Would you photograph assignments for clients free?

[x-ray]

Some of these situations are acceptable environments for "spec" work. But be careful - depending on the situation, doing this will earn you the ire of those who have fought for a decent wage.

Oh and you always retain copyright... piecework or "work for pay" sets everybody back. Don't do it. It's never worth it. Never.

I used to shoot a lot for Scripps Networks, HGTV, DIY Etc but they now require the photographer to release copyright to them. No thanks.

 

[Oscuro]

I used to shoot a lot for Scripps Networks, HGTV, DIY Etc but they now require the photographer to release copyright to them. No thanks.

Yes, dark ages, I'm afraid.

 

[Trius]

If someone asks me for free work, then I don't consider them a client ... they might be a friend or relative. Or maybe just a freeloader.

 

[lukitas]

Work is becoming cheaper all over the place. Photographers, designers, musicians, postmen, burger flippers. And the more the work is useful, the cheaper it gets : cleaners and nurses and teachers. As if getting job satisfaction means that you shouldn't be paid as much.

Free work is the new trend. Facebook exists by the grace of its users, who create the content that make it interesting - for free. The gizmo, where you have to copy out a deformed/defaced set of characters, to establish you are not a robot, is actually a program, designed to resolve ambiguous readings in googles book scanning effort : minimal amounts of free work, provided by everyone.

Free work is the future!

 

[x-ray]

Everyone has to decide. I often worked on "joint works" where most of the artists involved in the creative process will not own the copyrights in those works. e.g. "Work for hire." I know a lot of photographers who shoot catalogs for hire, and are just glad for the work (which averages in my area about $800 a day, the same as for graphic design). Not sure what one would do with photos of GAP socks anyway?

Of course if the creative is powerful enough, a movie score for instance, will not become part of copyright of the entire movie, and never if it is pre-existing.

Photos can certainly retain a separate copyright, but in my case, shooting film stills for continuity, was just not an option. I am not Annie Leibovitz. 🙂



People have the right to charge whatever they wish, from zero, to huge amounts. Someone will always say "they" are charging too little, or what they are charging is way too much.

All that matters is what they are paying me. If my work is perceived as no more desirable than the cheaper guy (and it really does not matter how much cheaper), then I am most likely screwed, at least from the perspective of that potential client.

This isn't about what anyone charges but is about the entitlement attitude of both the corporate and private world. Budget priced is one thing and free is another.

I have clients that have been with me for over 20 years. They've been loyal, assigned great work, treated my like a professional and paid on time. Some even pay ahead on invoices and pay in two weeks.

I tell these folks if the need a favor it on me. I'll jump through hoops backward for these folks. If they need a freebie they have it. None have ever asked for one but I'd be happy to help.

I do work for one agency I've worked with for decades. My connection goes back before the agency existed. I tell them I'll work on proposals that bring work to me for free. If I can help them procure work that brings work to me then I'll invest in the project with my time photography. I see it as invedting in future work. Never have they abused this and I continue to shoot all their work.

Sometimes it comes down to the long term relationship / friendship with the client. i like letting my good clients know I care about them.

 

[Oscuro]

With more detail from the working stiffs, one can see that the commercial relationship is nuanced. Access is not the same as spec but it can mean different things in different contexts.

Free is not the same as spec, the bookkeeping is simpler, is all.

 

[x-ray]

That is a partnership, which makes sense. It means having trust to develop projects together.

But I still don't see what that has to do with someone else's work. I could care less if someone charges zero for work, I might think them a fool, but it does not impact me.

Compared to many pros (maybe even you?) I give my time away for "free." If one photographer can get $5,000 per day, does that make the photographer who charges $250 a day a jerk? 🙂

EDIT: The reality is that the creative world is full of basically free work, many companies, and most non-profits survive on interns. It is not a pretty sight perhaps, but it has been around my entire work life.

I'm not trying to be rude so please don't think I am. Do you not see any value in what you do for free? Is your work not worth anything? I assume you do it simply because you enjoy what you do, correct? It's your business and no one elses. My take on free work as a professional of 50 years and having invested great amounts of time and money to perfect my work is that it teaches corporations and individuals they don't have to pay professionals because someone out there will do it for free. Free trumps quality in the minds of many photo buyers now.

I think back about the investment I've made in my career. I'm guessing It easily cost me over $1M over fifty plus years. It's not only equipment but the time to learn. After getting into my career I decided I had a lot more to learn and apprenticed a year and a half working 5 & 1/2 days a week for free. I apprenticed under a master photographer and learned more than I ever could have in any school. I learned business, working with art directors, layouts, clients and became a first rate printer and very good photographer. It gave me the foundation for what I am today. Perfecting ones skills takes time and money as does building and operating a serious business, not supporting a hobby.

When anyone gives work away for exposure it teaches people they don't have to pay because they can get it free atleast until they need a real studio and someone with experience that can execute a tough job. At the rate things are going in ten years there will be very few really experienced photographers and fewer well equipped studios. The reason, it takes money to operate a studio. I saw the trend coming and closed my large studio in 2000. I had 6,000sq ft and E6 processing and full dressing rooms, very well equipped studio with loading docks and huge cyc. My studio was big enough to shoot a helicopter in it. I did everything from retail fashion for Levi's and two department stores to Master Craft boats, Philips Electronics and John Deere. I did around 10 manor annual reports a year as well. Clients no longer want to spend money. They've taken the work to cheaper suppliers and some do it themselves. They want cheap.

My prediction, eventually corporations will assign work to folks that will pay the corporation to shoot the assignments for the experience and the exposure. I believe the day is coming.

How many reading this thread would pay to shoot a dream job? Would you pay to shoot a Coke ad, Porsche ad, portrait of a major rock star or athlete? It's coming.

 

[x-ray]

Thinking about free work, companies like Gerber baby products for example runs contests for mothers to send in their best pix of their baby. If they have the best shots Gerber will use their baby pictures in their ads. Free work, yes, no? They give their baby exposure and own all rights to the images. Free work, yes?

At one time I did a great deal of high budget work for Gerber when they didn't mind paying for it.

 

[mfogiel]

Money is just a modern means of saying: " I will return the help", where there is no money in exchange for work, this is as simple as free riding. No society accepts free riding, not even animal societies. If a customer suffers from lack of cash, he can pay with shares, after all he wants you to share the risk of his business.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Ours does! If you read the posts above, companies not paying young workers is very common, both in the US and EU. It is an intrenched system, a sort of twisted apprenticeship.

Young workers fight for internships, which also serves as a class and racial segregation, since only the wealthy can afford to work years for free.

Quite.

But another aspect of this has occurred to me: publicity. If the work is already done (not commissioned) then depending on the exposure it may be worth while. This is especially true for fine artists, and more especially still for those who are not yet well known. In such a case it can be free publicity; and half a page or even a page in a magazine, with contact details for the photographer, agent, gallery or publisher, may more than compensate for the relatively minor effort of sending a high-res scan to the journal.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Trius]

Work is becoming cheaper all over the place. ... burger flippers.

In some US states burger flippers will be getting a significant increase. Here in NY minimum wage for fast food workers will be $15 in a couple of years. While many are apoplectic that their Big Mac heart attack will end up costing more, there is a more significant impact for some businesses. My company hires a lot of people who are entering or re-entering the workforce. The nature of the business at present is that our clients want "better, faster, cheaper" -- which means pressure on hourly wages. People get merit increases, but not at the rate that executive management receive increases and bonuses.

Back to burger flipping ... The $15 minimum for fast food workers means it will be an even bigger challenge for us to attract, hire and retain at the entry level. I can't predict the ultimate result, but I would not be surprised if the ripple isn't far reaching and more than a "ripple".

I agree this is pretty far OT from the opening post, except to say that wide-reaching "work for free" is not sustainable.

 

[ABrosig]

I will work for free when I find the cause to be worthwhile and there is no budget. In my case, this concerns small events or campaigns that have a strong ethical and humanitarian scope.
However, this is always my own initiative and I get to see the visibility and promotions part of the event or campaign through, so I can at least list it in my resume and it will help build my future profile as a communications consultant. If that can't be part of the deal, then no deal.

Businesses that ask me for freebies while planning to make money off my work, don't let the door hit ya on the way out. 😉

I'm with you on this. I've done some free work for worthy causes. But, in general, it's no pay, no play.

I always amazes me the number of truly large corporations who expect free work. "We don't have any money in the budget for photography," or "We have a guy/gal in our office who could shoot it, but we like the look of your work" seem to have become by-words in many industries, including media companies.

I got a call once, a few years ago, from a major national network. I was the only one with this particular image and they wanted it. When I asked them what their budget was, they actually got abusive, telling me what an honor it would be to have my byline on their network and how much amazing exposure I would get. I calmly (more calmly than them, by the way) told them once my landlord started taking bylines for my rent, I would gladly supply them with the image. Until then, no way.

We have to stick by our guns and refuse spec/free work/comp requests. The ONLY way I'll work on spec is if my expenses are covered and I have a WRITTEN guarantee of additional, full-rate work in the future. I've pitched that a few times and have yet to get a gig from it.

 

[x-ray]

Quite.

But another aspect of this has occurred to me: publicity. If the work is already done (not commissioned) then depending on the exposure it may be worth while. This is especially true for fine artists, and more especially still for those who are not yet well known. In such a case it can be free publicity; and half a page or even a page in a magazine, with contact details for the photographer, agent, gallery or publisher, may more than compensate for the relatively minor effort of sending a high-res scan to the journal.

Cheers,

R.

From my observations the only thing that comes from exposure / free work is more free work. Rarely do pay jobs come from free.

 

[Roger Hicks]

From my observations the only thing that comes from exposure / free work is more free work. Rarely do pay jobs come from free.

True, but that's not what I'm saying.

You don't expect to be paid for running an advertisement.

You do expect to be paid for taking pictures.

I'm talking about something in between: existing work, run in a piece about the photographer in a widely-published magazine or even book.

Even if you are well established, this can be useful, especially if you've a book to plug. If you're not well established it can be a godsend.

In other words, I'm talking about something between advertising and showing someone your portfolio. You don't charge people to look at your ads or portfolio, do you?

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Tricky question. Yesterday an old friend of mine, asked me what photos I had of a work from the '70s. An author has asked for photos, and because it is a so called scholarly work the author wants them for free "if possible" knowing full well that some photographers will demand payment for photos held by artists.

The author knows of course that one lawsuit from a copyright holder can destroy any possible profits.

Generally it is considered good publicity to be in a book. But my friend said, these kind of books do not really move the sales needle much at all. I consider the photos belong to the artist in question, so I am neutral.

Exactly. The last "scholarly work" that used one of my pictures was fortunately (a) very expensive, over $100 or maybe even $200 and (b) a subject that interested me, so I just asked for a copy of the book. By contrast, the last audited circulation of Amateur Photographer magazine I could find was 18,500 a week. That can "move the needle", I suspect.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

If your parents are wealthy here you go...

The _____________________ offers both academic year and summer internship programs for college students. Internships are geared toward juniors, seniors, and graduate students (no freshmen). Under the supervision of a department head ...

Internships are an excellent opportunity for students to learn about a specific area within a mid-sized _______ institution. Academic year interns are required to commit to a minimum of 2–3 days per week for the entire semester. The summer program is nine weeks and full-time. There is no stipend, but summer interns receive two monthly MetroCards, are eligible for regular employee discounts at the _________ restaurant. ...

Academic Internships for undergraduate and graduate students are by semester or full year. To apply, submit a resume and cover letter to __________ stating the departments you are interested in working in, the skills you bring, and how you hope to contribute to the department. There is no specific deadline for the academic year, but it is best to apply before the beginning of the semester. For details on the summer program, please refer to the information below. The deadline for submissions for the summer internship is February 1.

Hammer on dem shackles good, massa...

Cheers,

R.

 

[aoresteen]

This is exactly why the business is, in part, going down the toilet. People shooting for access is...nah not going to say it.

I listed those situations as they will NEVER occur. Impossible. Any company covering those events have their own pros who they pay very well.

So since the situations will never happen, I could never shoot them - for free or other wise. So therefore I don't work for free.