Topic: Licensing fees through flickr/getty images

[sapata]

I have been approached by a magazine wating to use one of my pictures available on flickr. The thing is that on the email, they're not mentioning about paying for using my photograph but only giving me the credits. My pictures are copyrighted and I was checking the info where it says

"...If there is an image you'd like to use, look for the "Request to license" link near the license on the photo page. We've partnered with Getty Images who will review the image, determine if it's a good fit for licensing through them, and work out all the details if so. "

Well, I don't want to give my image for free since it's not a free magazine so I was wondering if anyone has used this services before or the best way to proceed? cheers...

[Pete_R]

You don't have to use Getty - they'll take a cut anyway. Just reply with what you want to be paid. They'll either agree or go away.

I was approached by someone who wanted to use one of mine in a book. I agreed for a free copy of the book. I was happy with that but you have to stick with what you want. On a previous occasion I quoted someone a price to use one of my pictures in a company annual report. I never heard from them again.

[sapata]

Thanks Peter,

I've been going through loads of stuff on the web regarding what I should get paid and it's confusing. One thing for sure is that I won't give it for free... considering the reputation of the magazine I though it was a bit desrespectful not even mentioning paying for a license fee.

I had a look at the shakodo.com website and it varies from case to case. The thing with getty is that I believe it will be hassle free, but then I'd pay for it...

[limr]

I'd also take a look at the language of the licensing agreement from whatever service you use. And if you don't use a service, you might consider having the magazine sign something anyway, which means you'd have to draft it yourself. Remember that you're not really selling your picture; you're selling the right to use/copy/distribute/alter that picture, so any agreement should be clear about setting the limits of that right.

[Paul Mitchell]

You don't have to use Getty - they'll take a cut anyway.

They also often require exclusivity which means you cannot lodge your images with other image libraries at the same time.

I had a request to use some of my images last year from a local cancer ward, they wanted to create some large canvases for use in their family room. They even emailed me images of them in situ with one of the patients holding a large 'thank you' sign. Sometimes it's not about the money.

Paul

[DonkeyDave]

I suspect that if you ask for money they will go elsewhere - margins are tight and there are plenty of people who will willingly have their images in print for credits. I last got 'paid' for a magazine image in the 1990s, even then a front cover only got me £150. Since then I either take credits or some free 'stuff'.
Be interested to see how this pans out.

[Late Developer]

A few years ago, I received a request from a head teacher at a school. She wanted to use some photos I'd taken of a medieval jousting tournamet held at Hedingham Castle in Essex. It was for a project the class was doing on heraldry and chivalry. All I stipulated was that the photos were not to be used for commercial gain and that copyright and exclusivity rights remained mine.

She was delighted and apparently the kids loved the bright colours and horses, armour, swords and stuff. Made me feel like I wanted to be back at junior school.....

[sapata]

there are plenty of people who will willingly have their images in print for credits

How come people work for free? I don't really understand... obviously there are some situations where it's ok (charities, schools, art magazines), but comercial magazines...? I'm not sure. Wondering if a doctor would perform an operation in a patient just for credits

[Pete_R]

I don't think it's a case of working for free. If someone asked you to go and take some pictures to their specfication and for their use but then said they weren't going to pay and you had to pay your own expenses the I guess we'd all tell them where to go as that would be working for free. But if it's a picture you've already taken and would have taken anyway then I don't see allowing someone to use it as working for free. Maybe if I relied on income from photography to make a living I'd think differently but as I don't, then I don't see I'm losing anything buy allowing some use.

Of course, any commercial publication will be making a profit so why shouldn't you take some of it. Question is, will they pay or will they just go elsewhere? And would you benefit in any other way by having your pic published that might make it worth forgoing a cash reward?

[sapata]

I see your point Peter and a year ago I'd probably let the pics go just for the credits, but if I'm going to make photography my living then I have to be serious about this stuff. One thing I've learned here since I came back and been trying to get on this market is that magazines are asking for free images because there are people willing to give them for free, and all got pretty worse when everyone decide to be a photographer just because they have a digital camera. If people wouldn't swap work for credits for such publications, then the market could be different and editors wouldn't go elsewhere trying to get free images.

[Owlsflight]

there are plenty of people who will willingly have their images in print for credits

How come people work for free? I don't really understand... obviously there are some situations where it's ok (charities, schools, art magazines), but comercial magazines...? I'm not sure. Wondering if a doctor would perform an operation in a patient just for credits

I agree with what Peter R said as well, but I also wanted to add something. There are a ton of photographs and photographers on the web today. A large chunk of this group are just starting out and trying their best to stand out in the crowd. An offer to have a photo published, even for free, is a huge ego boost to someone with not much experience. Just the chance to see their work in print is reward enough. Like Peter said, the photo was already taken, so the only work the owner of the photo then has to do is say yes to use.

Unfortunately that hurts a lot of the photographers who would have actually charged for a similar, and maybe better photo.

But of course like it's been said, there are many different variations of this situation. And in the right situation there is nothing wrong with letting someone or some organization use a photo for free.

[gothamtomato]

Hi,

You are correct to NOT give your pictures away to the magazine for free. Even though print publishing budgets are not what they once were, they do still pay. You just have to figure out how much. You do that by asking how they will be running it (cover, inside, size), what is their circulation, will it be used on the web as well. There are calculators that can help you figure out the price you should charge. You could also join the ASMP Pro Advice group (which is an open Yahoo group) and pose the question there, with all the info about the magazine (minus their name), you'll likely get a good ballpark there.

You also want to request that they run your photo credit with your copyright notice. AND when you send them your image you send it with a delivery memo that states that they are buying one-time usage, and that any reuse in the future will need to be negotiated then.

Good luck!