enlightened-images

<p>My read is that you'll lose. You agreed that only the company and you shall get to use the photos. You are licensing the further distribution of copyrighted material when you "sell or grant" a copyright license. If it goes in front of a judge, and the decision is a toss up, the favor will almost always go to the client when something is vague. Even before that point is reached, if the client finds out that you've done this, (a) are you willing to lose the client, and (b) are you willing to pay the costs needed to defend yourself if the client decides to sue you over the matter. I don't think your non-legal mind should have signed off on that last sentence if you wanted to do anything other than use the photos for your own promotional purposes, which is what I'm sure your client was interpreting the sentence to mean.</p>

<p>20k for a buyout of 25 images? 40k sounds better. Full buyout? Why not say 10k per selected image? Why sell then an apartment building if they only need one or two units?</p> <p>For the global extension to include print and retail, what would you have charged to shoot that to start? Still 4k for 25 images? 4k for 5 images? 30k for 25 images? Print and retail are still a greater premium use than web only, so I'm thinking 2.5x the orig. is a good ending point, so start negotiating at perhaps 4x the original. 16k for 25 images sounds pretty darn fair for a major brand.</p>

<p>The next time someone asks you for the free use of one of your photos in exchange for some exposure of a credit line, just picture yourself standing outside naked in a blizzard. That's exposure. Your non-existent credit line is worth almost the exact same as a real credit line: not much. For a big magazine, you're just the smallest blip of a fly on a wall, and your complaining about not getting your free credit line will get you exactly what they would do for anyone they paid for the photo and a credit line; You'll get a small correction notice in next months issue. (Unless you piss them off.) There's nothing more they owe you. The reason pros ask for money is cuz they know credit lines are pretty much worth squat. The reason commercial uses get more money than editorial uses is the photographer charge more to the company to leave the credit line OFF. Think about it. The value is not in having the credit line, but it is worth more to the client to not have the credit line as a requirement for use. But... moot point since many who call themselves photographers don't understand the value of their work.</p>

<p>I do this quite a lot, but usually with a full blown thematic presentation. Recently I was asked to "just show some pictures and talk about them." Don't ask what they want to hear about, but rather just invite people to ask questions as you go along.<br /><br />Pick some kind of outline subject that you can work a concept foundation around, whether location, subject, technique, personal passion, etc. If you practice the presentation, aim for about 5-10 minutes short so you can answer extra questions. Also, be aware as an audience member, they can get bored if looking at the same image while you talk on an on for two minutes describing the experience. Try and use multiple images to illustrate a topic or concept, and perhaps build up to how you arrived at a particular end shot.<br /><br />Good luck.</p>

<p>If it was me...<br> They could opt for a full priced traditional rights managed license for commercial marketing use and corporate web site use based on size and press run, or<br> <br />I'd charge a *Minimum* of a high-end traditional RF license, just for the marketing materials, *with* a requirement for a credit line in all printed or electronic uses for 3 years, $750 for 5 years, or $950 for unlimited term non-exclusive use. (2x times RF rate)<br /><br />For web use, at a minimum, I'd limit to inside secondary screen, 3 years, under 600 pixels $175 with a credit line and a live link back to my web site, $300 no credit line, or $495 no credit line no term limit (again, another rate equal with a high-end RF image, but without the RF license.<br /><br />Hope that helps.<br /><br />Gary.</p> <p>PS I have a page about pricing images on the sidebar of my weblog, but Photo.net won't let me post a link. You can find it by going to my web site though.<br /><br />PPS @ Ellis V. Great pic of the Japanese Umbrella which showed up on the bottom of the page.<br /><br /></p>