# Should I charge for this?



## Compaq (Jul 7, 2013)

Hi guys!

The marketing section of a large firm (which supervises big building sites and stuff) contacted me a couple of days ago, asking about a picture I took of one of the University buildings. They want to use it for marketing purposes on the coming website promoting a renovation project of said building. I will get "full credit" for the picture, but I think they mean getting my name under the picture (still pretty cool, though!).

My question is, should I ask for some money, or just let them get it? Don't get me wrong, this is not about the money! I just don't want to be subject to a large firm's exploitation.

I appreciate any help!
Anders


----------



## Overread (Jul 7, 2013)

You've been here 3 years  you should know the answer 

But simply - YES

Crediting is worthless these days unless its credit in a very specific place - for example appearing on the front page of Nat Geo is WORTH them having a single free shot with credit. Website promotional material of a university building is, probably close to worthless as a single photo example. You might chance it that someone who can enable things might notice it; but honestly most are unlikely to give it much of a second thought at all. 

Since this is a one photo deal negotiate and see what you can get; they've put the offer on the table and thus already decided upon a value for the item and since you're not a pro with an established price let them put their offer on the table (do your own research into a fair amount of course so that you know where their offer stands). 

The other option is to simply gift it to them, however unless you know someone well in the company its unlikely to generate anything more than more free work. 

PS make sure there is a contract - read it carefully and watch out for them taking a royalty free, infinite time, any display type of licence for themselves. Also remember that contracts are made to be negotiated - if you just sign then all you do is void your chance to give your side of the negotiation and you're just agreeing with whatever they want (which will ALWAYS be weighted toward their own interest - in fact many will contain clauses that they know will be pushed back on or removed during negotiation - they include them because there is always the chance that they will go through)


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jul 7, 2013)

They're a business? Then they can pay for photos for marketing purposes. 

Why should you give a photo to a business to use to make money or promote their products/services? using your work, your talent and time?

For something like this I'd probably be expecting terms to be non-exclusive, one-time use for a specific purpose and a specific time period.


----------



## Compaq (Jul 7, 2013)

In the US, what would you charge for this? 

This firm i gigantic, having supervised many, many builds costing up to $1 bill!


----------



## SCraig (Jul 7, 2013)

Sooooooo ... since it's a large company the photograph is worth more than if it were a small company?  What if it were a not-for-profit organization or an individual, would the same prices apply?

I'm of the opinion that a photograph is worth whatever it is worth regardless of the person or company purchasing the rights to it.  If it's worth $50 to the lady down the street then it's worth $50 to Walmart.  Just my personal opinion.


----------



## Compaq (Jul 7, 2013)

So how do I determine how much it is worth


----------



## Overread (Jul 7, 2013)

First get a clear written outline of the type of licence and usage they specifically want to sign for. Chances are they'll throw the the typical "unlimited use, unlimited editing rights, right to sub licence, etc...." line at you (ergo we own it angle). Whilst you'd rather be wanting to negotiate for a licence similar to the one that vintagesnaps outlines - one that allows them the rights to use the photo as they Need to without giving them rights they don't need but would rather Like to have. That is unless you've no problem with them having more rights - or having the option on the table to pay for more rights.

Once you have the licence type they want you can more easily search for a value of that.


----------



## KmH (Jul 7, 2013)

Compaq said:


> So how do I determine how much it is worth


Experience. They want to use your photo in part because they know you have little or no experience and they expect to get use of the photo for free.
In fact, if you ask for much more than just 'credit', they likely have several other candidates all lined up who will gladly do it for free.
In other words, you have little you can negotiate with. The Photographer's Guide to Negotiating

Pricing in Norway won't be the same as here in the US.

What you want to do is price a stock image. Here in the US many commercial photographers use *fotoQuote Pro 6* stock and assignment pricing software.
http://www.cradocfotosoftware.com/fotoQuote-Pro/index.html


----------



## texkam (Jul 7, 2013)

This photo has value. You should charge appropriately.


----------



## kathyt (Jul 7, 2013)

I want to see it. Show me the goods.


----------



## Juga (Jul 7, 2013)

Compaq said:


> So how do I determine how much it is worth



Easy...Dr. Evil said it best "100 billion dollars" :er:

I have a contract in place with a real estate firm and we have a fixed rate in place and we got to that number by me letting them throw out numbers at me until we had a mutual agreement. So with that said and as Overread has already stated I would let them put the offer out there because he is right...they have a figure already in mind. They just want to see where you are at so they can get it for the best possible price.


----------



## Compaq (Jul 8, 2013)

kathythorson said:


> I want to see it. Show me the goods.






Urbygningen 3 by Anders Myhre Brakestad, on Flickr

They want to use it on the renovation's web page, flyers, year reports, and conferences/seminars. I'd be willing to let them use it freely during the build as long as my name appears, and that they cannot sell their rights themselves.


----------



## SCraig (Jul 8, 2013)

SCraig said:


> Sooooooo ... since it's a large company the photograph is worth more than if it were a small company?  What if it were a not-for-profit organization or an individual, would the same prices apply?
> 
> I'm of the opinion that a photograph is worth whatever it is worth regardless of the person or company purchasing the rights to it.  If it's worth $50 to the lady down the street then it's worth $50 to Walmart.  Just my personal opinion.





Compaq said:


> So how do I determine how much it is worth



I'm sorry, Anders, if I gave the impression in my post that it was aimed at you because it was not.  It was aimed at those who feel there is a double-standard for pricing, one for the wealthy and one for everyone else.  Or, more on topic, one for big corporations and one for everybody else.  I have yet to see anything for sale on this site, in a store, or anywhere else that lists two prices depending on how much the purchaser is worth, and I think it's wrong to advocate that when pricing a photograph.


----------



## Compaq (Jul 8, 2013)

I aired the idea that I be given a proper contract, and maybe a small payment. Then they said that  they would find a different photographer. 
I contacted them again, and waits for their answer. I felt like I was begging, LOL


----------



## Deneys (Jul 8, 2013)

Compaq have a look @ this article hope it helps


----------



## amolitor (Jul 8, 2013)

A savvy company isn't going to pay much for what is basically a stock photograph. That's the way it goes.

I don't mean "stock photograph" in a negative way, I simply mean that any reasonably competent photographer could take a picture of the same thing, that is good enough for the company's needs. If any competent photographer _can_ then competition will inevitably drive the price down to very close to zero.


----------



## kathyt (Jul 8, 2013)

Compaq said:


> kathythorson said:
> 
> 
> > I want to see it. Show me the goods.
> ...


I can see why they want it. Stick to your guns. The reflection is so crisp. Very nice shot.


----------



## orljustin (Jul 8, 2013)

I'd adjust the HDR so the top half of the building isn't so dark.


----------



## Compaq (Jul 8, 2013)

I have lots of shots of the uni, and I have been meaning to ask whether they want some of them to use for their marketing. Imo, my shots are prettier than the ones they currently use.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jul 9, 2013)

Someone might have already posted this, there are guidelines for determining pricing on sites like ASMP that would be appropriate in the US. Prices seem to vary somewhat depending on the part of the country. 

It's unfortunate that some people want photos for free and that there are people willing to do that (although the photos that are free may not be that good); it's not just the photo it's the talent and time and practice it takes to develop skills that enables a photographer to produce good photos - and I think that's what people get paid for, doing the work and the expertise involved.


----------



## texkam (Jul 9, 2013)

> they said that they would find a different photographer.


 Fine. Because they won't be willing to pay a different photographer much, they will most likely get a subpar image that they will not be happy with. There's a good chance they will get back to you about this image, and because you've shown that your work is better than anyone else they know, there's also a good chance they will contact you for future needs.


----------



## tirediron (Jul 9, 2013)

Can you parlay it into a reduction in next year's tuition?


----------



## Stevepwns (Jul 9, 2013)

If they dont pay for your picture, they will pay someone else to take it.....  Your picture is worth getting paid for.  Its really nice, just my 2 cents.


----------



## KmH (Jul 9, 2013)

Compaq said:


> I aired the idea that I be given a proper contract, and maybe a small payment. Then they said that  they would find a different photographer.


With all the photo sharing web sites and 500,000,000 new photos put online every day, companies don't have to pay for photography anymore. They just need to pay an employee an hourly wage to sift through the web sites.

On web sites like Flickr, people 'tag' there images making it that much easier for the company minions to search for relevant images.

Cost, actually get-it-for-free, is more important then image quality. No doubt there first choice will be a high quality image, but in the end, mediocre is usually good enough.

So as I alluded to before, because of the billions and billions of images in online image sharing web sites, we have nothing to negotiate with.


----------



## gsgary (Jul 9, 2013)

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/beyond-basics/332973-answering-your-own-questions.html


----------



## emdiemci (Jul 9, 2013)

That is a very nice image. I would definitely charge whether they take it or not. That's your work and time and skill. If you just want to promote yourself which I doubt it will, then just give it to them.


----------

