How crucial is it that I get photo credit?

**sholtzma** · 08-23-2008, 06:14 AM

I am negotiating with a small business in town to take about 24 scenics and other shots of their business (a restored house and garden). The owner wants to use these images in ads, a brochure, and her website. In order to determine what to charge, I have proposed some contract conditions to the owner. She accepts some and does not accept others. My question to all you is what, if anything, I should compomise on and what I should not.

So far we agree that I will keep copyright of the images and that I will retain all rights to use the images as I see fit. We also agree that she will be buying some unlimited rights for an unlimited time, such as to use the images as many times as she wants, in any sizes she wants, and in any locations she wants.

The two terms still at issue are these: (1) I asked to receive an inobtrusive photo credit (name and copyright symbol) with any print or web use of any of the images. And (2) I am insisting that she use the images only for advertising purposes. So, for example, she may not put my images on products (cards, pots, mugs, T-shirts, etc) that she sells, even if the sale also indirectly advertises her business. But I will let her use the images on her website even if she ends up selling ad space on her site, since the website is about advertising and she would not be directly selling the images. She could also put the images on a thank you card that she sends (freely) to clients.

I am tempted to offer the following compromise: I will withdraw the condition that any use of images have a photo credit, if she will accept the limitation that she use the images only for advertising.

Is this a good compromise, in your view. And, assuming she were to agree to it, any help with what price I should ask for?

Thanks in advance to any comments you have.

Wheatfield · 08-23-2008, 08:36 AM

Originally posted by sholtzma

I am negotiating with a small business in town to take about 24 scenics and other shots of their business (a restored house and garden). The owner wants to use these images in ads, a brochure, and her website. In order to determine what to charge, I have proposed some contract conditions to the owner. She accepts some and does not accept others. My question to all you is what, if anything, I should compomise on and what I should not.

So far we agree that I will keep copyright of the images and that I will retain all rights to use the images as I see fit. We also agree that she will be buying some unlimited rights for an unlimited time, such as to use the images as many times as she wants, in any sizes she wants, and in any locations she wants.

The two terms still at issue are these: (1) I asked to receive an inobtrusive photo credit (name and copyright symbol) with any print or web use of any of the images. And (2) I am insisting that she use the images only for advertising purposes. So, for example, she may not put my images on products (cards, pots, mugs, T-shirts, etc) that she sells, even if the sale also indirectly advertises her business. But I will let her use the images on her website even if she ends up selling ad space on her site, since the website is about advertising and she would not be directly selling the images. She could also put the images on a thank you card that she sends (freely) to clients.

I am tempted to offer the following compromise: I will withdraw the condition that any use of images have a photo credit, if she will accept the limitation that she use the images only for advertising.

Is this a good compromise, in your view. And, assuming she were to agree to it, any help with what price I should ask for?

Thanks in advance to any comments you have.

I would definitely insist on a photo credit, as this can draw customers to you. If she wants to make secondary income off your images (gift shop items), she should be paying you a royalty on every item she sells that has one of your images embedded.
For myself, I would take the photo credit over limitation of use if i had to make the choice, since you will get more exposure from the credit.

little laker · 08-23-2008, 10:20 AM

I agree with Wheatfield.

I've never had anyone even consider using my images, without giving me credit towards them.
And I've always gotten more credit than I asked for.

Damn Brit · 08-23-2008, 02:08 PM

I would say that a credit is for one (or short time) use and if she was going to use it for mugs, t shirts etc. I think you are moving in to royalty territory which you could waive by upping your initial pricing.
A lot of it depends on how important it is for you.
You could be famous one day and these early shots could be a goldmine for her with her mugs and t shirts. Ok, that's taking it to extremes, but I hope you get my point.

**sholtzma** · 08-23-2008, 04:28 PM

Okay, let me then ask you this:

Say that I were to charge $350, get photo credit in some form, and limit the use of the photos to advertising only. How much more should I charge if I do not get photo credit but do get limited use? How much more should I charge if I do get photo credit but do not get limited use? And how much more should I charge if I get neither?

Any help greatly appreciated.

MJB DIGITAL · 08-23-2008, 06:22 PM

In my experience a photocredit has not been what drives clients to me. Having a photocredit does at times get your name noticed, although for this situation you may need to balance the scales.

When I am dealing with commercial client like this. I normally let them know that I am very loose with my contract terms and that we should discuss usage of the photos. So that everyone can be happy.

My main point of concern when I shoot for ANY client is simply that I work well enough so that I can shoot for them AGAIN.
If you look through a magazine, you will notice that little (if any) of those photos have photocredits. Why?....because it really isnt that important. Also, when a layout design (ads brochures websites etc) looks good and clean, even that little photocredit can piss of the designer because they simply dont want to have the credit imposed on their layout/design. They just want the picture.

Now, when you shoot professionally, you are shooting to produce photography. When you shoot and produce great photography, you wont need that photocredit on there. In that case, the editor/business/layout guy will simply call you back for another shoot if you did well and got along with the magazine office.

My point is that the photocredit is tiny, unobtrusive (that means you cant really see it very well), and can be tedious for the layout people to put in there.
In my opinion, you would profit much more by letting the photocredit go.

HOWEVER
Regarding the point that she wants to take the shots and whore them out all over the place, that is a different story.
That is a point where I would suggest that you drop the whole client. From what I understand, she wants terms that will not only provide an aesthetic look for her business which may drive thousands of dollars in to her, but she also wants the rights to retail your images and make another number of thousands of dollars.....
all for the price of $350.
One side of me says drop the client if she wants to whore out your photography.
The other side says I have budgets and I need that $350.

....If you do the job on her terms, you can just let it go when you are done, collect a check, pay the rent, and possibly get another job from her in the future.

my two cents

peace

editted to add:
Advertising is generally something that you have to pay for. Piggybacking your name onto every photo going into publication isn't the cleanest way to work.

JJJPhoto · 08-23-2008, 06:59 PM

I get paid for jobs in two ways:

1) Money
2) Photo credit

If one of those two isn't offered then the other one has to be offered in excess.

For example, with my advertising clients I usually don't get photo credits because the photo is going to be part of an ad campaign ... but I charge MUCH more for that type of job than I do for a typical magazine editorial job.

On the other hand, if I agree to provide my services to a non-profit that needs photography, then I insist that I be given VERY prominent photo credits since I'm working for free ... plus the tax write-off.

**Lowell Goudge** · 08-23-2008, 07:08 PM

I think the photo credit is not really worth it for all the reasons others have stated.

I believe you should have, however, an agreement on useage. Either restricted useage, for the terms of the contract or a royalty as part of all sales. regardless of what royalty is paid, you still need to have the uses specifically stated, and you should also make sure that you can still use the photos. If you are taking photo's of their property, remember they may have some rights too.

You might also want to, in your agreement, state your photos, or reasonable attemtps to produce similar images By this, I mean having another photographer take the sme shot.

**sholtzma** · 08-23-2008, 07:30 PM

Lowell, I was following you until your last paragraph. Can you elucidate?

wlank · 08-24-2008, 09:40 AM

Originally posted by sholtzma

So far we agree that I will keep copyright of the images and that I will retain all rights to use the images as I see fit. We also agree that she will be buying some unlimited rights for an unlimited time, such as to use the images as many times as she wants, in any sizes she wants, and in any locations she wants.

I am not an attorney and you might need one. My take is that you are NOT retaining the copyright under the conditions stated. My wife is an oil painter, and about the only time this comes up in our household is when she is asked to do a poster for an art festival. T shirts, coffee cups, unlimited poster reproduction, you name it. She just tells them,"I wasn't looking for work when you called me". Get someone else. AFAIK she has never lost an opportunity because of her response.

Jester_rm · 08-25-2008, 04:08 PM

I'm pretty much in agreement with the previous responses. A compromise on the photo credit might be one credit notice in the advertisement/website (like "Photos by...." at the bottom of the page) rather than a credit on every image.

Wouldn't compromise on the "additional usage" rights unless they were willing to basically buy out your copyright for the photos at an increased price, or agree to some sort of royalty structure.

Gooshin · 08-25-2008, 05:42 PM

my business studies and ex-sales man knowledge offers the following advice:

getting both credit and royalty rights is definetly the baseline for a contract, however since in your case (perhaps) you do not have the status to push clients around, your compromise should simply based on your percieved impact from those images.

ei

if you feel that your images are of a quality and substance that would inspire others to seek your work, then ask for the photo credit. I mean no disrespect by this because all of us value most of our work, but for instance if you are taking a picture of Starbucks from the outside on a nice sunny day with clients walking in and out, chances are it is not going to be anything art-gallery worthy. Anyone looking at a brochure with such images is not going to think "i want THIS guy to do my advertising, chances are they are thinging "this is pretty cool i should hire a photographer to do this"

if, however, you feel (or know) that the customer plans to use your images heavily as part of their base business model (meaning that t-shirt/mug/poster sales are a large chunk of their revenue) then i would opt for royalty fees.

If they are smart business owners, and see an increase in revenue from the sale of their goods from YOUR images, perhaps they will develop the idea that you were a contributer to this, and may perhaps in the future seek your business,

all the while you reep the benefits of their sales, no matter how small.

this is my advice.

08-23-2008, 06:14 AM	#1
sholtzma Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Salisbury, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,043	How crucial is it that I get photo credit? I am negotiating with a small business in town to take about 24 scenics and other shots of their business (a restored house and garden). The owner wants to use these images in ads, a brochure, and her website. In order to determine what to charge, I have proposed some contract conditions to the owner. She accepts some and does not accept others. My question to all you is what, if anything, I should compomise on and what I should not. So far we agree that I will keep copyright of the images and that I will retain all rights to use the images as I see fit. We also agree that she will be buying some unlimited rights for an unlimited time, such as to use the images as many times as she wants, in any sizes she wants, and in any locations she wants. The two terms still at issue are these: (1) I asked to receive an inobtrusive photo credit (name and copyright symbol) with any print or web use of any of the images. And (2) I am insisting that she use the images only for advertising purposes. So, for example, she may not put my images on products (cards, pots, mugs, T-shirts, etc) that she sells, even if the sale also indirectly advertises her business. But I will let her use the images on her website even if she ends up selling ad space on her site, since the website is about advertising and she would not be directly selling the images. She could also put the images on a thank you card that she sends (freely) to clients. I am tempted to offer the following compromise: I will withdraw the condition that any use of images have a photo credit, if she will accept the limitation that she use the images only for advertising. Is this a good compromise, in your view. And, assuming she were to agree to it, any help with what price I should ask for? Thanks in advance to any comments you have.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Published photo. No credit. ???	skyoftexas	Photographic Technique	14	07-07-2010 09:20 AM
Is your credit good?	MJB DIGITAL	Photographic Industry and Professionals	5	06-05-2009 01:32 PM
Giving credit where credit is due	wildman	Photographic Technique	2	02-03-2009 05:07 AM
point credit	pete_pf	Post Your Photos!	10	10-25-2008 09:02 AM
Crucial 2GB MicroSD Card w/ SD Adapter - Micro SD - 113477	Fl_Gulfer	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	0	06-24-2008 08:45 AM

08-23-2008, 08:36 AM	#2
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,987	Originally posted by sholtzma I am negotiating with a small business in town to take about 24 scenics and other shots of their business (a restored house and garden). The owner wants to use these images in ads, a brochure, and her website. In order to determine what to charge, I have proposed some contract conditions to the owner. She accepts some and does not accept others. My question to all you is what, if anything, I should compomise on and what I should not. So far we agree that I will keep copyright of the images and that I will retain all rights to use the images as I see fit. We also agree that she will be buying some unlimited rights for an unlimited time, such as to use the images as many times as she wants, in any sizes she wants, and in any locations she wants. The two terms still at issue are these: (1) I asked to receive an inobtrusive photo credit (name and copyright symbol) with any print or web use of any of the images. And (2) I am insisting that she use the images only for advertising purposes. So, for example, she may not put my images on products (cards, pots, mugs, T-shirts, etc) that she sells, even if the sale also indirectly advertises her business. But I will let her use the images on her website even if she ends up selling ad space on her site, since the website is about advertising and she would not be directly selling the images. She could also put the images on a thank you card that she sends (freely) to clients. I am tempted to offer the following compromise: I will withdraw the condition that any use of images have a photo credit, if she will accept the limitation that she use the images only for advertising. Is this a good compromise, in your view. And, assuming she were to agree to it, any help with what price I should ask for? Thanks in advance to any comments you have. I would definitely insist on a photo credit, as this can draw customers to you. If she wants to make secondary income off your images (gift shop items), she should be paying you a royalty on every item she sells that has one of your images embedded. For myself, I would take the photo credit over limitation of use if i had to make the choice, since you will get more exposure from the credit.

08-23-2008, 10:20 AM	#3
little laker Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,697	I agree with Wheatfield. I've never had anyone even consider using my images, without giving me credit towards them. And I've always gotten more credit than I asked for.

08-23-2008, 02:08 PM	#4
Damn Brit Guest	I would say that a credit is for one (or short time) use and if she was going to use it for mugs, t shirts etc. I think you are moving in to royalty territory which you could waive by upping your initial pricing. A lot of it depends on how important it is for you. You could be famous one day and these early shots could be a goldmine for her with her mugs and t shirts. Ok, that's taking it to extremes, but I hope you get my point.

08-23-2008, 04:28 PM	#5
sholtzma Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Salisbury, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,043 Original Poster	Okay, let me then ask you this: Say that I were to charge $350, get photo credit in some form, and limit the use of the photos to advertising only. How much more should I charge if I do not get photo credit but do get limited use? How much more should I charge if I do get photo credit but do not get limited use? And how much more should I charge if I get neither? Any help greatly appreciated.

08-23-2008, 06:22 PM	#6
MJB DIGITAL Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: st. louis Posts: 1,170	In my experience a photocredit has not been what drives clients to me. Having a photocredit does at times get your name noticed, although for this situation you may need to balance the scales. When I am dealing with commercial client like this. I normally let them know that I am very loose with my contract terms and that we should discuss usage of the photos. So that everyone can be happy. My main point of concern when I shoot for ANY client is simply that I work well enough so that I can shoot for them AGAIN. If you look through a magazine, you will notice that little (if any) of those photos have photocredits. Why?....because it really isnt that important. Also, when a layout design (ads brochures websites etc) looks good and clean, even that little photocredit can piss of the designer because they simply dont want to have the credit imposed on their layout/design. They just want the picture. Now, when you shoot professionally, you are shooting to produce photography. When you shoot and produce great photography, you wont need that photocredit on there. In that case, the editor/business/layout guy will simply call you back for another shoot if you did well and got along with the magazine office. My point is that the photocredit is tiny, unobtrusive (that means you cant really see it very well), and can be tedious for the layout people to put in there. In my opinion, you would profit much more by letting the photocredit go. HOWEVER Regarding the point that she wants to take the shots and whore them out all over the place, that is a different story. That is a point where I would suggest that you drop the whole client. From what I understand, she wants terms that will not only provide an aesthetic look for her business which may drive thousands of dollars in to her, but she also wants the rights to retail your images and make another number of thousands of dollars..... all for the price of $350. One side of me says drop the client if she wants to whore out your photography. The other side says I have budgets and I need that $350. ....If you do the job on her terms, you can just let it go when you are done, collect a check, pay the rent, and possibly get another job from her in the future. my two cents peace editted to add: Advertising is generally something that you have to pay for. Piggybacking your name onto every photo going into publication isn't the cleanest way to work.

08-23-2008, 06:59 PM	#7
JJJPhoto Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 419	I get paid for jobs in two ways: 1) Money 2) Photo credit If one of those two isn't offered then the other one has to be offered in excess. For example, with my advertising clients I usually don't get photo credits because the photo is going to be part of an ad campaign ... but I charge MUCH more for that type of job than I do for a typical magazine editorial job. On the other hand, if I agree to provide my services to a non-profit that needs photography, then I insist that I be given VERY prominent photo credits since I'm working for free ... plus the tax write-off.

08-23-2008, 07:08 PM	#8
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,891	I think the photo credit is not really worth it for all the reasons others have stated. I believe you should have, however, an agreement on useage. Either restricted useage, for the terms of the contract or a royalty as part of all sales. regardless of what royalty is paid, you still need to have the uses specifically stated, and you should also make sure that you can still use the photos. If you are taking photo's of their property, remember they may have some rights too. You might also want to, in your agreement, state your photos, or reasonable attemtps to produce similar images By this, I mean having another photographer take the sme shot.

08-23-2008, 07:30 PM	#9
sholtzma Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Salisbury, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,043 Original Poster	Lowell, I was following you until your last paragraph. Can you elucidate?

08-24-2008, 09:40 AM	#10
wlank Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Santa Teresa, New Mexico Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,130	Originally posted by sholtzma So far we agree that I will keep copyright of the images and that I will retain all rights to use the images as I see fit. We also agree that she will be buying some unlimited rights for an unlimited time, such as to use the images as many times as she wants, in any sizes she wants, and in any locations she wants. I am not an attorney and you might need one. My take is that you are NOT retaining the copyright under the conditions stated. My wife is an oil painter, and about the only time this comes up in our household is when she is asked to do a poster for an art festival. T shirts, coffee cups, unlimited poster reproduction, you name it. She just tells them,"I wasn't looking for work when you called me". Get someone else. AFAIK she has never lost an opportunity because of her response.

08-25-2008, 04:08 PM	#11
Jester_rm Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Redmond, Oregon Photos: Gallery Posts: 228	I'm pretty much in agreement with the previous responses. A compromise on the photo credit might be one credit notice in the advertisement/website (like "Photos by...." at the bottom of the page) rather than a credit on every image. Wouldn't compromise on the "additional usage" rights unless they were willing to basically buy out your copyright for the photos at an increased price, or agree to some sort of royalty structure.

08-25-2008, 05:42 PM	#12
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	my business studies and ex-sales man knowledge offers the following advice: getting both credit and royalty rights is definetly the baseline for a contract, however since in your case (perhaps) you do not have the status to push clients around, your compromise should simply based on your percieved impact from those images. ei if you feel that your images are of a quality and substance that would inspire others to seek your work, then ask for the photo credit. I mean no disrespect by this because all of us value most of our work, but for instance if you are taking a picture of Starbucks from the outside on a nice sunny day with clients walking in and out, chances are it is not going to be anything art-gallery worthy. Anyone looking at a brochure with such images is not going to think "i want THIS guy to do my advertising, chances are they are thinging "this is pretty cool i should hire a photographer to do this" if, however, you feel (or know) that the customer plans to use your images heavily as part of their base business model (meaning that t-shirt/mug/poster sales are a large chunk of their revenue) then i would opt for royalty fees. If they are smart business owners, and see an increase in revenue from the sale of their goods from YOUR images, perhaps they will develop the idea that you were a contributer to this, and may perhaps in the future seek your business, all the while you reep the benefits of their sales, no matter how small. this is my advice.