Trade for Prints/CD, what's fair?

[kgphoto]

Good replies so far. I think I will wait for the weekend crowd to chime in before the next question.

I would like to hear from some models as well. Remember, this is not intended to be US vs THEM. It is a collaboration and I want it to be fair to both parties.

Thanks to all who are participating.

[Bobby_G]

Originally Posted by Stecyk

Bobby, do you, like RFS, have your copyright overlaid across the image? I am just curious if most photographers follow this procedure.

No I don't...probly should though. I figure if someone wants em bad enough they're gonna get em with or without the watermark. I do embed the copyright info in the metadata through PS so its built within the image...don't know if this does anything or not but its there ...

[Stecyk]

Originally Posted by Bobby_G

No I don't...probly should though. I figure if someone wants em bad enough they're gonna get em with or without the watermark. I do embed the copyright info in the metadata through PS so its built within the image...don't know if this does anything or not but its there ...

Thank you for responding.

[R_Fredrick_Smith]

Originally Posted by Bobby_G

No I don't...probly should though. I figure if someone wants em bad enough they're gonna get em with or without the watermark. I do embed the copyright info in the metadata through PS so its built within the image...don't know if this does anything or not but its there ...

I include the copyright notice in the metadata as well, as it becomes just one more thing the photo pirate has to remember to edit before claiming the photo as his own. But all one has to do to remove all metadata is to use Save for Web so its super easy to get rid of the metadata.

Cheers,
rfs

[kgphoto]

OK Based on your replies so far and a PM I received, here is the follow up questions and thinking. I really would like to hear from more models as well.

I get where some of you are coming from thinking this session is an advertisement for your business. Make her happy and she will tell two friends and they will tell two friends, etc. I was just worried that she will only tell the two friends who want more free pictures.

I come from the background of only shooting paid glamour. I had a couple of model wannabees for my first sample images, but that was it.

The other thought was that as long as I do a great job with her, she will still tell two friends. I was planning on giving only a few images as I described in the thread, and then if she wants more than that, sell them to her.

Also if you shoot everything they need, there is little chance for them to come back for a paid session as they all ready have everything.

Granted a real working pro will always need more images later, unless she is getting tearsheets, but most wannebees just do the one set for the book and then go on to be a PTA mom (nothing wrong with that).

Another thought I am wrestling with is the proper way to charge for photography today, both in the model/glamor and portrait fields.

In the old days, we kept the negs and copyright and sold prints to make a living. Low sitting fees got them "on film" and if they wanted the images, they had to come to us to get them. "Free sessions" frequently earned $500 or more for us. Nowadays, the suggestion is higher up front fees and lower cost reproductions.

Now with the proliferation of scanners in homes as well as Kinkos, it is too easy for them to make acceptable images. Do you put a water mark on your model prints? Me personally, I wouldn't want to receive them that way if I was a model. Maybe for TFC? How do you handle it?

I used to request credit & copyright notice on headshots, composites and newspaper publicity images. Even if I put them on now, it is easy to remove them with Photoshop. Even back then, they would conveniently forget to put it in.

I don't want adversarial relationships with clients, models or industry professionals. That is why I posted the thread.

[jimmyd]

this thread seems to have occasionally gone on-and off track as it progressed. i'm not sure what shooters' individual rates have to do with figuring TFCD work. Either you want to shoot the model with that kind of a deal in place, for whatever reasons, or you don't... regardless of what you get paid when people do pay you.

personally, i don't have an etched-in-stone rate. there's been times i've been paid a lot--sometimes way more than i thought the job was worth--and there's been times i've been underpaid. i've not ever taken a job i didn't know what the pay was going to be so, when i feel i've been underpaid, shame on me: i took the freakin gig! (unless the client wasn't upfront with all the job would entail.)

i don't do much TFCD-- very rarely in fact. it's not cuz i'm an elitist of any sort or a legend in my own mind or i'm too good to do it. it's cuz i simply don't have enough time. that's not to say i'm shooting every day of my life, I'm not, but there's more to life than shooting pretty girls. yeah, i'm passionate about photography and it consumes quite a bit of my life, but it's not everything and some things are more important than constantly figuring out how to get the next naked girl in front of my lens, whether i'm being paid or not paid.

[kgphoto]

jimmyd,

The photographer's rate has to do with TFCD in the sense of trading fair and equitable materials. I mean you wouldn't typically trade a Mercedes for a Volkswagon, would you?

If a photographer has invested a lot in a studio, equipment, training, would he be wrong to not give the model all the images if she was just a beginner and needed a lot of direction and maybe didn't sizzle? How else will he support the studio overhead?

On the other hand, if she was Cindy Crawford, wouldn't you expect to give a little more to her?

I guess the point is, if a model is worth $300 for a session, shouldn't the photographer give her $300 of his/her value, whether that is time, prints, files or a combination of all of the above? Once that threshold is reached, should he/she then sell the remaining images/files to them at market rates?

Or are you saying the joint sharing of all the images is the way you are comfortable doing it, or would you go so far as to say it is the way it should be done, or it is too bad that "horny" photogs give it all away when a girl is willing to take it off.

What if she is not willing to take it off, does she get less?

If you go on websites models are selling copies of their images at various prices. If we take $25.00/8x10, as an example, then a session that generates 100 good images, is worth $2500. If you then give reproduction rights, you have even given greater value. Perhaps, in the real world a 100 shot session would only net 12 good images. That times $25.00 is the $300 value of the model. Should she get the remaining images for free? What if the session is extra successful and there are 20 out of a 100 or 40 out of 200?

Or are you saying, if the images are good, both parties can sell the images to recoup their investment? Do models and photographers have the same investment in a test session?

I guess the motivation of this question is brought on by a concern that photographers seem to always be undervaluing their worth and undercharging for their work. Real Estate is at an all time high. Studio space is not cheap and many have had to close down their spaces.

So what is fair and equitable to both parties?

[isaiahbrink]

Originally Posted by kgphoto

Thanks for the replies so far. I just want to clarify something.

I am not looking for a lesson on how to set prices for a business. Nor am I looking to find out what other photographers are charging for their day rate, print rate, etc. I am asking what is the thinking behind the industry practice of TFP & TFCD?

The day rate what just an illustration of the relationship of the model to the photographer value.

I don't want me or anyone else to give away the farm, nor do I want to gyp the model. In looking at the described practices (not this thread) it seemed like they were giving an awful lot for a little to the model. Maybe I am not seeing the big picture, so that is why the question was asked.

I'd like to gather a few more replies and then I will have some follow up questions if you don't mind.

Thanks again.

The primary idea behind TFP/CD is building a portfolio for the photographer and/or model. In a TFP/CD no money is exchanged, but prints or a cd is (just threw this in, there's talk of pricing, etc and just wanted to make sure.) But when it comes to pricing on a paid gig, what I've found to be the norm is considering the local competition prices, along with what is being offered.

[Photomart]

Originally Posted by jimmyd

... personally, i don't have an etched-in-stone rate. there's been times i've been paid a lot--sometimes way more than i thought the job was worth--and there's been times i've been underpaid.

I'm with JimmyD and BobbyG. I manage two websites - one for my commercial work and one for my model photography. My rates for shooting models is different from my commercial rate for shooting products ... which is different that my rates for shooting events or weddings. And, while I have posted my rates on my commercial website, I've rarely shot for a client that didn't have a "unique project" that required me to "negotiate my rates."

As for the TFCD discussion -- yes, I do "free" shoots all the time. Sometimes I spend hours of my valuable time shooting products, jewelry, landscapes, buildings, etc These shoots are not for clients, but to help me improve my skills within areas I make my money ... and I'm always looking for something that will enhance my commercial portfolio. Other times I might see a new model with crappy pictures but an incredible "potential" ...and I might offer her a TFCD shoot with the gola of getting something new and different for my model photography portfolio (I prefer shooting undiscovered models versus a model who has pictures in every photographers portfolio).

[Jetboy]

Though I'm a "hobbyist" photog, I agree with a previous post about checking out the going rate(s) in your area and using that as a base to determine what you can charge. Like any business, it's supply and demand.

Really interesting thread, btw. =)

Alan B.