http://www.airrunnersystems.com/air-suspension/

I am definitely going to do some more research and check out the links. And if the amount is decent, I'll definitely give the owner of the car a cut.

Thanks again everyone.

[LBaldwin]

Ok we have a issue. This is not for editorial usage this is a website dedicated to their products, so it is commercial. Which means the rates should be higher. If it is for advertisments then the product should be in the forefront, but just because they publish a website and possibly a fanzine, they probably do not allow other makers of the same products to advertise on their sites / publications.

TO the OP:

I hope that you have learned some of the business aspects to commercial or editorial photography. Once you take pay - you are a pro, regardless of experience. You need to use contracts with car owners prior to shooting to iron out any details prior to shooting. One of those issues, is the owner sending your shots to a magazine without you knowing about it. You need to maintain total control over your images from the very minute you start. The owners of these companies are not fools. They know that every schmuck with a camera would love to provide them images for free just sto see their name in a mag or on a website. Those idiots with cameras cause untold amounts of problems when pros approach the mag or company to do work for pay. How can anyone compete with free?

I am very happy that you will get paid for these shots. The rates I gave you are still valid, but don't suprised if they want all rights to the shots. Not to mention you now should have a property release from the car owner since this is no longer a editorial gig. It is commercial. So the car owner could technically sue you for using his car in the shots without written permission. Is it likely? NO, they knew that they were having shots taken, and they were the ones that sent them to website owner to start with.

Just so I am clear

Editorial = News or events images, no models release or property is usually needed.
Commercial= Shots used to sell a product or service. Advertising, is the primary usage.
Advertorial = Is a blurry line between the two where a former editorial image or film is now used to advertise a product. A good example of this is N*ke ad where Tiger shoots a hole in one, but the film footage comes from NBC.. Not unusual for N*ke to pay $$$$$$$$$$ for film like that.

[PhotosGuy]

They know that every schmuck with a camera would love to provide them images for free just sto see their name in a mag or on a website. I just looked at this link of theirs DUB2010 Anahiem Stadium Photo Gallery (http://www.airrunnersystems.com/air-suspension/dub-2010-anahiem-stadium-photo-gallery-cool-rides-and-girls.html) & it looks like that's exactly what they have there. Which is probably why they want to use yours. Ok we have a issue. This is not for editorial usage this is a website dedicated to their products, so it is commercial. BIG issue! As Les said, that changes everything. No pay, no pics.

[dollei]

So you think I should be charging more than suggested? I think they really want my pictures, cause the guy emailed me again asking for a response haha. I've just been busy lately and haven't thought of what to say yet...I will probably ask them what they'll be using it for, etc.

Thanks again, guys!

[LBaldwin]

No I don't really think your pricing is too cheap - this market is not that well funded to go much higher IMO. But folks with more knowledge of the LA car scene may know more. If they want a specific shot and ALL rights - not uncommon with an ad then triple the pricing I gave you above -per shot. But you really need to know IN ADVANCE(next time :-) what their usage is. But in this case I would try to push them into one image with an option on the others at a lower rate IF they pay the freight on the first.

The conversation should go something like this,

Them: Dollei we need to get the prices on those shots.
You; Yea not problem what are you guys thinking for usage is this commercial / advertising or editorial? My pricing is different for each usage. I will provide the contract for my copywritten images to you guys but I need to know what your usage is.
Them: Well we have a deadline.
You: Well that is OK the shots are ready to go, I can provide any spec you want including CMYK. But I need usage and payment info prior to sending any images over. I require you to sign my contract, with 50% payment up front and 50% on delivery of the files. I charge a 10% fee per month for any late payments after 30 days, of the 2nd payment. Of course this will be spelled out in my contract.
Them: Well we want ALL rights.
You well that's OK But I only do that on a per image basis and makes the cost go WAY up, May I suggest 3 years exclusive usage both web and print for $3k? and I will lower the pricing on any subsequent images to 2k for 3 years exclusive. I will provide a signed property release from the owner and restricted copyright release for those terms on signed contract and up front payment of 50% total.

[dollei]

Thanks for your response, LBaldwin.
So I asked them what they will be using it for and they said it will be in a Japanese VIP magazine (not sold in the US), will probably be about half a page, and the photos will also be used for their website.

[IndyJeff]

Also take into consideration if it is for an ad you not only need a release from the owner of the car but from the car manufacturer as well. A couple of years back Ford shut down a car club's idea of making a calendar of the clubs members cars that they were planning on selling.

edit: Looking at the photos you have a lot of releases to secure. The brake manufacturer, and every sticker that is on that car needs a release before the image can be used in an ad. I wouldn't leave it up to the publisher to secure these either. If someone doesn't like their logo (window decal) being displayed in an ad they may decide to sue for damages and yes, you too will be named.

[amfoto1]

Thanks for your response, LBaldwin.
So I asked them what they will be using it for and they said it will be in a Japanese VIP magazine (not sold in the US), will probably be about half a page, and the photos will also be used for their website.


Just to clarify...

As others have already mentioned....

There is a big, big difference between "a half page photo in such and such magazine" and "half page advertisement using the photo, in such and such magazine". The first is editorial usage, and some idea of rates you might charge have been given. The second it commercial usage, for which you should charge considerably more.

Likewise, there are both editorial and commercial usage on websites.

It appears that they are intending commercial usage. Best guess... commercial usage of an image may run 4X to 10X what editorial use does. Used very widely and on a large scale, it may be even more. One of George Lepp's photos sold for $250 for use in a text book (editorial), and Kodak paid him $25,000 to use the exact same photo for some billboards (commercial).

In either case, you need to know the circulation of the magazine. That's a big determining factor in pricing. You already know about what size it will be.

Also, they may want some exclusivity... In other words you won't be selling the same image to their competition in the market where they're using it. That adds to the cost typically. It's usually for a set time period, say a year or more. It also might be that they want world-wide exclusive use of the image. In that case the price goes up yet again.

Many sales are "one time use", but an advertiser may wish to make multiple uses of an image (subsequent publication of the same ad in future editions of the magazine, for example). You should get paid for each use, or get a "package" price for a pre-determined number of uses. Usually subsequent uses are discounted, or you might offer "re-use" option at a discount to encourage them to come back and use your image again, rather than going out and finding another image from another photographer.

Since the image is being used in a commercial manner, it would be wise to get a signed property release from the owner of the car. Pay them a bit (as already suggested) or comp them a dinner, or something like that... as some compensation. The advertiser/ad agency should be asking for a copy of the release, but you need to keep the original (a properly released image is worth far more than one that's not been released).

Personally, I'd also give the car's owner a nice, matted and framed 8x10 or 11x14 of the photo... Perhaps a framed copy of the ad.

Speaking of which, you should ask for four to six copies of the magazine in which the ad appears, for your portfolio.

Advertisements usually do not include photo credits.

Your usage license needs to be carefully crafted, spelling out the terms clearly and in good detail. You can probably Google up some examples. The book "Pricing Photography", along with some of the ASMP publications, have a lot of guidelines, sample forms (property release, too), and would help you understand all the terminology.

Key thing that I think others have covered in part.... You retain ownership of the image... You don't transfer the copyright. You are licensing usage, which means you are only agreeing to let them use your image in some limited ways, and agreeing that for some period of time and/or in some markets you won't use it in certain ways.

Watch out for contracts or offers that want to "buy all rights" or include any sort of "Royalty free" terminology. Some advertisers may want to buy all rights (take over ownership of the copyright), thinking they need that to insure exclusivity. I'd say "Okay, but the price will be $125,000 per image."

Sounds ridiculous, but in truth a really nice image might be sold over and over through your lifetime, and even after by your heirs, and may be worth even more than that over time. So it's really a fair asking price if they insist on buying "all rights".

But, the other truth is, they don't actually need "all rights" to achieve exclusivity. Careful licensing will do just fine, and at a much lower cost to them.

p.s. Nope.... I don't think you need a release from Lexus for most of the photos. Only the last one includes the Lexus logo and model name. The other photos don't show it, so wouldn't need a release.

You are displaying the advertiser's logo, aren't you? You might want to ask them to sign a release, for future use of the photo elsewhere. (But it's not really needed for use in their own ads.) Give a little discount to them somewhere, in exchange for the release.

But, I agree, other companies' logos that are clearly and recognizably displayed, should be released for the image to be used in a commercial manner. The company buying the use of the image might be able to help acquire those. Often there are interrelationships within any industry, such as aftermarket performance car parts.

I am not sure if you need any release for the location. It depends upon how recognizable it is. An entirely unique location that's private property and is highly recognizable, it's wise to get the owner to sign a release.

[IndyJeff]

Just to clarify...

p.s. Nope.... I don't think you need a release from Lexus for most of the photos. Only the last one includes the Lexus logo and model name. The other photos don't show it, so wouldn't need a release.

You are displaying the advertiser's logo, aren't you? You might want to ask them to sign a release, for future use of the photo elsewhere. (But it's not really needed for use in their own ads.) Give a little discount to them somewhere, in exchange for the release.

But, I agree, other companies' logos that are clearly and recognizably displayed, should be released for the image to be used in a commercial manner. The company buying the use of the image might be able to help acquire those. Often there are interrelationships within any industry, such as aftermarket performance car parts.

I am not sure if you need any release for the location. It depends upon how recognizable it is. An entirely unique location that's private property and is highly recognizable, it's wise to get the owner to sign a release.

Regardless of whether you can see the logo of the Lexus or not, the car can be identified as a Lexus therefore you would need the release. Same as if I use a photo of you in an ad. I haven't identified you or shown your drivers license in the photo but, you can easily be identified as you so, I need a release to use the image for an ad.