 Amber Stephens |
Price on a copywright A customer asked me if I would let her use a photo I took of her family for a mass mailing of Christmas cards (both she and her husband are affiliated with the state government, so tons of people will be getting this card). She is going to create the card herself online, so all I need to do is burn the photo to a cd and give it to her. I really have no problem with this...it is great publicity for me (probably more than I need because I just do this as a hobby). My questions is how much do I charge her? I assume I would just charge her a flat fee. Any suggestions?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
Well, you probably will and should charge her a flat fee for the usage on the cards BUT your fee depends on approximately how many cards she intends to send out. An estimate from her will do. Also, you need to have her sign a stock or photo delivery memorandum which outlines the usage agreement, provides for additional uses and fees down the road as needed, and covers a bit of copyright law in that you own the image, they don't. Unfortunately, if you don't do the delivery memo and assuming you don't have any sort of written contract for usage and fees, (and also assuming you haven't actually registered the image with the copyright office on form VA), then you're essentially giving your work away and tossing the copyright to the wind. This could be problematic later on if you decide that you DO want to earn income or even a living from your photography because as your reputation gets around, people will start to believe you give your work away rather than charging for it. You can get sample delivery memo forms by buying the ASMP.org book on "Business Practices for Professional Photographers", among other places. Some form books even have the delivery memos on CD that you can just complete as the needs of your biz (or hobby) require. Okie dokie?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jerry Frazier |
I get where you are coming from, but I design the cards for clients. Many times they don't like it because I charge alot for my cards too. But, this way I have control of my image. Clients creating their own cards?...I don't think so, not with my images. If you hand over the image, and you haven't registered it with the US Copyright Office, forget about it. If you want to charge for the image use, I don't do this, but somewhere around $100 per file, seems to be a going rate in my world for personal use. For Xmas card use, I would charge more. One note: the idea that all these people getting this card are all going to see your name, and you thinking this is exposure, I wouldn't get all excited. I'd be surprised if you get one call. I offer discounts if a client lets me put my logo on the front of the card, and then all my company info on the back. I have never had a client take me up on it. The disocunt is deep, but the card turns into an advertisement for my company, and not really a holiday card. Photo credit is useful in some areas of the business. And, it is industry standard. However, on Xmas cards, it will not generate the business you might expect. And, because your client is creating the card, who knows what it's going to look like in the end, you may not want to have any association with the piece of crap they develop. As a wedding photographer, by the time a client is done butchering my album to pieces, I just leave my studio name off of it, and give it to them. I don't want to have anything to do with it. Does this person know anything about how to process your image so it will look it's best? ...these are just things to think about.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
Jerry makes some really great points Amber! In fact, I think they're all excellent, especially about using your work, the potential for disaster and putting your name on it. Jerry's price is probably fair too, but since I don't do that kind of work I'm not entirely sure. A buck per card seems pretty close if they made up 100 cards and leaving your name off seems right. You could ask them to just put people in touch with you if someone asks who did the photo. Mark
|
|
|
|
||
|
David A. Bliss |
While I have been shooting for over a decade, I am only a short way down the road of "professional" portrait photographer, so I am reading as many of the Q&As regarding the subject as possible. I was in a similar situation. I have a neighbor who has been wonderful in helping me get contacts, and getting things rolling. She helped me get a shoot with a friend of her's, who has an incredible amount of contacts. Let's say she can help me even more than just word of mouth. Since there was some back scratching going on, I agreed to waive the sitting fee for the shoot. They wanted to use a picture for their xmas cards, and are going to print the cards themselves. My contract reads $100 for a full size electronic copy (and requires a limited usage amendement to the contract). I gave them e-copies for $20 (again, part of the deal). With that said, they are ordering a number of prints, and also gave me a check for the sitting fee, even though I had agreed to do the sitting for nothing. They seem to be incredibly happy with the results, and have already started discussing other potential shoots with me, as well as passing my name on to others. They are very aware that the prices they are getting are discounted, so they aren't passing these rates on to others. I guess what I am getting at, is that you need to look at each situation, and see what it can bring for you. This one shoot could quite possibly bring me more business than if I had spent hundreds on advertising.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jerry Frazier |
David, What you said is very true. Sometimes you gotta give to get. However, people talk. Discounting has to be very carefully crafted. I have seen many, many times where new poeple give special deals to a few loud mouths, and then they can't book at their regular rates because every knows what Ms. Alice paid. It's a really difficult business. And, I would say it is even more important to never give deals or on-off deals to anyone if word of mouth is how you plan on working. Because word of mouth always includes the price they paid. Think about it this way, who are they going to be more loyal to, you, or their friends and family members? I am speaking from experience and have paid dearly in the WOM network for giving deals.
|
|
|
|
||
|
David A. Bliss |
Jerry, you are absolutely correct with the dangers of WOM. This was a very lucky situation for me. I almost look at it as an audition, because she is active (leadership type of active) in a couple of groups that use photographers on a regular basis. She was very understanding as well. She knew that I needed to pad my portfolio as well, and was very concerned that I get some shots I wanted, and not just focus on their needs. I told them their needs come first, and anything else was a bonus for me. I mean, done correctly, the pictures for them should be portfolio padding for me anyway! As for how much to charge for an e-copy, I am still trying to decide on the best rate, and the best way to go. Part of me thinks $100 is too expensive, considering that a lot of magazines pay $100 or less for use of an image (non cover), and it will be reproduced many times more than the portrait shot will be. But then again, it's not like you can sell the portrait image again, like you can a stock photo. At this point, I am looking at more of what the market will bear. I am researching what other photographers are charging for services, to see what typical costs are in my area. Dealing with individual consumers as opposed to publications seems to make things just that much more tricky! Also, there is a part of me that feels that since I have been paid for the shoot (sitting fee) and have been paid for the e-copy (whatever the agreed upon price is), then how they use it is not my concern (as long as they stay within the guidelines of the contract, meaning they don't sell the picture without my consent). Nothing is really to stop them from printing the photo as many times as they want. My only recourse would be, first, to find out, and second, to sue them. I don't really like the idea of having to spend my time suing clients. Some people will completely respect that they must go to the photographer for reprints, or to renegotiate the usage contract, but others will not. Should the latter just be "written off," in the same way stores expect a certain amount of theft? Sorry, didn't mean to steal this thread, and take it OT... ;-)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jerry Frazier |
I would love to hear what Mark says about this topic, but my stance is this...once you provide a file, that's it brother. Anything goes. Now, if you can find blatent misuse, then you have to step in and say something. But, it depends on the use. If I find a client selling photos from my files, I will bring down some serious heat. If I find a business using an image of mine without permission, I will begin the process of law suit, starting with a letter requesting immediate cease and desist, along with an invoice for the use. When I do provide files, like for weddings, as an example. The client can print until hell freezes over, as long as it's personal use. But, if I see any commercial use at all, I will come down on them hard. For instance, if you ever photograph a real estate agent, all of a sudden, one of the engagement portraits you took winds up on her website, business cards, and in other print ads. I kick-ass on that kind of stuff. I don't tolerate it. And, the thing is, if they ask me, I'm totally cool with granting permission, and charging really low fees for it. Especailly if they are a client (wedding or portrait). But, to steal it, I get pissed off at that. So, it depends on the situation and the extent of the theft. I had a client who owns a large business, and wanted to use some of the photos I took at his wedding on his corporate website. He got really pissed when I quoted him a fee, and he said he was going to put them up anyway, because I was being a thief with my fees. I simply pointed him to the contract he signed where it defined "usage". He still said he was going to do it. I said that if I saw them there, I would begin the legal process. To date, I haven't seen anything. I assume that once he calmed down, and maybe even talked to some people, he realized that I was right. On the flip side, I have people who are using my images right now, who have paid fees, and I have contracts with them to do so, but the reality is, I have no way to really montitor everything. So, at some point, I just let it go. If something comes to my attention, for any reason, I'll pursue it. But, I don't normally go seek it out. Don't worry too much about it. Define the terms, get your fees, and then, unless something forces you to go check it out, just leave it alone. We have to have trust of humankind, at some point.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
Well guys, as far as WOM goes, it's a small world (but I'd hate to have to paint it). Depends on where you live, size of the town, what your practice consists of, ad infinitim I guess. I agree with what both David and Jerry have offered here in that you kind of lay your money down and take your chances. At some point, you have to trust your client but as Jerry said, when you give them an image that can easily be duped, it's "Katy bar the doors" preferably before not after the horses all leave. Back in the ole days of starting out I had clients I distrusted and figured they would do something to violate the copyright rules and that was when everything was done on film. Nowadays, I rarely do biz with any corporate clients I don't fully trust and the copyright issue seems pretty well settled. They understand it, their art-directors, ad agencies, graphic artists or illustrators understand it. And if one wants to use an image of mine for another project or related project, 99.9 % of the time they ask. If they don't and use it anyway, chances are it's for the original client and they forgot to ask inadvertently (so they claim). The problem around here, (BP that is) is that there are very few of us who are really pros and earn our complete livelihood at photography, like Jerry, Dave to some degree, and me, among others. Unfortunately, everyone with a digital camera and some version of photo shop thinks (or strongly suspects) that they're Richard Avedons striving to corner the editorial or advertising market. I applaud their efforts because some of them learn and meld those two different technical skills quite well. Yet, a lack of understanding of the business practices involved in this profession, (although clearly it appears that Amber wants to learn at least some of them) creates problems for everyone doing this professionally and just dilutes the pool of qualified, negotiating pros who understand the value of their own work rather than wanting to give it away to see their work and/or name in print (if they even get a byline). So, in getting back to Amber's initial question, the real answer beyond say a buck a shot, lies in what Amber values her work at, including her total time to create the work, the materials, the depreciation on her equipment, travel if any, ad infitinim, that should give her a realistic figure to start contemplating her usage fees for this particular type of assignment.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Amber Stephens |
Thank you all for your responses. You all have given me a great deal of insight to the situation. Thank you for taking the time to write.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||