A Shot in the New York Times

Another shot of mine in the New York Times this week! It never gets old

Did the NYT compensate you? If not, you're getting cheated... and that gets old.

The shot was provided to them from the theatre company's press agency -- they hired me. I'm not displacing Sara Krulwich anytime soon!

Hopefully you were at least paid by the theater company. The Times should still pay though - when they run mine I get a check, $400 for a small image, regardless of who sends it in.

Rich, NYT and other papers solicit photos w/o paying all the time.

90c4 wrote in post #16901155
Hopefully you were at least paid by the theater company. The Times should still pay though - when they run mine I get a check, $400 for a small image, regardless of who sends it in.

Yes, I do know how to get paid by my clients

So if you are hired by a band (or their press reps) to shoot and the Times is doing a review of their show and use a shot you delivered to the band/press rep, you're still getting a check from the Times?

I've had the Times reach out to me for additional photos for shows (for $$$), but if they were using the deliverables I provided the client, not so much.

AlFooteIII wrote in post #16910706
Yes, I do know how to get paid by my clients

So if you are hired by a band (or their press reps) to shoot and the Times is doing a review of their show and use a shot you delivered to the band/press rep, you're still getting a check from the Times?

I've had the Times reach out to me for additional photos for shows (for $$$), but if they were using the deliverables I provided the client, not so much.

I still get paid because it's in my contract with the PR company. Truth is, the publication (Times) is either going to get the photo for free because you're excited to be "published," pay you a fee, or pay their shooter or contractor to make the images.

In the future, you definitely need to push for double dipping payment.

Well they credited you... Even though they did that incorrectly.

Iii?

Staszek wrote in post #16910905
I still get paid because it's in my contract with the PR company. Truth is, the publication (Times) is either going to get the photo for free because you're excited to be "published," pay you a fee, or pay their shooter or contractor to make the images.

In the future, you definitely need to push for double dipping payment.

say you work w/ a band to shoot some publicity photos.

would you expect to get paid every time one of those photos was used in a paper, magazine or website? no, that's preposterous. that's what the label or musician is paying you for, to provide photos that they can then use in promotion of a tour or record.

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #16910912
Well they credited you... Even though they did that incorrectly.

Iii?

Not even the Times hires a copy editor anymore, it seems...

narlus wrote in post #16911040
say you work w/ a band to shoot some publicity photos.

would you expect to get paid every time one of those photos was used in a paper, magazine or website? no, that's preposterous. that's what the label or musician is paying you for, to provide photos that they can then use in promotion of a tour or record.

It depends on what the intent of the photos and your contract outlines with the label. The label company or PR firm would not be paying me additional fees, the publication would be directly. My licenses are based on circulation size, so a small local weekly may not have to pay, but a large daily like the NYT does. Likewise, my material can be used in Playbills, but billboards are additional.

AlFooteIII wrote in post #16894215
Another shot of mine in the New York Times this week! It never gets old

Nice pic!