michaelchadwickphotography

Photography is a business, and yes, it has to be managed just like any other. Artists often have a hard time thinking of themselves as business people, and we all wish that we could just shoot and the business would take care of itself. That just isn't the case. Much of the time, a photographer fails at it not because they are a bad photographer, but because they do not understand the business. It's a necessary evil, and can mean the difference between owning your business or just shooting for someone else's business. There is nothing wrong with working for someone else's business. You don't have to worry about negotiating fees, payroll, taxes, advertising, marketing, or any of that other stuff. However, I hope you will think about owning the business yourself. Here's why... Yes, the costs of doing business can be hard, but if you do it right, the rewards can far outweigh those costs.

Varies by region and by use. You need to know what the photo will be used for. A quick social media post is much different than regional or national marketing use. One-time use is much different than perpetual use. You need to educate yourself by talking to others in that specific industry, as well as research what is fair market use for the specific use the band intends. If the band is asking you what to charge, it's likely they don't know what it's worth either. Find out what it's going to be used for, then come back here looking for an answer. Without that, you might as well come here and ask "What's a car going for these days?" without giving any more information about what kind of car you need. I know that doesn't answer your question, and that you're probably here to get a quick and easy answer without having to actually do the research. Unfortunately, it's in your best interest to actually do the research.

I imagine that this forum is not something which pays the bills for anyone, meaning they have other more important things on their plate. My suggestion would be to have patience and simply make an inquiry through the proper channels instead of trying to throw them under the bus on a public forum. I also believe this would be more appropriate for Site Help rather than a forum for beginners at photography looking for photography advice.

Do a basic search on wedding photography. Seriously, come on now. Just do your homework.

Wow. There's a lot here to discuss. Contracts. How to price your services. What expectations your couple should have for deliverables of your work. That's just the tip of the iceberg, too. These topics alone are several pages of text in a forum like this. I recommend purchasing a course in photography business or purchasing a book of the same. You could also pay a local, established photographer to sit down with you and teach you the basics of running a photography business. Many of these and other business questions will be answered in photography business books, of which there are many. The books are not expensive and they are vital to running a photography business efficiently and effectively.

Any credit card merchant is going to charge you money. Build that into your costs of doing business.

That works out to about $300 per shooting hour, yes? Depending on your workflow, travel time and expense, and how much of that you're taking out for the payment processing (if accepting a credit card) and for sales tax (if you're building that into the fee), you should be left with a decent hourly rate even with post-processing.

I don't have a different hourly rate for events based on length, but I do have a minimum number of hours (3 for most events). Language-wise I simply say that until a retainer is received and contract is signed, the rate is subject to change. Once they contract at that rate, you are locked into that rate. If you're concerned about someone hiring you too far in advance that your prices might change, put a limit on how far in advance you can be booked for such an event. I include post-processing in the rate I charge. It's simpler for the client, plus it looks less like you are charging them for every little thing. You've been doing this long enough to know what your post-processing flow is like, so you can charge accordingly. Different events are covered in different ways. I do not offer an hourly wedding rate, they have to get a minimum package. Other events are shot and treated differently, so their rates may vary from one event type to the next. Event photography is storytelling, while corporate portraits are something else entirely. In my experience, event photographs are the copyright of the photographer. If a client wants rights to use the photos, a secondary conversation must take place regarding the extent of the use and who will own the rights to that usage. Giving them complete control and no photo credit should cost a lot more than you having photo credit and a say in how they are used.

You should definitely get paid, but how much depends on what is being expected of you. Ask them to define "assistant" and what that entails. If you're just hauling around equipment and bringing them water, that's a lot different than if they actually mean "second shooter" and want you there as an artist. Once you have a handle on the expectation, talk to some other photographers in your area and find out what the going rate is for that particular work, and for your particular skill level.

Yes, I did not feel it was appropriate to push my own book. Thank you. :-)

There are books on starting a wedding photography business. There are online courses. There are a multitude of photographer sites out there with portfolios and blogs. There is no shortage of available information, you don't need us to throw up a bunch of photos here.

"Is this the hill you want to die on?" That's what someone told me when I first experienced your problem. You have to decide whether it's in your best interest to pursue. Here are the questions I recommend you ask yourself. 1) Is the relationship with the company established and positive? In other words, if someone asks them who took the photographs, is there any reason to suspect they would not give out your information? 2) Is there some monetary benefit they are receiving by posting the photographs? If so, does your contract with them state they must provide photo credit and/or compensation? 3) Is there a possibility of future business with that company which would be put in jeopardy by you getting on their back about it? Have you politely asked them to provide you with credit? If so, and if they refused, then you might consider further action. It might just be a simple oversight. It might be ignorance (an opportunity for you to educate them). If they do not give you credit as it is due, nicely but firmly remind them that it is in your contract (which you have, right?) that the copyright to the photographs are yours and that they must provide photo credit.

Nope. I have done a LOT of work in intellectual property cases and the definitions of derivative work, and your arguments would not hold water in court. Your rationalization that it's not hurting anyone is nothing more than that - a rationalization. You asked if it was right. It isn't. You asked if it was legal. It isn't. Will you get caught? Probably not, but don't think for a moment we're going to tell you it's okay. In order for something to be a derivative work, it has to be a completely new work with a completely new purpose. If you don't think you're breaking the law, I triple dog dare you to do it. Don't say you were not warned. Moderator Note: The OP has his views and the premise of the thread was asking for opinions – all those received are similar in content. The OP has been provided advice apropos Copyright Legislation in the USA and also referenced to the Berne Convention for matters dealing with countries that are signatories to that convention and he should interpret the law and make his own actions as he sees fit. This thread has now run its course. It is bogged down and is the same repetition of statement and rebuff. Given the repetition; personal comments; sarcasm and misquoting; the thread portrays elements typical of a thread prone to a rapid and further demise. Accordingly this conversation is now closed.

You are hurting the photographer whose intellectual property you are profiting from. You are depriving the owner of the intellectual property of royalties. Not all crimes "hurt society as a whole" but that doesn't mean they are legal. If I restore a Picasso and pass it off as my own, is society worse? Yes, because the artist whose intellectual property is being stolen is part of society. A crime against one that doesn't affect 8 billion other people doesn't mean the crime is insignificant. Is it immoral for you to make money off of someone else's creation? Yes. You can have whatever opinion you want, but the law is the law.

Look, all of your vitriol aside, the likelihood that anyone is going to recognize photos of a landscape taken decades ago are pretty slim. If you're asking whether it's legal or not, the answer is no, it is not. It is not your work and you cannot legally profit from it. Are you going to get caught? Probably not. I'm sorry if you don't like the answers you are being given, but they are accurate. A derivative work is not created by you simply cleaning up an image, any more than a person restoring and repairing the Mona Lisa could suddenly take credit for it. Yes, photo restoration as a derivative work hasn't been challenged in court, sure, but there's very likely a reason for that. You're also not asking whether restoration as a new work is derivative, you're asking if you should be able to profit from buying some old slides and selling the photos inside as stock when you have no rights to those images. Just contact the seller and get the rights, then the whole discussion is moot. The fact alone that you hid your true identity in order to ask this question pretty much sums up whether or not you are aware of the potential illegal nature of your endeavor.

You lie (father's photos) and violate the intellectual property of others, and then get uppity when someone calls you on it? Why are you surprised by any of that? If you came here looking for validation on your violation of intellectual property laws, you're not going to find it. We respect your desire to be entrepreneurial, but not through illegal means. Contact the seller and obtain rights to the images. If they cannot give those rights to you, then THEY are at fault and you should get your money back.

A parallel might be drawn here. If you went to a garage sale and found an original Chagall, bought it for $5, then tried to profit off of its sale, I think that would probably be okay if you were selling it as a Chagall. If you tried to sell it as your own work, that would be a different story. I don't know how intellectual property rights work with respect to purchasing the print representation of someone else's work and then profiting from it. This is where speaking with an IP lawyer would be beneficial. If your agreement in the purchasing of the property included rights to own the intellectual property contained therein, and assuming the person selling it had those rights to begin with, then I imagine you would be in the clear. But, if you didn't get the rights to the intellectual property, then all you bought was some slides. You didn't buy the intellectual property contained in those slides. When you buy a CD of music, you are buying the CD, not the intellectual property contained in that CD.

If you didn't get intellectual property rights to the photos on the slides when you purchased them, I'm afraid you run a risk (even if it's a very small one). On the purest technical level, selling images you don't have the rights to just because you don't think anyone will recognize the photo taken (especially given the subject matter), is still wrong. But based on what you tell us about the photographic content, I can't imagine a likely scenario where someone would recognize it as a photograph someone else took. The rather laughable possibility here is, in the (highly) unlikely event someone bought a stock version of one of these and used it in a very public and profitable way, you could get burned. Like others have said, you're basically asking this because you know it's not actually legal.

1) If you're not currently selling your photos online, a service such as Zenfolio or SmugMug is an easy way to start. However, if you don't normally sell photo products to events in general, it might not be worth the initial investment. I believe Zenfolio and SmugMug both have varieties of accounts, so look into those. 2) What are the costs you need to cover, including your time both in shooting and in processing? What other factors should you keep in mind when setting your prices, such as your costs of doing business? Do you believe you will make enough off of photo sales to the dancers and their families to cover your costs? If not, will the dance studio give you a "guarantee" of a minimum profit? In other words, let's say you feel you must profit $500 from this shoot. You only sell enough prints and other photo products to make $150 net profit. Will the dance studio pay you $350 to make up the difference? 3) If you're not experienced with e-commerce for your own site, I recommend using a third party like Zenfolio or SmugMug. 4) Unless the dance studio asks for a cut (which if they do, what are they giving you for that money?) you should be keeping it all yourself.

Why is this two year old thread being resurrected?

I recommend looking at PPA (Professional Photographers of America). Basic internet searches work pretty well, too, so I'm not sure why you think the internet is bad at it. You also should know that just saying "a photographer" without being more specific is like asking someone to recommend "a mode of transportation to get me somewhere." Much more specific information is going to get you a better answer.

1) Do NOT shoot someone's wedding without experience. How do you get experience? Second shoot with an established photographer. While not every photographer out there is willing to educate others, some of us are. There are also books on how to get started in wedding photography. I cannot link you to my own as that would be a violation of TOS here on the forum, but I do know such books are available because I (among others) have published them. 2) When you're second shooting, work with a studio who will allow you to post the photographs you took at those weddings, on your own site. Most studios will require you to provide that studio with credit, such as "Joe Photographer for ABC Wedding Photography" 3) Once you have LOTS of practice, you can not only shoot someone's wedding, but not have to charge minimal prices to get the work. Your partner photographers will likely also start referring business to you if you have shown you're good enough and they have the date already booked.

Just be very clear to separate the personal from the business. Let them know that IF you are to be there in a professional capacity, you will need them to sign a contract outlining expectations (both yours and theirs) and that you will be interacting at the event as a professional and not as a guest.

People say they charge little while they are getting their feet wet, but there is no reason anyone should be shooting a wedding as the primary photographer if they have not already gotten their feet VERY wet (like, soaking wet) as a second shooter. They then should be apprenticing with a well-experienced primary photographer who will guide them toward shooting a wedding on their own. Not everyone follows this route, but it is the best way to ensure you do not ever mess up someone's wedding and potentially end up in court yourself. People should treat it like learning surgery or flying a commercial airliner. There should be a LOT of practice before you actually get in the hot seat. Once you DO have the proper experience and are truly ready to be the primary photographer, then you are absolutely in the right to charge an appropriate fee which will cover all of the expenses (including your shooting and post-processing time). Finally, if one is charging $500 for a wedding, it is likely the person hiring you will not treat you with as much respect. It seems odd, but it's true. It's called "Perception of Value" and it plays an important role in how the value of professional photography is perceived.

I hold onto the RAW files for one year in the event someone requests anything that I'd prefer to do in the RAW editor. In hundreds of weddings this has only happened maybe three times, so I don't think you're really in much danger if you discard them after a year. What would you possibly use them for, and have you set any expectations with your clients that you will hold onto them for any reason?