Shooting yourself in the foot

We have seen the enemy and it is us.
From old USA cartoon character “Pogo”.

First time I’ve heard of a mag charging photographers, that takes the biscuit!

michael,i couldn’t agree with you more.i would also add to your list all those photographers who put their images into pathetically low paying micro/royalty free sites.after all,if we don’t value our work,and are prepared to sell it for a pittance,why would anyone else value it?

That’s disgraceful behaviour. I keep getting emails from various people representing dubious publications who have seen images on Flickr and want to use them utterly free of charge, assuming, of course, that i’ll jump at the chance to see my name and image in print. Needless to say, i won’t, and i hope no one else does either…

It almost sounds like a scam to drum a low advertising sales.

Michael,

I wouldn’t worry too much about that. In the field of literature the ‘vanity press’ industry that charges authors to get their books published has been around for ages, yet good authors still do find real publishers.

Carsten

How about this, I do a lot of work for a university in Pensylavania, particularly for the university’s business council. When I invoiced them, for what I thought was a good rate for their annual fund raising dinner, I had a call from the director of the business council to say that he stopped my invoice. I listened carefully as he suggested I re-consider my fee given that with fundraisers they have a budget that allows for some flexibility. I ended up billing nearly double the original fee as per his suggestion. I’ve remained loyal to this client throughout and on this occasion I was rewarded. This guy knows the value of good photography and a reliable shooter. It’s the best professional relationship I have at the moment and the best I’ve ever had.

Since that incident I’ve re-committed myself to this profession. Just prior to that I was at my wits end and in a very dark mood indeed.

If you haven’t already, you should send word of this along to photographers’ organizations in the UK. The NPPA here in the US has a monthly column on the good, the bad, and the ugly in the photo industry, and serves to get the word out about such deplorable practices to photographers who might not know any better. This one’s worse than ugly….

It’s hideous,good to see you got your sense of humour back Paul,No seat warming for you I take it?

Perhaps it would be useful to send her a link to this thread.

Name and shame time Michael.

Seat warming Glenn? I’m still broke but the fact is that I do my best work when I’m cheerful. I have a wonderful family and they are more important, by a long shot, than my lackluster career. I’m still broke and most likely always will be. But fuck it. I’m not going to let it get me down anymore. Life is too short. I’m trying very hard to find a way to do my thing as independently of editors and publications as absolutely possible.

Michael, lets expose this stupidity. It’s time to name the magazine so as to alert others. Such numskulls!

Hi all, and thanks for the support.

With reference to those who suggest that I “name and shame” (a revolting tabloid expression!), I think you are missing the point. As I said in my earlier missive, I am inclined to say “good luck to you” to the magazine, they are after all only exploiting the laws of economics. If no one was prepared to simply give them the work they would soon have to adopt a “policy” of paying for it. If any naming and shaming should happen, it should be the magazine telling us which “photographers” are daft enough to accept this policy – it is they (us) after all who should be ashamed.

I am more inclined to write a brief article and submit it to the British Journal of Photography, asking them to run it with a headline along the lines of “Wake Up and Smell The Roses!”

Michael,

do you have any indication that they are in fact successful with their ‘policy’ ? I can’t imagine that a lot of photographers would fall for this scam.

Carsten

Hi Carsten,

That is what she told me in the phone conversation, and it was repeated in the follow up e-mail she sent. My response in my e-mail to her was:

“As I said on the phone, I am a full-time working professional photographer, and my practice covers everything from work for government departments, through the Metropolitan Police, International PR firms, the media, and social photography.

I find the idea of having to pay for advertising in order for one of my pictures to be used by you in an editorial capacity rather funny – at least I would if I didn’t think it was worrying. If all working photographers had to pay in order for their pictures to be used, there would be no such thing as professional photography as it would be impossible to make a living. It strikes me that the only reason you have been able to adopt this as a policy is that you are appealing to the vanity of a particular branch of photography where the possibility of being published is sufficiently remote that those you approach will pay for the privilege of having their work grace a front cover. I am afraid that having had my work published in newspapers and magazines all around the world, my vanity is not in need of a massage.

I note from your media pack that a full page advert is priced at £800.00 plus vat. According to the guidelines I work to set down by the Chartered Institute of Journalists (my representative body), your advertising rates position you as a grade F magazine. As such the appropriate rate for me to charge for one of my stock images to be used by you as a front cover is £480.00 as a First British Serial Right. I will be happy to provide you with the appropriate rates for other sizes and forms of use as you require.”

I am awaiting a reply… I suspect it may be some time coming.

If this is not in fact their “policy”, and they genuinley want to use the image, then they should come back to me, even if only to establish whether I can be beaten down on price. On the basis of my conversation with her, however, I will be surprised if that happens. But we shall see – I will keep y’all informed.

Jesus, that takes the cake, doesnt it? The next time she asks you for a freebie ask her if she expects her employer to pay her for her time and effort on their behalf. If she doesnt work for free, why should you?

Michael, we’ve got to protect the herd here, I think, and expose this publication. Simple as that.

By the way, your letter to her was nicely articulated. I’m sure it’ll be spinning around in her head for some time. At least I hope it will. On behalf of photographers everywhere, thank you.

bugger this.go on,work for free or a pittance,see where it gets you.i am off to a nice restaurant on the river to spend some of the big fat i cheque i recieved today for taking photographs.oops,wrong thread,should have been in the one below.not that it makes much difference,some people are always going to act selfishly to try and get ahead.i think i will eat fish today.

Hi Paul,

I want to give the publication a chance to respond before I declare their identity to all. But I am still not sure that they are at fault.

You say we have to “protect the herd”. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I rather regard myself as a sentient being – not a head of cattle. Surely we are all responsible for our own actions. It is up to us as professionals to look after ourselves, and (more importantly perhaps since so many are keen to castigate the state of our profession) to look after our industry. Do you think that professional photographers need to be molly coddled and protected from the big bad world, or do you think – as I do – that we need to give ourselves a really big kick up the arse and start behaving like responsible business people? I think the mistake that too many people make is that they feel, as artists, that somehow they are misunderstood etc, etc, etc. The magazine in question is a business, and it will treat everyone it deals with as a business and utilize the laws of supply and demand: if photographers will supply for nothing, then that is what they will demand.

Twenty years ago I read a great book that begins with the following line, which seems appropriate at this point:

The world is what it is. Men who are nothing, who allow themselves to become nothing, have no place in it. – V.S Naipaul “A Bend In The River”

I’m so glad my ego is subpar!

You and I are on the same page man. Just about every other profession sticks together in a way that we don’t. Sure, we have unions and organizations but we don’t participate enough and so we get walked on. It’s our own fault.

We need to have more and more workshops available on running a business and professional survival and this kind of thing. I know of too many exceptionally gifted shooters who just fade away because they just don’t get it. I fall into that category. Or at least I did. There are so many photographers that are good at making a living that are no where near as gifted image makers as so many that fade out.

There are also many young photographers entering the arena that need to be nurtured and protected in order that our profession lives on. That’s how things should be. It’s a delicate balance for sure but as individuals we need to be a collective as well. Simple as that. We need to take responsibility, as you have done, and speak out when injustice and bad practice are apparent. It may not be illegal, it may even be legitimate but if it’s bad for photographers we should speak out.

Why there is not a NAME for this Magazine editor…Or just the Magazine???
You are too gentleman…

Give us a name…revenge, revenge…
The problem is always the same..There are hundreds, thousands of “Brand new photographers” who think that they really ARE photographers…(Remember the old times when we had to work in a lab, BW..etc..) And will found ANY way to get in the circle, no matter the price to pay but fuc…ng the real photographers…
There is no respect anynmore..

Hi Michael,

It almost sounds like some kind of scam…but if on the level, is unfortunately the more extreme edge of an increasingly growing phenomenon, which I touched on when you kindly invited me to give that talk a while back.

We need to stop pointing an accusing finger at the big photo agencies and stock houses and look in the mirror to see the ultimate culprits.

I’ve sadly concluded that many photographers are really living in a dream world, and really don’t have a hope of making a viable living in this pursuit. To do that requires a lot more clear headed thinking than many seem to want to do.

And that’s the crux – they’re not stupid, its just that their heads are so full of Nachtwey-esque, Koudelka-tastic fantasy and nonsense about how they think being a photographer works, that they don’t spend the time simply knuckling down and being a professional photographer.

That business aspect of it is often a grind and a chore, but it simply has to be done and marks out people who take their photography seriously as a profession from those who frankly, don’t.

I have no objection to people pursuing photography as a hobby or creative pursuit.

I just wish they wouldn’t screw the rest of us down in the process by offering themselves up for peanuts.

A related thread on this forum from ‘MarisaB’ is a case in point. Despite offering paltry to non-existent payment for magazine use (whose sole function appears to be to promote everybody involved EXCEPT the photographer), there are tons LS’ers offering themselves up – in some cases, nearly TWO YEARS after one intial request was made…

...er, maybe check the date on the assignment brief next time eh?

That’s Professional Photography Fucking Blindingly Obvious Rule No. 1. Write it down, so you don’t look like such a total desperate idiot next time.

Ya know, it’s no coincidence that the word often put in front of ‘artist’ is ‘starving’.

Sion, shit, as (almost) every time you post, you’re right and articulate it right.

Photography is a business. Point. Even if you love what you do. As me, for example…..!

If you treat it that way, it will honour you.

Maybe Koudelka is the cleverst of us all, cutting down on costs and so providing freedom for his work. You all, read the business column at “Digital journalist” and act up to what you have read.

Koudelka is a maestro. But he knows how to keep his overheads low, and from what I gather, has a level of personal discipline which would shame most Marines.

That’s what makes him a professional, whereas someone working for fuck-all and wondering why they can’t afford that new whizzbang digital camera, and not being able to make the connection between the two problems…

...isnt.

hear hear!

Thanks Michael, Paul, Sion and everyone for your thoughts! It helps me as a newcomer in the world of photography to understand the dynamics of the business and how I can help to not break the delicate balance…

We are killing our own profession. Seriously. Every time one of us agrees to shoot for peanuts, we lower the overall dignity of the term ‘photographer’.

No business and no client would want to pay us more than what we are worth. Would you spend half a million dollars on a cup of Assam Tea? No! Everyone can buy that variety of tea for a few bucks in a nearby store.

If ‘people with cameras’ start calling themselves ‘photographers’ and charge next to nothing, it is going to hurt the real photographers who spend their lives perfecting themselves in the art, science and business of photography. But it is going to hurt even more when real photographers become desperate and agree to shoot on the same wages!

I have had difficult time explaining prospective clients that having a fancy digital camera does not make anybody a professional photographer. I don’t know if I should blame the companies marketing their new cameras as ‘know it all’... but people strongly believe that there is nothing left out in today’s camera that would require any knowledge in photography. “It does everything by itself… you only have to click.” “We just need someone to stand here and click the button… no need of a ‘photographer’”

I have refused such assignments very quickly, with a small dose about the value of photography, but as long as another ‘photographer’ agrees to work with those degrading terms, we will keep having problems.

The most interesting question the client asks is “What’s the difference between your picture and one taken by my nephew?”.

This is usually the last question in the discussion… because at least in Ahmednagar, people will ask you about your ‘rates’ first and if they think the price is OK, only then they will look at your portfolio. Heck, I met a few photographers who don’t even have a single photo with them – they say its not necessary to show your work… just bargain for the lowest price you can afford and you’ll be fine!

I have walked out from one office at this question, and let them know that they have seriously insulted me by comparing the photos before they even saw the work. But I guess that was just bad decision. Another time, I sat there, showed them some of my best photos and once they were convinced that I was charging them fairly, I refused to work for them and let them know that they had hurt my profession. They called me for the next assignment – no questions asked.

In business where we earn on our skill and talent, we need to have a reasonable ego; even if it is a false one!

I am not the best photographer around. I’m not even mediocre compared to so many LSers here. But when I talk to a prospective client, I do NOT let them lower the prices. They can choose someone else with better photography skills than me and I will strive to make myself better. I will compete with skill… not with low prices.

“The most interesting question the client asks is What’s the difference between your picture and one taken by my nephew?”

The nephew isn’t being paid to make your client look good, or have an understanding of the clients image needs.

Thats whats worth paying for.

Theyre paying you to solve a problem for them. They need to look good and differenciate themselves from their competitors. Thats where you come in.

Of course, if they want to pay less and end up looking just like any other company, then that’s their choice…

Sorry Gents,

My feeling and experience is that publishers do not really care about the quality of the images they publish anymore and will pay any shmoe who fancies himslef a photographer or photojournalist dirt low rates. In the case of my newspaper I am saddened to report that our owners are giving reporters small digi point and shoots and will publish any rubbish they are able to xmit to the paper. I am at my wits end as photo editor here and I am truely believing I have lost the fight. I am ready to hang my nikons up, sell everything and dedicate myself to enjoying my life.

If the publications and agencies do not give a rats rear end about the quality of the images they publish then of course they will always go with the lowest common denominator. Simple as that. There will always be some former shoe salesman who has acquired a brand new camera, knows nothing about ethics, or quality, composition, light, the decisive moment… Sell his crap image for peanuts and screw us all in the end.

I am sorry about this rant but I am exhuasted and can’t take it any more.

mayby tomorrow I will fell better, but not today.

Tomas

Michael, I think it’s important to name and shame not just to penalize the magazine itself but it helps take away the vanity aspect and discourages future photographers from contributing to this magazine. Photographers will find it hard to use their “covers” as examples of published work when it’s well know that they paid to have their photo selected.

Ps. just an addendum to my post. I think lightstalkers and other photographer forums can be tools to fight back to at least some of these bad business practices. Many photographers whether they admit it or not care about the respect of their peers. Why do so many people want to be magnum photographers or work for national geographic?? Part of the reason is because both institutions are respected in the photographers community and among the community at large. Now imagine you found out that Magnum memberships were going to the highest bidder or National Geographic assignments are non paying and not based on merit but rather can be won through a lottery system anyone can enter through their website. Absurd? Yes, of course. But the point is that all the Cappa and Steve McCurry want to be’s with stars in their eyes would no longer be pining to be magnum members or be national geographic photographers.

Nothing heard from the magazine yet. In the meantime, however, it occurs to me that part of the problem lies in the lack of understanding of running a business that is displayed by those who do “work” for little or nothing.

Many of you have referred to the latest whizz bang digital cameras that people buy and seem to think that makes them a photographer. The thing is to some extent I can understand that part of it: they have the camera, most of them own a computer before they get the camera, and they think that is it as far as capital spending goes. Hey, all they need is a bag and from that point on every penny they earn goes in their pockets, or more likely behind the nearest bar. If that is their understanding of business you can see why they might think that the rest of us are overcharging. In their minds they are doing the “customers” a service by correcting what they see as a long term imbalance in prices.

The thing is, your gear is not the real cost of running a business. In fact in the average year I spend very little on gear. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I have accountant’s fees, advertising/marketing expenses, telecoms and broadband fees, rent, rates, petrol and other travel expenses, postage, letterheads and business cards, lab bills, software costs, half a terabyte of harddrives to buy every six months, blank CD and DVD media, insurance (don’t even get me started on that!), electricity, water. I need to earn thousands every year just to stand still. If someone only has a £300 camera they might not think it worth insuring, and a lot of these guys probably just cut and run (and give the rest of us a bad name) if it all goes wrong. But if there was some compulsion on them to fork out for third party liability, professional indemnity, and employers liability they would soon start asking to be paid to work!

“something in a midnight blue would be nice with a black leather interior. I then explained myself, and understandably she looked shocked”

Blue with black leather interior – that’s why. It’s just not done.

Blue with grey or tan… well, I reckon you could have nailed that deal. Live and learn…

So if you use that Getty service that charges you to post you picture and it gets accepted by this magazine you’ll spend even more money to get your photo on their cover…