another GWAC undercutting those in the business

the shoestring budgeted Federal Hockey League team's owner that i shoot for owns a team in the league. he uses college kids to do "internships" for the video (web feed) play by play, photographer and i THINK rink announcer. he has a fairly large 4-year school to choose from. for the level of training between a photographer and say the DJ, i think the DJ should be an intern as well but the guy they use is sort of rooted in the press box...

my small town of 33000 has 513 wedding photographes (not really) but only one or three of us who shoot sports, including the one full-timer at the newspaper.

the owners up in arms because im the ONLY photographer in the league getting paid. im not claiming to be SI or AP or UPI quality, but I will say im one of the top 2 shooters for the league. well, he went off on the GM about cutting costs so they went and got a rock concert photographer to come in and do an unpaid internship and theyre looking for one more to do so as well. im kind of pissed because i think they could have asked me to renegotiate my rate (fair costs for the size or the league based on AHL rates, i know of) instead of soliciting unpaid guys behind my back.

i dont really see it ending well, come next season. other than the league media guy who wishes i could cover ALL of the games for all of the teams, no one really can understand good hockey photography from okay hockey photography. at the end of the year, itll be a) the internship guy didnt work out so well, maybe paying David was the best route (15-20%) b) this internship thing worked pretty good but i do like having David there for contingencies (20%) or c) the internship guys stuff is SO MUCH BETTER than Davids, dont offer any money next year (20-40%) or d) the internship guys stuff is "good enough" lets just go with him next year (30-70%)

i got the gig because for the first 2 years their volunteers a) didnt cover enough games, b) werent reliable enough to contact the team if something came up (like they forgot or just didnt feel like covering) c) they werent really qualified to shoot sports, let alone hockey and d) they were illequiped, shooting with a mirrorless sony with lenses 2-3 stops too slow for the venue. im not looking to make a killing and im not but its a very equitable fee for what i provide...

sorry if i sound like im whining, (i am) but there was another guy who i explained this to a couple of years ago and he agreed with my point and stopped giving his work away...

In context, you do not seem to be talking about GWAC in the usual sense of Governmentwide acquisition contracts. Can you provide a clue to your intending meaning?

Guy
With
A
Camera

Keep in mind that a lot of these photos (social media) would not have ever been needed in decades past. Many published shots were "file photos" and reused regularly.

The market has changed dramatically, with that has come expansion of the total market for our services as well as expansion of the number of people who can potentially fill those roles.

Sell your services without much regard for the scrubs. Or don't and drive yourself nuts, your choice.

i know the team (the owner is an absentee since he owns more than one team and doesnt live locally) staff have been extremely grateful for the quality and quantity of images (as allowed under license in our contract), as compared to what they had received in the past. theyve told me as much, but their hands are tied from higher ups...

theyre working on light post banners and have used the images for other printed matter, in addition to the social media outlets...

Ltdave wrote in post #18941633
i got the gig because for the first 2 years their volunteers a) didnt cover enough games, b) werent reliable enough to contact the team if something came up (like they forgot or just didnt feel like covering) c) they werent really qualified to shoot sports, let alone hockey and d) they were illequiped, shooting with a mirrorless sony with lenses 2-3 stops too slow for the venue.

This right here is where you need to be focusing.
The difference between a pro and an amateur is often not the quality of the images.... it is the professionalism. Turning up week in, week out, rain or shine, getting the shots the client wants.

Dan Marchant wrote in post #18941870
This right here is where you need to be focusing.
The difference between a pro and an amateur is often not the quality of the images.... it is the professionalism. Turning up week in, week out, rain or shine, getting the shots the client wants.

and i was. every game, early. cleaning the glass by my usual shooting locations, checking with Game Day operations for any special events i.e. kids events, intermission events, puck drop etc...

i dont know that i can do any more than that. if the OTHER guys dont, then thats on them. we had to provide one image to the league so they could use in their game recaps. a day or two after the game was fine with them. mine was there within 2 hours of the game finishing (has no bearing on the team's decision honestly) but i ALSO had the images processed, culled, loaded to dropbox (image size prohibitive for regular email) and the link sent to the team with in 3 hours, usually under 2 because i get my stuff pretty close SOOC and with my presets. the biggest delay is that ive got another job i work midnights on and it takes 50 minutes to get there lol (i dont always go in Friday nights which technically my Saturday so those games, ive got it all wrapped up before 12pm)

Ltdave wrote in post #18942197
and i was. every game, early. cleaning the glass by my usual shooting locations, checking with Game Day operations for any special events i.e. kids events, intermission events, puck drop etc...

i dont know that i can do any more than that.

Doing it isn't enough. You have to be seen to be doing it.... or rather you need to be making sure that potential clients know that this is a key part of your service by noting it in your marketing, so that when a GWAC lets them down they remember you and come back.

Of course there are other issues here as well....
The barrier to entry is a lot lower due to the availability of kit and the fact that the necessary skills can be learnt relatively quickly. While the resulting images may not be as good as yours they may in fact be good enough for the client. If they get the same amount of media coverage from the good enough images then there is no sound business reason why they should pay.

In addition to being professional are there other products/services that you provide that the GWAC can't. Many sports photographers do composites (player portraits combined with a cool background and logos/name plates). Are there other services that you could be offering (and charging for) as part of a "Season package" - Do they have a regular/on going social media presence? If it is intermittent offer to provide that service.... post to their accounts for them.... look to do things they aren't already doing like player profiles (with those composites).

Finally lower leagues may simply not be viable clients. They don't generate enough money, don't have the vision, tend to rely more on volunteers across the whole range of their business and as such simply don't see a need for paid photography. It may be time to step up to a level where the companies do want/need your services.

I’m betting they’ll beg for you back after the Rock Gods fail in shooting hockey. I’ve tried hockey a few times and I suck at it. It’s definitely not easy. Good luck.

Dan Marchant wrote in post #18942217
Doing it isn't enough. You have to be seen to be doing it.... or rather you need to be making sure that potential clients know that this is a key part of your service by noting it in your marketing, so that when a GWAC lets them down they remember you and come back.

Of course there are other issues here as well....
The barrier to entry is a lot lower due to the availability of kit and the fact that the necessary skills can be learnt relatively quickly. While the resulting images may not be as good as yours they may in fact be good enough for the client. If they get the same amount of media coverage from the good enough images then there is no sound business reason why they should pay.

In addition to being professional are there other products/services that you provide that the GWAC can't. Many sports photographers do composites (player portraits combined with a cool background and logos/name plates). Are there other services that you could be offering (and charging for) as part of a "Season package" - Do they have a regular/on going social media presence? If it is intermittent offer to provide that service.... post to their accounts for them.... look to do things they aren't already doing like player profiles (with those composites).

Finally lower leagues may simply not be viable clients. They don't generate enough money, don't have the vision, tend to rely more on volunteers across the whole range of their business and as such simply don't see a need for paid photography. It may be time to step up to a level where the companies do want/need your services.

well as far as being seen, the game day manager has seen me and my efforts for 2 years.
the general manager and assistant gm have seen me and my efforts for those 2 years.
the owner, didnt make ONE APPEARANCE last year, but I saw him at the league championship games (out of town).
the coach (who was also the GM 2 years ago) saw me and if he was still the coach or GM, id probably not have this issue. the problem it popped up now, is that the current coach is also the gm and the captain. the assistant gm is an alternate captain. yes player/coach position.

player portraits and profiles etc are done by a wedding photographer who gets a dasher board advertisement in exchange for her services...

i agree it would behoove me to shoot a higher league. i have been asked to shoot AHL (feeder to the NHL) but a) the nearest team is 3 hours away b) theyre not the ones asking me to shoot for them c) the team that DID want me to work for them is 7+ hours away, at $40 a game.

there was talk of having me do some of their social media/website stuff last year but they found someone who 'likes to play around with that" who's willing to do it for free...

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #18942225
I’m betting they’ll beg for you back after the Rock Gods fail in shooting hockey. I’ve tried hockey a few times and I suck at it. It’s definitely not easy. Good luck.

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #18942225
I’m betting they’ll beg for you back after the Rock Gods fail in shooting hockey. I’ve tried hockey a few times and I suck at it. It’s definitely not easy. Good luck.

id love to think so, but as i mentioned and Dan mentioned, too many places think "good enough" is good enough, especially if they save a few bucks. that combined with so many places who "dont have a budget for photography" make it pretty difficult to get any traction. too many people who are benefitting from the ease that Digital has brought to photography.

So this is the harsh reality of this business.... it is supply and demand. Its simple economics. If the images don't have economic value to the team, then they will not be paying for them. If they aren't driving butts in seats, program sales, or increasing circulation for a publication, it is unwise for anyone to pay for images that don't have economic impact. If the "free" image satisfy their marketing needs, there is no reason for them to pay for better content. Having better or more reliable content is immaterial to them. It's like having a fine food restaurant in a small town that few value the better quality.

I know this sucks...

And providing free content (interning) is how a lot of pro shooters got their start - either by "working" for a college paper or interning with a publication. Its about having the ability to build your skills, show off your content, and creating a network of people who are aware of your content. A lot of times its about creating perceived value of your work.

It sounds like you have done that for the most part, locally. But it also sounds like your skills have outgrown local demand. It really just depends on what your long term goals are. Are you working your way to becoming an NHL photog... or at least a regular stringer for the highest level events.... this could be part of your maturation. If your aspiration is to stay local, and just make some money off of this... this may be a tough problem to solve. Trying to find the economic equilibrium may be tough if your are worth more than the local market will bear.

Like you said, at the end of the season it will be up to the owner to see if there was value in the images, and what the market says that value is. Each market will monetize your skills differently depending on demand. You can't fight "free" is good enough, when it is. You've become a premium brand...

It would be interesting to see what the banding is for number of viewers to what images are worth. In the hundreds... not that much. In the thousands, more. Tens of thousands, and now your talking being worth a far.

What is the average attendance at the games you shot? Is there a team shop you can sell images through? Find someway to drive revenue with your shots. Perhaps a yearly team yearbook. Or premium images in their program would justify a higher price. Maybe step it up and not just shoot, but look at ways to drive revenue for the team to justify your expense. Partner with the team to monitize your work... assume some of the risk, and capture more money via increased revenues.

Croasdail wrote in post #18942349
So this is the harsh reality of this business.... it is supply and demand. Its simple economics. If the images don't have economic value to the team, then they will not be paying for them. If they aren't driving butts in seats, program sales, or increasing circulation for a publication, it is unwise for anyone to pay for images that don't have economic impact. If the "free" image satisfy their marketing needs, there is no reason for them to pay for better content. Having better or more reliable content is immaterial to them. It's like having a fine food restaurant in a small town that few value the better quality.

I know this sucks...

And providing free content (interning) is how a lot of pro shooters got their start - either by "working" for a college paper or interning with a publication. Its about having the ability to build your skills, show off your content, and creating a network of people who are aware of your content. A lot of times its about creating perceived value of your work.

It sounds like you have done that for the most part, locally. But it also sounds like your skills have outgrown local demand. It really just depends on what your long term goals are. Are you working your way to becoming an NHL photog... or at least a regular stringer for the highest level events.... this could be part of your maturation. If your aspiration is to stay local, and just make some money off of this... this may be a tough problem to solve. Trying to find the economic equilibrium may be tough if your are worth more than the local market will bear.

Like you said, at the end of the season it will be up to the owner to see if there was value in the images, and what the market says that value is. Each market will monetize your skills differently depending on demand. You can't fight "free" is good enough, when it is. You've become a premium brand...

It would be interesting to see what the banding is for number of viewers to what images are worth. In the hundreds... not that much. In the thousands, more. Tens of thousands, and now your talking being worth a far.

What is the average attendance at the games you shot? Is there a team shop you can sell images through? Find someway to drive revenue with your shots. Perhaps a yearly team yearbook. Or premium images in their program would justify a higher price. Maybe step it up and not just shoot, but look at ways to drive revenue for the team to justify your expense. Partner with the team to monitize your work... assume some of the risk, and capture more money via increased revenues.

no, i know that there really isnt any advantage to professional images over "good enough" free shots. the budget is so shoestring, that they did virtually zero local advertising the last couple of years. one year they had some vehicle wraps on the local bus system but no billboards, no newspaper ads, a little bit of social media...

yes. i started shooting in high school, and ran the local community college newspaper's photo department as editor and chief photographer (covered just about everything we had in the paper since too many people flaked out on either shooting an event or providing the film/images after shooting it). then "interned" for 8 years in the Air Force. there are other places to intern, id think vs a semi-pro sports team, and a lot of the time the "internship" doesnt replace paid work, but enhances it...

im 54. i dont know if my goal is to move up to the NHL/NFL/MLB/NBA (detroit is only an hour away) but thanks for the compliment (if it wasnt, too bad lol. i TOOK IT as a compliment) about having outgrown the local market. the largest market in the league, has a rather prestigious 4-yr university that they use for their interns. (same owner) and his thought "the league is in part a developmental league, the photographer and video play by play guys should be developing (no pun intended) their skills too...

It would be interesting to see what the banding is for number of viewers to what images are worth. In the hundreds... not that much. In the thousands, more. Tens of thousands, and now your talking being worth a far. im not sure i know what this means...

average attendance is around 950. i put together some photo packages of the players the last couple of years (5x7, similar to what i had gotten from the Tigers when i was a kid) and sold 1, to the booster club that sold it or gave it away. the captain's wife bought a dozen of her husband for a collage for his dad (the coach). ive got everything all set for a calendar, if i can get any confirmation on being able to sell again this year. ill have a very limited time to sell (only 5 games before 1 Jan) and ive offered a percentage to the booster club. again im still waiting to hear from the team. the team doesnt sell programs; they have a one-page sheet with the game teams for the night. there was a 'yearbook' after the 1st or 2nd year, that was given to season ticket owners but i wasnt involved with the team at that point. it was one of the hit-or-miss volunteer photographers (part of which drove them to hiring me)...

thanks for the thoughts. i honestly expected a bunch of nay-sayers giving me grief because i was concerned about "losing a gig" but this thread has gone well...

Ltdave wrote in post #18941857
theyre working on light post banners and have used the images for other printed matter, in addition to the social media outlets...

With a competent marketing department, the shots needed for those pieces could be made in a single day rather than over the course of an entire season of home games. Potentially with a better quality product. Not that they care about quality, lol, but just another way the supposed need for social media photos has changed the landscape.

Agree... one of my main gigs is shooting images for Media Guides. The shots used in those could come from just a single game, if all the people who they need images of are there and available.

LT Dave... the banding I am referring to is the total size of the audience/readership determines what the marketing budget will be, or the demand to have images available for the local media. If average attendance is about 1,000... that runs in the same class as a high school game in most places. That also means that the marketing budget for a <1,000 attendee team is going to be almost nothing. If they were trying to get 5,000 seats filled, they would have a larger budget. 10,000 Plus... they would have some money to play with. At only >1,000, they are probably at break even at best.

I would take it as a compliment that. The fact they did pay... says something for your work.

But as you mentioned, this is a stepping stone to larger things for a lot of people.... I would see if could still get credentialed, and just shoot when you feel like, and make those images available to them at a nominal cost. Trying to force this into a money making venture is likely going to end up like milking a bull... you may get something, but its not going to be sustainable. Have fun, and if you make some money... bonus.

Being the league photographer for youth sports can be very profitable. I just don't like it. A few years ago I did it for my sons soccer league and doing team and individual shots for that, I made over $5,000 one weekend. That was cool. Having to process images from over 500 kids... not so much. But some do really well. I also kicked back some of the money to the league itself, which made them very happy.

Individual images of semi-pro... not sure how that would be sustainable.

The term GWAC seems a bit misleading. It sounds like the team is going with student interns that are actually in photography or journalism as opposed to someone from the crowd who happens to own a camera?

duckster wrote in post #18942464
The term GWAC seems a bit misleading. It sounds like the team is going with student interns that are actually in photography or journalism as opposed to someone from the crowd who happens to own a camera?

i dont know if this guy is a student at the local community college or not because honestly, i only know of ONE photography class being held there anymore and its a film and paper class...

hes NOT a working professional according to the information I got, so to me that indicates just a guy with a camera