I recently shot a few hundred product shots for a big magazine's web site. They're collaborating with a big name dept store as well, the store provided the products.
So I bid for, won, and shot this pretty big contract. Now my primary client asked if their dept store partner can have web usage rights as well for the images - and if it will result in an additional charge. It's my first job with this client and I'm looking forward to more work from them.
What's standard practice for product work? These were plain silo shots on a white sweep with some retouching, but nothing styled or with props.
Is this typically work for hire (I did not spell that out in the contract)? If I shot an editorial piece I would definitely charge per usage and type of usage. But in this case, I'm thinking it's their products, I did a basic non-styled shot, is it something where I want to charge for additional usage or let them assign out the rights as they wish and maybe earn some goodwill? Currently the contract only grants my primary client the usage rights.
If you made out well financially and really care about how the company perceives you, I would not give them "for free". You don't have to charge, but explain to them the circumstances surrounding your decision to allow further licensing.
Send them an invoice for how much you would charge had it been an editorial with the same usage (aka a decent price), but also show a full discount on the invoice for a balance of $0.00.
This way they perceive your work as valuable/worth something and appreciate you "going out of your way" to give them such a huge discount. Because you discounted an invoice down to nothing you aren't obligated to ever uphold the same agreement if you do more work for them.
I've never been in that situation, but that is how I'd respond and react to such. YMMV.
I'd probably have to draft an entirely new contract for the client's partner, since your original contract expressly stated that rights are only extended to the primary client. Then I would charge as you would normally charge, except this time to the client's partner. You don't really have to "explain" yourself beyond what is stated in your contract, regardless of if this is your first shoot or 100th shoot with the client. The contract exists for a reason and your client is obligated to adhere to it.
I have to respectfully disagree with PatFurey in that I do think you should charge the client's partner for your work. I don't see why you wouldn't. If you give away your work for free to your client's partner, they won't consider it as you doing them any kind of favors. Maybe they'll hire you again in the future, but they'll expect you to shoot for free since that's what you had done originally. It doesn't set a very good precedent. They also won't perceive your work as valuable. They'll perceive it as valueless, since they're not paying anything for it.
I fully agree with mdude85. All your previous arrangements were with the original client.
A new license to a different licensee is a separate contract. This is actually for their own protection (as much as your own profit) because as it stands they have no license to use the work--their own lawyers should object.
I also would charge the same license fee to the second company. If your invoice separated expenses, then you would not double-charge the expenses to the second company, but however you have calculated the fee for usage, that method should apply to the second company.
Giving them a freebie will result in their undervaluing your product, not in generating good will. On a person-to-person basis, that might work with someone you know very well, but on a corporate basis, you don't want to do that.
This is absolutelynot"work for hire." You are an independent contractor.
PatFurey89 wrote:
If you made out well financially and really care about how the company perceives you, I would not give them "for free". You don't have to charge, but explain to them the circumstances surrounding your decision to allow further licensing.
Send them an invoice for how much you would charge had it been an editorial with the same usage (aka a decent price), but also show a full discount on the invoice for a balance of $0.00.
This way they perceive your work as valuable/worth something and appreciate you "going out of your way" to give them such a huge discount. Because you discounted an invoice down to nothing you aren't obligated to ever uphold the same agreement if you do more work for them.
I've never been in that situation, but that is how I'd respond and react to such. YMMV....Show more →
Sorry but since you have never been that situation the advice you give is to be honest a sure way to go broke. In fact I had a friend who used a similar business model and went out of business many years ago.
This idea that anyone in a large corporation appreciates you going out of your way by giving them them a valuable product for free is naive. Business is business and if you charge nothing for a product your client sees the $ value as nothing, if you charge them $5000 they see the value as $5000.
Why are photographers always so eager to offer discounts to giant businesses ...
