$1000/year for 1 photo!!?

D-50 · Nov 27, 2007

So my company is putting together a business plan for future expansion, a photograhper took some shots of one of our locations and said if we want to use the photo on the cover it will be $1000 a year for the use of the photo.... Is this usual? sounds unreal to me, anyway my bosses did not realize the extent I am into photography and I am going to take it for them tonight. I just wanted to hear others opinions on this pricing

dpolston · Nov 27, 2007

That might not be out of line. I would love to see the shot (out of curiosity). It kind of sounds like a "photo for lease" for advertising.

Think about it. Around here you lease a billboard starting around $800 a month. Maybe this guy thinks the same way? His shot is your company's billboard. (BTW - offer your shot for $500... nevermind, that might not be ethical.)

Alpha · Nov 27, 2007

Not entirely unusual. Publication fees are just one of the many ways that commercial photographers make money.

Sideburns · Nov 27, 2007

seems alright for me. Except...if it's just internal then perhaps he went a little high?
You never know though...pricing is all over the board.

Alpha · Nov 27, 2007

Also, to put it in perspective, he or she would have to land 100 of these contracts in order to gross six figures.

astrostu · Nov 27, 2007

For a public brochure/ad, that seems fine. Think about how much your company will be effectively making by the use of it. For an internal brochure that sits in peoples' "In" boxes that they never look at, then I agree it's fairly high. Try looking at a stock photo site and see what the licensing fee would be for similar usage.

D-50 · Nov 28, 2007

I understand this person needs to make money but it was just a shot of a fast food location. Also its use is for the cover of a marketing plan. Yes this plan will hopefully bring in money through investors however I do not thnk it is integral to selling the idea of the business, meaning if the investor meets with us and likes what we put forth I do not think he/she is going to say "I love the business plan and strategy but it was the picture on the front cover that sold me". Furthermore the general public will never see this photo so its not a regular advertising shot.

Anyway though I did the shot last night and it looks just as good as the other photographer's and will be going on the cover of the plan. Looks like she shot herself in the foot with such a high price.

Big Mike · Nov 28, 2007

Anyway though I did the shot last night and it looks just as good as the other photographer's and will be going on the cover of the plan. Looks like she shot herself in the foot with such a high price.

How much is the company paying you for the use of the photo?
You might be loosing out on a bunch of money.

I'm not a commercial photographer...but I do know that it's a pretty lucrative market, if you have the clients. A 'cover shot' would probably demand a high price...although cover for a marketing plan is probably different than a cover for an advertising product.

subimatt · Nov 28, 2007

Seems perfectly reasonable depending the size of the company/ exposure it could get from said image. Winds up being a little over $80 a month for an advertising image. if it doesnt yield results after a year, you change it... loss of 1k? im sure thats less than the electric bill for one month of a medium size office.

Alpha · Nov 28, 2007

D-50 said:
I understand this person needs to make money but it was just a shot of a fast food location. Also its use is for the cover of a marketing plan. Yes this plan will hopefully bring in money through investors however I do not thnk it is integral to selling the idea of the business, meaning if the investor meets with us and likes what we put forth I do not think he/she is going to say "I love the business plan and strategy but it was the picture on the front cover that sold me". Furthermore the general public will never see this photo so its not a regular advertising shot.

Anyway though I did the shot last night and it looks just as good as the other photographer's and will be going on the cover of the plan. Looks like she shot herself in the foot with such a high price.

Big Mike said:
How much is the company paying you for the use of the photo?
You might be loosing out on a bunch of money.

I'm not a commercial photographer...but I do know that it's a pretty lucrative market, if you have the clients. A 'cover shot' would probably demand a high price...although cover for a marketing plan is probably different than a cover for an advertising product.

"and the problem is, there's so goddamn many [photographers] who have no idea that they're supposed to be paid every time they do something-- they do it for nothing."

phakimata · Nov 28, 2007

There are photographers that charge even more. It all depends on the type and purpose of publication.

Alpha · Nov 28, 2007

Unless your company is pinching pennies, I think that undercutting this other guy was wrong. At best, you're entering into a relationship with your employer in which you're not a photographer but an employee with a camera. You can expect to be treated as such in the future.

D-50 · Nov 28, 2007

Undercutting is a way of business and personally I feel $1000 for a photo is too much. If this was not for my company I would charge anywhere from $200 to $500 depending on the size of the company and the nature of business. That being said if I were to do a job for a giant company I would of course charge a lot more... I believe you need to gauge your customer and charge accordingly. Furthermore I have actually given my notice to this company so I will not be employed by them for long. I figureded I'd help them on my way out, as for pinching pennies when trying to start a fast food franchise you need to save every penny you can. At roughly $400,000 to open a store it is a very expensive industry and the profit margins are slim considering we use all natural foods.

astrostu · Nov 28, 2007

MaxBloom said:
Unless your company is pinching pennies, I think that undercutting this other guy was wrong. At best, you're entering into a relationship with your employer in which you're not a photographer but an employee with a camera. You can expect to be treated as such in the future.

Agreed. You're also cutting out the independent person for in-house, which though cheaper, is kinda a blow to the "little guy." For example, my Aunt is a freelance graphic designer and had designed packaging for a product. But instead of using her design (which the company really liked), they ended up going with someone in-house which was nearly identical.

Sideburns · Nov 28, 2007

D-50 said:
Undercutting is a way of business and personally I feel $1000 for a photo is too much. If this was not for my company I would charge anywhere from $200 to $500 depending on the size of the company and the nature of business. That being said if I were to do a job for a giant company I would of course charge a lot more... I believe you need to gauge your customer and charge accordingly. Furthermore I have actually given my notice to this company so I will not be employed by them for long. I figureded I'd help them on my way out, as for pinching pennies when trying to start a fast food franchise you need to save every penny you can. At roughly $400,000 to open a store it is a very expensive industry and the profit margins are slim considering we use all natural foods.

you might charge that...but that's not how the photographers normal business structure works in most cases. If it's a small use photograph...then maybe he did overcharge...but you should have haggled instead of doing the photo for free...