Travel images required for website in return for publicity and links

<p>This thread seems to have deteriorated into an "amateur vs professional" debate which isn't the way I see the issue here at all. It's not to do with the "protection" of professionals' businesses.</p>

<ul>

<li>It has got to do with how photography is valued from any source. People work hard to produce the best result they can at some cost and at the expense of some time and learned skills. And what is this effort valued at by the OP and some others? Well precisely nothing. Despite the fact that they want to use it to make money for themselves, and despite the fact that the OP's own business also consists of inserting time and skill into the process of planning travel to make it better. If everyone values time and skill at zero then she has no business.</li>

<li>The offering of "credit" from a business that presumably scarcely exists yet is not a meaningful recompense to photographers and effectively has no value. As I said before if it were Coca Cola one could take a different view. Meantime the OP hasn't picked up at all on the suggestions made on how photographers could be recompensed made by me and others and indeed deemed herself offended by the thought that her business should recompense the photographers after it has survived a while. She could have offered discount travel. She could have offered a free trip planning service. She could get on a stock agencies website to see just how much she's actually trying to save here. But instead the offer was "credit" and non existent (yet) exposure which are long term as well as short term free.</li>

<li>I'd suggest that in starting a new business it is more important to choose the images that say the right things about your business and what it offers than whether the images are free or just low cost. I'd suggest that it might be hard to find a single photographer who can offer the gamut of locations and style/content that this business is looking for. Which is why searching a stock agency's database might well be a less arduous and more successful way to fulfill the OP's needs than trying to piece together what you need from an array of photographers. We know she's not totally easy to please ( and maybe rightly so) because she's rejected frre photographs already. So if you need to be fussy, and if you value your own time, why not explore the stock agency route where prices for web use are pretty low? Of course that's not the same as free, but then it might be better and might be easier. You're more likely to find what you want in a fully searchable database of millions than you are by looking at the portfolios and websites of most individuals. </li>

<li>And all of this happens from someone who joined Photo.net on that day specifically to ask a group of complete strangers (even in an internet context) for something for nothing, and has clearly put little effort into thinking about what might be fair and what can be offered that won't break the business' bank right now. </li>

</ul>

<p>It is worth considering that if Tanya's business does get off the ground and expand, then fairly soon she will be in a position to buy photos from professional photographers. Ultimately her current strategy could put more money in the pockets of pros. Certainly more than if she went out of business.</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

<p>Alan</p>

<p>"It is worth considering that if Tanya's business does get off the ground and expand, then fairly soon she will be in a position to buy photos from professional photographers."</p>

<p>The other side to that is, once she's in a position to buy, who do you think she is more likely to buy pictures from? The "pro" that wouldn't help her out, or the "amateur" who was willing to give? So you could say that that the "pros" are only potentially hurting themselves. Another way the "pro"could be hurting themselves is that this thread, like all others here, can be found through an internet search of your name. What if the Red Cross or some other large charitable organization or socially conscious company is considering you for a large contract and they come across this thread and see you and all these other "pros" who are not willing to help people out unless there is something offered in return? Don't you think that would hurt the "pro" industry? Maybe then they too would decide to go with photos from some "armature" who photos are just as good as yours. Just something to think about.</p>

<p>Jeff Spirer, you seem to be arguing for the sake of it. i mean, you're a professional photographer and your business "dried up in the past 6 months" - how many free photos did you offer to Tanya?</p>

<p>Alan Ginman, it's true that she may be "in a position to buy photos from professional photographers", but why would she when there are all these nice people who will give it to her for free? Jeff Spirer probably got a ticket to Europe to shoot pretty pix for Tanya for free. </p>

<p>p.s. i don't make money on photos but find Tanya's request for free images so she can make $ ridiculous. </p>

<p>Most of us do appreciate the time, effort and expense of professional photography. However, I would not say that every time we take a photo it is hard work! For us semi-pro-amateurs who work full time other than in photography it is as much pleasure as work. I do it to relax, for the excitement and the fact that I love to play with the technology (oddly I can’t stand TV, mp3 players or cell phones).<br>

<br />Most of us, on this forum, have hundreds if not thousands of photos we are never going to use sitting on our hard drives. Some of them may be great travel pictures of European places we have been. Every photo we take, as photographers, surely is not being held back for the big dollars it may make. Few people ever make much of anything off of travel pictures. I see nothing wrong with outright giving them to someone to use in their business provided your name appears at the bottom. If you have a website as well, and you should if you really want to sell, then have that listed also.<br>

<br />Of course it is wise to make sure the person DOES have a business before you give them photos. Even then, how much will it matter if it is not some great picture that can be printed off and sold for hundreds? Give them images at web resolutions, which is what they want anyway. If I had any I would give them some just to see them used and my name in print! If they never use them so what.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>It is worth considering that if Tanya's business does get off the ground and expand, then fairly soon she will be in a position to buy photos from professional photographers.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Rubbish. She will plead poverty again and scrounge more photos for free. There is never a time when a business ever feels so flush with cash that it looks for opportunities spend it on something it can get for nothing. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Ultimately her current strategy could put more money in the pockets of pros. Certainly more than if she went out of business.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I really wouldn't bet on that.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>how many free photos did you offer to Tanya?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is a complete misreading of what I said, so much so that it looks deliberate. But it does make my point - what I do is what I do. What someone else does is what someone else does. It appears that some photographers oppose the free market, and think that photographers should goosestep together over pricing. I don't. I think it's a free market and people have to adapt. Plenty of professions grow, shrink, arise, disappear. It's up to people to figure out how to deal with it. If photography isn't paying, time to figure out how to make it pay or do something else. But nobody else is responsible for my business and pricing. I have to compete in a changing world. So does everyone else.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>It is worth considering that if Tanya's business does get off the ground and expand, then fairly soon she will be in a position to buy photos from professional photographers.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Where have we heard this before? <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot_com_bubble">Oh yeah.</a></p>

<p>I don't like the idea, but...deviantart, 1x, hi5, etc...are using our photos to make money, legally.</p>

<p>There is one thing here that I do not see. Any and I mean any of the companys information. No name no nothing. People protect yourselves. Everyday scam artists are trying to come up with new ways to finagle you and no not just for money. (Tayna not saying that you are, I have no proof of that).</p>

<p>And Tanya's changed her name also so best forget this one. Although I'm sure you can find it if you look back throughg you're alert emails....</p>

<p>This is the tip of the iceberg that is to come. The exponential growth of photography, photographers and new digital camera technology will eventually sound the death knell for the majority of professional work. I bet that 50 times the amount of people who have replied to this forum have already emailed the poster of this question.</p>

<p>Folks, this thread has gone on far enough and everything has pretty much been said. But I leave you with this:</p>

<p>Giving away images rather than selling usage of them is a personal decision. Anyone who can read a discussion with any sense of objectivity can see the points on both sides. It is a free country and people should do whatever the hell they want with their own images and also that giving away images (or any skill for free) takes food off of the plate of people who make a living with those images.</p>

<p>Then there is the ubiquitous "you'll get exposure" claim that so many young pros are forced to listen to. Yes, absolutely you can get future work from "exposure", but you have to ask yourself, "just what kind of exposure will get me future work?". Is this a portfolio piece that I can use to promote myself? Is this a location where other photo consumers are likely to see? Is the person I am giving these images to likely to pay me for the same thing in the future? In my personal opinion, the answer to all three of those is "no" in this situation. But that is for you to decide. yourself.</p>

<p>Even ignoring that, one might say to ones self "Why should I give images to someone who isn't even giving me the respect of offering me a little something in return?". Barter is golden. Both people get a little something, respect is given all around, and the tax man doesn't get any of it. Sure, I have given images away, particularly to friends who have businesses they are running. My buddy who has a screen printing shop asked me for some images of products and in return he printed me up a few shirts. Sure, for the time I put in, I could have bought 4 dozen shirts for what I would have charged someone. But the guy is my friend and I like to help him out. Plus, he respects me enough to say "I know your time is valuable and I'm asking you to do something for free, so here's a token of my appreciation". To me, it's all about intent. And some random person showing up on an internet forum asking for something for free with little to offer in return doesn't fit the bill for me personally. Again though, that is up to you to decide.</p>

<p>I will say that what is up to me to decide is when this thread has reached the end of it's useful life. And that is now. Thanks for coming, and goodnight folks.</p>