A triathlon mag I shoot for published two photos of mine. One was smallish about 1/6th page and the other almost full page but faded to about 70% behind the words.
Would you consider this a published photo? I would and have billed them for it which they wont like but thats too bad.
I do. Is it a good source of income? If so a call may be in order first. If not then yes i would just bill them.
I take it that they have paid for use of the image prior hence the fact that they have it. Would they have thought that they were buying the image?
I sense that there is some back story which the original poster has not revealed to us. Without an explanation of the circumstances, there is not much to do except speculate idly. I can imagine a couple of scenarios that might have prompted him to write the cryptic message that he did. The original poster has basically said that the images were published and we are inclined to take him on his word that they were.
Perhaps the original poster takes some pleasure in seeing well meaning people thrash around in an attempt to try to figure out how to help him, but I think that if he really wanted feedback or assistance he would be well advised to help us help him right from the beginning by being more fully forthcoming.
On the other hand, perhaps he just wants to vent and get soothing sounds in return.
Whether there is some story going on in the background that we do not know about or not, they have used/published your photo. Unless you have signed a specific contract regarding how lightly they screen back the image for use as a background, it doesn't matter as long as the image is easily recognizable as your image.
i shoot for 10 magazines for which my photos are published from the cover to the ads but i dont bill them. its part of my job. so if you shoot for them, youre either a hired photog that works for them regularly or youre a hired freelancer
Thats Fresh wrote:
i shoot for 10 magazines for which my photos are published from the cover to the ads but i dont bill them. its part of my job. so if you shoot for them, youre either a hired photog that works for them regularly or youre a hired freelancer
If you're an employee of the magazine, then it's work made for hire as part of your job (unless negotiated otherwise) and of course you wouldn't bill them.
If you're a contractor (freelancing), it's not work made for hire unless you're crazy enough to sign a contract that says it is, and you would (and should) bill them.
Monito wrote:
I sense that there is some back story which the original poster has not revealed to us. Without an explanation of the circumstances, there is not much to do except speculate idly. I can imagine a couple of scenarios that might have prompted him to write the cryptic message that he did. The original poster has basically said that the images were published and we are inclined to take him on his word that they were.
Perhaps the original poster takes some pleasure in seeing well meaning people thrash around in an attempt to try to figure out how to help him, but I think that if he really wanted feedback or assistance he would be well advised to help us help him right from the beginning by being more fully forthcoming.
On the other hand, perhaps he just wants to vent and get soothing sounds in return.
<soothe> <soothe> ...Show more →
haha you're funny! It is a simple question without boring you about how I know the mag well and contribute frequently blah blah
This is the question incase you missed it, and gawd knows how you missed it!
A mag I gave my photos to for use (and payment before you all jump on me for that!) used one and the other as a background faded photo. I consider this a published photo and have billed them for it. Do you consider it a published photo? Do you not consider it a published photo.
you dont need to know my pants size or the magazine or circulation numbers or anything like that. It was a very basic question...
Freelance for them.
It wasnt a what should I do question... it is a what would YOU do. Again, a simple question most of you got the hang of.
Bloody hell, id hate to have some of you quote on a job! you would want way too much info
I think the ambiguity comes from the fact that you (andrew81) is asking whether a photo printed in a magazine is published or not? If it is printed in a magazine,how much more published can it get?
There is something else you said that I find confusing...
"A mag I gave my photos to for use (and payment before you all jump on me for that!) used one and the other as a background faded photo. I consider this a published photo and have billed them for it."
So, you delivered photow and were paid for that. Then, when they published them, you billed them again? Or did you mean, that you delivered photos with the intention on billing them for anything they publish?
This is the internet, so try not to be ambiguous. It's hard to understand what people mean sometimes. (and, I have always had a hard time with Australian accents. (; )
Now educate me on this, I have only worked with one Australian Magazine. And I feel they low-balled me. I asked for day rate plus usage because it was for multi-page (2 or 3 pages of varying size) use over multiple issues (6 issues over 6 months). The editor told me that I was charging too American a price, and he would just pay photographers in Australia to shoot for $20-25/hr, and receive full rights to the photos.
We ended up settling on twice the original day rate, and I let it go... But, what is the normal way Australian Magazines pay for this?
NickyD
Yep I can see how that was confusing. Just to clarify that point. They selected a few, i sent them in hi-res and the graphics person puts it all together. She then sends an email asking for an invoice for X amount based on their rates. I know what they charge so I bill them as soon as the mag comes out, helps me get paid quickly!
The money question. It all depends on the magazine I guess. For example, if it is Working Dog Monthly then I would say they are about right in paying $25 p/h
If it were say RALPH or big mag then that is pathetic and they are screwing you. PM me if you want with the magazine and I would be able to give a rough guide on what I think.
I get contacted a fair bit about for "by-line" photos. Meaning they will put my name on there, and use it for free. 95% of the time I say no. Unless I know it will help me directly later on. On average though, magazines have no idea what the going rates are for photos and the rates have halved over the past 5 years!
Yeah, the way you've posed your question is incredibly confusing. I'm still not sure what the hell you're asking.
Is it whether or not it counts for the same licensing rate if the photo is faded into a background? Is it that they've paid you for the normally-used photo and not the faded one? Is it that you supplied a bunch of photos for comp purposes and only charged them for use of one, but now they've used two? Is it a question of what constitutes "published"?
I'm sure this makes perfect sense to you, but I don't think you're expressing yourself as clearly as you think you are since you've obviously confused half of the respondents.
And, by the way, I ALWAYS ask for more information before quoting a client. I ask for as much information as is available, because it helps me give an accurate quote that I don't have to revisit and revise later on. And my clients love it - one longer phone call at the head of a job and they get an accurate quote that doesn't change, as opposed to an ongoing series of calls and a budget that changes every time I find out something new about the project? That's a sure way to keep from being hired again.
I'm booked to a job for all of next week that was initially offered at one rate, but a single phone call with the intermediate and end clients made it clear that they'd underbudgeted. A single 45-minute conference call resulted in a 250% jump in my net on the job, addition of a discretionary expense budget, addition of two assistants and a 400% jump in my rental budget.
I agree, there must be more to the story. Yes, both images are published. What was your original agreement for the shoot? I also tend to ask a lot of questions of the client so I can quote an accurate fee. Last year, I shot an editorial story and they later asked to use an image for the cover. All I had to do was edit an image and submit an invoice. Are you licensing your images or a work for hire?
