Help! They want my picture for a tv-show

Thank you all for your input and your opinions.
The last thing I want to do is hurt photographers in any way by giving my pics away for free; credit and/or some payment does seem appropriate. But it did sound like she wanted it for free, and with so many pictures out on the web these days I don't really blame her for trying. Especially since the pics are nothing special anyway! But I have to admit I'm kinda curious how she intends to use them:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

I don't know that you would be harming any other photographers if you let them use your pics for free but I think that you would be harming yourself by doing it. No credits and no pay. Boy I would love to get deals like that all the time. Don't sell yourself short. If they are going to profit from using your pics then you should, too. I give a lot of my pics to friends without thinking of getting $$ in return but my friends won't use my pics for profit. I can't imagine giving my pics to this tv show for free and not even getting credit (on screen) for them. And after saying all this, remember, these are your pics and if you want to do this, go ahead and do it.

They are probably doing some mockup work and trying to sell the show. I would ask for an offical letter like. "The lovable fly trap Molly from the xxx show is based on photgraphs from Bea"

If you must get paid or not is up to you. However If the show is a hit and you have this letter then you can post it on your web site and get hits from anyone searching about the show or Molly. You get credit just not on screen and might sell some other images.

Drew

Thank you guys, more great advice Since it's the weekend now it'll be a while before I can expect to get a response from her, which is good, it gives me more time to research .

I visited Getty Images and they are asking *very nice* prices, both for RF and RM images. I had no idea what the market was like. I still don't think she would pay anything like that but I will ask for some payment once I know more.

dazzlebea wrote:
Especially since the pics are nothing special anyway!

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

It's a seller's market: she wants the pictures, and you have them. You need to be rewarded for your work. If there's no money, there's no point in you helping this woman to leech off your work. Thank her politely for the interest, and ask her to consider you again when she has some budget. And under no circumstances should you let on that you think they're nothing special (these ones are very good).

Set a price in your head (the $300 figure seems reasonable enough). Offer 30% off if she accompanies payment with an unreservedly glowing reference.

Thank you so much for your advice, Giles. She sent me an e-mail back with further details about how the pics would be used, and saying she would love to get as many photos as I'm willing to send. I sent her a reply back, telling her my conditions. I figure I have nothing to lose, so I quoted her a price and if she likes it, good. If it is too high she can always try to bargain. If it was too low, I don't care because I'll never know.

I like the idea of offering to reduce the price in exchange for a letter with "unreservedly glowing reference" That doesn't cost her anything, does it?

Update:

A.M. sent me another, very friendly, email explaining to me that they work on a tiny budget. She went out and bought a venus fly trap herself and took pics (which, according to her, are not as good as mine). She would keep me in mind for the future since she loved my pictures. I told her thanks, I understand, and if she's ever interested again we can work something out.

Ahh, well...

You have got to be kidding me! If the project group is that cheap you are better off not getting involved. Never sell yourself so short that you give your work away. Especially to a group of people intending to make a profit for themselves at the expense of others. A.M. is quite the little con artist. If she writes again, write her off.

Sometimes I'm just amazed at the nerve of the "big guys" who try to take advantage of average people's hopes to "make it". Apparently I'm not the only one....this is an exact quote from the letter of the month in August's issue of Photography Monthly (taking issue with BBC for not paying for submissions they use):

"Firstly, while the BBC does have a public service duty, that is not it's only function. Ask any staff member and they will tell you it is very definitely a "commercial" organization. The priceless not for profit status comment is little more than appalling attempt at spin.

Secondly, with this policy the BBC are doing nothing more than cashing in on Joe Average's desire to be "famous" at any cost. It doesn't matter to these people that they don't get paid as their reward is "My picture was on the telly..." This policy is nothing more than blatant exploitation. The BBC is perfectly aware too that this is a growth area in society which means that they have no doubt seen the "opportunity" this presents to save money by reducing the need to send out staff photographers and film crews.

Lastly, there is no "need" for the BBC to adopt this stance. It can and should pay contributors in much the same way every other "decent" publication or organisation does."-David Newton, Wetherby

Mr. Newton seems to point out that by not paying for the amateur submissions they use, paid photographers are effectively cut out...who'll pay if they can get things for free?

I'm not a pro, in fact I've never submitted anything, but I can appreciate the hard hours it takes to work your way to the top of anything....and lately there does seem to be an ever widening trend to eliminate the need for the "pro" photographer when amateur photography is one of the fastest growing hobbies of this generation...look how many pages of magazines that are given over to "readers submissions". Though, several do give their readers gifts if their submissions are printed. But is a card reader the same fee that a pro would get for a page of photos? (Mostly these questions are rhetorical but still, I applaud the OP for sticking to your guns and not giving up your rights...present or future!)