A picture is worth . . . ?

[tonyhathaway 0]

I don't send ANY photo to parachutist or skydiving for the money. Sure, even $150 is OK to get, its about another photo in the magazine. Now, outside of the industry I have turned down money WAY more than that beause it was still too low a price for what I had and what they wanted it for. Part of the problem is that people take way too little for what they are giving. I'm still learning what photos are really worth, but I can say that I don't "give" them away. Sometimes $500 is still "giving" them away. If you shoot tandem videos mostly, then get offered $300 for a photo, it seems like a lot-and it is. It still may however not be enough. I used to give away photos, then I realized that photo credit doesn't pay the mortgage. Next time someone wants you to give them photos, ask them this. Are they on the phone with you for free? Is the publisher doing their book (or whatever) for free, is the printer doing it for free? Distributors? Barn's & Noble? Why should you-the skydiving photographer- the one with the most specialized, dangerous part in the whole process be the one to work for free. Just because you have the images on the computer, or in your slide box, and all you have to do now is hand them over, there is still so much more that went into getting those shots. STOP thinking in skydiving prices. Those prices are $25-$50 per jump. START thinking in prices that reflect photography in general. Just my 2 cents. -Tony

My O.C.D. has me chasing a dream my A.D.D. won't let me catch.

[jdhill 0]

So, back to Q's question... what about for advertisers... not just to get another shot in the magazines (I justify it to myself that way too...), but for and advertisement?

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[Deuce 1]

I do barter with the gear advertisers.

[davelepka 4]

I agree that photos for Parachutist and Skydiving can't be for real money. Parachutist in particualr because we pay the operating costs anyway, so it's silly to take the money from them.

Gear advertisers are another story. They should be paying a reasonable rate for photos (even trade for equipment is acceptable). The trouble is simple economics. The price for any product or service is whatever the market will bear. This market won't bear a fair price because too many jumpers will give pics for ads for little or nothing. This sets the standard that the rest of us have to live with.

It's too easy for an average jumper to strap on a camera, shoot 10 rolls of film over the course of a weekend (on jumps they would have made anyway) and get lucky with one or two good shots they want to see in print. An experienced professional may be able to get that shot on one jump, and it may look 10% better than the 'lucky shot', but if one was free, and the other required compensation, the manufacturer will go with the free one.

I think there is room for the experienced professional camera guys to make some cash. The manufacturers could afford to pay a fair price for quality work. The trick is going to be getting the weekend warrior to hold their photos for thier own personal use. It's funny though how the same jumpers will spoil the market for expereinced, full time guys, and the next minute be in the video room asking for advice, and to use the edit suite, and for some gaffers tape, and for film reccomendations, and what filter to use, and how to fly this slot, and how to get that exit. You get the idea.

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

but there must be -some- room for movement.

No there isn't. Parachutist has more pictures submited than it can handle. Demand is low, so rates are low. Stop or meter the suply and rates will go up.
Quade, this:

Quote

It's too easy for an average jumper to strap on a camera, shoot 10 rolls of film over the course of a weekend (on jumps they would have made anyway) and get lucky with one or two good shots they want to see in print. An experienced professional may be able to get that shot on one jump, and it may look 10% better than the 'lucky shot', but if one was free, and the other required compensation, the manufacturer will go with the free one.

and this:

Quote

I am fairly new to photogrophy. I have only been shooting for about 6 months now, Almost All tandem and AFF for the local DZ. How would I even get into the market and where do go I go to get pics published or sold. I, like several others, only really got into this for the fun and to pay for some jumps, however I have been thinking of ways to make skydiving another part of my income and relly have no clue on how to get started. Any advice would be appreciated

are some of the biggest reasons why you're not getting paid.

No ofence to everyone, and I wish all that try to market their wares the best of success, but I ain't gonna bitch about it. I'll just try harder to make sure it's MY product that gets in there.

Quade, and Tony I'll agree that it would be nice if everyone had the attitude that you shouldn't "settle" for the first offer. Unfortunatly the positive status an amature feels from getting paid clouds their judgement of what their product is REALLY worth. It's not the buyers fault they are getting a deal!

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[Deuce 1]

Quote

Demand is low, so rats are low.

Yes, jp, us camera rats are the lowest of the low.

[PhreeZone 15]

Side tangent... Do you include your models in the payment check? Do you get model release forms beforeyou take their picture or send it in?

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

Side tangent... Do you include your models in the payment check? Do you get model release forms beforeyou take their picture or send it in?

I'm loving this question!

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[quade 3]

Too many different situations here for a simple answer.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[AggieDave 6]

Here's a question, then.

Lets say you and me go up and do a jump. It turns out that something cool happens and you get a killer-sweet still. You sell that still to BumFart-Extreme Shoes for $X so they can use it in their ad in "eXtreme" magazine.

Would I be entitled to anything? Would you have me sign any sort of release, or would I just notice my ugly mug in freefall someday in a random magazine?

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Cajones 0]

You would not be entitled to anything unless you agreed to keep the rights to your image or you had hired the photographer to shoot for you.

There should be no reasonable expectation of privacy on the jump because you knew the photographer was going to be there.

- Cajones

The laws of physics are strictly enforced.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

You would not be entitled to anything unless you agreed to keep the rights to your image

How often, if ever, has that ever happened in skydiving?

Also, what qualifies as "hired" for a freefall photographer? At the least would it be having bought the slot so he/she could be on the jump? I'm not talking ethically, I'm talking legally.

Also, this is just an academic study for me, since even if I didn't get more then a "hey cool skydive" from someone and my pic showed up someplace cool, I'd be pumped.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[quade 3]

Let's assume it's an outside of skydiving industry ad and a stock photo house wanted to use a photo that I had took. Yes. They would -require- that I have a model release from you. As part of a legal model release I would have compensated you somehow. This -may- have been me giving you a dollar at the time I had you sign the model release. Depending on the wording of the model release, you are probably not entitled to any further compensation.

If, on the other hand, if BFE Shoe Co. contracts me to produce their fall catalog of shoe wear and they want bitchin' photos of skydiver's in freefall wearing them. YES! Hell yes, we're both going to be rolling in some coin. They're going to pay for maybe a day or two worth of jumps, meals, model fees, maybe some new jump wear, you'll probably be able to keep the shoes at the end of the day and there's always that coin issue I was talking about.

INSIDE the skydiving industry . . . again, too many different situations to talk about in depth. My guess is that -nobody- is going to get paid squat. In some instances, posing for the drop zone ads might be a part of the "team" dz giveback as part of being sponsored -- OR AT LEAST IT CERTAINLY OUGHT TO BE. Posing with gear . . . same deal.

Hey, if I think photographers get ripped off right and left, we should probably also talk about drop zones and gear manufacturers getting ripped off left and right by "team deals".

Publicity has a value, but in most cases I think drop zones and manufacturers aren't getting their moneys worth. But I digress.

Ok, what other wacky situations . . . boogies and other crap . . . Let's say I travel to a boogie and shoot a 42-way state record. Nope, I don't need a model release or pay you or anything of the sort. Technically, it's news. News is exempt from all that crap. Any of the shots on the ground or telling the story -- news.

IF, later on, I sell that 42-way to a stock photo house AND you are recognizable then I should probably have a model release.

Like i said, this is a way complicated issue and these are only some of the scenarios I'm coming up with off the top of my head.

JC at a swoop meet - news. JC in a harness room going over procedures with Britany Spears for her AFF - news. JC in a harness room going over procedures with Joe Nobody and I plan on submitting it to a magazine to illustrate a generic story about training . . . I probably should have a model release just to cover my ass at some later date.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 3]

Quote

There should be no reasonable expectation of privacy on the jump because you knew the photographer was going to be there.

Yes and no. Depends on the situation. Depends on the usage. Depends on the person being shot.

It's a complicated topic.

I can go up to L.A. and shoot a batch of papperazzi photos of any star I want to and sell them without their permission. I can NOT use those same photos in an advertisement without their permission.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[PhreeZone 15]

Lets propose a simple question.

I go on a Skydive with my video camera, my buddy is also there and we are working on getting some special shot for a personal project (like a year end video) but I later decide to sell the footage to "The X Channel". They end up using this clip or some frames of it in advertising the show or the network... I get some money out of this, but do I have to pay my buddy? I mean he knew I had a camera on (so did he), so there for he loses his right to claim income just since he knew I had the camera? It is acceptible to sell footage or stills to someone with a clearly reconizable face with out a model release?

On my trip to Skyventure I noticed as part of their waiver they included the photo release in there so they can take pictures and use them as advertizing. I wonder what would happen if I took video of someone flying in it and sold it to "Action Sports Channel" for a nice fee.

If teams are not supplying their sponsors with Photos then if I was the sponsor... I'd drop them. Too many people are sponsored IMHO in the sport based on the number of jumpers. I was at a DZ once and a full 1/3 or more of the jumpers had free gear or were sponsored in some way. I'd love to see how having that many sponsored people sells more rigs or canopies for the company.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[kallend 1,623]

Just thought I'd mention that last summer the local newspaper here in Nowhere, Illinois wanted to do a story about a local old-fart's participation in the 2-point 120-way at Z Hills. I contacted Tony about his photo of the completion, and he graciously agreed to let them use it gratis, as long as he was given the photo credit. I think that was pretty cool of him, since publicity in Nowhere, IL is not going to do him a great deal of good or pay his mortgage.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[base428 1]

Another way to look at the model release issue is the following:

1) Filmed on public property = No model release required.
2) Filmed on private property = Model release highly suggested.
3) Use of people's names = Model release required.

In other words, if you jump at Bridge Day and then find yourself on a Discovery Channel program, you have no claim to compensation since it's public property.

If I film you watering your lawn on your own property, then I could get sued if I sold the video and it aired on TV.

If you vandalize my house and I catch your big fat ugly face on video, then I'm free to air the video anywhere, anyplace I choose. However, I can't list your name on the video. Check out the attached picture of the dumb vandal that I caught on tape after knocking my porta-jon over at my new house. Since this little weasel had rich, influential relatives in town, they bought their way out of a conviction. So, that's why the little a-hole is gonna show up in every magazine and TV program that'll show it.

PS. My little vandal friend made his first magazine this month. Check out the December 2003 issue of HOME AUTOMATION magazine.

(c)2010 Vertical Visions. No unauthorized duplication permitted. <==For the media only

[ffejdraga 0]

Further, everyone seems to be focusing solely on the editorial photographic work -- what about the advertising photographs? Any comments there?

[skyfly 0]

we are all like whores, we'll give for free what the magazines want - cause we know ,and they know that if it's not me - it's someone else. there are sooo many good photographers and soo many good pictures out there - that they dont really have to put much effort to find the "right photo".

It's somewhat of an ego trip, and the magazines know it, and use it wisely.

I doubt it'll change in this sport.


but come on - it's all good - we're one big family - and we share our visions with each other. now show my any other sport that is so tight ?

Be Simple, Be Creative, Bee!
Sharon.

[GravityGirl 0]

Quote

I do barter with the gear advertisers.

SO THAT'S WHY YOU DON'T SHOP LOCAL!!!!!!!!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peace and Blue Skies!
Bonnie ==>Gravity Gear!

[GravityGirl 0]

Quote

Here's a question, then.

Lets say you and me go up and do a jump. It turns out that something cool happens and you get a killer-sweet still. You sell that still to BumFart-Extreme Shoes for $X so they can use it in their ad in "eXtreme" magazine.

Would I be entitled to anything? Would you have me sign any sort of release, or would I just notice my ugly mug in freefall someday in a random magazine?

BumFart-Extreme magazine would have to obtain a release from you before they publish your picture in any magazine ad. Same with video ads.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peace and Blue Skies!
Bonnie ==>Gravity Gear!

[fasterfaller 0]

Quote

Quote

Here's a question, then.

Lets say you and me go up and do a jump. It turns out that something cool happens and you get a killer-sweet still. You sell that still to BumFart-Extreme Shoes for $X so they can use it in their ad in "eXtreme" magazine.

Would I be entitled to anything? Would you have me sign any sort of release, or would I just notice my ugly mug in freefall someday in a random magazine?

BumFart-Extreme magazine would have to obtain a release from you before they publish your picture in any magazine ad. Same with video ads.

This is not really true . I photographed a event last summer that was used in a print ad that involved people . The ad was printed and here comes Joe Jerk and his Scottsdale lawyer taking us to court because he should be compensated . The case was thrown out and Joe Jerk was told by the judge that if he didn't want to be photographed to stay home and far away from events with corporate sponsorship as the sponsors have the right to publish without a release .

[Blue-Skies92629 0]

my understanding is that if it is an event open to the public. ( Like going to a football game) then they have the expectation that their picture could be taken and used without their concent. Unless it is posted with something like "Photography is not allowed". (Like going to a casino in Las Vegas)

"Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana" -Groucho Marx-
"Tom flies like a rock" -Tom Carson-

[lewmonst 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Here's a question, then.

Lets say you and me go up and do a jump. It turns out that something cool happens and you get a killer-sweet still. You sell that still to BumFart-Extreme Shoes for $X so they can use it in their ad in "eXtreme" magazine.

Would I be entitled to anything? Would you have me sign any sort of release, or would I just notice my ugly mug in freefall someday in a random magazine?

BumFart-Extreme magazine would have to obtain a release from you before they publish your picture in any magazine ad. Same with video ads.

This is not really true . I photographed a event last summer that was used in a print ad that involved people . The ad was printed and here comes Joe Jerk and his Scottsdale lawyer taking us to court because he should be compensated . The case was thrown out and Joe Jerk was told by the judge that if he didn't want to be photographed to stay home and far away from events with corporate sponsorship as the sponsors have the right to publish without a release .

Cross posting in reference to a thread about the recent SunPath ad in parachutist ...

Seems to fit this scenario... Does anyone know if SunPath sponsored the event? If not, it seems to me they should have gotten a release from those in the ad, which would have been an issue as some of them do not endorse SunPath...

peace
lew

http://www.exitshot.com

[Michele 1]

Interesting thread.

What do you think about writers, who set up a story, find the photographers, and submit them all together?

As someone who has written specifically for Parachutist, I am not at all upset that I got paid a tiny fraction of what 3 pages would go for in, say, "Newsweek". Why? Because the stories I wrote just will not cross over to mainstream media. Just like the photos don't cross over for the most part. For me, it's not about the money. Skydiving is too small of an arena to expect big (or even bigger) bucks.

(and yes, I'm heading back to bed right now...'cause I am still hurting...and it's time for the next pill. Sorry, Deuce! )

Edited: I just realized where I posted. Please feel free to ignore me....maybe I'm still rather loopy after all. Sorry....

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~