Charge Wedding Couple for Photo in Paper?

I shot a wedding for a couple, and agreed to provide 800x1200 resolution photo files to the couple for personal use as part of the deal.

The Bride's mom wants to put one of these photos in her local paper. Should I charge? If so, how much?

I feel like publishing the photo in the paper is beyond the scope of "personal use", but at the same time they could post the low-resolution photos on facebook or something and I would feel fine about that.

Also, I want to make sure to not sour the relationship, since they have not yet ordered prints.

Any thoughts on a tactful way to handle this? Thanks for any input!

Would not that be free publicity for you and it"s only one photo.

I'm not a wedding photographer but I would not mind if my photo was published in my local paper.

If I were you, I'd let them do that, provided that the paper credits you as the photographer...

think of it as a free advert mate...

Cool, thanks for the advice, guys!

In all situations, try putting yourself in the other persons shoes.

MadTony wrote in post #11079663
I shot a wedding for a couple, and agreed to provide 800x1200 resolution photo files to the couple for personal use as part of the deal.

The Bride's mom wants to put one of these photos in her local paper. Should I charge? If so, how much?

I feel like publishing the photo in the paper is beyond the scope of "personal use", but at the same time they could post the low-resolution photos on facebook or something and I would feel fine about that.

Also, I want to make sure to not sour the relationship, since they have not yet ordered prints.

Any thoughts on a tactful way to handle this? Thanks for any input!

The primary and original purpose of "engagement photography" is to put it in the local paper. When you do the engagement session, you should always include some head-and-shoulder shots suitable for the newspaper. That should be part of the license--and yes, it is still "personal use." What otherwise are they selling or advertising? It's a personal announcement. There should not be an additional fee, it should have been part of the package.

No, you don't necessarily get a credit, unless that's the paper's policy.

I don't mean this personally, but try not to have your hand out at every opportunity. They're your clients; treat them like clients and not just another transaction. It costs you nothing for them to put the photo in the paper so I think it's pretty darn easy to say yes. Be nice and maybe they'll credit you for the photo.

RDKirk wrote in post #11081251
The primary and original purpose of "engagement photography" is to put it in the local paper.

+1. This is a traditional use of wedding/bridal/engagem​ent photos and is expected by most, if not all clients (at least in my experience). Go through any local paper for the past 50 years--and even weekend editions of major dailies--and you'll see how common this once was. In light of that, it'd reflect poorly on you to ask for extra payment. Interestingly, the practice is slowly dying out because many papers these days now have resorted to charging to run wedding/engagement announcements--it's essentially a paid ad--so you don't want to pile on. It's simply not worth it.

What others said about tradition and not having your hand out at every opportunity. I'd happily give them the photo for that purpose.

If our photographer had tried to change us for an ANNOUNCEMENT they wouldn't be shooting our wedding.

Rights grabs are one thing. This smacks of greed. I would even be able to easily get the deposit back.

Austin Fern wrote in post #11082058
If our photographer had tried to change us for an ANNOUNCEMENT they wouldn't be shooting our wedding.

Rights grabs are one thing. This smacks of greed. I would even be able to easily get the deposit back.

Curious to how you could get the deposit back?

ChuckingFluff wrote in post #11082256
Curious to how you could get the deposit back?

Photographer changed the terms of the contract when he or she decided to even discuss charging charging extra for something already part of the package.

-F

Austin Fern wrote in post #11082276
Photographer changed the terms of the contract when he or she decided to even discuss charging charging extra for something already part of the package.

While it is my personal opinion that announcement shots are so traditional that they are implied even if not specifically included in the contract, I'm not so sure I'd go so far as to say that would hold up in small-claims court if the photog wanted to be a jerk about it.

The photo you shot that is in the newspaper becomes your business card even if they don't give you credit. If the shot is very good, people will ask who did it. Referall because of doing really good work is a great way to find appreciative clients who will advertise for you.

All points well taken. (See post #4 above.) I'm definitely not looking to have my hand out at every occasion, but the contract signed explicitly included the shoot and the low res files for personal use, with other items, prints, etc, included on an ala carte basis. My primary interest is keeping them happy, which is why I asked here rather than just sticking my hand out. They were thrilled with the photos, and i would hate to sour the experience. Thanks everyone for the better understanding of the industry interpretation of "personal use".

Adam