Comments on: Nine Inconvenient Business Facts for Aspiring Photographers

By: Regina Photographer

Regina Photographer — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 04:06:22 +0000

One thing that is sad about the wedding market in my area is that it seems like everyone "gives away the copyright". So if I don't, it's a bad thing in the brides eyes. Any suggestions on how to deal with this?

By: Alex

Alex — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 11:38:40 +0000

Number 1 refers to the photogs who "offer" their services for free and never bother to register their images. they just give them out for "pride" purposes! and also because they know for a fact they can't charge as they are flat our amateurs with another day job! Read the 12 excuses thread and you will see hat I mean and how many practice this.

By: Denver Engagement Photographer

Denver Engagement Photographer — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 21:37:16 +0000

I think the insurance one is the most valuble. If you can't afford to replace it at any day during the year, then you need to have insurance on it.

By: Tim Gander

Tim Gander — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:18:16 +0000

I can see why there is confusion over point number 1. The clue is in the first word "if". In other words, IF you don't retain copyright in your work you will fail to make any money from your work.

A friend of mine asked me once what income I made from copyright. My reply, everything I make is earned through my exercising copyright. Sometimes I have to sell it outright (Crown Copyright), but the rest of the time I'm licensing the work I produce.

It wouldn't be a bad idea to re-write point #1 so it's clearer.

By: Adam Nyholt

Adam Nyholt — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:08:47 +0000

Maria- I think his point is if you are signing away your copyrights (or granting someone a full commercial license with unrestricted use of the images) you better be charging a heck of a lot, since you will never make another penny from those images (selling them as fine art, stock, etc.) He may also be referring to aspiring photographers who work underneath another photographer but don't have the rights to use their images after they leave the employ of that person. The latter is common practice, but you should know what you're getting into in that situation.

By: Richard Tallent

Richard Tallent — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 20:10:38 +0000

Fact #1: Wrong use of the word "copyright." Better stated: if you *license* your work loosely (or provide full-resolution files to the general public, regardless of the written license), you should arrange your business model for up-front profit rather than residuals on reprints.

Fact #2: If you are an employee, your work is likely covered by "Work Made for Hire" by default (here in the States), which means you don't own copyright to the photos produced as part of your job, unless you have a written contract giving you those rights. Something to consider before you demand employee benefits.

Fact #3: You should divide by 49, not 52, unless you plan to never take holidays.

Fact #4: This conflicts with fact #5. Either you charge by the job, or for your time.

Fact #5: As you get better and more efficient, you simply raise your rates. There is something to be said for using day rates rather than hourly, and it should be noted that it is easier to move a mountain than to raise rates on an existing client, so start with high hourly rates and just choose to not bill some of the time judiciously as you climb the learning curve.

Facts #6-9 I have no quibble with. Good advice.

By: John Burns

John Burns — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 15:14:18 +0000

Ahhh, I mis-read the point. Thanks for the clarification. I see it now.

By: Scott Baradell

Scott Baradell — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 14:26:57 +0000

Gene is correct.

By: Gene

Gene — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:33:10 +0000

With reference to fact #1 I believe the author is warning against signing away your copyright or the result is as mentioned.

By: John Burns

John Burns — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 07:46:07 +0000

Super points, very good... well... all except point number 1, which is so untrue it's unreal. Not sure where you've got t=your facts from John, and it might be a geographical thinkg, but in the UK - apart from a few anomolies - the moment you take a photo, copyright belongs to the photographer. Period. Any chance of explaining point 1 please as I am not the only one querying it.

By: Frederic Sune

Frederic Sune — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 02:12:10 +0000

Excellent post but like Maria, the point 1 make not sense. I keep my copyright for any shoot I do. It's written on my contract / invoice.

By: Paul Conrad

Paul Conrad — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:16:15 +0000

Great stuff.

But the question remains: What and how does one charge for assignments?

Number 8 is a great piece of advice. Don't fall for the "I know we agreed on $X, but we can only pay $Y." Make them follow the contract.

By: Maria

Maria — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:14:28 +0000

I don't understand Fact #1. Why don't the photographers have copyright to their photos when created? Does this article assume they're working for another photographer? Or is it assuming work for hire with all rights signed away?

I re-read your lede three times and this point does not make sense to me. The creator has copyright unless he signs it away.

By: Jason Collin Photography

Jason Collin Photography — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:25:19 +0000

Great points about copyright and making sure you are paid for all aspects of a time consuming photography job. I do not offer a photo DVD to clients for free. It takes me time to burn the DVD and go to the post office and mail it. Therefore I charge them for that full hour of my time.