Thread: Photographer

Forgive me if this has already been discussed and I haven't seen it.

I started up my website and have decided to have professional pics done...for multiple reasons: starting to get to a decent weight after baby, the pics husband took suck...lol So, I found one through a friend, she specializes in artistic, natural light sets. And she's super excited to photograph a belly dancer....Great!

So, we have a dilemma...I'm unique to her other clients in that I need photo rights to post on my site, right? She's not sure what to charge me...so, what have you paid for photos to be posted on your websites? How have you and the photographer come to agreements? Etc?

Thanks!

Hmmm....that kind of sends my Spidey Sense tingling. I'm always on photo shoots, and I've NEVER had to pay any type of royalty, commission, or other fee to post a photographer's work for my own promotional purposes. Not saying this doesn't happen, but I also think it's highly unusual. What, by her definition, makes you different from her other clients?

Typically, a photographer will make me sign a model release, which is usually very fair and reasonable. The only stipulation that they usually caution against is you directly profiting off the pictures. So unless you plan on making calendars, T-shirts, posters, lunch boxes or other memorabilia, I really, really don't see any need to pay this fee.

Many photographers will also put their watermark on a picture or ask that you give them credit or link to their site. But to ask that you pay her? I mean, c'mon....you're probably paying and arm and a leg to get your pics done already.

This whole thing just seems really, really weird and unfair to me. Has anyone else had to pay to use their pics???

I think the standard is that you pay a fee to use the images as you see fit OR packages come with a standard amount of images that you can have. There may be restrictions on whether or not you can use images without a water mark (which may cost more).

Most photographers make their money off of the printing fees...so if you are not getting any prints and only using them for electronic reasons, he/she may be looking for a way to earn money.

I don't think what the photog is asking is unreasonable...however you may be able to get better prices. Here is something I found on the internet with a search of "Standard photography rates"

Product Photography - Rates for Non-Professional Work - Photo.net Business Forum

Originally Posted by SatinWorship19

Hmmm....that kind of sends my Spidey Sense tingling. I'm always on photo shoots, and I've NEVER had to pay any type of royalty, commission, or other fee to post a photographer's work for my own promotional purposes. Not saying this doesn't happen, but I also think it's highly unusual. What, by her definition, makes you different from her other clients?

Typically, a photographer will make me sign a model release, which is usually very fair and reasonable. The only stipulation that they usually caution against is you directly profiting off the pictures. So unless you plan on making calendars, T-shirts, posters, lunch boxes or other memorabilia, I really, really don't see any need to pay this fee.

Many photographers will also put their watermark on a picture or ask that you give them credit or link to their site. But to ask that you pay her? I mean, c'mon....you're probably paying and arm and a leg to get your pics done already.

This whole thing just seems really, really weird and unfair to me. Has anyone else had to pay to use their pics???

When you hire a photographer it's a little different than a model agreement. Most photographers charge a flat rate for the session and then charge for prints and images. Seems fair to me.

It would be best if some of the photographers on the board posted their standard practice. I will say that yes, you do need to obtain permission for any commercial use of the pics... that includes use for your promotional materials. If and how much the photographer charges for this permission is up to him/her. Usually they allow use your for promotional purposes w/o an extra fee... so long as your not selling the pictures for profit (the lunch boxes, etc, that Satin mentioned).

Most photographers I have talked to have been pretty consistent on how they charge, even if the rates vary drastically- since they aren't going to be making money off the prints (which is where most of their income comes from) they will charge a copyright fee either per photo that I approve, or I get a flat fee for the session and a smaller per photo fee- I like the second situation because I can purchase a few photos at a time- larger initial investment, but smaller for subsequent from the same shoot. The advantage of this is that I have actually purchased the copyright and can do whatever the heck I want to do with it, no questions asked.

First off, I Am Not A Lawyer. This is my opinions on what may be legal issues. You get what you pay for. YMMV.

If you are hiring the photographer to take pictures for you for your web site, then paying her is standard practice. If she wants to shoot you as a model to add to her portfolio and stock collection, then she may or may not pay you.

Satin: I suspect you have been a paid or TF* model, not someone paying for promo shots.

If you pay her, you should get rights to publish and use for whatever commercial purposes you see fit, but you will not likely own copyright to the images unless you pay through the nose for them.

There are two documents you may sign. One is a Model Release. That allows the photographer to use the images for whatever purposes are spelled out, usually commercial sales and often with a "no porn" clause. The other document is a Usage Agreement. The UA gives you rights to use the photos as spelled out in the agreement. You should be able to see both of these well in advance of the shoot, and the photographer should provide both of them. They are two distinct legal documents and should not be combined, although sometimes they are. The Model Release is for the Photographer and her purposes, the Usage Agreement is for the model. The contents of both documents is negotiable. If you hire the photographer, you may not have to sign a Model Release, but you should have some kind of written agreement worked out before the shoot.

Without a Model Release, there are still many things a Photographer can use the photos for. Without a Usage Agreement, almost anything the Model does with the images will be Copyright Infringement.

If you are hiring the photographer, you should expect to pay a session or sitting fee (probably hourly, maybe part of a package) and pay for prints or electronic usage based on what you want to use. To some degree, you will get what you pay for with the photographer. But (and I can't stress this enough) look through their portfolio and see if you like what you see. Are the pictures flattering and well composed? Even if they aren't dancers, do they convey a feeling that expresses what you are looking for? This is what you are really paying for, not sittings and prints and whatnot. It's what sets a photographer apart from some schmuck with a camera.

Ok, that's enough.

Originally Posted by JGilchrist

This is what you are really paying for, not sittings and prints and whatnot. It's what sets a photographer apart from some schmuck with a camera.

Ok, that's enough.

In the modeling world, we derisively call 'em GWC's: Guy With Camera

My standard package pricing is:
$195
includes unlimited photos in 1 hour
print credit for 35 4x6 prints and 1 8x10

$100 extra hour.
**I have done a couple of dancers sessions and charged and extra $100 and gave them the high res images to use. I still retain the copyright though, but I allow them to use them on their website, business cards, posters, ect. They need to give photo credit when applicable too.
**I am going to come up w/ a better package, but for now..that is what I did....

From a photographers view, that is very cheap for photos. I hardly make anything after I add up all the hours spent on it. 1 hour of shooting, then it takes a while to upload everything to the computer. I shoot in RAW, so then I have to edit all the photos and convert to jpg. Then go back and apply any special filters, or retouch them, brighten the eyes, ect. I can easily shoot about 300 photos in an hour...so imagine how long that takes...LOL...in the end...I have worked about 5 hours...and only made $295?? Not nearly enough!..not to mention resizing them to post on smugmug!

Originally Posted by JGilchrist

But (and I can't stress this enough) look through their portfolio and see if you like what you see. Are the pictures flattering and well composed? Even if they aren't dancers, do they convey a feeling that expresses what you are looking for? This is what you are really paying for, not sittings and prints and whatnot. It's what sets a photographer apart from some schmuck with a camera.

Ok, that's enough.

Ha ha yes too true! Our company tagline is "It's Not Just Photography". Cuz it isn't, it's about communication, rapport, projection etc.

As a photographer, if I shoot you, I own copyright unless otherwise agreed in writing. I can sell you the copyright, but that will cost you, the amount depending on how famous or in-demand you and your pics are.

If you wanted a CD of pics, to use on your website or to make your own prints from, I would give or sell you reproduction rights, and if this were a TF* (Time for CD or Time For Prints) shoot, you would get the reproduction rights free. You wouldn't pay for a TF* shoot.

To use your pics on my website I would need to get you to sign a "Model Release" form which would agree my usage rights.

Copyright law here in the UK is very tricky, but in your case I would say that a written agreement of some kind is needed and that if you are paying for the shoot, you should get some sort of written Reproduction Rights and, in my opinion, not be paying very much for the CD of pics to use unless you are intending to use them for commercial gain (the T Shirts, Mugs etc. that Satin mentioned), rather than personal promotion.

And a written agreement of some sort is essential in this case, as it seems it's a friend doing the shoot and the last thing you want is for this to get in the way of a friendship, should a misunderstanding occur. I've been burned by that one a few times myself so do get it pinned down somehow.

Have a great shoot and do remember to show us the piccies!!
x

Thank you, everyone! I have checked out her portfolio and I've really enjoyed the communication she's had with me...so I'm pretty optimistic about her work - and she's VERY excited about shooting a belly dancer.

She is charging me for the sitting fee and we are doing a one and a half hour session with two costume changes...she was just stuck on the what to charge for website rights...plus, as I told her, I will more than likely buy some prints as well for my practice/private lesson space in my condo...

I will definitely post once I have them done! :)

Taste of Cairo have just updated their website (otherwise I'd have posted this sooner):
Photography*-*Taste Of Cairo

Basic package £80 = USD125 (includes 2 final images on cd, but you can have more, at a small extra fee)
A little more £130 = USD202 (includes 2 final images on cd, but ditto)
Ultimate package £300 = USD465 (includes 6 final images on cd, but ditto)

The really great thing is that Tracey is a dancer and she really knows what dancers need and expect, whether that's action shots or posed shots.