Author looking to put my photo in a book - For attribution

In 2010 I entered a statewide landscape photo contest and won best in show.

I have been contacted by the organization that put on the contest and told that a person is writing a book about the James River and was hoping they could provide him with some photos for the book. They are asking me if I would allow it. "With attribution, of course"

I sell this picture now and again.

I have licensed it for some uses. But got paid. I'm inclined to actually do it but the thought occurred to me that if it gets on the dust jacket I should get paid.

Any suggestion on how to proceed?

Thanks

Unbelievable that the contest group would even consider handling this transaction. They should have immediately put the author in touch with you.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18900794
Unbelievable that the contest group would even consider handling this transaction. They should have immediately put the author in touch with you.

I think maybe that's true. They're kind of funny about things like this.

I have asked them to tell me more about the book and to maybe just put him in touch with me.

If it's a self published vanity thing I might do it for attribution.

But it occurred to me if it ended up on the dust jacket I'd REALLY think I needed to get paid.

I'm hoping they put him in touch and get a feel for his project and its budget.

Was also curious about how other more experienced folks would go about this.
BTW the book is a history of the James river and this is the image they want:

.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18900794
Unbelievable that the contest group would even consider handling this transaction. They should have immediately put the author in touch with you.

.
Agreed. . It seems very awkward to have the photo contest acting as a go-between. . That causes me to suspect that maybe it is one of them themselves that is doing the book.

Moving forward, I would tell them that you would be happy to discuss this with the book's author, and that they have your permission to give your contact information to him/her.

.

Sort-of on-topic ...

Back in the 70s, my then teenage wife-to-be entered a poetry competition. The 'prize' was inclusion in a book of poems.

She didn't get published, but her poem later got published as the lyrics to a big pop hit by a Motown group. She never received a cent, nor even attribution and, because it was pre-email era and the poem wasn't included in the book, proving it was her work would have been tough.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18900800
.

.
Agreed. . It seems very awkward to have the photo contest acting as a go-between. . That causes me to suspect that maybe it is one of them themselves that is doing the book.

.

I like your skepticism!

Bpiper, without a proper contract you are potentially putting yourself in a bad position. Far too much of this going on and the people taking advantage of photogs seem to be getting sneakier.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18900800
Moving forward, I would tell them that you would be happy to discuss this with the book's author, and that they have your permission to give your contact information to him/her.

+1 to this.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18900821
I like your skepticism!

Bpiper, without a proper contract you are potentially putting yourself in a bad position. Far too much of this going on and the people taking advantage of photogs seem to be getting sneakier.

Thanks to everyone who responded. I sent the organization an email asking them to put the guy in touch with me. I wouldn't give permission without a usage license anyway. This picture is pretty popular locally. (Thanks to the organization whose contest it won.)

I'm always chasing down sneaky folk who think it's theirs.

Is the author giving the book away?

If he's selling the book, you should be paid...

Road Dog wrote in post #18902478
Is the author giving the book away?

If he's selling the book, you should be paid...

.
What if the author is selling the book, but only at actual cost? . By "actual cost", I mean the actual price that the author is paying to have it printed, without anything extra to compensate for his/her time in creating the book, and without any extra to compensate for expenses incurred in gathering and creating content for the book.

There is a difference between selling something and making money at it.

If someone has put hundreds of hours of hard work into creating a book, and pays, say, $12.50 per copy to have it printed, and is only charging $12.50 for the book, then I would have no problem with them looking to crowdsource some content for free usage.

How would you feel about that scenario?

.

A contest that doesn't claim ownership of all photos submitted. Wow. Who'd a thunk it.
Congratulations on a great photo and win.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18902488
How would you feel about that scenario?

1. The author spends money to make the book and then earns back that money. They didn't make a profit but they also didn't make a loss - and they gained some non-monetary reward by having a published book.
2. The photographer similarly invested time and money and effort into creating the image but they don't get that back. That doesn't seem fair to me.

Why should the printer get paid to print the book and the post office paid to deliver it and the box maker paid for the packaging to ship it in but the photographer not get paid?

If the author isn't paying the photographer then they aren't actually "paying the cost of production" at all. They are only paying part of it and the photographer is being asked to pay the rest for something they have no stake in.

Dan Marchant wrote in post #18902539
Why should the printer get paid to print the book and the post office paid to deliver it and the box maker paid for the packaging to ship it in but the photographer not get paid?

I can't answer your question exactly the way that you asked it, but I can answer a very similar question:

Why would the printer get paid to print the book and the post office paid to deliver it and the box maker paid for the packaging to ship it in but the photographer not get paid?

I suppose because no printers are willing to print books for free, and no shipping company is willing to ship things for free, and no box makers are willing to box things for free ..... but many hundreds of thousands of photographers are willing to allow their images to be used for free. . Hence, there is an ever-growing perception that extending usage of ones' photographic image has little to no monetary value. . I don't think that public perception of an image's value should be this way, but it does seem to be a reality.

The lines between professional photographers and hobby photographers are very blurred in mainstream public perception, compared to other professions, because millions upon millions of people do photography purely as a hobby (many of them do it as well as, or better than, many full time professionals), whereas almost nobody manufactures boxes as a hobby or prints other people's books as a hobby or delivers packages as a hobby.

I thought that this was common knowledge amongst us photographers, because it has been such an issue over the past couple of decades. . It surprised me that you had to ask me about it. . I thought that all of us already knew that this is the current state of the stock photo market ..... and has been so for many years now.

.

"Because everyone else is doing it"

This is the same logic that has so many folks calling people idiots from the comfort of their home keyboard.*

* not saying anyone is calling anyone an idiot ITT.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18902551
Why would the printer get paid to print the book and the post office paid to deliver it and the box maker paid for the packaging to ship it in but the photographer not get paid?

There is a difference: marginal costs. The additional cost for a photoG to allow an existing photo to be used is basically zero. This is also the reason why so many people ask what they should charge - it is not inherently clear. It is much clearer for printers and card box makers....

That said: I do firmly believe that the creative sector needs to be paid - otherwise we will descend into creative mediocrity. However, it is a much more difficult area to define fair prices. I also think that non-professional should therefore charge a substantial price for their work to keep value of the craft and the profession alive. Therefore: Charge as much as you can!