Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I wonder if Subway gets e-mails titled "we have no budget for sandwiches, but we'll put the word out for you". The writer did too.
It pretty much nails it.
This is of course, not taking into account people who actually volunteer (for whatever the reason may be). But, instead, on the general sentiment that photos are "a dime a dozen" (if they're feeling generous). The "anti-establishment" dropping into the pool, while the "anti-dropping" are trying to keep established in the chlorine-lacking pool.
It is a transition time, no doubt. How you deal with it is as important as how you practice the craft.
It pretty much nails it.
This is of course, not taking into account people who actually volunteer (for whatever the reason may be). But, instead, on the general sentiment that photos are "a dime a dozen" (if they're feeling generous). The "anti-establishment" dropping into the pool, while the "anti-dropping" are trying to keep established in the chlorine-lacking pool.
It is a transition time, no doubt. How you deal with it is as important as how you practice the craft.
Messsucherkamera
Established
Nothing in the world of photography is free
Nothing in the world of photography is free
My sentiments exactly.
Cameras, lenses, film, batteries, camera bags, printing, framing, etc. aren't free. Everybody in the photographic food chain wants a piece of the pie.
If I went to the camera store with the intent of going home with a new camera or lens and informed the camera salesman, "I have no budget to pay for this camera, but I need it anyway. I'm sure you understand" - I'd go home empty handed - as I would expect to.
Nothing in the world of photography is free
My sentiments exactly.
Cameras, lenses, film, batteries, camera bags, printing, framing, etc. aren't free. Everybody in the photographic food chain wants a piece of the pie.
If I went to the camera store with the intent of going home with a new camera or lens and informed the camera salesman, "I have no budget to pay for this camera, but I need it anyway. I'm sure you understand" - I'd go home empty handed - as I would expect to.
Corto
Well-known
Does no one just take pictures anymore?
Bobbo
Well-known
Sure. But if someone else is going to make money off my work, then you can bet your ass I expect to get paid for my efforts. If that were my primary source of income, I would be doing everything to keep it going.
Last edited:
gavinlg
Veteran
I could not agree more with that entire piece. It gets very old very quickly being told by people that have sought you out for your previous work that "we don't have a big budget but you'll get heaps of exposure".
gavinlg
Veteran
Some of us actually do it for a living. More what this is about...
Corto
Well-known
Sorry.
Life goes on man, The next day someone will take a shot you did not.
Some of us have actually done this for a long time.....
gavinlg
Veteran
Sure, life goes on... But it is literally the same thing as calling an architecture office and asking for a complete design free of charge.
The more people wrap their head around it the better...
Corto
Well-known
Strange comparison.
Just because you see and capture something doesnt mean you own anyone. Anything.
Last edited:
Messsucherkamera
Established
Your images have inherent value
Your images have inherent value
Even if photography is not your primary source of income, there is inherent value in high quality, well crafted images with insight and visual impact.
It matters not whether an outstanding image was made by a professional or a hobbyist - it is worth money and the creator of that image should be fairly compensated by the user of that image - particularly when the user of that image is using it to create income for himself or his business.
This is just my opinion, and others may not agree - but I say never give your photography away except in two cases:
1 - As a gift or a token of friendship to friends or family, or
2 - To help deserving not for profit charities and agencies who are working for the benefit of others who are in need.
JMHO.
Your images have inherent value
Agreed.
Even if photography is not your primary source of income, there is inherent value in high quality, well crafted images with insight and visual impact.
It matters not whether an outstanding image was made by a professional or a hobbyist - it is worth money and the creator of that image should be fairly compensated by the user of that image - particularly when the user of that image is using it to create income for himself or his business.
This is just my opinion, and others may not agree - but I say never give your photography away except in two cases:
1 - As a gift or a token of friendship to friends or family, or
2 - To help deserving not for profit charities and agencies who are working for the benefit of others who are in need.
JMHO.
rlouzan
Well-known
Not without a waver!!! Since you made the picture, you are still responsible if someone sues them.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Exactly. Either free, from love or respect or both, or at 'market value' as far as you can determine it. But the point about model releases is important too.
Cheers,
R.
gavinlg
Veteran
It means that I own the photograph. It's not a strange comparison at all.
jarski
Veteran
good writing. IMO its mainly because of digital (together with Internet). on one hand this has democratized photography tremendously. but because "everybody can do it", some people dont value results skilled photog can deliver, at all.
I Love Film
Well-known
If the website, or business or whatever can easily get all the usable images similar to yours they need for free, then the market value of YOUR images is zero.
There are lots of photographers who are getting huge sums of money because they can produce images that cannot be found for free. Try to figure out what they are doing.
There are lots of photographers who are getting huge sums of money because they can produce images that cannot be found for free. Try to figure out what they are doing.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Basically you need to do work that is different than all the amatuers are doing. That doesn't necessarily mean different subject matter. I've licensed photos of things that a million people have also shot, but my photo was better than theirs.
People will pay if you have something unique...they have no choice in that case, if they want the image. They'll also pay for technical quality. Not everyone will, but increasing numbers of people who buy images are getting tired of 'free' images that turn out to have serious technical flaws in the fullres file that didnt show on the web, or images edited on non-calibratedmonitors that don't print correctly, etc.
Once or twice burned, they see the value in paying a pro. Remember that a printed thing like a book cover or music CD case costs many thousands of dollars just to pay the printers for their work. If the final product looks crappy because some idiot with a cheap D-SLR who thinks its cool to give away images gave a picture that didnt print right, the 'buyer' has lost BIG MONEY in having the job reprinted!
thegman
Veteran
I think Chris is right. These days almost any artwork like website, photos, illustrations can be had for next to nothing or free. However, if you want something just right I think there remains a healthy market for that.
In the computer industry, you can get a good website for $50, but a great website has probably never been more expensive.
In the computer industry, you can get a good website for $50, but a great website has probably never been more expensive.
hans voralberg
Veteran
Well if you pay $50 for a website I wouldn't call it anywhere near good! I used to work in a team who charges north of 10k just for a basic website that won't give the future admin heart-attack or anger-induced stress.
Same thing applies to photos, you gotta pay if you want something that works well and not bug the life out of you.
Same thing applies to photos, you gotta pay if you want something that works well and not bug the life out of you.