Business Model Q - Shooting A Stock Catalog and Price Setup

[Dennis Murray]

This isn't so much a "what-to-charge" issue as "how-to-charge"...

I've been contacted by a company to explore shooting some events that they are involved with as a primary sponsor. My shots could potentially end up in sales catalogs, store point-of-purchase display, web use, print ads, you name it...

Now, the use of the image could be as long as 18 months after the shoot. I don't want to shoot on spec for this type of work, but I'm not going to engage in a work-made-for-hire gig where I turn over rights to them in exchange for a day rate up front.

While I have FotoQuote, my thought is that up front they pay a day rate for me to shoot, and then as they license photos for specific use they pay those fees then.

My dilemma is how to break up the fees...assuming they pay me a day rate for shooting the event and then decide to license something, they shouldn't pay the same amount for images that company X walking in off the street should pay for normal stock in my catalog.

Thoughts? Advice?

[Jacob Leveton]

Most companies just want the bottom line. Tell them how much you want for the shoot. If you want, tell them you need X% either up front, or day of the shoot (to cover your day rate). But most companies will just want a bottom line of how much the shoot cost.

You can break it up on the invoice if you wish.

[Todd Corzett]

I'd say to charge your day rate to shoot the images, then have separate line items for each of the different uses they want now... which will give them bottom dollar for the shots they want now. Then, in the future, charge them usage rates for what they want. Unless they guarantee, in writing, future work... I'd not discount anything based on it. If the company doesn't come back to you... you don't want to be stuck fronting the bill or feeling underpaid. By charging your day rate + usage now... then usage in the future on spec... you get paid now, and in the future.

-Todd...

[John Thawley]

Well, honestly, unless it's a Fortune 500 company, do a work-for-hire. They're simply not going to get into use fees. Forget it. Be smart... establish a fee for the shoot and get the job.

The red flag you sent up was "could potentially." Start running a whole bunch of mumbo jumbo about use fees and the only thing that's "potentially" going to happen is your not going to get the work.

This is not an issue to start being a bar room lawyer about or having fantasies of the Folger's coffee guy. It's a shoot of some canned shots that my best guess is that no one else wants other than the company you're shooting for. Land the shoot and make a few thousand bucks. Honest.

Now... if it's a Fortune 500 company and the potential use involves national publications, then that's a different story. Though usually, a Fortune 500 company is going to coordinate this via their ad agency and would be operating on a whole different level than negotiating directly with a photographer.

JT

[Mike Ditz]

JT is right.

Or they could end up using next to nothing. The company is trying to build up a library and avoid having to license each and every use.

I'd like to see you explain to them that you can charge them for a day rate, and then charge them for the usage like anybody else walking in off the street.

Pick one way to do it.

A. WFH at a decent creative fee. (easiest way to go IMO)
B. Creative fee plus usage (what they are proboably trying to avoid)
C. Shoot it on spec, thereby accepting some risk in return for a larger reward of licensing indv shots for indv uses.

[Dennis Murray]

They have (within the last 30 days) had a national print ad on cover 3 and cover 4 of a national magazine. The rates were 59k and 67k respectively.

The company is a subsidiary of a brand that is well known within a conglomerate that is fairly well known. The conglomerate is Fortune 500 but it seems like the conglomerate is pretty well removed from the day to day operations.

They produce a lot of materials in house (catalogs, items for in-store displays, so on) and the creative for their last print ads seems to have been done in house.

I just don't want to sell short here - and do something that will further drive down cost expectations in the photo industry.

[John Thawley]

They have (within the last 30 days) had a national print ad on cover 3 and cover 4 of a national magazine. The rates were 59k and 67k respectively.

The company is a subsidiary of a brand that is well known within a conglomerate that is fairly well known. The conglomerate is Fortune 500 but it seems like the conglomerate is pretty well removed from the day to day operations.

They produce a lot of materials in house (catalogs, items for in-store displays, so on) and the creative for their last print ads seems to have been done in house.

I just don't want to sell short here - and do something that will further drive down cost expectations in the photo industry.

Ah... then you might start with a sit down and come to a better understanding of "defining the work." I had a similar scenario regarding "use" last month. They came at me with a moving target. I shot slightly high... they came back with a "what if?" I came back with... "I based the proposed price on the use "range" you provided. I tried to keep you below a "blanket" annual use assuming you were trying to keep a tight budget. Honestly, you should be purchasing a blanket use or we could be "what-iffing" over the next 12 months." They went for blanket and I ended up 30% higher than FotoQuote. I think you need to push them for specifics.

JT

[Dennis Murray]

Thanks for the opinions everyone. I'll try and box in the intended use and length of time of the use a little more.

Greatly appreciate the help.