My image in a 2012 calendar?

awp said:
Sorry - but most of these competitions are aimed at making the publishers money by grabbing pictures for free. I don't see any merit in that for any photographer.
Click to expand...

Not every merit achieved in life has to come from seeing £££££'s.
These companies aren't forcing anyone to enter, you as the photographer decide to enter or not. Some people are more than happy just to see a picture they have taken in print, thats all that matters whether you or I agree or not.
 
awp said:
...and what is that if not ego?
Click to expand...

I was merely stating that having your picture in print is payment in itself, not having a huge ego. If it was ego they would just be doing that aiming for top mags etc not a local calendar for example where the prize is a copy of the calendar.
 
Ok. I'll leave at that. We're never going to agree 100%.
 
awp said:
...and what is that if not ego?
Click to expand...

"Ego - Appropriate pride in oneself; self-esteem"
Don't see a problem with that personally.

Or from another angle. From your website:

"I also shoot for stock and am represented by a growing list of major picture libraries including Alamy, Collections, Human Spectra, Loop Images, Photographers Direct, Photoshot, Scottish Viewpoint and Shorelark"

Is this massaging your ego or purely aiming at increasing the chance of more future sales? :shrug:
 
pitkin2020 said:
Not every merit achieved in life has to come from seeing £££££'s.
These companies aren't forcing anyone to enter, you as the photographer decide to enter or not. Some people are more than happy just to see a picture they have taken in print, thats all that matters whether you or I agree or not.
Click to expand...

Indeed! ...... :thumbs:
 
awp said:
Charity may be different - but so far as I can tell this is a commercial organsation making money out of photographers who are happy to give their pictures away for free. It does them no good and it does the industry no good - it only benefits the publisher. In 40 years I have never got any work from a credit! These people prey on amateur egos.
Click to expand...
The point was that the person wouldn't specifically be doing it for charity - they'd be doing it to get a portfolio of published work they could use to promote their own business.
When you're talking website design or software development it's probably going to make more of a difference to point people towards people using your work; especially as this doesn't sound like a 'big business' calendar company.
However, if you're talking listing a portfolio of published works for potential clients, I'm sure the company logo thrown in there can't hurt.
 
awp said:
Ok. I'll leave at that. We're never going to agree 100%.
Click to expand...

I don't think we will agree. I do appreciate this is your trade and it can be quite annoying see images that you would get paid for just being given away and it may have an effect on your business. I wonder how many mechanics worried when the Haynes Manuals came out?

What ever trade your in there will always be a hobbyist/amateur doing it for free or cheap. It could be for a number of reasons, they don't want to earn a living off it and see it as a little extra income or they enjoy doing it/sharing it and that is enough payment in itself or worse still they have no idea how business works and under prices themselves.

These companies getting these so called images are just like you, running a business. How many images have you sold of people that may not even be aware that they were in the shot, have you exploited someone or someones property in the name of stock photography.
 
awp said:
...and what is that if not ego?
Click to expand...

I am sorry but I fail to see you point free publication could be seen as purely an ego thing by someone that is syndical but I often notice your posts including in my own threads and I have to say although I value the experience that you bring to TP you are often overly aggressive and confrontational towards anyone who's opinion differs from your own, when you also seem to have different opinions from one thread to the next

To the OP it's a great picture and deserves to be paid but if a few calendars is what is offered I think I would still go for it as I do believe it could lead to future openings and I can understand the pleasure of sharing your images with a wider audience,

Do you submit images to the TP calendar I know I have and would I expect to get paid, no I would not, and what's more I'll probably end up buying a few :lol:

I know TP Calendar is slightly different situation
 
Last edited:
Can I just say thank you for the entertainment value on this thread, I normally read the equipment forums to learn more as I am new to it, but this has been much more fun to follow :-)
 
Archant seems to hold several photo competitions per year and amateur galleries on their site, as a consequence they don't have high outlay costs for images in their magazines because people give them all what they need for free. The prizes are usually pretty crap in the competitions though. If you just want to see your image used in a magazine or calendar then you should do it, get it out of your system.
Archant didn't want to pay me for my image a few weeks ago, but that was ok, because I didn't give it to them, I have been published other places but prefer to be paid for it now as being published is no longer such a thrill on it own. I have sold images to people via flickr and via my own website. I have spent money driving to locations, buying equipment and spending my time taking my shots so if somebody is going to make money out of them I would like it to be me as well. I wouldn't enter any archant competitions or buy their mags anymore.
 
Last edited:
sc0ttie said:
Archant didn't want to pay me for my image a few weeks ago, but that was ok, because I didn't give it to them, I have been published other places but prefer to be paid for it now as being published is no longer such a thrill on it own.
Click to expand...

Nail, Hammer, Hit....

Some people have NOT lost that thrill, and to some, including myself, photography is a hobby. If I wasn't spending money on kit it would probably be spent on motorbikes or some other interest. Making money, for some, isn't what it's about. However, if somebody likes an image that I shot for myself and they think it's good enough to be published in their magazine then I'm happy.

If I can generate a little bit of money to help pay for the upgrades then that's handy too, but one doesn't necessarily have to follow the other. If somebody isn't willing to pay, and you want money, then fine, say no....

Steve
 
Jelster said:
to some, including myself, photography is a hobby.
Click to expand...

From your website "Our aim is to provide a very professional modern photographic service."

Make up your mind - which is it?
 
awp said:
From your website "Our aim is to provide a very professional modern photographic service."

Make up your mind - which is it?
Click to expand...

I dont see your point,
are you saying that because he sees it as a hobby and not a career
he can't produce professional quality images ? Or provide a 'professional service' ?

A pro photorapher does not necessarily have to have a career in photography, it can just be a hobby.
 
Last edited:
I used to work as a photographer for Archant. We produced a number of regional papers and a lot of magazines and even then there were scads of submitted shots coming in, some of which were used, some even paid for. Like all such organisations, they have been struggling recently, and a lot of titles have been closed.

It's simple economics, I'm afraid. I imagine the people who made quill pens suffered similar angst when typewriters came along, and while I have some sympathy for pro snappers who used to be able to charge hundreds for a couple of days shooting, the reality is that more people than ever before are capable of producing publishable work.

You have to move with the times, guys! I still find plenty of paying work now I'm freelance - it's there if you look for it. Sitting and moaning isn't going to work. No-one is forcing anyone to enter a competition, and there are plenty of hobbyists who are capable of taking outstanding shots and will do so just for the kudos, so why wouldn't the publishers take advantage of this?

There seems to be a bitter little group of pro snappers who seem to want to limit published shots to people who are members of some sort of club. Sounds a bit like communist Russia when only state approved journalists could get published.

PS: Anyone boycotting Archant magazines will have to stop buying British Photographic Industry News, Photography Monthly, Professional Photographer, Which Digital Camera...
 
jon ryan said:
PS: Anyone boycotting Archant magazines will have to stop buying British Photographic Industry News, Photography Monthly, Professional Photographer, Which Digital Camera...
Click to expand...

Never bought them, so that is fine with me.
 
This always happens. Arguments that Pros stomping their feet. Really if you think that is what it is then you need to sit up and listen.

Someone is making money of your work! Do you think the printer does it for free? Do you think the designer does it for free? Do you think the staff work for free?

You are the only one working for free! That means you are being used! Ripped Off etc.

I don't care what you do, I do care that people are being exploited by people preying on their innocence and egos! Not that ego is a bad thing, but ego gets in the way of common sense sometimes.

It's not that you are an amateur or whatever making it harder for pros, It is that you are being exploited by people who make money off your hard work and those of us who have seen it happen time and time again are trying to help you understand the business side of things.
 
Last edited:
jon ryan said:
So, what's your solution?
Click to expand...

There is no solution, As I cannot dictate what people do, but I would get back to them with a price for the image, if they don't use it, fine, move on.

Why not use images to create your own run of calendars? Even if for charity. A charity calendar gets your name out there, will get you in local press if done right and will bring in more custom to you as a photographer than giving it away to some big business for free.

It isn't to not work for free, it is about being smart with how you do things and not letting yourself be exploited.
 
I agree about `getting yourself out there`. Photography is a tough, highly competitive business. Being capable of taking great shots is just part of it. Thing is, a lot of people who can take great shots don't necessarily want to do so full time, but they do like to see their work published and often don't care about being paid for it. So they'll enter competitions. Editors have seen budgets and staff slashed over the last few years and naturally will try to save by using free shots if they can. Who can blame them?

The world of photography has changed hugely in the last few years. Photographers have to adapt - or get out.
 
ding76uk said:
This always happens. Arguments that Pros stomping their feet. Really if you think that is what it is then you need to sit up and listen.

Someone is making money of your work! Do you think the printer does it for free? Do you think the designer does it for free? Do you think the staff work for free?

You are the only one working for free! That means you are being used! Ripped Off etc.

I don't care what you do, I do care that people are being exploited by people preying on their innocence and egos! Not that ego is a bad thing, but ego gets in the way of common sense sometimes.

It's not that you are an amateur or whatever making it harder for pros, It is that you are being exploited by people who make money off your hard work and those of us who have seen it happen time and time again are trying to help you understand the business side of things.
Click to expand...

Where is the hard work from someone who has a snap shot published?? If they went out to seek a location, made sure they got there at the right time, visited the site numerous times to get the perfect light conditions fair do, they would be very stupid to be giving away images for free when a lot of work has gone into getting it. I expect a lot of people are giving away images for free probably went to the location once took a photo and it turned out very well. Someone liked it and it got published.

As I said before and funnily enough it was skipped, how many pro togs have sold stock photos of someones building or of someone and hasn't paid the person/owner anything for the privelage yet have made money from it.

Of course if its your business your aim is to get paid for everything you do regardless if it took 2 weeks to produce or 2 mins but as I have said before the money isn't important to everyone the enjoyment of taking the picture is all they want, if its get published thats just a bonus not the intention. What would happen if everyone said, Right no more free images, every image has to be bought. How many companies would then switch to buying images instantly or just employ one full time tog getting the images they want. Not all images can be recreated for sure but most stock pics like landscapes, buildings etc can all be recreated and it would be far cheaper to employ one person on 30k+ a year getting all those images where they would own the copyright then to buy the images with a limited license at a few hundred at a time.......you can't have your cake and eat it
 
pitkin2020 said:
Where is the hard work from someone who has a snap shot published?? If they went out to seek a location, made sure they got there at the right time, visited the site numerous times to get the perfect light conditions fair do, they would be very stupid to be giving away images for free when a lot of work has gone into getting it. I expect a lot of people are giving away images for free probably went to the location once took a photo and it turned out very well. Someone liked it and it got published.

As I said before and funnily enough it was skipped, how many pro togs have sold stock photos of someones building or of someone and hasn't paid the person/owner anything for the privelage yet have made money from it.

Of course if its your business your aim is to get paid for everything you do regardless if it took 2 weeks to produce or 2 mins but as I have said before the money isn't important to everyone the enjoyment of taking the picture is all they want, if its get published thats just a bonus not the intention.

What would happen if everyone said, Right no more free images, every image has to be bought. How many companies would then switch to buying images instantly or just employ one full time tog getting the images they want. Not all images can be recreated for sure but most stock pics like landscapes, buildings etc can all be recreated and it would be far cheaper to employ one person on 30k+ a year getting all those images where they would own the copyright then to buy the images with a limited license at a few hundred at a time.......you can't have your cake and eat it
Click to expand...

Very few snap shots get published, time an effort has gone into it whether that takes 20 seconds or 2 hours.

It takes a mechanic 2 mins to change a bulb on a car, yet they will still charge for it because the skill is being able to do it, no matter how easy. If photography was that easy, why would there ever be a pro photographer?

If you are the only one in any organisation/business/chain not getting paid, then you are the one being taken advantage of. It is not about money it is about not being ripped off.

Magazines do have staff photographers they use in some cases, the freelance market has always existed as what if you need to take photos of different people, in different areas of the country, on the same day.

My question with this is always the same:

Why if your work is good enough to be used by a publication is it not good enough to be paid for?
 
Last edited:
pitkin2020 said:
......... Right no more free images, every image has to be bought. How many companies would then switch to buying images instantly or just employ one full time tog getting the images they want. Not all images can be recreated for sure but most stock pics like landscapes, buildings etc can all be recreated and it would be far cheaper to employ one person on 30k+ a year getting all those images where they would own the copyright then to buy the images with a limited license at a few hundred at a time.......you can't have your cake and eat it
Click to expand...

If only.

Whichever way you look at it, it would be more work for photographers.

Salaried, fine, you don't keep your copyright but you have all the advantages that fulltime employment brings.

Freelance, fees would rise making freelance photograophy a viable career option again - as it was maybe 10-15 years ago.
 
I think this is a great thread. I've seen a few here where someone is slated for suggesting they might give their picture away or work for free to gain experience but this is the 1st I have seen that properly lays out the arguements for and against.

To be honest, I believe the free market will always win. Meaning if you want to make money from photography you have to compete with everyone else, that includes competing with amateurs who are happy to give away images for the rewards of having their name published. If you can't compete with that then you might consider reviewing your career options.

i also don't buy the "give it away now and you will never be able to charge for it" argument. If that was the case then no-one would do work experience.
I think calling work experience being ripped off completely devalues the concepts of learning and wisdom.

I'd compare this with the SW industry - there are millions of programmers out there that are perfectly happy to give away their code as part of open source developments. And yes, a lot of that code ends up in commmercial applications. Does it devalue the industry or reduce their chances of getting work? Of course not, it is a great showcase of their talent to take to future employers. Has it killed the SW industry? No, changed it maybe but not killed it.

So to answer the OP I say go for it as long as it makes you feel good :)

Toby
 
Last edited:
ding76uk said:
This always happens. Arguments that Pros stomping their feet. Really if you think that is what it is then you need to sit up and listen.

Someone is making money of your work! Do you think the printer does it for free? Do you think the designer does it for free? Do you think the staff work for free?

You are the only one working for free! That means you are being used! Ripped Off etc.

I don't care what you do, I do care that people are being exploited by people preying on their innocence and egos! Not that ego is a bad thing, but ego gets in the way of common sense sometimes.

It's not that you are an amateur or whatever making it harder for pros, It is that you are being exploited by people who make money off your hard work and those of us who have seen it happen time and time again are trying to help you understand the business side of things.
Click to expand...

I see your line of reasoning, but would disagree with your conclusions.
There are many examples in daily life where people give their time for free alongside others who are paid - it it a choice that those who work for free have made; they may feel the cause is worthy, or they are gaining valuable experience, or, in the case of amateur photographers, that the 'recognition' of publication is sufficient reward.

I'm not saying that some competitions are not simply a way for publishers to get cheap (or free) images, just that if you enter knowing your reward will, at best, be having an image published then that is a choice you are free to make.
 
Faldrax said:
I see your line of reasoning, but would disagree with your conclusions.
There are many examples in daily life where people give their time for free alongside others who are paid - it it a choice that those who work for free have made; they may feel the cause is worthy, or they are gaining valuable experience, or, in the case of amateur photographers, that the 'recognition' of publication is sufficient reward.

I'm not saying that some competitions are not simply a way for publishers to get cheap (or free) images, just that if you enter knowing your reward will, at best, be having an image published then that is a choice you are free to make.
Click to expand...

Well put. :thumbs:
 
Faldrax said:
I'm not saying that some competitions are not simply a way for publishers to get cheap (or free) images, just that if you enter knowing your reward will, at best, be having an image published then that is a choice you are free to make.
Click to expand...

That is not the case here though is it? A commercial organisation have asked to use an image for free.

Working for free is not wrong, I have never said that, but people are being taken advantage of and not being able to see it. Great I understand the being published thrill etc. But people prey on this to get free work they would otherwise have to pay for. It is exploitation.

E.g. The mechanic I mentioned. He would probably put lights in for free for a retired pensioner and just charge for the bulbs, or service the vehicle for the local dog rescue. Good, I applaud that and am a big fan of it.

Do you think if the local lorry firm came in and asked for a free service on their lorries he should do that for free? That is the equivalent of what is happening. A commercial venture taking advantage of a situation.

A commercial venture are making money off the hard work of other people. People are not being nice by using you photo. It has a commercial worth and will make them money if they use it.

The people who are wanting to use it know that, but try to prey on those who do not see it they are being exploited by the "good exposure" "can call yourself published"

Work for free. Help people out. Shoot for trade of goods and services. I am in favour of all this.

It only stops when other people are making money off your skill level and hard work.

The example of the lorry crash photo that if they dont use it no one will.

Did you put time and effort into getting that pic? or was it a case of had camera right place, right time? If so you lose nothing by leaving on your hard drive. You gain by giving it away free. You gain the reputation of being the free guy. You may not mind now, but when you do want to charge, what then?
 
I get your aguement but just see things a bit differently.....
Shoot for trade of goods and services. I am in favour of all this.
Click to expand...

Should I mention that the OP is being paid via trade in goods ;) Maybe we have moved on such details though.

It is exploitation.
Click to expand...
I'd argue that it is only exploitation if the person being "exploited" doesn't like the situation. In this case don't play ball, it is your choice. So no exploitation here....
Profiting from others free work is not exploitation in my view. EDIT: as long as they have the right to withdraw their work anyway.

Did you put time and effort into getting that pic? or was it a case of had camera right place, right time? If so you lose nothing by leaving on your hard drive. You gain by giving it away free. You gain the reputation of being the free guy. You may not mind now, but when you do want to charge, what then?
Click to expand...
the crux of the arguement and where I disagree. If you want to charge later then charge, there is nothing stopping you. If your service is worth it then you will be paid, if it isn't then it will not. Like it or not the world has changed and is awash with superb images. So the only way you will get paid for them is if you add some value that the free images do not.

Toby
 
Last edited:
brman said:
Should I mention that the OP is being paid via trade in goods ;) Maybe we have moved on such details though.
Click to expand...

Yes but does he want free calendars? He has not stated that 10 calendars are of any use to him. Trade in goods is fine as long as you actually want what is offered.


brman said:
I'd argue that it is only exploitation if the person being "exploited" doesn't like the situation. In this case don't play ball, it is your choice. So no exploitation here....
Profiting from others free work is not exploitation in my view. EDIT: as long as they have the right to withdraw their work anyway.
Click to expand...

The issue here is many do not understand the situation. If you never had to deal with it you would never know otherwise. Many do, but many do not have the knowledge to make an informed decision. I class that as exploitation



brman said:
the crux of the arguement and where I disagree. If you want to charge later then charge, there is nothing stopping you. If your service is worth it then you will be paid, if it isn't then it will not. Like it or not the world has changed and is awash with superb images. So the only way you will get paid for them is if you add some value that the free images do not.
Click to expand...

and the way to add value in many cases is not to give them away. People on here have been asked for free pics, but because they have taken advice they have made money on it.

Some will say "I dont do it for money" BUt when a photo can pay for that shiny new lens you have been lusting after, many will change their minds.
 
Well I didn't realise I'd open such a can of worms on here. I can see the issues from both sides of the fence (pro vs am). The way I am looking at it is this:

If I left the image on my hard drive, it would never be seen and never have any chance of either making any money or gaining any recognition. By allowing a free usage on this occasion I stand a better chance of either. If something comes of it then so be it. If not, then it's doesn't owe me anything.

As has been said many times, the photography industry is forever changing with the easier access to cameras and software capable of producing fantastic images now. This free vs paid image debate is going to come up more and more.
 
wippers said:
Well I didn't realise I'd open such a can of worms on here. I can see the issues from both sides of the fence (pro vs am). The way I am looking at it is this:

If I left the image on my hard drive, it would never be seen and never have any chance of either making any money or gaining any recognition. By allowing a free usage on this occasion I stand a better chance of either. If something comes of it then so be it. If not, then it's doesn't owe me anything.

As has been said many times, the photography industry is forever changing with the easier access to cameras and software capable of producing fantastic images now. This free vs paid image debate is going to come up more and more.
Click to expand...

The point of the matter is, there is no solely right or wrong answer, essentially.

It can only be based on someones opinion.
To an extent, everyone is right.
To those who say "It won't gain you any recognition or benefit you at all"
yes, that's true to an extent. it is UNLIKELY he'll get much recognition for giving a photo to this calendar for £100. But, there's always a chance, where as if he didn't do it, there's no chance.

In other words, give up the debate.
 
wippers said:
Well I didn't realise I'd open such a can of worms on here. I can see the issues from both sides of the fence (pro vs am).
Click to expand...

Go back and read all the posts again - it has nothing to do with pro v am. It has to do with exploitation by the publisher. Strangely it's the 'ams' who keep raising this pro v am issue!
 
awp said:
Go back and read all the posts again - it has nothing to do with pro v am. It has to do with exploitation by the publisher. Strangely it's the 'ams' who keep raising this pro v am issue!
Click to expand...

The tog isn't being exploited though, they're willing submit an image. Its all there for the person submitting the image to read if they actually take the time to read it. All this "The tog is being exploited" make sit sound like they are in a chinese sweat factory where there is no option..........
 
Jeez! ... Willingly giving something away isn't being exploited........ How can it be?
 
Splog said:
Jeez! ... Willingly giving something away isn't being exploited........ How can it be?
Click to expand...

ex·ploit
verb /ikˈsploit/  
exploited, past participle; exploited, past tense; exploiting, present participle; exploits, 3rd person singular present

1. Make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource)
- 500 companies sprang up to exploit this new technology

2. Use (a situation or person) in an unfair or selfish way
- the company was exploiting a legal loophole
- accusations that he exploited a wealthy patient

3. Benefit unfairly from the work of (someone), typically by overworking or underpaying them
- making money does not always mean exploiting others

Dictionary definition point 3 seems to sum it up.
 
If everyone in the production chain is being paid - except the photographer - who is supplying the images that sell the product - then either they are being exploited - or surrendering their image for an ego trip. There seems no other explanation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top