Absolutely ask for compensation. Insist on it. If the work didn't have worth, they'd not want it in the first place. And by giving it away for nothing, you make it much tougher for our fellow photographers who do this for a living (maybe you yourself?)
Perhaps payment could be in kind for goods or services, as @MattKing suggested; but this should be spelled out in writing so that each knows the value of what the other is trading in the transaction.
Grant usage rights; DO NOT TRANSFER COPYRIGHT---read the fine print.
Yes, please ask for money. How much depends on the use. If its gonna be small inside the report, maybe $100. If its graces the cover a couple thousand. Seriously. I earn my living partly from licensing my photos like this. People write me all the time asking to use pics for corporate stuff. Some ask straight up how much money I want; they're the good ones, they know it has value and I need to eat too. Others don't mention money but don't come out and ask for it for free either; they hope you'll just give it to them. I always write back and thank them for contacting me and that they can license the pic for $xxx. Most pay and I send them a file of the resolution needed for the use they want it for. Some I never hear from again, they wanted free and went looking elsewhere.
I occasionally get such requests, so it's probably legitimate, but you should charge for this kind of usage. Consider that they could just go to a stock photo site and license an image like this fairly inexpensively, so they're being really cheap by trying to get it for free. You might at least see what the stock agencies are charging for such usage and offer it to them for that much, and since it would be a direct sale you don't have to split it with an agency.
Alamy has a pretty good calculator for determining the price of an image for various kinds of usage, so you might go to alamy.com, search for a similar image (maybe find one image that's Royalty Free and one that's Rights Managed for comparison), then plug in all the parameters and see how much it would cost you to license it for the same purpose, and charge that much.
I hope it is a real offer. It's an indicator that art buyers are shopping for images at non-traditional outlets. There have even a theft by an ad agency for a Toyota ad. http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/content...863d2f3831985c
If the offer is real, don't short yourself nor devalue pro photographers by under charging. If it's a buy out charge more. Good luck!
Best of luck with it, I've had a friend become published in a, albeit small, magazine for the first time through his flickr account...seems I really need to get on that. Well, hopefully it's me next time, that's all I'm saying
ALL THE BEST! Please keep us updated!!!
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Don't forget that people value most those things which come at a cost.
Originally Posted by stwb
If you give something away for free most people will not value it but if they have to pay for the very same item, suddenly it has value to them which they will want to protect.
It is always up to the individual to decide whether to charge for something and to decide how much to charge but, if you give things away for free, you will not be as respected as you would be if you charged for it.
Have you ever sat down to drink a bottle of wine, for instance, and thought, "This had better be good! I paid a fortune for it!" We all know that there are some wines that are just as good as a name brand wine which cost less but are not as well respected. There's a perfect example of the price-value relationship. People will pay for a name brand product when they intuitively know that a no-name brand is just as good but costs less simply because they assume that something which is more expensive must be better.
Therefore, giving your photos away for nothing puts you in the same situation. Your work is not valued as much because it is free.
I don't know. Have you sold any works before? The final decision is yours but, in my opinion, you should charge, at minimum, a nominal amount. $25.00... $50.00... but even if you decide not to charge be sure to get credit for your work.
Always charge for usage of your work...period.
The fee should not be nominal, unless it's your kids' public school PTA newsletter.
Do not allow "photo credit only" in order to "get exposure". It just doesn't work that way.
If you don't value your work, then who will? Your position in the marketplace, and others perceptions of your work, is gauged by what you charge. Never forget that...
I'm not saying that you shouldn't. I'm just laying out the continuum of possibilities. It is the individual's decision where to place himself within that continuum.
I'm not a professional and, as much as I would love to get a paid gig, I don't think my work is good enough or well known enough to demand a high price. But, what the hell? Even a blind pig can find the occasional apple! Right?
If it is a small, local publication I'd charge less than if it was a national publication. I'd have a hard time deciding.
I could never demand the prices some of you guys regularly get. You might be able to ask for hundreds or even thousands of dollars and get it. Me? I'd be lucky to get $100.00 on a good day.
That's why I gave the answer I wrote above.
Definitely get paid something. Believe me, they're getting paid and won't mine paying you.
And register your copyright now if you haven't already.
Get something but don't try and rob them, there are million and millions more pictures on Flickr!!...EC