I Have A Book Cover!

[dbphotos]

Just got notified that one of my Danica Patrick images was used on the cover of a book by Lerner Pubishing (Scholastic Books).

It's one in a series called Amazing Athletes. Both hardcover and paperback. Not on the NY Times best seller, but still cool. You just never know where your images will end up.

Here's a link to the publisher's site on the book and its for sale at Amazon.com as well.

[PeteQ]

That's awesome David! Congrats!!

[boxofrocks]

Well done! I just got my first magazine cover this week, but it's only a circ of about 25k.

Out of curiousity, and not asking for amounts, are they paying the fee based on circulation/number of copies printed? How did you arrive at the market value? And if it goes to a second printing, will you be getting another check?

I use FotoQuote Pro--have you used that tool? It's just a guide, but provides a starting place.

Can I ask any more questions?

[speedshot]

Way to go Dave

[CaptainTom]

You are buying lunch ????


Don't ask..

[boomerd35]

Sweet! Congrats.

Troy T.

[ppcass]

Way to go! That is great!

[dbphotos]

Originally Posted by boxofrocks

Well done! I just got my first magazine cover this week, but it's only a circ of about 25k.

Out of curiousity, and not asking for amounts, are they paying the fee based on circulation/number of copies printed? How did you arrive at the market value? And if it goes to a second printing, will you be getting another check?

I use FotoQuote Pro--have you used that tool? It's just a guide, but provides a starting place.

Can I ask any more questions?

It was based on size of image and circulation. If they go above the agreed circulation (hard cover and paperback) then I get paid again for the next printing above that agreed upon #. Also, the fact that it is an "educational" book reduced the value some. I don't necessarily agree since the cost of text books are so high, but that's the way it is.

The value was based on negotiations. There is not always a rhyme or reason to it. I actually made more money on a photo of that was printed 1 time in the London Times than I did on this image.

I have learned that you always start high and then negotiate. Editors will always say "I don't have the budget for it", but they magically seem to find it when it comes down to the wire. If its an image that only you have, stick to your guns, but if its an image they can get somewhere else, don't lose the deal.

I hope that helps. PM me if you need more details.

[DEMDeepEllumMusic]

Guess the Christmas stockings will be a bit fatter now!

Congrats!

[dbphotos]

Originally Posted by CaptainTom

You are buying lunch ????


Don't ask..

GET BACK ON THE PHONE!

[boomerd35]

Thanks for sharing David. Good info.

Troy T.

[Roy]

Congrats David!

[brad]

Congrats!

[boxofrocks]

Originally Posted by dbphotos

I hope that helps. PM me if you need more details.

Thanks for the offer, David.

BTW, Thursday I have a corporate shoot--they originally wanted the photos for posters around their office, but I got an email today saying they wanted to use them on their website, as well.

Since this is already a pretty good margin job, would you go back and ask for more $$ for web usage, or just be happy to have photos on a corporate website (I don't have many yet)? I'm leaning towards the latter.

It's really hard to work with corp clients without publishing experience and explain usage fees. They automatically think "hey--I paid you $X an hour, I want my CD, and get too use them any way I want". It can be a delicate dance, and sometimes you have to know when to just let them win, else lose the business. Sometimes, it's better to walk away.

The probelm is, it can set a dangerous precedent for the next client. I know non-full-time (I don't dare use the words "pro" or "amateur" around here anymore) shooters do it all the time, but it can de-value everyone's work in the long run.

Your thoughts, David?

[dbphotos]

Web site usage for small images don't bring that much $, so I'd let it go as more exposure since you have the "bigger" job. All web site images are priced by size and time of usage. I licensed a small image to AOL.com for 1 day for $20 (they can still save the image in archives), so you're not going to get rich off of it. I'd make it clear to the client that you are licensing the usage to them as part of your overall fee but for a limited time (usually 1 month, 6 months or 12 months) and if they wish to use it beyond the agreed upon time it will require an additional licensing fee.

If you use the term "licensing fee" most corporate clients understand as they are already paying licensing fees to all kinds of software companies (or at least should be), etc.

Let us know when its posted so we can take a look!