There's no budget for Photography but there could be other paid work.

Effects

A friend of mine in Sweden was recently contacted by a very popular Swedish band about using a photo he took of them at a music festival. It's for online promotion of the band. Their management came up with the often used line of there being no budget for photography and that there could be other paid work further down the line and that he would get a credit. He accepted their generous offer telling me that he's trying to make it as a photographer and he has to take what he can get. I think I personally would have said no. I've refused people looking for free photos in the past myself. Is he right to give his work away for free? I can't see it leading to much else myself but maybe i'm a sceptic. I can understand his thinking in that at least his name will be out there more, even in a very small way.

dirtyghettokid

all he'll get is more offers of unpaid work. blah, hate that "credit" thing.

thebaz

wonder if the food & beverage folks were so accomadating for the bands Rider needs - the sad fact is creativity, in most mediums, has very little monetary value today - Look at that Cultural fiasco down in Limerick recently, the Rappers behind the lyrics(in essence the creativity) were unpaid , the interfering political Chief executive was on a 6 figure salary - creativity has very little value , but bureaucratic paper pushers are totally overvalued -

dazftw

Effects wrote: »

could be other paid work further down the line

They have no budget for photography but they may want to pay him in the future?

D.S.

I dunno - the way I see it is that it's just one photo and your friend has the opportunity to help (presumably a struggling / upcoming band if they can't afford the one photo) while at the same time gaining some free publicity. I'd consider licensing the photo, and maybe even see if your friend could keep a nice tasteful logo on there, or get public credit somehow wherever it is used.

There may be no exchange of money, but maybe both parties can gain publicity wise. I don't see a downside here or am I missing something? Worse case, your friend licences the photo (making sure the band can't resell or reuse it) and nothing happens. Best case, some people see the photo, think its cool, and it encourages more work for your friend.

Personally, I'd like to think about getting into photography professionally / semi professional down the track, and you can't beat any activity that creates a name for yourself. I don't think I'd shoot a free job, but licensing out the odd photo if you think it could be seen by an audience that you want to tap yourself - can't put a price on this really..

jimmycrackcorm

He should have suggested swapping for them playing at a function for free for him...

thebaz

D.S. wrote: »

I don't see a downside here or am I missing something?

well the downside is Effects friend gets no money , for his image , from a Popular band - the publicity / credit thing is worthless, certainly if you're hoping to do it professsionally. The whole thing sounds like taking the piss - I'll say no more

ps3man

Avoid.. Run for the hills.. I got a similar offer a few weeks ago.. The second you ask about the paid work they begin their search for the new mug who will work for free.. Avoid

Effects

D.S. wrote: »

I dunno - the way I see it is that it's just one photo and your friend has the opportunity to help (presumably a struggling / upcoming band if they can't afford the one photo) while at the same time gaining some free publicity.

There may be no exchange of money, but maybe both parties can gain publicity wise. I don't see a downside here or am I missing something?

They are pretty far from a struggling band. When they do tour it's a fast sell out. He's asked for payment in merch so he's getting some of that and possibly a photo pass for other bands under the same management.
Perhaps he can give those photos away too

D.S.

thebaz wrote: »

well the downside is Effects friend gets no money , for his image , from a Popular band - the publicity / credit thing is worthless, certainly if you're hoping to do it professsionally. The whole thing sounds like taking the piss - I'll say no more

Effects wrote: »

A friend of mine in Sweden was recently contacted by a very popular Swedish band about using a photo he took of them at a music festival. It's for online promotion of the band. Their management came up with the often used line of there being no budget for photography and that there could be other paid work further down the line and that he would get a credit. He accepted their generous offer telling me that he's trying to make it as a photographer and he has to take what he can get. I think I personally would have said no. I've refused people looking for free photos in the past myself. Is he right to give his work away for free? I can't see it leading to much else myself but maybe i'm a sceptic. I can understand his thinking in that at least his name will be out there more, even in a very small way.

Effects wrote: »

They are pretty far from a struggling band. When they do tour it's a fast sell out. He's asked for payment in merch so he's getting some of that and possibly a photo pass for other bands under the same management.
Perhaps he can give those photos away too

Yep - I misread the post. I thought they were struggling. Given they are popular - then the manager appears to be acting the smartarse..

Tiriel

Effects wrote: »

They are pretty far from a struggling band. When they do tour it's a fast sell out. He's asked for payment in merch so he's getting some of that and possibly a photo pass for other bands under the same management.
Perhaps he can give those photos away too

That's a much better outcome than a credit and a nod - at least it's something that will enable him take more photos and you never know, sell a few.

amdgilmore

thebaz wrote: »

well the downside is Effects friend gets no money , for his image , from a Popular band - the publicity / credit thing is worthless, certainly if you're hoping to do it professsionally. The whole thing sounds like taking the piss - I'll say no more

I agree in principle but the logic doesn't apply to a saturated market. There are hundreds of amateurs with decent equipment at every gig or event. If you don't give permission for your photos to be used for free, the next guy probably will. If the going rate for amateur gig photos is zero then your gig photos are also worth zero.

I'm all in favour of people getting paid for their work but there's a lot of naivety in these threads. If you want to get paid for what you're doing then you need to be smart about it. Move into a less saturated field or get agency work or start your own business (and credit from a well-known band could actually help with the latter option).

thebaz

amdgilmore wrote: »

I agree in principle but the logic doesn't apply to a saturated market. There are hundreds of amateurs with decent equipment at every gig or event. If you don't give permission for your photos to be used for free, the next guy probably will. If the going rate for amateur gig photos is zero then your gig photos are also worth zero.

I'm all in favour of people getting paid for their work but there's a lot of naivety in these threads. If you want to get paid for what you're doing then you need to be smart about it. Move into a less saturated field or get agency work or start your own business (and credit from a well-known band could actually help with the latter option).

my point is that it seams sad that a good image does not seam to have any real monetary value today - Personally I have stopped doing music photography, as ther seams just no value to it at all - regardless how good that image is - I still do the very odd one , on my own terms; But that thing of we will credit you , gets right under my nose - like damn right, you will credit me, its my image that you want to use.

amdgilmore

True. The value of the average-to-good photo has been completely wiped out. There's probably still a monetary value for exceptional or unrepeatable photos, but it's not often that any photographer, pro or amateur, gets one of those.

magicbastarder

thebaz wrote: »

well the downside is Effects friend gets no money , for his image , from a Popular band - the publicity / credit thing is worthless, certainly if you're hoping to do it professsionally.

it's more than worthless. it's helping devalue the very trade he's expecting to make a living from.
simple rule of thumb - if the photo is to be used in a commercial or money-making context, payment should be assumed.

Wabbit Ears

As long as he puts his logo/mark on the image and the release states that the images can only be used with the mark intact then it can be seen as an advertising oportunity.

twowheelsonly

Generally I'd say no....but....

As it is the photo is worthless to him. At least he has gotten some kickback from it with the merchandise and photo passes as well as what could be invaluable contacts if he does want to progress in that field. He should be in a decent position now to build slowly and make a bit of a name for himself within the music industry.
If he had said no then what has he got? A photograph.
If he had said yes just for a credit it wouldn't have any impact.

Sometimes you just have to be flexible (especially for a newbie) and aim for the reward at the other end. Now he has the potential to cash in on it with further work. In other instances, such as architectural or some landscape work people just like the photo and most likely won't want anything else or it won't open doors for you.

BTW, Astrid Kircherr took a lot of early Beatles photos for free in Hamburg and she did all right out of it. Never made a fortune (how many do??) but did well enough.

CharlieOscar

Why don't you simply ask what other business you will get out of it, and if they cannot give you a straight up answer they are taking the **** out of you.

Be straight up with them and expect the same back. How about get them to sign a contract with you as their official photographer?

Effects

Here's the image and where they used it
http://theknife.net/2014/01/the-knife-coachella-us-tour-2014/

thebaz

Effects wrote: »

Here's the image and where they used it
http://theknife.net/2014/01/the-knife-coachella-us-tour-2014/

they'd be a big eneogh band , certainly able to afford a few quid for a publicity image, i would think

Effects

thebaz wrote: »

they'd be a big enough band , certainly able to afford a few quid for a publicity image, i would think

Yeah, that's what I would think too. But I guess that's what management are for, keeping costs down. My mate seems pretty chuffed to have been asked, and he's a huge fan of the band and he's happy enough with that.

landsleaving

The Knife? Are you kidding? They're an internationally known and pretty successful act. They can afford it. Easily.

How would they react, I wonder, to people asking if it's ok to download their album from a torrent site?

Deadlie

Effects wrote: »

Yeah, that's what I would think too. But I guess that's what management are for, keeping costs down. My mate seems pretty chuffed to have been asked, and he's a huge fan of the band and he's happy enough with that.

Didn't he get a big Box Set of Vinyls at the end of it too though?
It's a small enough use - at the start it sounded like it was gonna be used on Posters and T-Shirts, if it's just that usage, I'd be happy with what he got for it.

As the infamous Reddit post says:

98% of the people requesting to use photos for free are not willing to pay ANY AMOUNT for your photos, no matter how much you low-ball the price, or how much you explain why you should be paid.

At least he got something for what in reality is a very small post.

ScumLord

If the band is well known it's probably worth a punt, the photo might have some return if he lets it out there, it's not going to do anything for him sitting on his hard drive. He should ensure they have limited use of the image.

I can't imagine trying to make money off photography these days, it must be hard and like with all creative jobs it doesn't matter how good you are it's all about how well known you are. If everyone knows your name you don't even have to be that good.

Effects

Deadlie wrote: »

Didn't he get a big Box Set of Vinyls at the end of it too though?
It's a small enough use - at the start it sounded like it was gonna be used on Posters and T-Shirts, if it's just that usage, I'd be happy with what he got for it.

Yeah, turned out to be small enough actually. I told him to at least get something out of them if they wouldn't pay money so he rang them back and then he said he was getting merchandise. Not sure how much vinyl as I don't think he's got it yet.

edanto

Sounds like he went about it the right way, and is getting something. Maybe it could stand to him for pit access having a contact with band management.

It reminded me a bit of this story -
http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2013/11/06/whitey

Effects

Yeah, I loved that reply. I looked it up earlier to remind myself of it.

melekalikimaka

This is exactly why I packed in gig photography years ago.

Complete take the p1ss market these days

Gehad_JoyRider

melekalikimaka wrote: »

This is exactly why I packed in gig photography years ago.

Complete take the p1ss market these days

I think that's down to idiots who shoot for free and dream of epic exposher. :pac: From what I've shot at gigs its all a little easy watch what the lights are doing listen to the beat when the song goes nuts take pictures.

light room preset black and white job done.


granted its not that easy but you know what I mean its not exactly rocket science.. I think Learning how to shoot in studio and doing still life/stock/ advertisement is more a credible job then taking pictures at a concerts is more so pub cannon fodder. We've all seen the climb of a photographer and a fall due to crappy decision making

Effects

I guess most gig photographers who make money from it started working for free/exposure.
Ticketmaster are now using his image on their website selling tickets for the bands US gigs with no credit. Both nights in New York in a 3000 capacity venue are sold out.

Splinters

Unfortunately bands/musicians (both big and local) are notorious for the "There is no budget for photos" line.

Zack Arias tells a great story about wanting to get into music photography years ago but had very little knowledge of bands/musicians at the time other then just being a fan. He started going to a lot of shows in Atlanta and talking to musicians afterwards about maybe doing promo shots some day etc etc. He got that line so many times and was genuinely feeling sorry for a lot of these musicians, seemingly always broke but still trying to get out there and have their music heard.

Then he started taking note of their instruments and out curiosity looking up the value of them. He found a lot of the guys that were telling him they didn't have a budget for photos were playing $1500 Gibson Les Pauls, drumming on $6000 DW drumkits etc. He found out about recording studio costs and how much these bands would spend on getting an album or EP recorded and mixed. These guys all had the money for what they valued as being worth paying for. From that day he decided to take it upon himself to create photos that these bands would deem worth paying for.

Its a nice story and in his case worked out well. I think the reality of it in a lot of cases is quite different though. If your friend had said "no unfortunately the promise of future work and credit isn't accepted by bank as mortgage payment" then they simply would have found another photographer who would provide them with free shots. Saying that at least they were decent enough to provide some merch for your friend. I actually quite like The Knife so that's restored my faith in them quite a bit.

Gehad_JoyRider

Effects wrote: »

I guess most gig photographers who make money from it started working for free/exposure.

Exposure? What good is it, if no one knows who you are! I think to many people dream of exposher as the only door way into photography when in reality its set back after knocking on doors setback knock on more doors set back and so on, I don't believe for a second exposure is a credible or even a viable way to get noticed unless your doing something that holds a very credible work in terms of booth quality and artistic merit.

To many, 10 a penny wannabe pro photographers claim there able to shoot, go through there portfolio theres no lens correction, barreling on telephone poles and so on. Some of them dont even know how to move C/A, I'm currently working on my stock photography and the level of quality you have to have is so high. While granted its not very creative it teaches you quality in lighting, but also accuracy also how to make an Irish breakfast look nice and more so edible.

I think if you want to go pro and want to meet the higher level you have to be prepared for the closed doors the uncertain future and I guess spending a lot of time getting knocked back eventually things go right!

Effects

Have you a link to your stock?