Is this crazy or is it just me?

[klynam]

Originally Posted by ParkImaging

... or we can just wait until Don (Barnes) chimes in and gives us the correct answers. :)

- Wil

Tru'dat - where is Don anyway? Getting ready for his bday party?!?!?!?

[klynam]

Dang Pete - you sure make a lot of sense for a Yankee.

You sure you're not from Texas?

[d2creative]

Originally Posted by PeteQ

Ok, then why shoot it? Not trying to be a jerk but by doing that you set yourself up for this. Did you do it roughly at the same time or was it an entirely different shoot? To me that plays into things. If I capture "bonus material" that may fall outside the original scope I will usually work a deal as I was already there etc.

I think there is a communication error happening here.

I quoted, completed, and got paid for a job. End of story.

Beginning of NEW story is that an entirely different party is interested in purchasing the usage rights to the photos shot from that previous job.
Happens all the time for me.
Whenever i shoot for an architect or builder, i make it crystal clear than if anybody else is interested in using the photos (like contractors, suppliers, etc) they must contact me to purchase usage rights. There is no reason why the original client should pay for someone else's advertising.

[PeteQ]

Up here you don't do crap without a contract... And that contract is almost always written by me. I specify what they will get and how it can be used. Here's an example. I shot some stock medical images for a large company. They wanted about half a dozen or so pieces of equipment individually so they could drop them into their presentations etc. As I was shooting their proprietary gear individually I also took a few minutes with each set-up to group things that would be used together in a hospital setting. All told I may have added an hour or two to my day. Now when I presented the proof for their selection I had almost double the amount to show them. My contract stated they would get X number of images which covered about 2 images per piece. Well now that they saw the groupings they wanted more. I was happy to oblige an made them a fair deal for additional photos. I told them that any images that weren't selected are destroyed (sounds much more final than deleted) immediately and if they wanted to re-shoot them it comes with another full day rate fee. There were happy to pay for additional licensing and I made extra money.

But yes, I lived in Fort Worth for a while and miss it dearly.

[KobraCarry]

Money is money. Pride is pride. Don't burn bridges. I'm no pro, but I'd love to be and I get compliments on my work on a regular basis. Heck, if someone offered me a few hundred bucks for my work I'd be happy. Step in the right direction.

[PeteQ]

Originally Posted by d2creative

Beginning of NEW story is that an entirely different party is interested in purchasing the usage rights to the photos shot from that previous job.
Happens all the time for me.
Whenever i shoot for an architect or builder, i make it crystal clear than if anybody else is interested in using the photos (like contractors, suppliers, etc) they must contact me to purchase usage rights. There is no reason why the original client should pay for someone else's advertising.

Ok fine, but do you have a property release with your original contact that allows you to sell the images of that property to a third party? Not just a say-so, but a written property release. While you own the images you need a release from the property owner to sell images of private property to others. If you don't you are setting yourself up for problems. If you don't currently do this, start now.

Assuming you do have the release let's look at this. Do you invoice as a single amount or do you break things out into creative fees and licensing fees? I list them as individual line items. My creative fee is my fee for doing the set-up and shooting etc and my licensing fee is exactly that. Let's say I shoot a day-long job for Party A for $2000 and it's broken into a $500 creative fee and $1500 in licensing fees for 3 images. If party B comes in and only wants 2 images they can expect to pay $1000 for licensing for those same images (assuming the same usage). I wouldn't expect them to pay for set-up charges (that's just my way of doing it ymmv) but the fees are standard for the usage and different usage (web, print, one time, perpetual, circulation size, etc) has different fees.

It's when we try to use "one size fits all" usage/licensing stuff that it gets complicated because it's hard to explain things to a potential client. When I discuss things I ask how they intend to use it, give them some options and then write a license and price it for their needs. A one time use in a 10K circulation run magazine is less than a one year license for a year long 50K count brochure run...