Payment for photos on a website?

actuallylike

Hi all,
I'm sure this has been brought up before but the new search function on boards is pretty rubbish so can't find it.

Someone emailed me about some photographs of mine that they want to use on their website. There's around 10 of them but I have another 50 or so that they don't know about that I'm sure they'd want too (they're all themed photos).

They mentioned that I would get credit for them by my name beside them but I'd be after the dollar to be honest. The photos are by no means professional, just catching funny things around the place. I have already put them in the public domain (facebook). Would this be an issue?

How should I approach this situation carefully? Does anyone have an average cost for photographs? Bear in mind now, these are not professional and won't be defining the site.

Thanks.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Pick a price you are happy with that you think they will pay.

Work down from there if they don't go for it.

If they don't want to pay, don't give them photos, there's nothing in it for you, and plenty in it for them.

If they are a provider of goods and/or services, perhaps you can arrange a barter, if their products interest you?

Ballyman

Forget about whether they are "professional" or not. A business wants them so they are professional enough to be sold to them.

Find out what they want to use them for. If they are a business then charge them, whatever figure you like but charge them.
If you want some sample figures for usage on a website then go to Alamy.com and use their pricing calculator to get a baseline figure for yourself. Don't be surprised at the high figure you get from Alamy. This is what business pays for images. You don't have to charge the exact figure but it will give you an idea of what they would have to pay if they went elsewhere. You can then decide what you want to charge for you images.

Do not accept a credit from them. If they don't use your images and move elsewhere looking for free then so be it. The 10 seconds of furry glow seeing your name beside your pic subsides very quickly when reality dawns and you realise you have been taken for a mug.

actuallylike

Cheers lads (or ladettes), I'm not after much, just a little broke at the moment but you're right. Some things I've done in the past have been used on sites and I do get a little glow from seeing my name but feel an idiot when I realise I'm the only one not profitting from it. And sure if they say no, then their loss I suppose, I mean they emailed me.

To quote a man of men, "Fúck you, pay me":)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE

linearcutter

Just as some perspective, at least they have contacted you to seek permission. To me this suggests that they have some kind of professional ethics or at the very least, a knowledge of copyright law. It's a good start either way.

You seem to be reluctant to add any value to the images yourself when you repeat that they are by no means professional, but they clearly have something in them this company wants. If they are not willing to pay you, you can certainly walk away, but there may be some exposure for you that you're passing up on. This is probably hard for full time pro photographers to remember, but sometimes you have to let things go for little or nothing at the beginning to gain something more in the long term.

Maybe if you have a site or blog of your own, the credits on the interested company's site could link back to yours, immediately generating more traffic to your site.

Again, I'm not being a hippy about it, you could always take the
"f**k you, pay me" stance, it worked for wise-guys, and it's quite valid too.

Cutter.

actuallylike

linearcutter wrote: »

Just as some perspective, at least they have contacted you to seek permission. To me this suggests that they have some kind of professional ethics or at the very least, a knowledge of copyright law. It's a good start either way.

you're right, I was very surprised to get the email so fair play to them for that I suppose. I am not a professional photographer at all. Don't even own a camera. The pictures I'm talking about were beleieve it or not taken on my camera phone but as you said there's obvioulsy something in them that they want.

I've emailed them and asked them to make an offer so we'll see how it goes. I don't have a blog or anything to promote, the only profit I could make out of it would be the almighty dollar! Hopefulyl they reply with the professionalism of their first.

Ballyman

linearcutter wrote: »

If they are not willing to pay you, you can certainly walk away, but there may be some exposure for you that you're passing up on.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble here but there is ZERO exposure for anyone bar the company using the pics. They get free imagery for their website (that they paid a company to design & build) and you get to sit at home and stare at your name. And thats it. And then shortly afterwards you start to realise that maybe that "Fcuk you, pay me" guy was right and that you have been made a mug of.

Walk down the street today and ask every person you meet to name one photographer who has a photo in any newspaper/magazine/website today and unless they are people with an interest in photography then not one person will be able to name anyone.

linearcutter

I've emailed them and asked them to make an offer so we'll see how it goes. I don't have a blog or anything to promote, the only profit I could make out of it would be the almighty dollar! Hopefulyl they reply with the professionalism of their first.

Fair enough....best of luck!

Walk down the street today and ask every person you meet to name one photographer who has a photo in any newspaper/magazine/website today and unless they are people with an interest in photography then not one person will be able to name anyone.

I wasn't suggesting that fame and celebrity would ensue, just that to have a published image or set of published images is a good thing, that could potentially lead on to better things, particularly if someone was in the early stages of a career.

It's clear the OP isn't a photographer so in this case, a cash payment is appropriate, but I still think there is room for a long view to be taken in starting out and doing work gratis.

Cutter.

PCPhoto

linearcutter wrote: »

If they are not willing to pay you, you can certainly walk away,but there may be some exposure for you that you're passing up on. This is probably hard for full time pro photographers to remember, but sometimes you have to let things go for little or nothing at the beginning to gain something more in the long term.

Maybe if you have a site or blog of your own, the credits on the interested company's site could link back to yours, immediately generating more traffic to your site.
Again, I'm not being a hippy about it, you could always take the
"f**k you, pay me" stance, it worked for wise-guys, and it's quite valid too.
Cutter.

The only people who believe "exposure" is great if your name is linked to the pics are people who do not believe the images are worth anything.

Almost every photographer goes through it at the start of their photographic careers - giving images away because it will bring in more work or it'll be great exposure/advertising and to some degree it worksbut not in a professional context, if you ever want to consider making money from photography then don't give away stuff for free.

an amateur is usually thrilled to see their name but after a while that wears off and the realization that the image next to theirs also has the photographers name.... but that photographer is also making money from the image.

The availablility of images these days has seriously devalued the price on an image - almost everyone has access to a camera, some people have access to professional equipment - photography is an art ...a dying art.

in this case - the business cannot get those exact images anywhere else so they want to get them from you, how much do they value them? ... are they willing to meet your valuation of them? if not, do you want to give them away for free ? (ahem...in return for "exposure")

Ballyman

linearcutter wrote: »

I still think there is room for a long view to be taken in starting out and doing work gratis.

You're entitled to your opinion obviously but providing images for free will get you nowhere. You'll be known as the place to get free images and you will never get paid and if you eventually request money then they will move onto the next person who will provide images for free and you will be forgotten about as fast as lightening!

Now if you wanted to assist or attend a shoot/event for free to learn then thats a totally different matter and that may help you out in any future prospects you may have but if you supply images to anyone then charge them and get paid for them.

A lot of people have the "I was at the event anyway so I don't mind giving them away for free" outlook which is a pretty stupid way to think. If you were painting your house then you might as well paint your neighbours as well as you were there anyway!

If someone wants your work then charge them for it. It's as simple as that.

Paulw

linearcutter wrote: »

I wasn't suggesting that fame and celebrity would ensue, just that to have a published image or set of published images is a good thing, that could potentially lead on to better things, particularly if someone was in the early stages of a career.

It's clear the OP isn't a photographer so in this case, a cash payment is appropriate, but I still think there is room for a long view to be taken in starting out and doing work gratis.

I wonder how many photographers have had free publications lead to paid work?

Very very few, I would assume.

If you did a survey on just boards here, I'm sure it would be in single digits, or could be counted on one hand.

Your name in a paper means ... well ... a few cm of ink. It doesn't mean that anyone will take note of your name, nor anything else.

I recently had an image printed in many national papers. Only two papers printed my name with the image. In the end, it meant nothing. I don't care if they print my name or not, as long as they pay me. But, I do like being credited for my work too.

People who know me know that I don't do free, not unless I'm sure that there is a bigger reward in line just around the corner. I won't provide images to papers/magazines/websites (no matter how big they are) for free. There is just nothing in it for me.

If you don't put a value on your photography, no one else will. If your images are good enough to print/use, then they are good enough to be paid for.

linearcutter

Okay, I'll swing at that pitch!!

Say a student photographer is contacted by a heavily subscribed popular art & design website/blog, seeking the student's consent to feature an image on their monthly homepage, offering a credit/link to their own personal portfolio in return. Surely for the student deny such a thing without payment would be a little bit cheeky and short sighted?

I think it's a question of context and while I agree with your principles, I think it isn't always going to be as cut and dry as you say.

In this case, the OP isn't neither a beginner, student or professional. They've said they don't even own a camera and took the pics with their mobile phone. Perhaps a token payment is due, but equally, I wouldn't think it was an absolute given.

Cutter.

Ballyman

linearcutter wrote: »

Say a student photographer is contacted by a heavily subscribed popular art & design website/blog, seeking the student's consent to feature an image on their monthly homepage, offering a credit/link to their own personal portfolio in return. Surely for the student deny such a thing without payment would be a little bit cheeky and short sighted?

I would consider it more cheeky for the "heavily subscribed popular art & design website/blog" to ask for free pictures.

Paulw

A few years ago I was asked to provide images for a new website for an international event which I had taken photos of. I was told that my images would be credited and linked back to my website, which would link me to that event/brand and I would get worldwide recognition.

I very much wanted to be associated with the event/brand, but didn't want to give the images for free (the PR company certainly weren't working for free). So, I put a nominal price on my work (much lower than standard and what I would normally charge). They came back saying that they weren't prepared to pay me since they were giving me worldwide exposure.

Needless to say, I didn't give them the images. I know two other photographers they then approached, who also wanted payment (who were beginners at the time). The website was never launched, since they found it hard to get quality images that they could get for free.

It shouldn't matter what camera/device the images were captured on. An image is more about what is captured than what is used to capture it.

It is never pure black and white, true. But, many on boards will tell you how hard it is to ever get payment once you start giving away freebies. Once an organisation gets images from you for free, they will always want images from you for free, and will never want to pay, no matter how good you get. It's a sticky and bad spiral to be in.

nilhg

PCPhoto wrote: »

snip...

The availablility of images these days has seriously devalued the price on an image - almost everyone has access to a camera, some people have access to professional equipment - photography is an art ...a dying art.

snip

OT I know, but surely it's a bit extreme to say that photography is a dying art, the business of photography is obviously changing, and changing for the worse for many of the people who've been making their living from it but that doesn't mean that the creative side of it will go.

linearcutter

Okay, a few different perspectives on this it seems.

Would it be fair to summarise this into the following catch all?

If you are making a living from photography - F**k you, Pay me"

If you are not - get paid if you can but not at the cost of some positive exposure or kudos.

actuallylike

linearcutter wrote: »

Okay, a few different perspectives on this it seems.

Would it be fair to summarise this into the following catch all?

If you are making a living from photography - F**k you, Pay me"

If you are not - get paid if you can but not at the cost of some positive exposure or kudos.

Seems like it but considering I have nothing to expose (:o) and I don't need kudos I'm going to have to fall into the Goodfellas category.

PopeBuckfastXVI

If only Berminghams or Conns accepted Kudos...