A sign of the times…
- This topic has 24 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated Oct 15, 2009 at 4:15 pm by
.
-
Posts
-
Hey Folks –
I hope everyone is having a good fall. A friend who shoots editorial stock sent me this link to chew on:
Not sure what Time would typically pay for a cover, but I’m guessing at least $2,500 to $3,000. They got this one for $30. Apparently there was quite an online firestorm against the owner of the photo (who at first was delighted about getting the cover of Time).
Then, in their convoluted way of thinking, istcokphoto came out and called it not a victory for their shooter, but a Victory for Time because they saved thousands on a cover shot.
This is sad on too many levels, and I hope there’s not a bunch of good fly fishing images on that site. I didn’t have the stomach to sign in and look.
A sign of the times? You shoot a lotta coin-in-bottle shots?
This is sad on too many levels, and I hope there’s not a bunch of good fly fishing images on that site. I didn’t have the stomach to sign in and look.
No log-in needed Tosh but I’ll still save you the trouble; A quick keyword search on iStockphoto’s site for “fishing” yielded over 20,000 results. That’s minus illustrations and video. Some pretty good ones too. Quick question: Have you demanded top dollar for every shot you’ve had published? Just asking.  🙂
I think one would be surprised at some of the established names in this corner of the outdoor industry who have, for what ever reason, put out free stuff in exchange for their shot’s landing in catalogs. The horror!
Yes, I do try to get the best possible rate for each stock license–as should everyone else that promotes themselves as a photographer.
Yes, I do try to get the best possible rate for each stock license–as should everyone else that promotes themselves as a photographer.
Yes, of course you try. We get that. So do I doood! Problem is, doesn’t always happen that way. Welcome to supply & demand meets intellectual property, yada, yada. Do you have a solution? Or is this going to be another one of those “back in the day…”/ rate-bitch threads? I get more than enough of that from the local photo blogs.
No Doug, I don’t have a solution, but I do have a suggestion: if anyone is serious about their work, then they shouldn’t give it away on istockphoto.com, or by any other vehicle that sells it for 1/10th of its value.
Have I ever given a photo away in hopes of getting paid in the future? Yes, but it’s been a long time, and I’ll never do it again because what I learned from that incident is free work leads to more free work.
And no, this isn’t a “back in the day” thread because those stock rates we once enjoyed will never return. If I breached protocol here by posting information that provides awareness to the current plight of the photography biz, then I’ll happily refrain from doing so again.
Out.
Tosh, I hear what you’re saying and I concur. No protocol broken. Rates aren’t what they used to be. Come to think of it, rates always never used to be what they always used to be. It’s how it’s always been and everyone [you should care about] knows it too. I just think you’re too good of an image maker to get caught up in these debates. Nuthin’ new here IMHO. Leave ’em to the ‘ol sour rut dwellers of a by-gone era and the newbies w/ entitlement issues. We just wanna see your new stuff! That’s all.  🙂
An interesting angle on this is photographers, I know of, who actually lie about their rates and bookings. I am no psychologist, but it appears on one level their egos are battered, and on another level – saying you charge one thing and are actually charging a lot less, cons their fellow photographers into quoting higher rates.
Microstock will be here as long as still photography is digitally created … forever. If you care to do the volume of microstock images, you can, like a good friend of mine, have your 1-thousand a month studio rent covered by microstock income (and there are plenty of photographers making a real living at it).
OK, so if I don’t sell a photo for top-$ and I can’t sell one for less, for whatever reason, I mustn’t sell it at all????
I don’t know if I want to feel bad for pro photographers or bad for myself… but how does one get your work sold if you don’t break into the market somehow…
Actors are a great example, none of the big stars demanded millions on their first acting job, most of them were extras at one point in time…
Sorry, this horse has been flogged… I am now starting to understand why Time bought that image for $30…
We were having this same discussion, about the Time cover shot, on the forum of an organization that I belong to. I cut and paste my response from there so, don’t take it personal over here.
I saw the original shot, that Time purchased, and I honestly believe the scale was proper. Not to take away from the photographer but seriously, we cannot expect the pay scales to be the same with a very technical shot or hard to get one; if that was the case, why even bother learning how to shoot better?
This was my response on that private forum, of what are suppose to be pro photographers:
“To be perfectly honest, I am glad to see everything that is happening in the industry. Actually, I feel that it is way overdue and what most are complaining about is truly nothing more than a reality check. Seems that a professional is now nothing more than a person that bought a camera at WallMart last month and is now advertising to shoot weddings this month. What is worse is the idea that an accomplished photographer complains about loosing work, because the person that has been shooting for a month is already able to deliver images of equal quality. I would be ashamed to stand on the premise of, “the reason why I am loosing work is because to many other photographers showed up”.
Seems that many are satisfied with reaching a level of mediocrity, with some sort of applied PP automated algorithmic software. It requires less time and determination, in both learning and development for the purpose of applying acquired skill through knowledge. It is all over the net and seems that all of the photography forums are deluged with praising each other for reaching that level of mediocrity. It amazes me to see all of the little clicks that surround themselves with a group of compliment-laden shooters, while blacklisting those that could truly help them reach the next level. I remember the day when critiques were hard and honest, they may have hurt but “WOW”, the improvement from the critiques was powerful. This knew era of affordable digital photography is one were truth is rude and a real seasoned pro is blacklisted for doing nothing more than being honest and truly delivering very helpful suggestions. It baffles my mind on how little people actually want to learn and apply, how minimal the effort they truly want to put into developing their art, to something other than just general snapshots (I qualify that statement towards those that call themselves commercial pro shooters).
The industry is still very much alive and will be for some time. There may be a lot of wining from some that say there are to many photographers and stock sites but again, that is nothing more than an excuse. It makes it easier to not have to self-exam their own work and realize that a few hundred thousand other photographers can shoot the exact same shot, with many doing a better job of it. It seems that today’s photographer is obsessed with learning their camera and lenses, most only know just enough to use it then blog about their expertise on the subject. (I guess this is why there is so much misinformation all over the net). They then go to the store and get a few books on posses, with some naïve thought that they are the only one that has that book and that others will think their shots are all original concepts. They spend enormous sums in lighting but feel that it would just take to much time learning the physics of light and then learning how to mold, bend and simply modify the character of light. They have no idea or concept about the 5 types of contrast and/or the 5 elements of control or how to effect/control it properly. It is easier to cry about all of the new photographers ruining the ice cream party, of which they have had for far to long already.
The reason that there are so many wining about the surge in photographers and loss of work, or lowered pay scales, can mostly be explained in the sum of a lazy approach to their chosen profession. It is nothing more than complacency and denial, denial in the idea that perhaps being more professional in attitude and vigilance towards their job, as a knowledgeable and skilled professional, may be paramount. A professional designation is one that requires vigilance and must be attended to regularly. Using a pro athlete example: Are any of the pro athletes mediocre, in comparison to all of the other athletes in one particular sport? Look at the amount of time, energy, research and training that they put into their profession, enough to make them stand out from the enormous crowd of others that want to get the same position. Are they unique, can just anyone do the same job as well as them? I can’t imagine a pro saying: “I didn’t get the position because to many other quarterbacks showed up.” The same applies for those that want to shoot professionally or call themselves professional. If the masses can replace or duplicate them, then perhaps they never offered anything that outstanding and unique anyway. Even snapshot photography can be distinguished by a set of standards and the pay scales, for good snapshot photography, can be good. Again though, there are standards and great snapshots can be measured by the merit of applied skill and knowledge.
Victims are those that sit on the sideline and pout about the fact that anyone can perform at their level; they moment good ole days when they didn’t have to be all that effective at their craft. They dwell on the fact that misery loves company and they seem to be pretty lonely.
I, for one, have no complaints and I love the new direction, as well as this new trend of being weeded out, due to lack of pro level skills or uniqueness in application of knowledge learned/developed in how to properly exploit their equipment. Sure there are those low budget shoots but why would a real pro consider that to be a threat to their business, unless all of the above is true? Are magazines now paying low snapshot prices for average snapshot photography? Of course they are but that helps me by increasing the value of what I can deliver to the publishing demographics that I like to work in. I don’t submit snapshots to publishers and expect them to pay above their rates, just because it would make me feel better. If they want to adjust their rates down, go for it but if my level is one where that is the only type of business that I can shoot for— I got and get what I deserved.
Like these new trends or not, this is the reality that I see and the way that I honestly feel about it.”
“If you want to be paid a professional’s premium, you better provide a premium product.”
Zach
You hit that nail, square on the head!!! Couldn’t have said it any better.
A little side: A seasoned and consistent freelance photographer may get $6,000.00 plus for a NGO cover shot. Where as, an unseasoned learning staff photographer, for NGO, may only receive $35,000.00 per year. The thing is, skill is learned and if properly applied, they can then freelance and diversify their client base as a freelance for freelance prices. It is truly more about learning and most important; application of acquired knowledge. Not what automated software or stock site one uses. This is the stepping stone for proper advancement, not just sitting on rates and demanding them because one wants those rates, even when their work does not support it.
I know this one fact about my business: The only reason why I do get assignment work and why I travel so much, in comparison to a person that purchased their first DSLR, is not because I am some sort of self appointed elitist or secretly discounted my rates. It is 100% due to the fact that I put all of my effort into learning everything about photography and the art of same. The major difference is in the fact that I applied it and did not wait for some new algorithm to figure it out for me.
As Zach put it:
“If you want to be paid a professional’s premium, you better provide a premium product.”
Zach
This requires not only learning, it demands application of that which is learned. The increased contract pay comes along with this and no large group of all inclusive scale demands can change that.
Wow lots of food for thought!!! Â Ty for the post Ben:)
I’ll offer this as more of a question than a  position. Â
I do believe there are circumstances that  warrant  wavering from  established norms regarding rates .  If as a photographer  I simply respond to market demand regarding  product – ie- demand and supply  –  then things are pretty much Black and White:)) I make widget/market says widget is worth/you pay me that cost for use of widget.
As a  photographer – I can also  look at being an investor . If I see a  product/outlet  in it’s early development stage  that meshes  with my own sensibilities  I can choose to help make that happen/develop  –  that does not mean working for free – but it may mean  investing in someone elses vision with the lowered initial compensation that a  start up can deal with. The base  concept is developing a relationship that is mutually benificial over the long run , that allows for  growth on both parts , both financial and  in  delivery of  final product.
Maybe niave – but as a photographer I would like to participate in the process of  developing the final product versus simply supplying the windshield wipers .  Put simply- perhaps photographers have to take a look at sitting at the development/production table rather than the supplier conveyor belt at this point.
Miles off base???????????
Will
Will, yes to your question kind of. The answer will not be the same as you may think and it has nothing to do with the common offering of getting your rate. I will need to spend some time on my reply but don’t have the time now. I just finished an assignment and learned toady that they also want to purchase some of my outtakes so, I will be up most of the night in post. I will respond and explain what I mean tomorrow. it does have to do with economic barometers, as in your example, but more on markets of scale. I will explain it all tomorrow.
I have read similar types of complaining on other forums. They complain about the fact that I have done a few weddings at way less than they charge. The say that I am driving them out of business.
My feelings are this;
1. Some people simply cannot afford what they charge.
2. I believe Ben and Zach said this in a different manner, if you lose clients to me, with the meager skills and equipment that I have, then you were not offering much to begin with.To someone who has the means to pay more, they would never in my opinion hire me. They would take the money and pay a professional.
I also believe that being a professional goes way beyond receiving money to do something, whatever it is. I know many who have technical expertise in their profession, yet in my opinion fall way short of being “professional”.
If you have the technical skills and are a true professional, the money will follow.
Sorry for the delay… Will, one of the biggest problems with any sort of established rates is the fact that they do not take everything into account. When we shoot for commercial shoots, several things must be taken into consideration and we must remember the purpose of our end product: Marketing and/or Advertising. The size of the company must be accounted for and what demographics they are targeting as well as how large the sample group is. One of the key components in pricing is determining how much exposure the images are going to have. The main thing to remember is the fact that we aren’t just selling photographs as much as we are representing an entire sells force through or photographs, they are revenue-generating engines. The more exposure, the less value the images will have for resell potential so, this too must be factored in.
One of the worst things that can happen to a small company is drastic growth; I have seen more companies destroyed by accelerated growth than anything else. Having said that, a properly structured company will have a proper business plan and within the BP are short term budgets with revenue targets; this information is invaluable to us as it allows us to measure the amount of exposure our images will have over the contracted user license period. There is nothing wrong with establishing a rate in accordance to their growth, after all, it is the business that we want and not just the one time sell. Remember that your photographs are the same as an entire sales team so, don’t discount them and function more as a marketing/advertising consultant. Never ever offer a discount as all that does is condition the client to always expect one, as well, it is also a kin to saying; “My work rate is this but only worth that, so I will discount”. The company will use these images as marketing collateral and the images are a first impression of culture as well as introduction of product, in which margins will be measured.
The main thing, that I am trying to get across here, is: Rate according to their business objectives and remember that you are both a consultant as well as an entire sales force (through your images). In smaller company’s we have to keep driving that point home, when contracting with Fortune 500 companies, you would be amazed at how much easier it is; they understand the value. Never give anything away for free but remember that trade does have monetary value. If you choose to be an investor, make sure that there is a contract in place that warrants you compensation at a predetermined time and/or benchmark.
Also: We are neither developing their final product, nor do we supply the windshield wipers. We are skilled knowledgeable professional that are positioning their products into the marketplace; in such a way that conveys their culture and helps promote the emotional sale mechanism. Every commercial photographer should also study marketing and advertising strategy. The consultant aspect, coupled with delivering a premium photography product, is what allows one to turn a single location assignment into 10 additional assignments, across the US. (sorry, I am still a bit excited about this one 🙂 ) Don’t limit the professional designation to a viewfinder, we are truly service providers; or at least should be.
Make sense? (This isn’t written in stone as much as it is just one snippet of my business outline and approach)
Don Thompson, that is very true and is exactly what I was saying. I can’t agree with you more, lower income persons deserve to have wedding photographers as well and they shouldn’t have to take out a loan to do so. I couldn’t imagine being able to purchase a Ferrari for the same price as Dodge Neon. The scale should be priced according to ability and even a first time photographer can do a darn fine job, for one of the most important days in couples life. The only problem that I have is when a photographer misrepresents themselves as a seasoned pro and takes a rate higher than their ability; this just makes the rest of us look bad. Quote it according to skill level and use it as a stepping-stone and learning tool: In the end: The client makes the decisions, based on the honest information that they were afforded up front. If one is truly a seasoned pro and doesn’t like the rate, find a new client!
As skill level and applied knowledge grows, adjust the rates up accordingly. If not, be prepared for higher expectations at a stalled rate and no friends left in the pier group 🙂
The only problem that I have is when a photographer misrepresents themselves as a seasoned pro and takes a rate higher than their ability; this just makes the rest of us look bad. Quote it according to skill level and use it as a stepping-stone and learning tool: In the end: The client makes the decisions, based on the honest information that they were afforded up front. If one is truly a seasoned pro and doesn’t like the rate, find a new client!
As skill level and applied knowledge grows, adjust the rates up accordingly. If not, be prepared for higher expectations at a stalled rate and no friends left in the pier group 🙂
I agree 100%. No one should ever misrepresent their experience level.
In my case I tried to get the bride and groom to use someone more qualified, but due to finances, it was either myself or someone with a point and shoot. In all three cases they were very please with the end product but they knew up front what they could expect.
Ben and Zach summed it up.
The “Pros” will always distinguish themselves from the rest (regardless of Genre) and thus command better compensation. The difference between a Pro, somewho who one day wants to be there, and a weekend warrior?
Look at Toshs work, then look at my work. Theres a world of difference and you would have be blind not to see it. What sets me apart from people who are at some other levels. I’m working my ass off at it, at all levels and that extends far beyond bettering my craft (the end product).
Its a job, a “profession”. For others its a hobby with occasional gravy.
The difference between those two is night and day, much like the difference between my end product and Tosh’s.I’ve managed some things this past year, that have exceeded my short term goals with repsect to my business plan. Perhaps the largest is moving from getting credits on published photos only, to being listed as a contributing photographer on page two every month right under the “editors”. That won’t happen for anyone unless your professional about every facet.
I may never be as “good” as the likes of Tosh, but I know so long as I continue to work my ass off at it…I’ll continue to get steady work and sales.
/shrug
Have I ever given a photo away in hopes of getting paid in the future? Yes, but it’s been a long time, and I’ll never do it again because what I learned from that incident is free work leads to more free work.
And that for anyone whos trying to break in a bit is the single largest trap.
Well said Tosh
$30.00 for a time cover thats crazy stupid! One thing I see that is a glimmer of hope for photographers artist and other creatives is the ability to drive their own content like the guys at Catch Magazine. You can keep all the revenue then.
There have always been weekend warriors and more recently people making money from what is essentially their digital photography hobby. This has led to more participant driven content making it into print as well and they don’t know what to charge.
A guy that shoots high end weddings was asked how his business was? He replied “all my clients are still rich”. If you are competing where price is the deciding factor then being the cheapest wins.
I don’t want to be in that market!Beyond that from a photographers standpoint you would have to admit iStock Photo and the other stock agencies have ruined the market from a money making standpoint for photographers. Jay Meisel and many others made great money shooting stock. Â Â
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.