Fight for what you're owed..

dazftw

Recently had a photo in a local Newspaper and charged them €40 for usage(standard rate according to other photographers). A month goes by and no cheque but I get a call say they only have a small budget and can offer me €20 I plead my case.. "You charge for your paper" "I'm trying to make a small career out of this to supplement my income" "I don't want to be taken advantage of so I must take it seriously not matter how much" It was upped to €30 but I still wasn't happy but eventually got the €40.

I may have burned a small bridge because they said we will be less likely to use your images next time but I've only ever sent them pictures 3 times over the 12+ months.

What do you guys think!? Should I have taken the €20 and kept my mouth shut or fought like I did and get the €40!?

Kenny Logins

Fought. If you settle for €20, chances are the next guy will be expected to too.

Cookie P74

Well done, if your picture was worth printing then it was definitely worth the going rate.

Paulw

You need to stand your ground.

If the standard rate they pay is €40, and you settled for €20, then the next person that comes along would be offered €10, and they will then go on about the good exposure you get from having your image printed, etc, etc.

If your photo is good enough to print, then it's good enough to get paid the standard rate for.

Tallon

Fair play for holding out, you did the right thing!

thebaz

agree with above , ther is an expectation now to get images for free, next they wil be looking to get paid to use your image - the value of a photograph has never been lower , but eventually the tide will turn , as quality has been affected, and good photographers simply give up. And don't worry about the threat to not use your stuff, if it is good eneogh they will use.

dazftw

thebaz wrote: »

And don't worry about the threat to not use your stuff, if it is good eneogh they will use.

Yeah I thought the same.


I'm glad I stood my ground, I would have been kicking myself if I didn't.

thebaz

thebaz wrote: »

agree with above , ther is an expectation now to get images for free, next they wil be looking to get paid to use your image - the value of a photograph has never been lower , but eventually the tide will turn , as quality has been affected, and good photographers simply give up. And don't worry about the threat to not use your stuff, if it is good eneogh they will use.

That's something I never really thought of, to be honest. A lot of the people I know of that are working for little or nothing are pushing experienced knowledgeable photographers out of the game. But the guys doing it for feck all aren't very good in the first place.

I wonder will it be a case that they'll (In general) improve, or will they continue to be poor, and the papers will seek out their 'expensive' photographers again as a result?

A lot of people don't seem to care too much about quality though in my experience. Generally only businesses will give you a hard time if you try to pull a fast one. The average joe soap seems happy to accept any old rubbish from people they're paying to take photos though (in my experience, again).


It's a strange one.

AnCatDubh

thebaz wrote: »

if it is good eneogh they will use.

wise words.

Deleted User wrote: »

A lot of the people I know of that are working for little or nothing are pushing experienced knowledgeable photographers out of the game. But the guys doing it for feck all aren't very good in the first place

I don't think the cheap merchant is 'pushing' anyone anywhere. It may appear so but i've noticed a trend among photographers, and in particular more experienced knowledgeable photographers. The biggest threat to many of these photographers is themselves. Unfortunately, at least it appears to me that they don't change too readily -not open to change. They are mostly risk adverse. Take a look at the guys who turn up on communion days, confirmation days, etc.... - stand outside the church hawking for business. Most will have been doing the same gig for the past 20-30 years and will likely continue for another 20. Or they will see their career there for the next 40 - 50 years if they are the new kid on the block. Compare an image from 30 years ago to one of modern day by the same photographers and you'll probably find that not much has changed. It may be 'classic'. Those that do change will not be taking communion and confirmation portraits for terribly long.

The cheap photographer with poor quality photographs is a disruptive force to a largely stagnant industry with outdated business models. As Barry suggests in his post, the tide will turn but that may be in time. Advances in technology and the pervasive nature of decent cameras combined with the simplification of taking photographs through fully auto modes (which at a guess i'd imagine the majority of cameras get left in) has led to that faithful craze of the most horrid of photographs being shared amongst social media. This urgency to share whats on the camera's memory card rather than what should be shared has brought the expectations of the art of photography to a low. And, i'm not sure that it has bottomed out. Thus I agree with Barry. The tide will turn at least for many, and quality will become a differentiation in photographers. They will be judged by their work. But the models of operation must also change.

That said, we are human beings. Wanna buy an iphone for €500 or €100 - the €100 iPhone is the tempting one even though we may know the €500 is the real mccoy.

I might be veering off topic so to bring it back, @dazftw - I think you had the correct approach. You are valued at what your value is and in this case it is for you to determine. Perhaps it was a pity you were coming to the discussion about cost after the event had taken place however ce la vie.

pete4130

Deleted User wrote: »

That's something I never really thought of, to be honest. A lot of the people I know of that are working for little or nothing are pushing experienced knowledgeable photographers out of the game. But the guys doing it for feck all aren't very good in the first place.

I wonder will it be a case that they'll (In general) improve, or will they continue to be poor, and the papers will seek out their 'expensive' photographers again as a result?

A lot of people don't seem to care too much about quality though in my experience. Generally only businesses will give you a hard time if you try to pull a fast one. The average joe soap seems happy to accept any old rubbish from people they're paying to take photos though (in my experience, again).


It's a strange one.

Don't you charge €80-€100 per photo session in peoples houses?

I'd consider that very cheap considering as your probably giving up 1-2 hours time with travel, setting up, shooting, packing up and travel. Add onto that post processing time of about 1 hour, cost of printing, cost of CD. Thats less than €30 per hour?

pete4130

pete4130 wrote: »

Don't you charge €80-€100 per photo session in peoples houses?

I'd consider that very cheap considering as your probably giving up 1-2 hours time with travel, setting up, shooting, packing up and travel. Add onto that post processing time of about 1 hour, cost of printing, cost of CD. Thats less than €30 per hour?

EDIT: Never mind. Not getting into it with you, Pete.

dazftw

Just to update this, still haven't got paid. Any of you guys have any advice on what I can say to persuade them to pay me.

Paulw

dazftw wrote: »

Just to update this, still haven't got paid. Any of you guys have any advice on what I can say to persuade them to pay me.

Send in a 2nd, Reminder Invoice.

Then, in another 30 days, send a 3rd, stating that if the invoice is not paid within 21 days that it will then be passed to your solicitor.

If you have professional insurance on your camera policy, you may have a legal fees cover, so you can use that to get a solicitor's letter.

Normally a reminder invoice works though.

nucker

You will get the same attitude with musicians, and they go gallivanting around the country with their instruments and you wonder if they don't have a budget.

Newspapers do have budgets, because if they have an online version, they are likely to have advertisements that can give them a tidy profit

dazftw

Sent in a reminder invoice with "10 euro late fee will apply if not paid within 5 working days" Lets see what happens :rolleyes: