we don't pay freelancers.... ?

smash

so i was on my way home there and I saw a lot of smoke coming from behind some trees on the N11, I pulled off and drove down and there were 2 fire engines and big enough fire in a house. i took some pics and called a friend who's a journalist for the local paper, went and collected her, she did some interviews and I got more pics and they're good.

She says, that's great can you send them on to me and I say to her "If your boss is willing to pay for them" so she responds with "they don't pay freelancers, the way they see it is that they have their own photographers so they wont pay" Then she tells me I can see how far i get by sticking an invoice for 50euro through the letterbox so i laughed at her.

Now here's the thing, I told her about it, there was no other journalists there and no photographers so without my help they wouldn't have got the story and now they want the photos for free... I think I'll send them around to the papers myself and see what I can get!

6th

Thats nuts!

CabanSail

Take them around the photo's & put an invoice with them. If they then publish you get paid, if not they would be in breach of copyright.

soccerc

Never heard of that before and have not encountered that in any dealing with any media whether it be freesheet, local or national.

If they want the images they need to pay for them.

Ricky91t

lol thats a load of crap.At the end of the day if they want the pics and they use them they gotta pay up simple as that

Fajitas!

Cheapskates tbh.

Let her put in the story first, and before it's put to edit go in with the coinciding photographs. You're better off doing it in person if you're ballsy enough

TelePaul

Did your friend tell you they don't pay freelancers or did the editor tell you?

Ricky91t

i think when it comes down to it if the editor needs the pic he'll pay for it

TelePaul

ricky91t wrote: »

i think when it comes down to it if the editor needs the pic he'll pay for it

agreed, it's probably best to make a pitch yourself.

ThOnda

No yo-yos, no photos.
Charge them next time in advance or call some other newspaper (or RTE).

kensutz

A newspaper tried to do that with me on Monday but I called their bluff as I heard about them trying that with another person. Turned out they wanted to just steal my photo from the net.

bp_me

I'od expect that from a local alrght Steve. Not a national though.

Either they want to use them or not. Up to you how you want to procede.

FX Meister

kensutz wrote: »

Turned out they wanted to just steal my photo from the net.

Surely thay can't do that?

sunny2004

FX Meister wrote: »

Surely thay can't do that?

yes they can, they just right click and save :P

conair01

i do work for local papers and they are the meanest bunch. and i know other freelancers who have worked for papers in other counties got promised they'd get payed and never seen €'s.

smelltheglove

sunny2004 wrote: »

yes they can, they just right click and save :P

This is where the damned water marks come in handy. Only problem is the only way you can 100% prevent it being cut out is by watermarking over the main content which ultimately can destroy the image!

I watermark the bottom but I did see where someone downloaded, edited, removed the watermark and uploaded one of my shots again. This was a free shot done for someone I knew and had taken a pic of a friend so it was personal use but it irritated the hell out of me. Some sites you go to though dont allow save this picture but I haven't found out how they can block that option.

sheesh

sunny2004 wrote: »

yes they can, they just right click and save :P

one way of preventing that would be to put up small low quality jpeg of the image up. not so low quality that the pic looks crap but enough that if they try to use it for printing (300dpi) that it would look rubbish.

would that work?

Trojan911

I was talking to a photographer last night from the Evening Echo, he works direct for the paper. I was asking him how hard was it to get a job as a photographer with a newspaper & his reply was the papers are trying to let go of their photographers & use them as Freelancers.

I have spoken to several Daily picturedesks about submitting newsworthy images, as a freelance photographer, to them & they all quoted me prices they would pay if my image were published. They ranged from €60 - €150 per image or set.

Only one paper told me they would pay royalties of half the original fee if it was used again.

I've only submitted one set of pictures which will more than likely be used in the near future, so I will have to watch the paper to see if they are used, then I have to contact that paper & invoice them.

smash

It might be a good idea to create a sticky with links to picturedesks and syndication agencies actually. It would be usefull to everyone.

RCNPhotos

Yeah an awful lot of photographers were given redundancy (spelling?) packages etc last year and the year before. t's mostly all freelance now. Shame.

And then there was all the fuss over wanting to train journalists to use cameras.

sunny2004

why am I quoted above twice... it was a joke..

But on a rather radical note, my take on this is simple.
If you post stuff on the net you run the risk of it getting robbed !
small images at 72dpi are for the most part useless !
Watermarks are easy to get around..
and the funny thing is stuff i see that a blind guy would not rob with a watermark !

sunny2004

sheesh wrote: »

one way of preventing that would be to put up small low quality jpeg of the image up. not so low quality that the pic looks crap but enough that if they try to use it for printing (300dpi) that it would look rubbish.

would that work?

Yes in most cases..
if its your own site you can script the site so that the right key is disabled !

Note .. dont bother quoting that and saying what bout the screen save option..

My take is simple. I post 72dpi and if it gets robbed it gets robbed !

oeb

sunny2004 wrote: »

Yes in most cases..
if its your own site you can script the site so that the right key is disabled !

Note .. dont bother quoting that and saying what bout the screen save option..

My take is simple. I post 72dpi and if it gets robbed it gets robbed !

Haa haa, there is many many easier ways than getting a screen grab. You can just turn off javascript for one. It's safe to say that either low quality or watermarking is the most effective way of preventing this happening.

Edit - or embedding in flash

sunny2004

dont post it ??

Setun

Do computer screens not operate only at a level of 72dpi-equivalent anyway? Or did my tutor last year lie horribly to me?

And anyway you can boost the res of a low-quality image by re-scanning it so basically there's no way around it, apart from injure the pic-burglars so they don't do it again

oeb

You won't notice a whole pile of difference between a 72dpi and a 300dpi on screen, but when you print it (IE for a paper) you will.

sunny2004

Daddio wrote: »

Do computer screens not operate only at a level of 72dpi-equivalent anyway? Or did my tutor last year lie horribly to me?

Get your money back