” We are a charity organization and I am sure you would like to support us”
“I only want to put the image on my web site, not going to publish it”
” I can’t pay you but I’ll give you a credit which will drive LOADS of traffic to your web site”
“If you could provide just this one image I am sure we will purchase lots more in the future”
Like every professional photographer these are the type of requests I get on a regular basis. With the current economic climate I think it is time to dispel a few myths.
1 - Professional photographers need to eat, pay the mortgage, fuel up the car, and even occasionally repair and replace equipment. Until such time as a photo credit is an acceptable form of currency at my bank I do not accept them as a suitable form of payment for my work.
2 - What makes anyone think that placing an image on a web site is not publishing it? I always ask if the purpose of the image is for people to see it - if the answer is yes then IT IS PUBLISHED!!
3 - I will happily provide an image to a charity providing the following conditions are met
- It is a charity whose work I personally approve of
- The person making the request is an unpaid volunteer
- the charity has no paid staff
- people providing other services with regard to the use of the image are also providing these free of charge, including the printer, web host, designer etc.
Unfortunately all the above conditions are rarely met, yet for some strange reason it is assumed that photographers can give their work away for no recompense.
4 - I’m not an idiot, providing one photo for free does not guarantee that anyone will then pay for photos in the future
No winners in this game
There are no winners when photographers start giving their images for free. First it dilutes the whole market place for professional trying to make a living. Even persons starting out on their photographic career should charge a just and reasonable price for the use of their images. It does not guarantee entry to the world of the professional by giving images away for free or prices so low as to be laughable. All it does is devalues your own work, and ultimately that of the profession as a whole. If you sell a photo for $5 then guess what your images are worth - you got it, $5. It is very difficult to then charge the same customers $50 for the same image a year or so down the road.
When I cover a major assignment I carry around $75,000 worth of equipment, plus the cost of travel, accommodation, food etc. All of which I have to pay for most of the time. (My equipment is all owned by me and I am not sponsored by Nikon as many seem to think). I don’t think it unreasonable to come away with a profit after working 15 hours a day.
Finally a true story: Just prior to the Sydney Olympic Games I got a call from a magazine asking for coverage. I gave them my rates and was told that’s much too expensive and offered me $10 per photo. I politely declined telling the caller that I did not value my work at an Olympic Games on the other side of the world at $10 per photo. A short while later the phone rang again and this time it was the publisher of the same magazine. “Look here” he said “you’re being really stupid. We will use quite a lot of photos and although we don’t pay very much it’s all extra money for you, and anyway, what’s the problem, you are going anyway”. I replied “there’s a plane leaving tomorrow for Sydney, and it has two empty seats on it, do you think Air Canada will give me one of those for $5?” “Of course not” replied the publisher, ” and anyway, whats that got to do with anything?” My reply was”Well, it’s going anyway and it would be an extra 5 bucks for them!!!”
Rufous hummigbird from 2008