Fees for use of photo

Hey gang
A newspaper contacted me. They found a picture on my website that they want to run in an article. They propose printing it in black and white 3x4 inches in size with a circulation of 15,000...

I have no idea what a fair fee would be for the use of the picture. I was wondering if anyone had any ballpark ideas here. I realize there is a program that calculates a fair fee.

I know what they have offered. For laughs I will put that at the end of this thread.

Thanks in advance for any input..

You won't get rich selling photos for editorial usage in newspapers. The software program I use suggests an average price of about $150 for a quarter page (or less) with this small of a circulation.

I think you should tell them how famous and important you are and demand outrageous fees.

If that doesn't scare them off, I think $150 is probably optimistic for a relatively small paper.

Just don't let them get away without paying you something.

Good luck.

jn

Im curious if its your local paper Dennis? As far as a fee, depends on what you have to do to forward the image to them imo.

robert..........

Here is a synopsis of the communications...
===============================================
First message to me:

Requesting permission to reprint one of your gray squirrel photos, which I found during a Google search. The photo is slated to appear with an article in the XYZFGH Newspaper based in XYGFGH.

===============================================
My response:

Thank-you for your interest in a squirrel photo which you found on my website via a google search. What type of budget does your publication have for such pictures? The fee for one time use in a publication is based partly on your budget, and more importantly on circulation numbers and size of the picture in the publication.

Please realize that downloading of the picture from the website in any way including for use in a rough draft of your article is a copyright infringement. Once the fee is negotiated and paid I can provide you with a high resolution file for
your publication

==============================================

Return response:

Dennis K Olivero:

Thanks for your timely response. Our circulation is 14,000 in the XXXFGH area. The photo is to be dispayed in black and white, 3 x 4.3 inches, to accompany an article titled, "xxfghyeg." To be frank, we usually pay $10 for a photo reprint; we've been lucky enough to have found many photographers willing to comply with our low fee.......
===============================================

So I take a day off of work, carry $20,000 dollars worth of gear to a photo spot and make several images. I then spend the afternoon editing and selecting them, then put them on my website. For that, you get $10.00. Not sure if I should be happy that I have another means of gainful employment or should be insulted or both..

How does anyone make any money in the business of photography?
Rhetorical question, of course..

===

Thanks for the ballpark numbers. Oddly enough, no one suggested ten bucks..Good thing its fun..

Remember it's not just you trying to make a buck from the paper, but everyone that works at the paper as well. From their standpoint anything they pay you beyond the going rate is out of their profits, and therefore their salaries. Just to keep things in perspective, though I agree $10 is certainly not a just reward for your hard work!
Matt

$10, what a joke!

Photo requests generated by a website are really not indicative on the photo market in general. We have made some nice sales to serious buyers because of our website (including NG), but for the most part I would say 80% of website generated requests are not from legitimate buyers.

No matter how small the use, you should get at least get a $100, or it isn’t worth your time to process the image and collect the money – you won’t be covering your costs of doing business. Many photographers have much higher minimums, we strive for $125. Heck, the average price for a Royalty Free image at Getty is now $150. Once you get beyond a 72 dpi for web use only, most agencies charge at least a $100 for one RF photo. Your RM images should be worth more than a RF photo. Likewise all the major photo marketing outlets such as AGPix or StockPhotoRequest will not post requests from buyers for anything under $100 to $125, because they know most photographers won’t respond. So a buyer who is only willing to pay $10, $50 or $75 a photo has very few options besides surfing the net and finding willing amateurs.

I often wonder how much time a buyer such as that one spends trying to find images for such prices. They obviously don’t value their time too much. If it takes them a day to hunt down another images, they might have been money ahead to give you the 100 bucks and been done with it.

Sorry it didn’t work out this time for you Dennis – maybe the next time!

Thanks for the information Ron.. It doesnt matter to me at all. The only reason I post this here is because this is supposed to be a learning forum and I found the entire situation somewhat strange frankly. The first email says the picture is going to be used which seems like the cart is ahead of the horse. I think probably a number of people received similar emails and any that respond will have their photo printed. I just ran a classified ad for help wanted at my day job and for four lines a one day only listing was $125.00. Someone is making money someplace in the newspaper industry.

-------
My response back:

Dear Ms. XYFGH:

Thank-you for providing me with your circulation information. Industry standards suggest a fair price for the use of a photo in such situation as $100--150.00

I understand that you are a small business, as am I. Professional photographers spend considerable amount of time perfecting their craft, working in the field to make images, and must invest in expensive camera and digital imaging equipment. The pictures you see on my website were made with equipment in excess of $15,000. While you may find many photographers willing to give away their work, I am not in that camp. Thank-you for your interest in my photo but your fee does not allow me to grant permission for use

Best wishes for the holidays

Dennis K Olivero

Dennis, I really like your tactful response that will hopefully educate the people at this newspaper that your work has value. As someone who hopes to eventually sell some photos, I also appreciate your sharing of this experience.

Dennis Olivero wrote:. . . How does anyone make any money in the business of photography? . . .

By teaching others to make money with their nature photographs? Seriously, you were smart to turn them down, particularly given their sleaziness (i.e., "slated to appear" and "willing to comply," etc.).

Cliff is right and speaks from experience! I have also been contacted about such uses. Just recently a large state newspaper contacted me and said they wanted to use 3 of my images and for compensation they would "give me credit below the photos"! I actually laughed at the guy on the phone. Like the credit under the photo was worth anything to me. EVentually we negotiated a fee so it was obvious that they will first try to get the use for nothing even though they do have a budget. Of course there are some people that will comply just to see their photos published but when they are done so without any payment I think there is much less a feeling of accoplishment.

Dennis Olivero wrote:How does anyone make any money in the business of photography?
Rhetorical question, of course..

I've been mulling over that one for a while and I hate to say it but my guess is that you don't I don't know of anyone in nature photography who makes a living exclusively from field work. Even 1% or so of those who are further along than the majority generally have a day job or a job relating to nature photography but not specifically out in the field.

Welcome to the world of professional photography

Dennis,

Thanks for the dialog that you had with the newspaper concerning the usage of your photo. You handled it like a pro. By the time you billed it and paid taxes, etc. 100-125 is an absolute minimum. I would rather give the photo away than be offered $10, that was a joke.

Bob

Dennis-
That $10 for a reprint doesn't sound so bad. Lets see...... thats $10 per reprint times 15,000 prints comes to $150,000. I'm sure thats what they meant, don't you think? I think I'd take it hoping that they will pay a little more the next time.

Hate to burst the bubble...but I've received like $25-50 from larger papers for routine shots. More for more compelling images.

Dennis,

You handled that very well and as a nature photographer trying to make a living in this business I appreciate your response.

Whoever at the paper told you that they had no problem finding images for $10 is probably correct and it is one of the reasons that nature photographers are struggling to make a living. If everyone did as you have done it would make it easier for all of us. I wonder, sometimes, if editors respect or appreciate what it takes to provide them with the images that help put food on their tables.

Mark W. wrote:Dennis, I wonder, sometimes, if editors respect or appreciate what it takes to provide them with the images that help put food on their tables.

I sincerely doubt it

Way to go Dennis, I have declined at least 30 requests for photos this year by various organizations and publications including some with over 200,000 circulation because their expectation was to get a photo for free. Their argument is that there are plenty of folks willing to give them photos and their policy is to not pay for photographs anymore. Its a sad and disturbing trend.

E.J. Peiker wrote:Way to go Dennis, I have declined at least 30 requests for photos this year by various organizations and publications including some with over 200,000 circulation because their expectation was to get a photo for free. Their argument is that there are plenty of folks willing to give them photos and their policy is to not pay for photographs anymore. Its a sad and disturbing trend.

Right on, EJ!

This is a serious issue -- but as photographers we are probably our own worst enemies because it's often difficult to get good pricing information and then to stick to it. I've heard many experienced working photographers meanie about this issue but then offer zero guidance.

$10 is way out of line. $25-50 is not great, but average for routine shots (and that's what I was getting 20 years ago!). If you have a ball buster shot -- like an airplane crashing -- then the price goes up considerably. For pricing, though, newspapers are different than magazines because the work is much more perishable and the budget for art much smaller (if any). Again, the more news value that a shot has, the more it is worth.

Generally free-lancers who work regularly with a paper will package a story and the photo which will earn more. At least now we don't have the film and processing costs we used to have.

Of course, for new photographers, exposure ( ) is an issue. I think the best way to get it without selling yourself and others out is to donate work to organizations with which you may have a mutual interest, such as the cooperating associations in the National Parks. In such instances you should get a receipt for a fair market donation, by the way, in the event Congress passes legislation proposed by Sen. Peter Domenici to allow a deduction for full fair market of donated artwork.