Working for copyrights...or something

Would you ever work for $6 an hour for a place to take photos for them under the condition that they own your work?

Nope.

Yes, i have an issue with it to.

I think i made a judgement error that this time will not be a problem. And perhaps they never will mind.

My soccer photo that made it into the paper was actually taken while on the clock at the photo studio. The people are very nice but my girlfriend was at work today and brought it up. "He can use the photos for a resume and stuff but they still belong to us". I had been meaning to ask about the conditions of my work but when the paper asked me if i was going to be able to take pictures of the game, and the studio asked me if i was going to take pictures of the game. I kind of jumped on it all and didnt think about it too much until after hte fact.

As i said i dont think they are going to be too upset. And if they allow me to sell my work then i wont have an issue. But i do have a problem giving my work away like that for such a low cost.

I just wanted your guys opinion on the price i was getting paid. RFM once said here that it would cost in the thousands for him to even think about selling a copyright. I've always kind of felt the same way.

I would do it, if the shoot was a learning experience for me: something I hadn't done before due to lack of opportunity or lack of credentials etc.
(for example, women's bikini jelly wrestling or Formula 1 ! )

But if it's something more everyday, then I doubt it...

It's nothing i cant/wouldnt do on my own anyways.

And when they are telling me that my photos are better then theres it raises a whole other set of issues.

They hired me to work in the darkroom, i am learning and enjoying that so $6 an hour is a perk most of the time (other times i'd rather be at home...or taking photos).

They ask me to go out and do sports photos when they get into a crunch, when the realize they wont have another chance and they are already busy.

The two times i've done it i've come back with at least one shot that makes them tell me things like "I havnt even gotten a shot like this".

You may not have realised it, but you have already learned something from all this! 8)

Very true.

Timmy I would go out and shoot a game for $6 an hour and not own the rights to the image under 2 conditions

1. I hadn't eaten in at least 3 days

2. I didn't have a dime to my name.


As soon as the game was over I would get my pay and head for the nearest eatery and vow to never shoot for $6 an hour again in my life.....unless of course I hadn't eaten in 3 days again!

Only if it was taking passport photographs

N

neil_r wrote:
Only if it was taking passport photographs

N

We do do those if you need one .

I dont though.

How about they get first use free & you keep the ©?

did you actually sign on a piece of paper with your name and writing next to it saying so?

if not, i think you still own the copyrights of photos(i think), get them copyrighted at copyright office before it's too late.

I would never work for that condition, $6 an hour is already an insult to photographers, not to mention losing copyrights of your own work on top of that.

In Washington State, $6 an hour is an insult to burger-flippers.

I did not, nor was an agreement ever actually made. So i still have to talk to them about it.

Timmy:
You have to consider the value of what you bring to the equation: your knowledge, and experience (limited only by your age), your artistry, and your enthusiasm. $6 is an insult unless you can retain ownership of your work product. Let them have the initial use of it, but after a week, a month, or a year---whatever you can negotiate---you should own it.

Good luck.

Tom