This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

RE: Digest for Gardenwriters@topica.com, issue 360


> From: Rich Pomerantz <rich@richpomerantz.com>

>  almost never,
> does a work for hire publisher actually offer the value of all the
> rights inherently included in work for hire. Usually the price is for
> the usage they need, but the rights they obtain in WFH are worth alot
> more than that. It is a very powerful tool in the hands of the
> publisher, because it lets them keep the transaction very simple, from
> their point of view. They license the work and they own the work for all
> possible uses. End of story.
...when WFH is applied to a freelancer,
> the freelancer gains none of the benefits of the employee. I'll take WFH
> when the publisher is willing to pay me back all my overhead, including
> insurance, mileage, film & processing, etc. Until then, I retain the
> reuse, so that I can generate the income I need to keep my business
> running. Reusage fees are not an extra source of income for magazine and
> advertising photographers, it is an integral part of the business plan,
> and has been for several decades.
> 
> That's why it's a bad deal, especially for photographers - The majority
> of the value in many, many creative pieces, certainly in assignment
> photography, is in the reuse, not in the original creation. 

Thank you Rich for succinctly presenting the WFH case as seen by
freelance photographers.  I have presented this exact thought process to
many an editor over the years and stayed away from most WFH situations
to the benefit of my stock library.  While it has taken many years to
pay off, it always been a very conscious part of my business plan.

I will mention WFH has benefitted me in those situations where the
publisher pays a high premium for those rights.  For me, my WFH fee (plus
expenses) is three times my normal rate.  When a client hired me for
more than a year, to produce a massive amount of work for a good amount
of money, I took the money and ran.  (Paid off the car, an equity loan,
put substantial amounts into the kids education accounts, bought new
cameras, real family vacations, etc.)  Do I wish I had the rights back
to those photos ?  An occasional pang, yes.  But they don't exist as far
as I am concerned.  Considering the number of photos provided, I gamble
there is no way they will ever use all the rights they paid for.  They
had to pay WFH for even the medoicre ones.

I urge each individual "creative" to establish a rate that suits their
own comfort level.  Whether it is original/ assignment work as a
freelancer or staff person, whether it be second rights or derivative
use, each of us in all types of creative work and at various times in
our careers need to adjust to our own comfort level - so long as it is
done with good knowledge.  It is the publishers job to get as many
rights as it can and it is our job to keep as many as we can.  It does
not have to be adversarial, as that just creates tension and burns bridges.

When contract negotiations become difficult and one's comfort level for
price and rights offered gets weird, a polite "no thanks" is all you
need to say.  You will gain credibility and intangible benefits by being
just out of reach of low-ball contracts.  Situations will change
throughout a career.  Today, an offer of $75 for one of my photos would
get the polite "can't do it", telling the editor they will find someone
else's photo that will be almost as good for their purposes.  

[And I have come to realize I don't want my best stock photos in
circulation to low priced publishers, because they won't be here to send
to the others.  While I do have more than 200K images here, there are
always calls for similar images in similar seasons.  I always send out
the best and don't shoot many multiple frames so it is important to send
out excellent images to every editor.  Too many times in the past, I
have regretted sending out photos to a low price client when a better
one wants to see them the next week.  One must believe, as I do, that
one good sale is better than 2 small ones and that the work is good
enough to compete for the higher sales.]

Twenty years ago, when, not only was I much more eager for any sales but
my work was not as good (I gotta believe), I was delighted to sell
photos for $50.  $75!  they were giving money away...

Again, thanks Rich -

Saxon Holt

==========================================================
Extra! Extra! Read all about it! Get the latest weather,
sports, and lifestyle news you can't afford to miss, all
at a price you can afford to pay!  Click now!
http://click.topica.com/caaacQXbUrGSSbVSZwBf/TopOffers
==========================================================

GWL has searchable archives at: 
http://www.hort.net/lists/gardenwriters/
If you have photos for GWL, send them to gwlphotos@hort.net and they will show up at  http://www.hort.net/lists/gwlphotos/ 
**************************************************

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: topica.com@spamfodder.com

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrGSS.bVSZwB
Or send an email to: Gardenwriters-unsubscribe@topica.com

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index