Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography
Thread started 20 Jan 2005 (Thursday) 16:15
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

STICKY: Are you insured?

 
KennyG
Goldmember
KennyG's Avatar
2,252 posts
Joined Aug 2003
Leeds, UK
Jan 20, 2005 16:15 |  #1

I have a quarterly get together with some photographer friends of mine and we met up the other day. This is something we have been doing for the last seven or eight years. We have a few drinks, a meal and discuss everything and anything to do with photography. Our wives get together at the same time, but we have no idea what they talk about. :)

Hot topic was insurance for professional photogs. Three of the eight there had experienced problems in 2004 that involved insurance (I was not one, thank goodness).

One may sound amusing, but wasn't at the time or later. A light head exploded and set fire to a suspended ceiling during a wedding reception shoot. Non of us could work out how it could happen, but it did. The fire was tiny and easily put out, with the damage limited to a couple of ceiling tiles. However, the bill from the organisation that owned the hall for the repairs and loss of earnings while it was being done was huge (a few thousand dollars). As the photog in question was insured for all liabilities the insurance company took over the whole thing and he had no further involvement, other than supply details of the incident.

Another 'hardware' problem. Again at a wedding (Bloo Dog, you reading this?) he had his tripod mounted 1Ds with 16-35L knocked over onto a hardwood floor by some kids running around. The drop was too much for the lens which snapped into two parts and the mirror box contents of the 1Ds rattled a lot, so he didn't even look inside. The insurance replaced the lens and paid for the 1Ds repair.

The point of this is, when I read posts from people starting up a part-time business to photograph anything from weddings to pets, I would like to ask if they are considering their insurance position. They could be on the receiving end of a claim for damages, or have their camera/lens do a nose dive into oblivion just as easily as the people above, who have more experience and expertise than most of us here. If you are being paid for your work then you must be insured accordingly.

I think the US and UK have similar conditions for their homeowner's policies where you are not covered for losses as a result of doing your paid business, even if it is part-time. You must insure your equipment separately and be covered for liabilities, especially when we seem to have lawyers under every stone ready to leap out and sue.

All my equipment is insured, including allowances for loans and I have £5m ($10m -ish) of liability cover. Mine is due for renewal in a couple of weeks and I will have to review the current costs of replacing any items that get damaged/stolen, plus check the policy has all the models and serial numbers correct. This is as much of a 'must have' as the latest camera or lens.


Ken
Professional Motorsport Photographer
2 x 1D MK-II, 7D, 17-40L, 24-70L, 70-200 2.8L IS, 100-400L,
300 2.8L IS, 500 4.0L IS, 85 1.8, 50 1.4, 1.4 & 2.0 MK-II TC.

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Tom ­ W
Canon Fanosapien
Tom W's Avatar
12,743 posts
Joined Feb 2003
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Jan 20, 2005 17:05 |  #2

Good post, Kenny. Even if one is a non-professional hobbyist, the loss or damage of photographic equipment is not always included in the homeowner's policy.


Tom
5D III, 70D, & various lenses

LOG IN TO REPLY
GenEOS
Senior Member
740 posts
Joined Jan 2003
Pearland, Texas
Jan 20, 2005 17:34 |  #3

If your equipment is used in a business, most homeowners poilicies won't cover it at all.
Liability insurance is a good thing if you and your equipment is in a place it could cause bodily harm to someone.
Most sporting arena's won't let you up in the cat-walks or attach lighting unless you are insured to a specific amount.
Insurance is always a good idea. Better safe than sorry. It only takes one incident to ruin you finacially.
But, you have to get what you can afford. You can go broke buying insurance.....

I think this is almost two threads, liability insurance to protect the photographer and equipment insurance to replace broken/stolen gear....


Daniel Tunstall
http://www.dmtphoto.co​mexternal link
Sports Shooter Member
http://www.sportsshoot​er.com/members.html?id​=2474external link

LOG IN TO REPLY
leony
Member
197 posts
Joined Dec 2002
New Jersey, US
Jan 20, 2005 21:28 |  #4

It is rather ignorant to not get insurance. It is an added expense, but a small business (like most photographers are) do not have enough capital to self-insure.

In US a couple trade organizations (PPA, ASMP, etc.) offer "group rates" because they have a lot of buying power, although each policy is individually written.

You can get insurance for: libality / loss of income / employee comp / property / anything else as long as you're willing to pay for it. A good insurance agent will be able to put together a reasonable policy at a reasonable price together.

I personally know a fashion shooter in NYC who was out on location shooting small advertising gig. Next thing you know his car is stollen with all his gear in it. $90,000 worth + cost of the car. This is what his anual income is - there is no way he would have been able to get back on his feet without insurance...which covered the whole thing, including rental of necessary things to complete the assignment.

And someone tripping over a tripod and falling is plenty of reason to get insurance for liability purposes.

A small business, simply put, can't afford to not buy insurance. It's not there to pay for your new flash when the old one takes a dive. It's there to prevent a minor catastrophe from taking you out.


NYC Area | www.studioly.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
leony
Member
197 posts
Joined Dec 2002
New Jersey, US
Jan 21, 2005 07:52 |  #5

The guy was insured, equipment and all. The insurance covered all of the gear and a car.
The point is - what if he wasn't?

If my camera bag grows legs or takes a swim, I'm personally in no possition (financially) to buy all the things at once, and so I insure all my gear in addition to a general liability writen in on my policy. I might never make use of the insurance, but if I need to I know it's there and that the whole thing would be just an inconvenience and not something that will take me out of the game all together.


NYC Area | www.studioly.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,710 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Jan 21, 2005 09:51 |  #6

This plagued at ne for a while,. as fr reasons I won't go into,. I could not get Aprtment insurance..


Once I crossed the "coverd by homeowners" threashold anyways.. I could no longer sleep at nights.

It's all insured now.. and to the limits that pro policy offers. I take my gear to forighn countries,. it rides in the trunk of my car,. it hangs from my neck while I dangle over the water.. (or some cases when I'm actually IN the water) ... so it simply HAS to be insured.

If I were to sell it all I would easily have a down payment on a house... I can't let that kind of value tide up into something so portable ,.. somethig that can so easily walk away,... without it being covered.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
mikesd
Senior Member
mikesd's Avatar
893 posts
Joined Mar 2004
Olney Illinois,home of the white squirrels
Jan 21, 2005 10:36 |  #7

Equipment insured along with a buisness liability policy. Cant afford not to at aprox. $200.00 a year.


50D, 10D, XT, S3 IS, Tamron 17-50, Tamron 28-75, Tamron 18-200, 18-55, 430EX II

LOG IN TO REPLY
Vanderlei
Member
78 posts
Joined Jan 2005
Jan 21, 2005 14:28 |  #8

I just sent prices for my equipment to state farm... it's so worth the $ to insure it, it's not even funny.




LOG IN TO REPLY
RichardtheSane
Goldmember
RichardtheSane's Avatar
3,011 posts
Joined Jun 2003
Nottingham UK
Jan 21, 2005 17:50 as a reply to Vanderlei's post |  #9

Good post Kenny

Insurance has always been importnat to me, so my equipment is covered. As I begin to see mroe clients I will be taking out specific liability insureance. Be foolish not too :)


If in doubt, I shut up...

Gear: 40D, 12-24mm AT-X Pro, 17-85mm, Sigma 150mm Macro Sigma 100-300 F4, 550EX, other stuff that probably helps me on my way.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Scottes
Trigger Man - POTN Retired
Scottes's Avatar
12,842 posts
Joined Nov 2003
A Little North Of Boston, MA, USA
Jan 21, 2005 20:46 |  #10

I've got my gear insured under an addition to the home owner's policy. They cover everything - 27 pages of invoices from B&H and others - even a $6 lens cap that was on one of the invoices. $155 a year for $13,000 worth of camera gear and $5,500 worth of jewelry.

Now the kicker was when I asked about accidental breakage, and the insurance agent told me that the policy didn't cover this, so if something happened "just report it as stolen. It happens all the time."

I was floored by that statement.

But I've been semi-seriously considering pro insurance since "just reporting it stolen" goes against my grain, and there just might be something else involved where this might not even be possible.


One question here, if anyone knows the answer... My wife used to work with a guy who does the "trained animal act" at a local Renaissance Faire. A few years ago we got to play with some 5-month-old jaguar cubs - just her and I in a large pen with five 45-pound jaguars. (Yes, they had to drag us out, but then we just went over to scratch the ears of a 450-lb adult liger [LIon/tiger] but that's another story...)

Anyway, we plan on asking him if we could visit again with the cameras. Now if something insane should happen, would "pro" insurance cover a lion attack or something unbeleivable like that?


You can take my 100-400 L away when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Scottes' Rum Pages - Rum Reviews And Infoexternal link
Follower of Fidget - Joined the cult of HAMSTTR©

LOG IN TO REPLY
ssim
POTN Landscape & Cityscape Photographer 2005
ssim's Avatar
10,884 posts
Joined Apr 2003
southern Alberta, Canada
Jan 22, 2005 07:54 as a reply to Scottes's post |  #11

I was always just registering my gear with my insurance company as it was covered under my household policy. Then I crossed that threshold where I had more photo and computer stuff than everything else and I had to put it on a special rider.

I covered everything to the max. All replacement value (irrespective of how old it is) and covers me even if I break it. Around 35,000.00 worth of gear for about 500.00 cdn. Well worth the piece of mind.


My life is like one big RAW file....way too much post processing needed.
Sheldon Simpson | My Galleryexternal link | My Gear updated: 20JUL12

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,710 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Jan 22, 2005 08:06 |  #12

Scotts

I beleive the policy I have would cover just such an odd claim.

Are you talking about just gear coverage for the attack? Or medical expenses as well?

I am insured through NANPA's group insurance policy for pro photographers,. obviously with a focus on wildlife photographers.

My policy covers essentially anything I could possibly do to the equipment in any country,.. short of saying "I broke it because I thought it would be funny"

So the eqipment is at least covered. Pretty much no matter what.

The coverage obviously covers the gear,. but like Kenny points out,. a good plan does more than just cover your lenses,. it is a comprehensive policy that covers all kinds of unforseen damages that I or any pro photog could get themselves mixed up in.

My guess is that most policies that are really geared towards pro photogs would be similar in this regard.

However... if you get hospitalized by the lions,. and you aren't in there with the lions because of a professional job?? Again I'm sure your gear would be covered... but you? I dunno.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Scottes
Trigger Man - POTN Retired
Scottes's Avatar
12,842 posts
Joined Nov 2003
A Little North Of Boston, MA, USA
Jan 23, 2005 06:16 as a reply to CyberDyneSystems's post |  #13

CyberDyneSystems wrote:
However... if you get hospitalized by the lions,. and you aren't in there with the lions because of a professional job?? Again I'm sure your gear would be covered... but you? I dunno.

Well OF COURSE I'll be there in Pro capacity since there's no doubt that my wife would have hired me to take pictures.
:-)

Actually though, ANY job should really be considered a Pro job since every shoot is building up the portfolio for stock photography. Or something like that. I would think so, otherwise you'd have to have been hired for any time you went out to shoot something.


You can take my 100-400 L away when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Scottes' Rum Pages - Rum Reviews And Infoexternal link
Follower of Fidget - Joined the cult of HAMSTTR©

LOG IN TO REPLY
dpp
Member
129 posts
Joined Oct 2004
Jan 25, 2005 00:02 |  #14

KennyG, Can you recommend a good UK Insurance company? Its a minefield out there for this type of insurance




LOG IN TO REPLY
vwpilot
Senior Member
vwpilot's Avatar
592 posts
Joined Nov 2004
Maryland
Jan 25, 2005 00:08 |  #15

Check with your agents. I specifically asked mine two days ago whether or not I would be covered if my gear was damaged on a working job and he said it most definately WAS. I have a renters policy through Allstate and specific allowances for the camera gear.

I thought it was the other way as well and so I asked because I was going to change it over and stop flirting with danger, but he was very adamant that there would not be a problem even if I were working.


Jim Sykes
SportsShooter portfolioexternal link
SpeedArenaexternal link
Jim Sykes Photographyexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

135,197 views & 2 likes for this thread
Are you insured?
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00216 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
Latest registered member is locketlover13
804 guests, 304 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016