Brooks Ayola wrote:
You're not one of us. Not that my clients would shoot with you, but if you were next door to me and you were giving it away, I bet you would be hurting my market. I know you seem to be above all this, but I can't tell you how many times I've heard the line "Well, the other guy will shoot it for $1500." It's only a matter of time before that sentence changes to "the other guy will shoot it for free." How does that NOT hurt the photography market?

i have to disagree, brooks.  think about it.  there's no way he will ever be able to shoot our clients for free, simply because of the production involved, and the people involved. 

you can shoot glamour for free all you want, because it's just you and the girl, hell the girls even do their own makeup.  but that will never pass in a commercial market. 

and why on earth would you reply to a topic aimed at those who want to make a living at photography?  just so you can say that you're so above everything that you don't need to charge money for your work?  well good for you, but that doesn't help those who are wanting to make a career out of this.

Sean Armenta wrote:

i have to disagree, brooks.  think about it.  there's no way he will ever be able to shoot our clients for free, simply because of the production involved, and the people involved. 

you can shoot glamour for free all you want, because it's just you and the girl, hell the girls even do their own makeup.  but that will never pass in a commercial market. 

and why on earth would you reply to a topic aimed at those who want to make a living at photography?  just so you can say that you're so above everything that you don't need to charge money for your work?  well good for you, but that doesn't help those who are wanting to make a career out of this.

*swoons*

Sean Armenta wrote:
and why on earth would you reply to a topic aimed at those who want to make a living at photography?  just so you can say that you're so above everything that you don't need to charge money for your work?  well good for you, but that doesn't help those who are wanting to make a career out of this.

For the simple reason that I hear this every day, from those who do try to make a living doing glamour photography. Locals who shoot housewives wanting to feel sexy, or shooting nude content for pay web sites, for example. They consistently rail on those of us who shoot trade as stealing their business.

I have costs, too. I hire a makeup artist for most of my shoots because I want better results. Many don't, you're right - but that's somewhat immaterial because some do. I suspect, if I wanted to set up a full production, I'd pay those costs, too. Indeed, I have on many occasions.

Irrespective of the genre, there's always going to be someone who will do it for less. They'll likely suck more than you will, but nobody ever said clients would be smart enough to pick quality over price.

Sean Armenta wrote:
i have to disagree, brooks.  think about it.  there's no way he will ever be able to shoot our clients for free, simply because of the production involved, and the people involved. 

you can shoot glamour for free all you want, because it's just you and the girl, hell the girls even do their own makeup.  but that will never pass in a commercial market. 

and why on earth would you reply to a topic aimed at those who want to make a living at photography?  just so you can say that you're so above everything that you don't need to charge money for your work?  well good for you, but that doesn't help those who are wanting to make a career out of this.

Master of the backhand! :-)

Christopher Ambler wrote:
You seem to be under the impression that others in your field owe you some kind of price support. If others are willing to do, for free, what you do for pay, you either need to be that much better or, if you can't (or if they're genuinely that good), you need to find a new line of work.

I don't mean this to sound harsh, but that's the reality of a free market: some people are going to give it away, and sometimes it's going to affect your bottom line.

Never said that at all. I don't expect anything from a free market, but why should that discourage me from making my feelings about it known? You came here and said that "Anyone who gets upset and thinks that I'm hurting their market has bigger problems." What might those be? Personal issues? Medical issues? There's nothing wrong in being upset when your competition lowballs. There's nothing I can do about it other than show my disrespect for them. They are free to do it no matter what I say and I've never claimed otherwise.

Brooks Ayola wrote:

Never said that at all. I don't expect anything from a free market, but why should that discourage me from making my feelings about it known? You came here and said that "Anyone who gets upset and thinks that I'm hurting their market has bigger problems." What might those be? Personal issues? Medical issues? There's nothing wrong in being upset when your competition lowballs. There's nothing I can do about it other than show my disrespect for them. They are free to do it no matter what I say and I've never claimed otherwise.

No, I feel they have bigger problems because I, as a rule, suck. I'm a hobbyist. If they feel that my giving something away for free because I do it as a hobby at my low-quality level harms them, they need to examine that.

Those who make a living at photography typically don't have to worry about unknowns like me. And if genuine competition lowballs, well, isn't that, as I said, how business works in a free market?

When I was a consultant, I'd often get beaten out on a contract by a competitor who underbid me. Often, their work sucked. Sometimes it didn't. That's life.

Christopher Ambler wrote:
No, I feel they have bigger problems because I, as a rule, suck. I'm a hobbyist. If they feel that my giving something away for free because I do it as a hobby at my low-quality level harms them, they need to examine that.

Those who make a living at photography typically don't have to worry about unknowns like me. And if genuine competition lowballs, well, isn't that, as I said, how business works in a free market?

When I was a consultant, I'd often get beaten out on a contract by a competitor who underbid me. Often, their work sucked. Sometimes it didn't. That's life.

So... You were just highjacking the thread.

Sean Armenta wrote:
we all need to get our start somewhere, someway, somehow, but there's a lot of misinformation going on about the way to go about this, which actually affects new photographers more than it affects the industry as a whole, or more established photographers.  there's a distinct difference between "building your book" and giving your work away. 

i've shot stuff for free to get my book started.  i have also made the mistake of giving my work away when i shouldn't have.  i hope this will help those starting out to understand the difference.



if the resulting images are going into everyone’s portfolio, then shoot it for free.

if everyone involved (you, model, makeup, hair, etc) are all at the same level (i.e. just starting out), shoot it for free.

if someone involved is at a level higher than you, is actually willing to work with you, and it’s a portfolio shoot, shoot it for free.  you will be benefitting greatly from this shoot by learning from someone who has been in the industry longer than you, whether that person is a model, makeup artist, etc...

if a clothing designer is willing to lend you clothes for your shoot in exchange for images for non-commercial use, shoot it for free.  at this point in your career, designer clothes are a godsend.

if you walk into a modeling agency like elite, ford, next, etc... and they actually like your work enough to send you home with a stack of comp cards, shoot those girls for free.



after all these free shoots, you should have a pretty decent portfolio.  so when do you get paid?



if the resulting images are going into everyone’s portfolio but yours, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away.

if you are at a level much higher than everyone else involved, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away. 

if a clothing designer is looking to shoot her lookbook, which is a catalog aimed at clothing buyers of stores which will be carrying her fall line next season, and she wants you to shoot it for free because it’s great exposure for you, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away.  the truth of the matter is, your images on that lookbook is what is really selling her clothing, and her success is SOLELY dependent on your photography.

if the modeling agency that sent you home with a stack of cards is happy with the resulting images from those free test shoots, and is now calling you to test with their new girls and wants you to shoot if for free, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away.  your work is now an asset to them and by calling you they are telling you that your images are getting their girls booked for thousand dollar jobs.  models need to invest in these images, because the return is much greater.

if your images will be used in ANY commercial sense and you are asked to shoot if for free, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away.



NEVER compete on price or rate.  you need to value your own work before anyone else will deem your work valuable.  everything is visual.  photographs are responsible for selling everything.  everything.  when you look at a print ad, the first thing you see is a photograph.  not the text, not the catchphrase.  it’s the half naked girl sitting on the tire.  without photographs, companies would have a tough time selling products.  that’s why they are worth a thousand words. 

there is enough work out there for everyone.  it may not seem like it, but there really is.  those not getting any work are just going about it the wrong way, and/or are giving their work away constantly.

print it out and put it on the fridge- this is invaluable!

Brooks Ayola wrote:

So... You were just highjacking the thread.

No, I was pointing out that the screed against payment issues is sometimes misplaced angst. I've been on both sides of it, and I still feel it's misplaced angst.

You don't need to agree; indeed, it's clear that you don't.

Christopher Ambler wrote:

You seem to be under the impression that others in your field owe you some kind of price support. If others are willing to do, for free, what you do for pay, you either need to be that much better or, if you can't (or if they're genuinely that good), you need to find a new line of work.

I don't mean this to sound harsh, but that's the reality of a free market: some people are going to give it away, and sometimes it's going to affect your bottom line.

The more I see you post, the more I like you

Mark o Photo wrote:
I'm waiting to hear what those three books are with antici....
........
......
.....
...
......pation.

Lol. I had a Carly Simon flashback. 'Anticipation.'

Let me find them for you. Two I have, the 3rd is a marketing book that I never purchased for school, but it's a very good book. It's a text book for marketing/business. That is a very good class too.

Stacy Leigh wrote:
I suck at it AND I want to get paid!!! I have read your post several times, and I wonder when I will be good enough to charge....

Lmao! Stacey, everytime I read your post, I see this hyper women who is never calm.

Stacy Leigh wrote:
I suck at it AND I want to get paid!!! I have read your post several times, and I wonder when I will be good enough to charge....

Well then maybe you should take a step back and think about what you said Stacy....because you dont "suck" plain and simple....! Your work blows the average GWC out of the universe. Is your work Dave LaChapelle...no ,but I think models interested in shooting Glamour couldn't go wrong with your work. So yeah when you get TFP requests from girls with cell phone pics in their ports ,by all means you should get *PAID*

PTBphotography wrote:

Well then maybe you should take a step back and think about what you said Stacy....because you dont "suck" plain and simple....! Your work blows the average GWC out of the universe. Is your work Dave LaChapelle...no ,but I think models interested in shooting Glamour couldn't go wrong with your work. So yeah when you get TFP requests from girls with cell phone pics in their ports ,by all means you should get *PAID*

thanks.

Gibson Photo Art wrote:
I'm curious. Would anyone consider free advertisment on a local radio statio worth a shoot? I'm not being compensated otherwise.

Funny, because I had exactly that deal for most of 2006. I shot for 99.9 KISW in Seattle and gave them a license to the content for no cost.

What it got me was a slew of models who wanted to be featured on the station's web site bashing down my door for shoots. I had my pick. And it was very easy to say to them, "Sure, we'll get you shot for KISW, and I won't charge you a dime if you also agree to do this other project of mine - here's the release and contract, let me know."

I never had a single model turn me down. And now, even though I'm not shooting for them anymore (I handed it over to a friend because I'm much too busy with other things this year), I still have all of those models' contact info and when I'm doing other projects they're all still happy to play.

So was it worth it? Hell yes. Best barter deal I ever made. It's not always about cash.

Your mileage may vary.

Michael McGowan wrote:
Sean makes great points, at least concerning his wing of the business.

But there are many ways to start getting paid if you want to do photojournalism, even part time. Some of that includes using the skills you've learned by shooting models to shoot other folks for publication.

The marketplace for images is huge and dwarfs the segment that Sean, Marko and a few others inhabit.

As Sean says, you see pictures everywhere. If you're willing to be creative and versatile, there are many ways to make a buck. So far, mine have included newspapers, magazines, commercial (corporate meetings, etc.), advertising (local department stores), art galleries, a museum show, personal commissions, PR (for a record company most recently) and sales off my Web site.

One thing that's very true in publishing: Once you're published somewhere, it's a lot easier to get published someplace better. Not only that, you can usually get paid at ever step along the line.

Great - I so appreciate the advice, and agree with most of it.  However - HOW THE HELL DO YOU FIND THESE OPPORTUNITIES?  Everytime I think I'm on the right track, something falls through and I'm back to square 1!

Second, I guess I'm just too nice - Got to get better at telling people "my rates are...." I'm too quick to say, "sure, I'll do TFP", and at the same time, I'm too broke to work with a couple people I would love to pay to work with!

AARRRGGHH!!!

Sean Armenta wrote:
we all need to get our start somewhere, someway, somehow, but there's a lot of misinformation going on about the way to go about this, which actually affects new photographers more than it affects the industry as a whole, or more established photographers.  there's a distinct difference between "building your book" and giving your work away. 

i've shot stuff for free to get my book started.  i have also made the mistake of giving my work away when i shouldn't have.  i hope this will help those starting out to understand the difference.



if the resulting images are going into everyone’s portfolio, then shoot it for free.

if everyone involved (you, model, makeup, hair, etc) are all at the same level (i.e. just starting out), shoot it for free.

if someone involved is at a level higher than you, is actually willing to work with you, and it’s a portfolio shoot, shoot it for free.  you will be benefitting greatly from this shoot by learning from someone who has been in the industry longer than you, whether that person is a model, makeup artist, etc...

if a clothing designer is willing to lend you clothes for your shoot in exchange for images for non-commercial use, shoot it for free.  at this point in your career, designer clothes are a godsend.

if you walk into a modeling agency like elite, ford, next, etc... and they actually like your work enough to send you home with a stack of comp cards, shoot those girls for free.



after all these free shoots, you should have a pretty decent portfolio.  so when do you get paid?



if the resulting images are going into everyone’s portfolio but yours, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away.

if you are at a level much higher than everyone else involved, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away. 

if a clothing designer is looking to shoot her lookbook, which is a catalog aimed at clothing buyers of stores which will be carrying her fall line next season, and she wants you to shoot it for free because it’s great exposure for you, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away.  the truth of the matter is, your images on that lookbook is what is really selling her clothing, and her success is SOLELY dependent on your photography.

if the modeling agency that sent you home with a stack of cards is happy with the resulting images from those free test shoots, and is now calling you to test with their new girls and wants you to shoot if for free, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away.  your work is now an asset to them and by calling you they are telling you that your images are getting their girls booked for thousand dollar jobs.  models need to invest in these images, because the return is much greater.

if your images will be used in ANY commercial sense and you are asked to shoot if for free, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away.



NEVER compete on price or rate.  you need to value your own work before anyone else will deem your work valuable.  everything is visual.  photographs are responsible for selling everything.  everything.  when you look at a print ad, the first thing you see is a photograph.  not the text, not the catchphrase.  it’s the half naked girl sitting on the tire.  without photographs, companies would have a tough time selling products.  that’s why they are worth a thousand words. 

there is enough work out there for everyone.  it may not seem like it, but there really is.  those not getting any work are just going about it the wrong way, and/or are giving their work away constantly.

Now this is what I want to read when I come in MM.

Thank you for this Sir!

Goldie117 wrote:
To the op, overall good advice - something that is true for not only photographers, but models, muas, & stylists.

I second that.

Brooks Ayola wrote:
Just another note about working for free. In most cases (not all) once you work for free, you become "the free photographer." It's very hard, no matter what they tell you in the pitch, to start charging for something you used to give away for free.

I'm doing all right for myself, and besides the obvious testing, I've never worked for free. Tearsheets are over rated as work generators.

The Free Photographer..... Look at the first letter of each word....... T.F.P.

Christopher Ambler wrote:

Funny, because I had exactly that deal for most of 2006. I shot for 99.9 KISW in Seattle and gave them a license to the content for no cost.

What it got me was a slew of models who wanted to be featured on the station's web site bashing down my door for shoots. I had my pick. And it was very easy to say to them, "Sure, we'll get you shot for KISW, and I won't charge you a dime if you also agree to do this other project of mine - here's the release and contract, let me know."

I never had a single model turn me down. And now, even though I'm not shooting for them anymore (I handed it over to a friend because I'm much too busy with other things this year), I still have all of those models' contact info and when I'm doing other projects they're all still happy to play.

So was it worth it? Hell yes. Best barter deal I ever made. It's not always about cash.

Your mileage may vary.

That's the way I was looking at. Thanks.

Christopher Ambler wrote:
No, I was pointing out that the screed against payment issues is sometimes misplaced angst. I've been on both sides of it, and I still feel it's misplaced angst.

You don't need to agree; indeed, it's clear that you don't.

But you are so so so so independently wealthy!!!    I like you!

Sean Armenta wrote:
we all need to get our start somewhere, someway, somehow, but there's a lot of misinformation going on about the way to go about this, which actually affects new photographers more than it affects the industry as a whole, or more established photographers.  there's a distinct difference between "building your book" and giving your work away. 

i've shot stuff for free to get my book started.  i have also made the mistake of giving my work away when i shouldn't have.  i hope this will help those starting out to understand the difference.



if the resulting images are going into everyone’s portfolio, then shoot it for free.

if everyone involved (you, model, makeup, hair, etc) are all at the same level (i.e. just starting out), shoot it for free.

if someone involved is at a level higher than you, is actually willing to work with you, and it’s a portfolio shoot, shoot it for free.  you will be benefitting greatly from this shoot by learning from someone who has been in the industry longer than you, whether that person is a model, makeup artist, etc...

if a clothing designer is willing to lend you clothes for your shoot in exchange for images for non-commercial use, shoot it for free.  at this point in your career, designer clothes are a godsend.

if you walk into a modeling agency like elite, ford, next, etc... and they actually like your work enough to send you home with a stack of comp cards, shoot those girls for free.



after all these free shoots, you should have a pretty decent portfolio.  so when do you get paid?



if the resulting images are going into everyone’s portfolio but yours, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away.

if you are at a level much higher than everyone else involved, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away. 

if a clothing designer is looking to shoot her lookbook, which is a catalog aimed at clothing buyers of stores which will be carrying her fall line next season, and she wants you to shoot it for free because it’s great exposure for you, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away.  the truth of the matter is, your images on that lookbook is what is really selling her clothing, and her success is SOLELY dependent on your photography.

if the modeling agency that sent you home with a stack of cards is happy with the resulting images from those free test shoots, and is now calling you to test with their new girls and wants you to shoot if for free, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away.  your work is now an asset to them and by calling you they are telling you that your images are getting their girls booked for thousand dollar jobs.  models need to invest in these images, because the return is much greater.

if your images will be used in ANY commercial sense and you are asked to shoot if for free, stop it, you need to get paid cause you are giving your work away.



NEVER compete on price or rate.  you need to value your own work before anyone else will deem your work valuable.  everything is visual.  photographs are responsible for selling everything.  everything.  when you look at a print ad, the first thing you see is a photograph.  not the text, not the catchphrase.  it’s the half naked girl sitting on the tire.  without photographs, companies would have a tough time selling products.  that’s why they are worth a thousand words. 

there is enough work out there for everyone.  it may not seem like it, but there really is.  those not getting any work are just going about it the wrong way, and/or are giving their work away constantly.

Very well put. Thanks for the info!