|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
Patreon, how much money are you losing?
Seriously.... I know girls who are making over $1,500 a month from their patreon account. I recently put a "Not for Distribution" clause in my TFP agreement and I had a model refuse to sign it. I said "Thank you" and she had a cow when I packed up my gear. I then told her, she would have to pay $15 per photo for my Patreon release. Another cow, then she tells me, she usually gets paid and gets the photos. I just told her to have a great day. O.K. everybody.... What is your policy on people selling your photos? Sep 30 17 01:25 pm Link If there is any commercial use of the photos, I get paid, even if the model is not getting anything. As an example, for a Maxim submission, at one time the magazine requested that they have rights to use the images forever, manipulate them any way they wanted, not provide credit to the model or photographer. All this for accepting the submission, never. The belief that you can have anything you want for free, just cheapens everything. Sep 30 17 03:40 pm Link My photo studio has not lost any money due to Patreon. I might actually be making MORE income, now that more models are shooting & creating content themselves. Many people don't own studios so they are looking to rent cool places to shoot in for their content. I do 3-6 TFP shoots a year with models many of them are now using Patreon, I make sure they get a good set of 25 images, then I pull 2-3 images out of that set for my own promotions. The other 100+ shoots I do in a year are all paid, so I'm not hurting for business. I love Patreon, it gives creatives a format to showcase work & get a few $$$ for our efforts. Sep 30 17 03:53 pm Link Wilhelm Von Blum wrote: I always retain all copyrights to my images as stated in my model's release, a requirement to shoot with me. Sep 30 17 05:16 pm Link Web models rarely read Copyright law. Those complaining to me about it being "unfair," are told it's Federal Law, complain to your Congressman about it. Sep 30 17 07:08 pm Link We provide a personal use license (in any type of media) to them and that's it. No selling, giving away, or commercial use, period. A commercial distribution licensing fee would be a lot more than the few dollars mentioned here. Sep 30 17 08:05 pm Link Don't mind doing the occasional TFP with a model to create something we're both interested in and don't even mind providing more than just a couple images from that shoot as compensation. To me that's a fair exchange but when those same images are sold, that's an entirely different issue all together. I will provide a personal usage license for a TFP shoot but it clearly states that neither the model nor myself will sell or in any way, other than for promotion, use the images to make a profit. I make sure we're in agreement before the camera ever leaves the case that we're in agreement. If someone desires to sell images, great, let's talk about me getting paid up front and then they may feel free to make all the money they can with my full agreement. Trust is hard enough to earn from people. Breaking that trust by selling something that isn't yours to sell really destroys it all together and says so much about someone's lack of integrity. Sep 30 17 09:31 pm Link Wilhelm Von Blum wrote: Just curious, do you put TFP images in your e-book or on micro stock sites? Oct 01 17 08:16 am Link I have a Patreon which makes a pretty good amount of change, so I actually encourage models to use our images. Free publicity  Oct 01 17 09:14 am Link I am considering opening a Patreon site. I have a whole bunch of Hotel Room nudes that I can start with. Any comments on the good and bad on having a Patreon and what to expect as a photographer Oct 01 17 10:03 am Link PhotoACR wrote: Expect a slow start, but if you promote it, and your work gets people's attention; it can turn into a good thing. Oct 01 17 12:52 pm Link Jorge Kreimer wrote: Seems reasonable. Oct 01 17 01:00 pm Link Jeffrey M Fletcher wrote: The OP makes a point to mention shooting TFP, with no money changing hands. His contention is why should he work for someone for free and have the model turn around and sell the images for money. Oct 01 17 05:16 pm Link Todd Meredith wrote: I don't see TFP as "working for free". I see it as an exchange of services with both parties coming away with images. Oct 01 17 07:00 pm Link Actually, I think patreon takes a small cut of the earnings and since a lot of people now use patreon the small cuts add up. Not sure about the exact numbers, but I think patreon is a really cool site and whoever creates content should use it imo. It's borderline free money if you structure your perks to your needs (or just not have any but that might be risky). Oct 01 17 07:22 pm Link Trades in my view are about mutual promotion. If a model is planning to use your work to make money on a website or in any way then she/he in my view should pay the photographer for their time as should a photographer if he/she plans to display for profit or sell photos of models for stock, etc. Its one thing if we're talking about a few buck but if its hundreds and my work is helping a model earn that cash then I think its fair she/he should pay. One of the things that saddens me about so many photographers on this site is how little they value their work and other artists. Odds are if this were posted by a model who told us a photographer(s) were making $1,500 certain members would race to say how that was wrong. However since its models, well that's okay because after all photographers time, effort and skills should all be given away. When you don't value what you do why should anyone else. Oct 01 17 08:06 pm Link I just joined Purple Port, another industry social site based in the UK. Not so much US presence yet. Anyway, here is a post I found in their version of a forum. This was posted three years ago by a model and it is obvious to her that modeling is a business. "Sometimes, I am up for a TF shoot if I know that the photos will benefit me and help me generate more income. But it's still all about the money in the end. I don't believe I should feel honored and flattered just by the fact that someone considers me good looking enough to be photographed by them, as I said I am not 15 anymore, and I am over that stage. So please, don't get offended if I don't agree to work for free. I could be spending those hours doing some other work, making at least some amount of money, instead of posing to you for free. ESPECIALLY if you want me to do nude. I'd rather get a job in a strip club and get paid A LOT for taking my clothes off in front of a few people for a couple of hours, rather than strip FOR FREE and then have those images floating around the world wide web till the end of times." by EV from Purple Port Oct 01 17 08:42 pm Link Tony Lawrence wrote: Morning Tony, Oct 02 17 02:29 am Link Isn't Patreon a subscription service, as opposed to a print or image sales site. Do you feel that there is a substantive difference? If a model has 1000 images behind a pay wall can you really say that she is 'selling' your image? From what I understand, the most successful models there are doing exclusive self-shot content (photo and video) for their subscribers. Work for glamor photographers might be used for weekly updates or communication. I'm not advocating one way or the other, but I do think it is an issue to examine if there is an image which is available for view on a photographer's website without a paywall it is harder to make an argument that having the same image within a model's library of photos behind a paywall is adding that much to her revenue base. Certainly exclusive content behind a paywall is the point of Patreon, but in this case the same images would have been non-exclusive and available to view on a photographers website or social media. If you think that these factors don't effect the argument, I think that is possibly naive. Oct 02 17 05:37 am Link Todd Meredith wrote: There, fixed that for you! Oct 02 17 09:01 am Link Dan Howell wrote: Totally agree Oct 02 17 09:04 am Link Wilhelm Von Blum wrote: How much of this is generated from TF work? Oct 02 17 10:38 am Link How many of you who are upset a model is "selling images" are requiring full commercial model releases? You know that piece of paper that allows you as a photographer to licence & sell the images.... Are you upset that she is "earning" too much money @ $1500/mo - expenses? (Patreon takes a cut) Or Are you upset that she managed to find a market for these images while you let images rot on your hard drive? Oct 02 17 01:27 pm Link If this was Trade For * shoot and you, photographer retains the rights by law and you find a market to make some cash would this be okay with you? being a TF* it is seen as a collaboration and equal trade is assumed. Furthermore, the model making an extra income from Patreon is not selling the photographs, just an admission to a site where somebody can view the photographs. If the model was being paid tor her services then she relinquishes rights unless specified. Oct 02 17 01:59 pm Link Shot By Adam wrote: First Adam after a very successful 25 years as a working, professional photographer I doubt there's anything I need you to fix for me. Your point is well taken and illustrates my point exactly, though. Why should one party benefit financially more than the other is the real crux of the matter that the OP was trying to make. I see it as he was merely asking how others felt. Oct 02 17 03:10 pm Link If a trade photo gets money we split 50/50 of the profits I encourage models to make money off our photos . Oct 03 17 06:59 am Link On TF* shoots and no money is exchanged. Both or all parties contribute services and collaborate n the creation of photographs. This probably come under Creative Commons licensing. You still own the copyright but allow the creative participants to use it for their use. Oct 03 17 01:15 pm Link Ionalynn wrote: I pay models and don't do trade. So a model working with me gets the money up front, probably more than they would ever make selling the images. And they are guaranteed a payment regardless just from the shoot for their time. I have a full commercial model's release signed at every session which grants me permission to do anything with the images and states my copyright. I have shot content for models in the past for them to sell or use but for those sessions the model paid me. Oct 03 17 08:13 pm Link I only shoot trade. And the people I shoot are more than welcome to do absolutely anything they like with the photos I give them as long as what they do with them doesn't require me to give up my rights to do the same. If they can find a way to make a $1 or $1,000 off of them, more power to them. And if they wanted to throw some of that cash my way I wouldn't turn it down, BUT I already got what I wanted out of the transaction which was them in front of my camera. As much as I value my own time and skills(Tony) I ALSO value the time and skill of the models. And I'm not delusional enough to think that my one or two sets of photos on their Patreon is the reason all of their patrons are throwing money at them. If you're shooting them once a week and your work makes up half of all their content, then yeah, they need to be cutting you in. But you're not and they don't. That's just my take of course and you're welcome to do what you like. I'll be over here shooting photos of awesome models and not whining about how unfair it is that beautiful women can make more money off their own image than I can  Oct 03 17 10:16 pm Link I think it's important here to note that girls on Patreon are generally putting work into their site everyday and post a lot of self-published content. But I also know photographers who post on Patreon. While my images are less likely to be used because clothing, I generally don't mind if photographers use them on Patreon. First, it's usually quite a small amount any one artist (or model) is making, and if broken down into each photo session would *maybe* be worth $80 between the team. Second, I want my fellow creatives to thrive. As a photographer, again, my images probably wouldn't be relevant, but I wouldn't mind them using them. I don't do much paid work for personal projects, so my perspective on this is potentially quite a bit different than someone who survives wholly on work/ images from other creatives. Oct 03 17 11:56 pm Link me? have at it I ain't doing anything with them anyway now..I'm going to post them on flickr and 500px and DeviantArt.. so if they want 'exclusivity' - they can go pound sand - but if not - have at it Oct 04 17 10:31 am Link I think people have very different ideas of what it means to sell an image. When I read full commercial releases letting photographers "sell my image" I'm thinking they will literally deliver the file to another person in exchange for cash, and that person is going to do whatever it is they want with it - and I get paid for that because I've signed off my rights to have any say in what happens to that image file. That's not really what patreon, zivity, etc are doing. Someone subscribes sometimes as low as a single dollar a month and they get a password to SEE files uploaded to the internet. That person doesnt get to do anything with them, they can't re-distribute or sell it or alter it in any way. They're paying to LOOK at it, not HAVE it. And while models are constantly trying to find new content, the brunt of the content that generates subscriber interest in them are the self-shot sets, the selfies, the journals, the snapchats and instagram access, selling prints and polaroids, etc. The subscribers like that "personal" feel, they want to fee like they're really getting to know the model and that the model is a "real" person. Sort of the same way amateur or amateur-looking porn is a HUGE market, people are into that instead of the high-production-value-super-professional stuff. That kind of stuff makes the girl appear unattainable and fake. Girls making 1500 a month aren't raking in that money on your image and your image alone, theyre making that money across a wide variety of images, hours and hours of social media networking and promotion, and interaction with their fans. You aren't actually "losing" 1500 a month, if you actually divided it all up you're dealing with cents here, if you're actually "losing" anything at all (I'd argue that you're not) As both a model and a photographer I just prefer to be told - my biggest gripe is not be even made aware of where my shit is ending up. Oct 04 17 10:45 am Link Sorry, but I'm completely out of the loop here? From what I know about Patreon it's what YouTube content producers use to put some stuff behind a paywall to make some cash from subscribers. How would models use the platform? More importantly, how are they making $1,500/mo on it using still photos? Oct 04 17 03:12 pm Link jamie-the-photographer wrote: Many different types of artists make money on Patreon. Oct 04 17 03:39 pm Link jamie-the-photographer wrote: Some reasons have been stated above previous posts. Some models also do BTS videos. I think the key thing is they are showing content you probably won't find anywhere else. Oct 04 17 07:39 pm Link My release/usage agreement allows the model to reproduce or print in any medium, website, etc. for the purpose of publicizing their services as models or performers, but prohibits the sale or licensing of the files or prints, or their use in connection with any porn site, illegal activity, escort service, etc. I don't think Patreon would be a violation but Red Bubble, for example, would be. All IMHO as always, of course. Oct 04 17 07:55 pm Link jamie-the-photographer wrote: I don't understand why you would interject into this thread actually. You start by saying that you are completely out of the loop and then go on to state one (of many) types of Petreon users. You could have simply gone to the front page of their site to read the common categories and realize that video producers are one of the several different types of artists. Since you are a photographer, you would likely have clicked on the Photography box. The first screen shows the Top 20 Creators. Number 2 currently is a model with 392 subscribers ranging from $5 to $500/month (even if all of them were $5...that's still $1900/month to her). More than half of the top 20 are cosplay models. Oct 05 17 06:25 am Link Dan Howell wrote: Let him ask his questions???? Oct 05 17 07:13 am Link Dan Howell wrote: If you hadn't noticed, I joined MM about a month ago and this was my first post in the forums. Do you always greet people here who ask earnest questions with a flaming, three-paragraph response? It's just kinda sad that you seem to be upset that I wasted 10 seconds of your reading time and then you voluntarily spent 10x that much more time lighting me up. Oct 05 17 07:23 am Link jamie-the-photographer wrote: Touché! Oct 05 17 09:26 pm Link |
