Photojournalism: wire vs agency?

What is the difference between a wire and a photo agency?

What are the big players in either and what exactly is it that they do differently?

Do they ever work together?

 

Thanks for your info!

 

-dennis.

Dennis-- Wire services like AP and Reuters have staffers who are assigned to cover events, though they will also pick up images from freelancers. Agencies like Sigma, Sipa, Black Star, Gamma and a host of other names that slip my mind at the moment (just think of a Greek letter and there's probably a photo agency named after it) have contract photographers who send images to them and then they sell the images to magazines, newspapers, and other news outlets. Sometimes those agencies will contract their shooters out on assignment (Black Star actually does the majority of their business like that).

 

I've worked for several agencies. There are several tiers of shooters working for them-- news event photographers, magazine photographers, and assignment photographers, for example. News event shooters will shoot the senator's press conference or Martha Stewart going to prison, it's pretty much f8 and be there. Magazine shooters will shoot events or stories that are more likely to end up in the glossies. Assignment photographers will shoot for the high-level publications (National Geographic has even called for a Black Star photographer from time to time, but I'm not sure if that's happened lately). It takes a while to work your way up, but if you're at the top you will get offered the lower assignments if you want them.

 

Current split is 50-50, but when I switched agencies in '02 I was able to get a 70-30 split for my first couple of stories.

 

Aside from excellent photographic capabilities, he main thing they want from a shooter is utter reliability. It's often a more people management-oriented job than it is a photography job, but you do have to have the photography end of things down cold. You have to finagle your way into position, anticipate what is going to happen, and find creative ways to tell the story photographically so that people will be more inclined to use your photos.

 

I made my way into my first agency by assisting for one of their top shooters and then picking up assignments when they needed an extra photographer (and my boss was often rather chagrined when my stuff got used bigger and more often than his). Note that by this time I had been shooting for major dailies since high school and had a four-year degree in photography.

 

My currrent agency found me when word went out that I had exclusive photos of the sniper episode, which happened right by my house. I had been doing commercial photography and direct assignment magazine work for years, and had dropped my relationship with my former agency, so I was basically a free agent.

 

For domestic work you must have pro-level digital cameras and a laptop with the ability to wirelessly connect to the Internet, so that you can upload images ASAP (that's in addition to a full set of gear, including lenses up to 300mm f2.8). A lot of pros are using Nikon D2H's backed by N70's, but there are a lot of Canon shooters, too.

 

I don't do foreign spot news, just high-level magazine work (I will shoot DC area spot news assignments from time to time), and for that I mostly shoot film. For foreign spot news (Iraq, Afganistan, etc.) you need to know how to get your images transmitted via sattelite (often that can be pre-arranged via a service).

 

You should probably cover about a hundred local news stories before you approach an agency, and have a solid portfolio. To get an idea of what the top agencies are, just look at a magazine and check out the photo credits. If the shooter is with an agency, the tag line will read something like "Joe Blow/Sipa." -BC-

Thank you for telling your story. That was one of the most interesting and informative posts I have read in a long time. Cheers

thanks, bill. this is all great info, and fascinating. i'm still at a loss, though, as to the

difference between a wire and an agency, or is there a difference?

 

also, what exactly does it mean to shoot "on assignment?" is free-lance the opposite

of shooting on assignment?

 

preemptive thanks for any and all shared wisdom.

In a way they are synonymous. The are some photo agencies like Getty that provides a wire service to subscribers and there are some smaller agencies that do not. I know Bill covered quite a bit so I won't bore you with it again. Basically photographers shoot events they are assigned to do through their agency. The photographer can be on many different levels with the particular agency - staff, contract, freelance. When a photographer finishes an assignment, he/she transmits to a local or regional office. There, they proof your photo and "move" your photo to the appropriate wire within their agency - State, National, International, Sports, etc. Subscribers to the service, usually newspapers and magazines, can download your photo for use in their publication off of the wire. Some agencies have official contracts with organizations like Getty has with the NHL for licensing and distribution of photos. Some don't. To find out who are the heavy hitters, just pick up a newspaper and magazine and look at the credit. You'll see AP, Reuters, Corbis, Getty, Sipa... There are many big hitters. There are also specialized sports and entertainment agencies as well like Wire Image.

also, what exactly does it mean to shoot "on assignment?" is free-lance the opposite of shooting on assignment?

 

 

****************************************************************

 

No, not really. If I am shooting on assignment, the publication (sometimes it's a company newsletter or other business organ) contracts with me or through the agency to go to a specific place at a particular time and shoot a specific thing or person for a specific article. Most likely the writing has already been assigned or done. There will be specifics regarding what they will pay me, whether the story runs or not (sometimes there are lower "kill fees" if the story is killed, and in that case the images revert back to me or the agency and can be sold elsewhere, or they may pay the full rates and keep the images so they don't go other places). Since I am not on the staff of the publication, I would still be considered a free-lancer.

 

I would not be shooting on assignment if my agency says, "Can you cover the President on November 2 at the White House?" and the agency doesn't have a particular buyer for the images, they just believe that they will have customers and they'll split the take. The agency believes that I can do the job of taking saleable images and I believe that the agency can do the job of actually selling them. Again, I'm still a freelancer.

 

However, if I sign up with AP, and they pay me a weekly salary with benefits and etc., they would tell me where to go and what to shoot (unless there happened to be a breaking news story that happens right in front of me), and I would be a staffer, not freelance. They would own all rights to any images I take. Likewise if I got a staff job with say, The Washington Post or the New York Times. If I did that, I could probably moonlight shooting headshots or weddings, but if I ever sent any of my news images to a picture agency, I'd be dog meat.

 

I should add that agencies often send their freelancers out on assignment for corporate work like annual reports, which is technically considered advertising.

 

Happy shooting. -BC-

ok, so as i understand, a "wire service" is an organization that mainly works through a

subscription basis, while an "agency" mainly works through selling images as they

come, but both may do either in certain circumstances?

 

so in a freelance situation, if your agency says to go and shoot the President on Nov.

2 at the White House, can you take those images and sell them to the highest bidder

or are you bound (legally or ethically) to give those images to your agency? what

makes an agency "your" agency?

 

and in a staffer situation, does that mean that if, while you are under contract with

the New York Times, you make a documentary series on Alzheimers patients and

have it printed in Aperture you will be in trouble?

What makes an agency "your" agency?

 

 

***

 

 

You have a signed contract with them.

 

 

***

 

 

and in a staffer situation, does that mean that if, while you are under contract with the New York Times, you make a documentary series on Alzheimers patients and have it printed in Aperture you will be in trouble?

 

 

***

 

 

The short answer is yes. A staffer usually has a contract as well and copyright belongs to the paper. However if your paper is a member of the Associated Press and Aperture is also a member, Aperture might be able to use your photos. The AP is a nonprofit coop. Not only do they have their own photogs and reporters, but they also rely on member papers submissions. It is not uncommon for members papers to load their own work to the wire (usually little to no extra pay is involved for you) for other local papers or national papers to pick up. For example the Arizona Republic uploaded photos of the recent Bush/Kerry debate. These were photos not taken by a AP photog. Any paper that subscribes to the wire could use them in the paper. Also the AP often requests from papers to upload certain feature stories after they see them run in that paper. So your NYT photos could possibly reach many readers. You'll see in the credit: New York Times via AP.

******so in a freelance situation, if your agency says to go and shoot the President on Nov. 2 at the White House, can you take those images and sell them to the highest bidder or are you bound (legally or ethically) to give those images to your agency? what makes an agency "your" agency?***************************

 

As to whether or not I am legally bound to give the images to my agency, that would depend on the wording of my contract. Currently, I have a "handshake" agreement with them, so technically I'm not legally bound to anything. However, if I did give the images to anyone else, I'd be shooting myself in the foot. My agency has a stable of dozens of photographers, and publications know that if they piss the agency off, they will be cutting themselves off from a substantial source of material. If Joe Blow photographer tries to undercut his agency, he will soon find that he has no substantial power within the media world, and his agency would no longer work with him.

 

The agency has built up the relationships with the media outlets, and they work smoothly and well. They can take five minutes and notify more editors than I could dialing the phone all day and bugging people to take the time to look at an unknown quantity.

 

*****and in a staffer situation, does that mean that if, while you are under contract with the New York Times, you make a documentary series on Alzheimers patients and have it printed in Aperture you will be in trouble?

***************

 

As a previous respondent said, yes, if you were a staffer, AP could take your images and send them throughout its system to the other media outlets that were subscribers. However, depending on how your freelance contract reads, USUALLY they can't do that with freelance submissions (though scumbag publications are forcing freelancers into other arrangements).

 

There have been times when staffers were given special consideration for images used in photo-essays in highly-regarded photo publications. It's prestige for both the staffer and for the publication he works for. But the arrangements must be worked out with the staffer's bosses first.