What to do when asked to sell a picture on Flickr
One of our readers, Christopher Honiball (see his Flickr stream here) sent in this set of tips on what to do when you’re approached on Flickr to sell an image. The image to the right is one he was recently asked to sell.
Several members on the DPS forum have been approached by an official asking for permission to use their picture on their website/catalog/book/etc.
The first thing you will want to decide is whether or not you will charge for the use of your photo. Opinions on this WILL differ. Some people don’t mind giving away the use of their pictures to individuals doing personal projects or nonprofits (remember that nonprofits generally do pay employees, however). Many times, though, a large for-profit company will ask you for your picture, and in that case, they should be paying.
When deciding whether or not to charge, you should also think about your future goals with photography. Especially if you are producing work that has the quality to be requested for publication, you are probably looking to make some money from your hobby at some point in the future. If you give away the rights to your pictures now, you are effectively undervaluing yourself, and this same customer may come back again in the future expecting more free pictures. Obviously, you don’t want to put yourself in that situation.
Many people will ask for permission to use your pictures in exchange for “credit”. Here’s the thing – credit in most cases means nothing. When is the last time you went on a website (not related to photography) and saw an interesting background picture, immediately thought, “I wonder who took that!” and went and searched out their website? If you’re a photographer you may have actually done that (strange), but most people never even think of the photographer when they see a picture – they just think about the picture itself. Of course, if National Geographic or a photography magazine wants to publish your picture then that would get you some interest, but in most cases the benefits of “credit” are negligible.
Also keep the following in mind:
- You took the picture, and only you own the copyright to your picture. Do not give away or sell the copyright to your picture, only limited rights. Use a contract (Thank you forum member SusanH for reinforcing this with me).
- These people are probably not trying to scam you, since they actually cared enough to ask you for permission. Be careful though.
- Even if you are an amateur, your work has value if someone is asking for it. Don’t be afraid to ask for compensation.
- Find out what they intend to use your picture for. If they are serious about using your picture, use a contract!
Ultimately, it is up to you to decide what to ask for your picture. If you are approached, ask what the individual was looking to pay, and negotiate from there. It doesn’t have to be a huge sum – enough, however, to recognize that there is value in your work. Keep in mind that each photo given to a company in exchange for “credit” helps to undermine the value of creative or skilled photography -something which definitely has value.
What would you add to Christopher’s tips?
42 Responses to “What to do when asked to sell a picture on Flickr” - Add Yours
June 24th, 2009 at 8:43 am
Could you possibly post sample contracts for selling your photos or allowing limited rights?
June 24th, 2009 at 8:59 am
Good thoughts, Darren.
Having been in the industry for nearly 20 years, I have some great tips on my site, including a special resource page for people wondering… How Much Should I Charge for My Photo?
Keep up the great work!
Cheers,
- Gary.
June 24th, 2009 at 9:02 am
This is something I struggle with constantly. Unfortunately pricing is not set in stone…each request or project is different and comes with different circumstances and uses.
I would suggest to never give an image away for free. As stated here, your image is of value. I never provide images for photo credit only. I have never received one piece of business from anyone who contacted me because they saw my name below a photo online or in publication.
Test the water in your marketing area…speak with other amateur and professional photographers…although, in the end, most cannot give you a definitive answer….it’s up to you. And for many photographers who are just starting out, it’s like a stab in the dark. You will win some and you will lose some, but somehow, after time, it will become easier.
Good luck, and make lots of sales!
Dave
June 24th, 2009 at 9:02 am
I appreciate the emphasis on developing a contract for all business related dealings, and also the comment about not undervaluing our own work… so many good points here…
thank you DPS
June 24th, 2009 at 9:10 am
This is wonderful advice–especially about the contract! Last summer, I was approached by a very large, well known US newspaper. They wanted to buy one of my food photos on Flickr. I was of course, thrilled and flattered. It was all a good experience, except for one thing. They said they were choosing from a pool of photographers, and weren’t sure which photo they’d choose. But there would be credit given, and payment as well. Being a new blogger, I figured I had no shot of being chosen.
Guess what? They used my photo! But there was a catch–they didn’t tell me they did. I thought of it a few months (yes, months) later, and looked it up in their online archives. There it was, in the article they said they need a photo for. They gave me photo credit, but never got around to sending me a payment.
I contacted them right away and told them I’d be sending an invoice immediately, and also that I was a little ticked off that they never notified me. They gladly sent the payment out after that.
And you’re 100% right about giving your work away for free. Not a photo story, but a few weeks ago, another very large, well known publisher asked me for a recipe to contribute to a cookbook by a well known newspaper food writer. They were doing a section on the regional home cook. I was super excited! And when I emailed back and told the contact person what the fee was, I got a very quick “thanks, but no thanks” reply. And a condescending “oh, I see you’re one of those bloggers that charge for their work” attitudes.
Sure the exposure would have been nice, but I’m sure that the publishers employees, the author, or the contact person do not work for free. So why should I?
June 24th, 2009 at 9:29 am
Any particularly good resources for the contract? And when you say limited rights, what are the common limits you’d recommend using?
June 24th, 2009 at 9:46 am
Does anyone have a generic contract that they’d be willing to share? It need not be a “one size fits all” contract, but having something to start from would be much easier than starting from scratch.
June 24th, 2009 at 9:46 am
This is where I think licenses comes to place. If you are an amateur and you are not thinking on going pro, you can allow people to use it, since whoever will use it don’t do it for commercial purposes.
When you are not a professional photographer, it is not that easy to make a contract (especially considering your work is posted on the web and you can get a request to use your work from any place) and I guess you can get in trouble easily.
Here in Brazil, there are two things to consider about pictures rights:
1) Author rights, those are very similar to Copyrights,
2) and Image rights, any image that shows a person (or many) must have an written authorization from those persons allowing you to show them in the pictures. So, if that girl in the image above was a Brazilian, you would have to get from her an written authorization prior to add the picture to this post.
June 24th, 2009 at 10:05 am
I’d also bring up needing a model release if it’s a picture of someone other than yourself that someone wants to purchase(particularly if it’s being purchased for website/PR/commercial use). Most photographers know that it’s a common courtesy to always ask whomever you’re shooting for permission, but if you intend to actually sell the work getting a release signed is important for protecting yourself – otherwise the subject can turn around and sue you for unauthorized use/distribution of their image.
June 24th, 2009 at 10:12 am
In addition to get permission from people, there are some publications that also require a release for a recognizable building. Something to keep in mind if you are doing architectural shoots.
June 24th, 2009 at 10:39 am
Wow..thanks for the tips. Since I am an amateur, I tend to always think…maybe my work isn’t worth that much of an effort in getting some sort of compensation. I agree that an amateur’s work has value!
June 24th, 2009 at 11:08 am
Not only does your work have personal value, there’s another reason it’s important not to give away photos for free. Aside from devaluing your own creativity and talent, don’t forget that giving away great photography devalues photography in general–making it harder for others to earn a living too. (And if you’d like to aspire to someday earning a living with photography, it will be helpful if photographs still have value!) Good work will always have value, no matter whether it’s made by an amateur or a professional.
June 24th, 2009 at 11:14 am
I know of one woman who like to take peoples photos off the internet and put them on her blog with no credit to the original photographer. She also likes to take peoples pictures and email them to people claiming they were taken by her or of her. I am hoping this article helps her see the light that she should not take anyone’s photo off the internet for any reason without asking. She says that people put them on the internet for her to take them. She calls it “sharing” I call it “stealing”
June 24th, 2009 at 11:33 am
Could anyone here post a sample contract?
June 24th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
I can understand what Christopher has gone through. I had pretty much the same thing happen to me with two photos from my Flickr account. One was used by NBC and the other by a shipping magazine in Canada. In my case though; no letter asking permission touse was sent to me nor any mention of payment. I was told by another tour guide that used a shot that since my photos were under a Creative Commons license; they understood that these were just photos “out there” that could be used as long as a credit line was placed with the photo. Would I have been able to send these users a bill for using my shots? That’s a question I have yet to have answered. I hope Christopher makes sure of the buyers reputation and how he has the copyright listed with the picture. If anyone has an aswer to my dilema…please let me know.
June 24th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Recently a website named UNjobs.org published some of the Flickr user’s pictures about Nepal,including mine, without any of us getting noticed. Since there is a .ORG domain, I thought this was a non-profit organization. But can they still do this?
June 24th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Since I don’t really want to be a pro photographer and I REALLY would like for someone to get something out of my shots I’ve put *all my photos under a Creative Commons By license:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rpgmaster94/
If in the future decide I want to go pro I’ll just stop putting any more pictures under a creative commons By license… I’ll just put them under a CC By-NC-SA license!
*All but my portraits and self portraits. They are under a By-NC-ND license.
June 24th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
ed schultz, that depends on the type of Creative Commons you chose. Most include non-commercial, so yes, they need your permission and pay you whatever you ask.
June 24th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
good advice there. It would be good if you could post some inromation or a sample contract for limited right contract as I presume most of the readers are not lawyers. That way we could have a stating point and customise the contract for our own use.
June 24th, 2009 at 10:27 pm
I have been fortunate enough to experience this on two separate occasions.
The first time it happenned, it was for a book publication in which they asked if they could use about 6 of my images (6 in the same series) and I gave it away for free in exchange for ‘credit’. Its been about 4 months since, and I havent heard back from them yet, and I must say, I felt ‘cheated’ when i emailed the publisher my high res files.
The second time it occurred, it was National Geographic. They offered to buy the picture and even suggested a price for it (very reasonable as well) and they sent along the contracts paperwork, etc to get it all done.
Its abit of a murky area, but having experienced this situation on both sides, I think this post’s main point about knowing how to value one’s work is a sound logic.
June 25th, 2009 at 1:28 am
I think it all depends on why you’re doing photography. I’m doing it for fun and not for profit so giving away photos for credit is just fine with me. That’s why I use the creative commons license that I do. I’ve already had several photos published that would not have been used if the people had to pay for them. And for me, having my photos out there is reward enough.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ericsbinaryworld/sets/72157594191742515/
June 25th, 2009 at 3:00 am
We recently hired a photographer to do our wedding photos. She was awesome, and an old friend. One of the reasons we chose her though, was that she sells the copywrite to her wedding photos as part of the photo package.
We now have the rights to have any reproductions, use them in any context – they are our images.
That being so, she does not sell the copyright on her own work ever, only when she does work for hire. Her feeling (and the general feeling of other photographers in the area) is that work for hire photos should remain copyright the person paying for the work. (Which is how copyright law in Canada is actually written, photographers need to include a clause saying they keep the copyright if they wish to keep it as part of the contract.)
Her other professional stuff she does for herself is all her copyright, and she sells rights to single printings of images and such as well – it’s great work.
So – I think saying selling copyright is “wrong” depends on the facts of the photo shoot, the requirements of the person hiring the photographer, and the local market into which the images are being sold.
As an amateur photographer myself, I won’t sell the copyright to my images directly. However, if I am hired by someone to compose certain photos, they copyright is theirs, I am being hired as skilled labour. I think it’s an important distinction.
June 25th, 2009 at 3:05 am
I have only been asked a few times but one thing you failed to point out is that you need to have the right to sell the picture. I’ve been asked regarding a photo of private property and of a commercial item. I don’t have the rights to sell these photos as best I understand the rules. Due to these constraints, and one person refusing to pay me anything, I haven’t yet sold a photo.
June 25th, 2009 at 6:01 am
I’m an amateur and I’ve had two or three approaches for photos of mine and I’ve tended to go for a sort of middle ground.
I won’t allow the photos to be used for free, but I’m not that bothered about what I think would probably be fairly small amounts of money for web use, so I request that the companies make a donation to a specific charity in my name. Many charities allow this sort of ‘gifting’; when I get the email confirmation from the charity I email through the permission to use the photo.
My favourite charities get some cash, the companies pay less because they can write off at least some of the payment, looks like a win win to me.
Dave
June 25th, 2009 at 8:02 am
Seems to me the argument that giving your pictures away devalues quality photography is a lot like the argument the newspapers make about why we should pay for their print editions when a whole lot of online media present the news for free.
If most professional photographers were really that much better than the more serious amateurs out there, they wouldn’t have to worry. But most of them aren’t.
June 25th, 2009 at 9:59 am
The best option I believe is to submit images that are commercially viable to a stock agency. Flickr should be used as a marketing tool to advertise your photography. If someone is willing to pay you for usage of your image, then there’s no reason why they won’t go through a stock agency if they really want your image. The stock agency already has all the contracts and organization in place to deal with image buyers. It just seems that trying to sell images directly through Flickr is too much “hit and miss”. Of course, I could be wrong, and there could very well be many people who use Flickr very effectively to sell their images without the help of a stock agency.
June 25th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
@ RPG Master:
I just licensed 12 images for use on a small biz web site for $3000; under a borad creative commons license, I would have made $0.00; That’s why I mark all my photos on flickr as All Rights Reserved. That way I can decide a value for my photos based on the type of use.
Even if you don’t want to turn pro, it still might be worth giving a glance over some of the Professional Business Resources I’ve put up on my web site.
Cheers,
Gary.
June 26th, 2009 at 1:51 am
Hi all,
I recently closed my flickr account as i found my images popping up all over facebook.
I signed up to fotolia and think it’s great because it’s given me a reason to take better
shots.
As an amateur I would not have a clue about valuing my images, and this is where
these sites gain. They even give you resources like model release forms etc.
June 26th, 2009 at 2:14 am
You absolutely need a licensing agreement. I’m a photographer, and I’ve also been working in photo licensing/rights & clearances for 10 years, and I know the kind of stuff that newspapers, magazines and book publishers will try to get away with to cut costs and corners. Any photographer who is approached should find out exactly where and when the image will be published, the name of the article or project, the territory(ies) involved, print run (for books), size the image will run, and specify the time period you’re granting them said usage rights for. In the license you should stipulate that they send you a comp copy (this is 100% industry standard with the exception of newspapers). In the license, state that the image cannot be transferred or used in any way other than the specified use. They might want to use the image in another edition, whether it be the digital edition, another language or territory, etc. You have to stipulate that they have those rights.
The problem with Flickr is that most media outlets think if they’re getting an image from someone’s Flickr stream, then they can get it for free and with no paperwork, versus licensing an image from a photo agency. This is a huge problem and misconception. It is still copyrighted content that has value and needs to be properly licensed. You need to act like a photo agency to get what you deserve for your hard work. You’d be surprised, in fact, how much money these people DO have!!! Everyone cries poor. Everyone. But don’t be afraid of throwing a number out there or negotiating with someone. Unless it’s for a non-profit, no one should ever give away your work for free, and NEVER without a license. Because without a license, you’re giving them carte blanche to use your work however they please. A photo credit is a given in the industry, so if someone says “we’ll give you a photo credit” you should not be impressed. In fact, I would laugh if someone tried to get me to hand over my work simply for “a photo credit.”
If anyone is consistently being approached and is not sure what the industry standard is for specific types of usage, check out Photo Quote Pro, it’s a great program. I’ve used it in every job I’ve held in the photo biz. Good luck everyone!
June 26th, 2009 at 2:21 am
As someone who uses the Creative Commons licensed photos every week (I’m a minister in a church and find the 100,000,000 images quite useful for our digital slides in worship), I’m often surprised how many people DON’T include the “Non-Commercial” tag when they license their photos.
Folks, without that tag, you’re giving permission for others to use your photos for commercial purposes, without further contact.
I’ve had a few contacts for use of my own photos posted to flickr. Fortunately, the companies in question have respected the CC “non-commercial” tag, and have asked before use.
Peace – rb
June 26th, 2009 at 2:40 am
This article is very timely for me!
Really interesting article and comments. I’ve only recently had to worry about this issue. I shoot mainly actor headshots that they use for agents and auditions. however, i shot a family last fall, and this past week, the mom (a friend) said that her hubby was chosen as ‘father of the year’…we ran into them briefly and she flashed open the first page of the article in the magazine then closed it…and it was a 1/2pg of MY photo of their family.
On ALL of my invoices, i state that i retain all copyrights and any commercial usage must have direct permission, credit given, possible fee, etc…. Since I do not charge an arm and a leg for sittings and the digitals that come out of that sitting, I keep ALL copyrights so that I can use the photos for my own business.
While I would not sell one of my ‘people’ photos w/out direct permission from the talent in the photo, they should also not use my photo in publication w/out permission. if they wrote a poem and someone plagarized it in a publication and didn’t give credit, how would that go? lawsuit. I also have Full Copyright on all my Flickr photos.
So, i had to send a gentle reminder to my client…friends…which was awkward, but necessary. Needless to say, i didn’t even get credit for the photo…and this is a magazine that has a LOT of photographers advertising in it. Miffed- you bet. But I learned something from it, and now I ‘gently remind’ all of my clients that any commercial usage must have permission. ….if they call and want it in a magazine, i’ll charge for it – plain and simple.
the calculators are extremely helpful, btw, thank you!
happy shooting, all!
June 26th, 2009 at 7:08 am
I am very new in photography but thanks to DPS, I am learning a lot through this forum. I agree with Eric Mesa, as an amateur, to be asked by somebody to use my photos and publish it in one of the magazines is good enough as a reward.But anyway, if that somebody is willing enough to pay, of course, this will be a big fullfillment for me.
Imagine ,somebody got insterested with my photos, as an amateur, I would say WOW!! I would feel like I am one of those well known photographers being paid with every shoot they make…
Thanks to all…my idols!!!
June 26th, 2009 at 7:17 am
Just read all the comments!
Good points about making sure that you have the rights/proper releases to sell the pictures, and I apologize for not including that – it is very, very important.
Also, the reason I did not post a sample contract was simply because I could not find a good one. The best advice I could find was to “consult a lawyer”. Perhaps some more searching would yield something, but I have yet to find it.
June 26th, 2009 at 10:26 am
carl, how did you “find” your pictures all over facebook? how does one “find” their photos out there online?
June 26th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
Greetings,
Great info and advice for those just starting out. As a wildlife photographer for over 25 years, I can still remember my first published photo. Everything was manual back then. I was in the “readers’ photos” secttion of a local outdoor magazine. There was no money, but the satisfaction alone was worth all of my years of work.
Later that year, reality set in. I improved my work and also realized that if it was good enough to be published, it was good enough to be paif for. Magazines are a business and they don’t give away free copies just so that you can read them. Neither should you give away your work. You have probably spent countless hours, and money to get that shot. It has value and if someone wants it, they should pay for it accordingly.
Roman
June 27th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
Interesting, I was “lucky”.
Some of my photos was used somewhere.
I’m only amateur, so it is not important to me. This is a great honor that someone noticed me.
Unfortunately, not all ask for permission to use.
I use CC licenses – http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/deed.en
Sometimes I wonder whether to change it to another, or even reserve the right entirely.
people who asked me about the pictures, asked to send a link to the work done – no one ever sent nothing!
Of course, not everyone earn on my photos or I do not know.
Photos that I found were signed Fortunately, they come from my gallery.
June 27th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
You can use a service like licensestream. This service recognizes the difficulties of image licensing in the internet age. It costs very little, handles the licensing etc for you (you get 95% of the end price), and pricing is already set at industry standards (you can override the pricing if you want to). The contract is actually between the buyer and Licensestream, so amateur and busy professional photogrpahers don’t need to get caught up in the paperwork :
http://www.licensestream.com/licensestream2/Portal/products/comparison.aspx
At such little cost, a single sale will recover the annual fee.
The service also utilizes PicScout which embeds a code in your image and scans the internet for illegal use: http://www.picscout.com/
The service is easy to use, takes licensing off your hands, and even has pre-written emails to demand payment from people using images illegally. You can also create html code easily which can be embed in own website making licensing from own website easy.
Here’s one example I am involved in with a couple of photographer colleagues. It is proving valuabe:
http://www.licensestream.com/LicenseStream2/Store/storeHtml.aspx?id=86a5be7b-ce24-4712-970e-bbdbcb9a167e
Here’s an example of a license: http://www.colouriaconnect.de/english/2009/5/29/illegal-use-of-my-image.html
Don’t expect this to be like an agency with buyers visiting the site in droves. That is certainly not the case. It is more a tool to address the issue of easy licensing if someone asks you, tracking illegal use, and providing tools to do own marketing if you want to. Also, it has search engine publication tools which really do seem to work well.
We (my partners and I) like the potential of this approach, and it has solved some of the issues listed above for us.
Mark
ps I do not work for licensestream (I am paying a fee!). This is not an advert!
June 28th, 2009 at 3:52 am
I had to face this challenge a couple of times myself, first when the New York Times asked to publish this picture of the FBI Citizens Academy and later when a local guide website wanted to publish this picture of the Austin Convention Center.
Fortunately, I know a little about U.S. copyright law, and my wife, also a lawyer, practices mainly in that area. We were able to negotiate deals that preserved our rights to the photos while still gaining excellent exposure for these two works.
Both publishers were very professional – each had a proposed contract that required only minimal tweaking from our point of view – and the NYT even paid a small royalty.
A lot of people here are asking for sample contracts – remember that contracts will, as they must, vary depending on the laws of the country and state or province you live in.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:01 am
So – all rights reserved ought to mean just that, that I reserve all rights to my photos.
Yes?
That’s what I have on Flickr, which I don’t really use anymore. But it would be a good idea to also state that on my blog…
Great, and obviously a thought-provoking, article!
June 29th, 2009 at 4:20 am
It seems to me that this is an option on Flickr, which prohibits the saved images by others.
Then everyone must ask for the original photo. We have some control.
July 2nd, 2009 at 7:26 am
Often useful to know the intended end-use of the image. Whether professional or amateur, there are some clients (companies/organizations) that you just might not want using your images, directly or indirectly identifying you to be aligned with them.
December 4th, 2009 at 11:44 pm
I used to be asked a lot for my band photos – usually by fans or amateur authors wanting to include them in a book or website. I limit the catalog of music photos I put online now for that reason – because in these cases I never felt it was appropriate to ask for payment. In the case where an online music magazine wanted to use it, I setup a stock program or worked out a case by case basis, usually something like 5$ per live shot sent to paypal. Credit, on the other hand, is insulting to offer a photographer – if someone wants to use your photo, credit is a requirement! In commercial cases, of course, you can work out a deal to allow individuals to use a photo without a copyright notice by granting them a specific license, specifically in cases where an image is used as a design element in something bigger.
Nowadays, if I am asked to sell an image, it depends if the image is part of a fine art collection, or just one of the hundreds of miscellaneous ones. I recommend this for you – decide if the image in question is part of something you ever plan to put into a gallery or book. If the answer is probably not – sell it, but don’t ever sell exclusive rights. Use stock image programs instead and direct inquiries to your stock sales site.
Leave a Reply