they want my negatives......

[domenico_foschi]

I have been contacted by a rock band and asked to take pictures

for magazines and promos and possibly an album cover...

 

<p>

 

Everything would be allright if it wasn't for the fact that they want

to be the sole proprietors of the negatives.

 

<p>

 

I do mostly fine art (how they call it) i have dealt with clients

before but this is the first time i have been asked such a request,

which i do not like .

I need a feedback from somebody.......Thank you.

[abiggs]

I think your answer should be: "You gotta pay to play". Only after

they pay a huge sum for the images, they can have them. Otherwise,

the images should be on a 'per use' basis.

 

<p>

 

$.02

[rob_pietri5]

You are certainly not the first to be pressured into situations like

that. These days, it is a buyers market with so many starving

photographers clammering for a shrinking market. The matter is

entirely up to you. If you bend to their demands, you risk loosing

self respect plus damage the industry as a hole. If you say no, they

very well could go find someone who will do what they want. If they

won't bend, you have to decide whether you really need the work or

not. You could charge as much as 5 times your normal rate. But to

encompass all scenerios and possible future sales is difficult.

 

<p>

 

Money may not be the issue. They may be trying to protect their own

image by controlling the pictures, so to keep them from being

published where that image could be hurt, especially if they are

already famous. If they are up and coming stars, then keeping control

of the negatives could provide you with lucrative future revenues.

 

<p>

 

Just some things to consider.

[dfdncithekxlbn8kaglf33]

A buy out of all rights is not a good idea without healthy

compensation. Most pros would negotiate this away and still have the

deal, otherwise refuse the job. THis is a common tactic to get photogs

to hand over rights for far less than they are worth. Just imagine if

you shot a 13 year old Britney Spears and handed over the rights to

your film. Seven years later, you'd be kicking yourself.

 

<p>

 

Check out the wealth of inforamtion at www.editorialphotographers.com

A search should turn up something on a rights buy out. My opinion is

that you talk with them and let them know why giving all rights and

the film away for cheap is a really bad buisness practice on your end

(and on theirs too) and get an agreement that gives you a fair rate

and satisfies the proper buisness practices of a photographer. If not,

walk away, you have skills that are worth compensating, and an

industry that is worth upholding a minimun of value.

[ellis_vener_photography]

Unless they are throwing major money (like 10-20x your

shooting fee) at you , the answer is: no. And also no to exclusive

usage or copyright transfer.

Big shots in the entertainment industry like KISS or madonna or

The roolingStones can get away with such deals because; a.

theyy hire the best in the business and they pay very large

amount s of money for that exclusive usage. And that is what

anybody who hires you as a photographer for is paying your for;

the usage. not the factthat you own a camera and maybe some

lights, not for your creativity, they are paying for how they will use

the images you create.<P>They can ask, and you can be

flattered by their asking but you don't have to screw yourself (or

your client, really) in the process.

[guillaume_zuili]

Hi Domenico,

 

<p>

 

Like that general in Bastogne, surounded by the germans and asked to

surrender, say (and it's a very polite way) : NUTS !

 

<p>

 

Why would you give away of your property ! Author's right is a Wall

you don't cross, that's all we have. Some agencies and magazines try

to impose that and I strongly think we have to resist.

 

<p>

 

Anyway after that brilliant sentence...ask that band to sell his

songs just one for all.

A package...A good price...It's only a couple of songs, come on !

I don't think they would apprieciate.

Guillaume.

[john_flavell]

Even the established rock bands know better. If magazines want

images, deal directly with the magazine. If the band wants promo

images, let them buy limited rights. You can also negotiate for

limited time rights: Let them do as they wish for a year or so, then

have the rights revert back to you.

[steve_singleton2]

Ask them if a recording company gets all rights to their music when

they make a CD. It might help to talk to them as if it's their work

that's at stake. If you can get them to be upfront about their needs

and fears, you may be able to negotiate an agreement. If not, double

your fee and consider yourself well-paid enough to forgo any future

income. However, you should ALWAYS reserve the right to use the

images for your own self-promotion, regardless of any other

circumstance (just shoot enough film for both parties).

[dan n.]

Remember Napster and the music...? why they don't let us do what ever

we want with the cds we bought and then they want to do what ever they

want with the negs. we make....> think about that....

[mike_mahoney]

You could ask them why they want the negs, then you're in a better

position to negotiate. You say magazines, promos and album cover, all

those will be final digital products ... perhaps they are simply

trying to have your creative input on the shoot, and remove you from

the output production.

 

<p>

 

There are no good reasons to give a client the negs, and many good

reasons for you to hold them, both for the client and yourself. You

need to talk again with your client to see whats going on.

[neal_shields]

I dealt with a photographer for years that had three generations

working in the business, they went back over 50 years and owned their

own building.

 

<p>

 

They had a climate controled fireproof vault, and a file system that

never failed. If you gave them a catalogue number going back 20

years, you could have a same day print. I never knew them to lose or

damage a negative. My negatives were way safer with them then they

would have been with me.

 

<p>

 

I also knew that if I needed a print 10 years later the price of that

print would be the same for me as anyone else, no mater what the

subject mater, or reason for the need.

 

<p>

 

They were also scrupulously honest about rights. Essentially, they

owned the physical negative, and you owned the rights the photograph.

 

<p>

 

I tried time after time to encourage them to publish a book of

historical photographs of our city. They would not, because they

said that the images belonged to their customers.

 

<p>

 

Several years ago they went out of business. In their case they

arranged with a local university to take over the collection of

negatives, and customers can still get a print. However, in most

cases where photo business disappears, I suspect that the chances of

getting a print from a customer�s negative is remote.

 

<p>

 

How many photographers that insist on keeping control of the

negative, are not exercising due diligence in terms of their care and

preservation? How many are not even financially capable of insuring

that that negative will be available 10, 20 or 30 years from now?

 

<p>

 

How many young photographers realize how much responsibility that

they take on when they keep a negative?

 

<p>

 

In today�s modern world where you can leave your shirts at the

cleaners on Wednesday, and go back on Saturday to pick them up, and

the cleaners is gone, there may not be one standard formula for

photographer, customer relationships.

[david vickery]

Hello, The image is all that you really ever have. It does not

matter what the image is on, if you give away or sell all rights to

the image, then all you have is what you got for it. When a song or

novel is composed, it is not the material that the stuff was

originally written on that is copyrighted, it is the actual song or

novel that is copyrighted. If you sell or give away all rights to

your intellectual property make sure that it is of significant

benefit to you (and the industry that you are in)to do so.

I would like to suggest that Mr. Shields does not know what he is

talking about except to the extend that we should take good care of

the media that our copyrighted property exists on.

[dan n.]

I think that Mr Shields talked about archiving vs.copyright... whichi

is not the same....

 

<p>

 

In my opinion, if for some reason the negs. are lost... then the

interested party just hire a photographer again a redo the shot, if not

then re-use the old one and pay accordingly...I can't imagine some one

will give up the neg for cd cover and then see the same image on a

nation-wide advertsising campaign...

[david vickery]

"Essentially, they owned the physical negative, and you owned the

rights the photograph."

[dick roadnight cotswolds]

The customer is always right, but you do not have to accept their

terms.

 

<p>

 

My client insists on keeping the negatives, for security reasons, as

what I photograph is valuable, and they need very permanent records.

 

<p>

 

But they are not insisting on keeping all the negatives, and they are

allowing me to scan the negs and use the picture for self-publicity,

as long as I do not tell anybody where the treasure is.

 

<p>

 

If a museum wants to publish pictures of works of art, you would not

expect to acquire the copyright to sell images of millions of pounds

worth of art for half a day's work, would you?

[andy_eads]

Domenico, Get a copy of "The Legal Guide for the Visual Artist" by

Tad Crawford. If my memory serves me, he also has written a book for

photographers as well. It contains model contracts, negotiating

points and case law. His book has helped me earn a fair price for my

work. Andy

[matthew_runde]

Domenico,

 

<p>

 

Another book that may help you is <i>ASMP Professional Business

Practices in Photography</i>, by the American Society of Media

Photographers.

 

<p>

 

Also, if you are going to keep the copyright but let them take care

of the actual negatives, you may want to register the images with the

copyright office where you are (if there is one). I don't have

experience with this, but it's what I would check out.

[domenico_foschi]

THANK YOU, EVERYBODY i appreciate your help . You just

confirmed what i was feeling about the all situation.

[david_grandy5]

The first rule of working with rock bands is to get the money up

front. It's also the last rule. NO CREDIT!

 

<p>

 

As for giving them the negatives, why not? Would you refuse to

shoot colour transparency film? They'd have the "negs" then

wouldn't they? I just feel that you have to explore what the market

would bear and then charge that. It's no good to make 2000% of

nothing.