Selling Images - or not...

Hi Gang,

Here's an edited email conversation I had following an unsolicited request for one of my images. It's a photo of a bleached Acropora sp. taken in Fiji in 2001. Needless to say, that wasn't a free trip and my camera setup wasn't free either... So I asked for a fee for the image and stuck to my guns, but ultimately, they used another 'free' image. My policy is to ask for a usage fee from non-profit entities and education, but ultimately, I donate the fee back to the non-profit org. I just want them to realize that I value my work and I hope that they do too:

Not a problem.  The reason was because we are a non-profit organization and we try to obtain images for free.  You asking price is not too much.  As a last resort we will pay but free is always better.  

 

-----Original Message-----  

From: James Wiseman  

Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 3:07 PM  

To: XXXXXXXXXXXX

Subject: RE: Use of image  

 

OK, thanks for the followup Tarik.  Was the reason that you didn't use any of my images because of the cost?  

 

Sincerely,  

James Wiseman  

 

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------  

From: XXXXXXXXXX  

Date:  Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:55:44 -0400  

 

>Good Afternoon James,  

>  

>Thank you for sending me the images.  To answer your questions: Yes we did  

>find what we looking for.  However, we did not use any of your images.  I  

>thank you for all your help.  

>  

>XXXXXX

>  

>-----Original Message-----  

>From: James Wiseman  

>Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 2:40 PM  

>To: XXXXXXXX

>Subject: RE: Use of image  

>  

>Hi XXXXXX,  

>  

>Did you get what you need?  Did you decide to use any of my images?  

>  

>Sincerely,  

>James Wiseman  

>  

>---------- Original Message ----------------------------------  

>From: "James Wiseman"  

>Reply-To:  

>Date:  Fri,  9 Jul 2004 15:26:35 -0500  

>  

>>I will send you an electronic copy of the image you requested this evening at the size you need.  The fee for one-time use of the image in the magazine and on the web will be $XXX.  If that is acceptable, please acknowledge by email and I'll send the full-rez image.  

>>  

>>I am going diving this weekend but I will try to get a selection of images for you to choose from, before I leave.  

>>  

>>Sincerely,  

>>James Wiseman  

>>  

>>---------- Original Message ----------------------------------  

>>From: XXXXXXXXX

>>Date:  Fri, 9 Jul 2004 15:04:13 -0400  

>>  

>>>James,  

>>>  

>>>I would like to see your other images, I just need the url to view them.  

>>>The image would be published in a magazine, published by the American Chemical Society, which is an educational non-profit organization.  The image would appear in print with a news story and with the same story on the web.  It will not appear on the cover and we want one time use of the image.  

>>>  

>>>I will need to know by Monday July 12 by 10 AM if we can use the image that we select.  Also please include the fee for use of your image.  

>>>  

>>>Thank You

Cheers and I hope this was educational.

James

I agree with you on not giving away images for free. As another person trying to make a living at this game it is hard enough to market your images, buy equipment and process images. Unfortunately there are far too many people out there now who will give away images just to see their name in print. You have to make a stand somewhere. Even not for profit organizations have money in their budgets to cover these things.

Its a battle...

Non-profits can be frustrating, because they are generally willing to pay EVERONE on their project, all other contractors, etc for their work. But they won't pay the photographer... And oftentimes, the staff at non-profits are paid pretty well to boot...

Cheers

James

So many times non-profit orgainizations are non-profit based on their tax status. Yet they are fully staffed with a CEO and several underlings along with a stable of attorneys. I used to work for a "non-profit" hospital as a physician and they had this type of setup. The executives they had working for them were the most deceitful people I have ever encountered in my professional life. The hospital orgainization 10's of millions a year and would replace things like parking lots, update perfectly good equipment, remodel hospital floors, have outpatient ventures to spend the money to be budget neutral so as not to endanger their non-profit status. As far as taking indigent patients into the facility, forget about it. You got a wallet biopsy in the department of admissions before a patient could be admitted to the hospital. I have a very jaded opinion about "non-profit" status.

Tony

Hang on now - I didn't mean to turn this into a non-profit "bashing" thread. As we all know, there are awesome non-profits like shark-trust, WWF, etc.

The point I was making was that they pay for many services, but they almost always want free photos. I give them basically free photos if I wish to support their cause, but they don't get to know that until after they agree to pay for them first... Then they get a donation back.

Cheers

James

WWF...Worldwide Wrestling Federation?!

James and others,

I don't think eveyone thinks non-profit organizations are all bad, just more prone to ask for freebies as you relate. If you choose to donate back any fee they pay that's your choice. But more times than not I've turned down an organization that wants to use photos that cost THOUSANDS (yes, thousands when you add up gear, travel , your time, etc.) for free....I tell them politely they need to budget for images just like other needs....

Recently another professional photographer emailed me and several other photogs his reasons for not working with a particular magazine. It was pretty disheartening to say the least what magazines expect to get for low ball prices these days. But as long as folks want a byline under their image this is the way it'll likely go, especially with underwater images. Supply and demand plus the fact that even formerly higher paying advertising projects select 80% of their images from Getty or Corbis. Royalty free to use and tweek and re-use forever.....

Personally I think everyone should work on developing some special style and then charging as much as you can get for it....Until that style become a "me too" commodity (and hopefully I've stayed ahead of the curve This is all thrown out the window if you are especially adept at getting shots like a Whale Shark giving birth or other once in a lifetime behaviors....

If you really want to read up on how severely photographers rights are erroding subscribe (or go to a big library with lots of periodicals) and read Photo District News (known as PDN and also on the web.) Pretty informative on the business side of photography even if a bit biased to fashion and studio work. Great image ideas in there, too.

Lest you think this is too cold hearted it's only because I need to pay for my house, put my daughter through college, plus feed los gatos and maybe enjoy a little for myself. I've adopted this philosophy and it's pretty freeing knowing you're going to be paid a fair amount or it's not worth your time.....

YMMV

David Haas

Great thread guys. James, interesting approach, donating back the fee (if you choose to), that's probably a better approach than letting them use an image for free and reinforcing the behavior.

David, not cold hearted at all, simply the reality of supporting yourself as a photographer. I can only imagine how hard it must be.

I probably don't do much to promote selling any of my stuff because I don't derive any income from it and plus I really don't know how much to charge for stuff. Sometimes getting something published is so new for somebody like me that the money is really unimportant which makes it real difficult for the real pros who derive their living from this. I would be happy to charge money for images but have no idea how much. That's why this forum is so unique, many professionals helping out amateurs which could potentially be taking buisness from them. I think a pro deserves every buck the market will bear so that he can make a living and continue to upgrade his equipment as technology improves.

James, I didn't mean to say that all non-profit institutions are this way, its just my recent experience which cost me 10's of thousands of dollars to get out from underneath of changed my belief about this one particular institution. Don't mean to sound so bitter, in the long run I am many miles ahead now.

Tony

I probably don't do much to promote selling any of my stuff because I don't derive any income from it and plus I really don't know how much to charge for stuff.  Sometimes getting something published is so new for somebody like me that the money is really unimportant which makes it real difficult for the real pros who derive their living from this.  I would be happy to charge money for images but have no idea how much.  That's why this forum is so unique, many professionals helping out amateurs which could potentially be taking buisness from them.  I think a pro deserves every buck the market will bear so that he can make a living and continue to upgrade his equipment as technology improves.

I've given away quite a few photo to be used on brochures, small local magazines, and on websites... Matter of fact, the dive op I use down in Cozumel asked if I had any images they could use in their new brochure they are designing.

I'd like to one day charge for my images, but just as you were turned down for asking for a fee (james), I guess that's where my fear comes from. I mean, I have a regular job that pays the bills. So between the choice of make no money and be in a magazine, or make no money and not be in a magazine, I've often chose to donate images. :oops:

I may change that practice though.

Actually, I should qualify that I haven't completely given away much. I've always got "something" from my photo's. Through service or product, but never any cash.

Interesting example Jim.

If the dive op in Cozumel decided not to use your image in their brochure because you asked for $50 what have you lost? Nothing. Same goes for the local dive rag, etc. You don't lose anything but getting to see your name in print under the photo.

Seeing your name under there sounds appealing - some people think it will help build their "professional reputation." But this is a smallknit group in UW photography. What it really builds is the reputation that you give your photos away for free... The first time you ask someone to pay for a really great image they may just say, "Why are you charging us when you gave your images to Dive Rag for free?"

When Mr. XXXXX decided to use a different (free) image in his chemistry paper, I didn't lose anything, and the experience was very educational.

Cheers

James

I think I get Jim's point. It's not about the loss so much as the fear that someone might say "are you kidding, that image isn't worth $X" when you as a photographer feel it's one of your better / favorite ones. Sort of the whole fear of rejection issue.

I think that people probably feel it's good for their exposure if they can say "take a look at Issue 12 Page 15 of ABC Diving, that's my photo", but you're right James, it's a precedent setting issue like in any sales situation. Once a given discount level is set, buyers expect it to be the same at the next transaction.

"are you kidding, that image isn't worth $X"

Actually, it's worth 3x($X) if they take that attitude

Interesting discussion of this very issue can be found in this thread on Nikondigital.org, "Insulted or Honored, and Compensation".

OK, I have seen this topic come up numerous times.

If we are going to encourage people to charge for their work, many here who have never ventured down that road, what should they charge?

What are the industry averages for the various uses and sizes for print?

I have charged for 8x10 prints $30 and proportionately less for smaller. I have not actively persued anything seriously as this is my hobby so I cannot add more info than that.

I guess we'll have to hear from the pros on this one Todd. I believe I asked Mr. XXX for $95 for unlimited non-exclusive use. That shot was 3 megapixels shot with a Coolpix 990.

I heard recently that it's just better to ask for a bit more and give people unlimited use, since they are probably just gonna go ahead and use it for whatever they want anyhow.

Cheers

James

I always ask for payment for my images on principle. Its for myself, of course, but also because if we don't we devalue all UW stock. This is very important. I am not always concerned if I don't earn a fortune - if the usage doesn't warrant it. It is the principle of being paid for my work that I believe is important (and sometimes I do earn well from a single shot).

I have also heard direct from editors that once they know an individual photographer (and UW photog is a small world) gives away images for free they think less of their work. Ludicrous as it sounds, if people pay for something they tend to think they are getting a better product. I really have heard this from more than 1 editor talking about themself.

I do give non-profits images for free - non profit I support, not random ones I've never heard of. And I do usually allow school kids to use web versions of images for free if they take the time to write. So many would use the images anyway and never bother to ask, it seems unfair to punich those that take time to ask. Plus I am less strict on my land photography, which is not setting the world alight anyway!

Alex

Usage is important. You can look at some top guys website whether underwater or land . All charge different for natl mags, small brochures and intl advertising.

Circulation is important as well.

Look up some top level photogs websites and have a look around

No one sells anything for less than $100 i'd say.

I always get paid. Sometimes it is like pulling teeth but would you cut your neighbours lawn for free?

Tis principle

OK, let's see what it "should cost".

Let's say we want to buy an image of coral bleaching for use on a website, non-exclusive rights for one year. Lets be even more specific and say we want to use This shot by Brandon Cole. We will use it on a secondary page, not our home page.

Running the numbers for editorial web use on a secondary page, 1/4 of the screen, worldwide, non-exclusive for one year, Alamy will charge $US 299.10. And no doubt Brandon Cole would be happy...

Instead, let's use it in a scientific paper... 1/4 page inside, in a scientific/editorial article, print run of 25,000, one month licence. $US 213.57. Brandon is still pretty happy.

How about on a flyer for a non-profit to hand out at an environmental show, print run up to 25000, one time use, front of the fold, State of Texas only. $416.41. Brandon is even happier.

(And FYI, the print shop will charge about $4500-6000 for those flyers, based on my current experience with local suppliers. And they sure as h*ll are not going to do it for free...)

Art directors are used to paying these sorts of rates for stock imagery. Ask less, and they will pay less. And of course they'll ask for free, it's the nature of the beast.

OK, I have seen this topic come up numerous times.  

 

If we are going to encourage people to charge for their work, many here who have never ventured down that road, what should they charge?

I think this is a particularly apt quote, especially to myself as it pertains to me exactly. I am not a professional photographer and never want/will be. However, I have had several random contacts from people to use my images in a few different online ways. Mostly topside photos, but a few underwater ones as well. In some cases I've given them permission, and in others not.

As my skills have improved, I've really begin considering selling a few of them (or trying to at least). However, I've no idea what to expect/ask in terms of pay. At this point, if an organization approaches me that I am willing to support, I generally just give it to them rather than worry about the whole cost issue.

Thanks for posting that Craig. Brandon Cole was the one that told me about charging non-profits for images and then donating the money back if you think the non-profit is a worthy cause. So the "props" go to Brandon for that one.

Cheers

James