More redundant photographers!

A lot of great photojournalist started of at newspapers,people need to think when they give their photos to the press for free :(
 
MWHCVT said:
I'll never ever give a photo away for free to a news paper purely out of principle "no money, no picture"
Click to expand...


But plenty of other people will though ... and that's the crux of the problem. The old days are gone and they ain't coming back anytime soon.
 
I suppose on a positive note we will all soon be able to get behind the goalposts with our iPhones and the blessing of the papers :rolleyes:
 
I only really shoot landscapes so it's a somewhat unlikely scenario, but if a newspaper wanted to use one of my photos then I would let them for free, providing they gave me credit and didn't alter the image. I'd love to see one of my photos in a paper.
 
Carl Hall said:
I only really shoot landscapes so it's a somewhat unlikely scenario, but if a newspaper wanted to use one of my photos then I would let them for free, providing they gave me credit and didn't alter the image. I'd love to see one of my photos in a paper.
Click to expand...

What's your day job?
 
gramps said:
What's your day job?
Click to expand...

I'm a mechanical design engineer. I can see where you're going with this and I agree, if some chump offered to do my work for free then I'd soon be out of a job. Like I said though, I shoot landscapes, and I think giving these photos away for free is a world apart from giving news related photos away and taking money from photo journalists.
 
Carl Hall said:
I'm a mechanical design engineer. I can see where you're going with this and I agree, if some chump offered to do my work for free then I'd soon be out of a job. Like I said though, I shoot landscapes, and I think giving these photos away for free is a world apart from giving news related photos away and taking money from photo journalists.
Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat as you Carl and would let an image go to print for free with the proviso of a credit, also, it's not like Mechanical Design Engineering is a very popular pastime.............. unfortunately for professional photographers, photography is, and growing year on year, so there is an abundance of photographs and photographers in every segment of the photography world
 
Last edited:
Carl Hall said:
I shoot landscapes, and I think giving these photos away for free is a world apart from giving news related photos away and taking money from photo journalists.
Click to expand...

I wonder if Professional Landscape Photographers, of whom they are many in the UK, would agree? :)
 
Stuart M said:
But plenty of other people will though ... and that's the crux of the problem. The old days are gone and they ain't coming back anytime soon.
Click to expand...
This. Times have changed and continue to do so. While the stand is admirable ultimately it's futile as the position of staff togs will soon be a redundant position.
 
Johnston Publishing made all their Togs go Freelance last year.Now Newsquest have changed things. Local World have not done anything as yet.
 
gramps said:
I wonder if Professional Landscape Photographers, of whom they are many in the UK, would agree? :)
Click to expand...
RPSmith and Carl hit the nail on the head. The cold hard facts of the matter is that the market doesn't value "professional landscape photography" to the degree that it values mechanical design engineers because the demand vs supply ratio is massively weighted towards "supply" in the former case.
Do hobbyists have any responsibility to artificially prop up the market? I don't think they do.
 
Last edited:
gramps said:
Should they assist its demise?
Click to expand...
They should do what they want with their work. The market status of professional photography is not for them to worry about.

The advent of practical digital cameras had a massive negative impact on film and associated industries. Should people who shoot digital feel responsible for "assisting the demise" of those industries? No. The market changed. Film became worthless outside of a small, niche market. The demand vanished as people swapped to digital. The film industry had to adapt or die.

More and more, pro photographers are going to have to demonstrate how their work is tangibly better and more useful than that of the millions of hobbyists who have no interest in making money from photography and are happy to supply work for nothing. Shouting at the tide never helped anyone. They have to adapt.
 
Last edited:
benc98 said:
Credit doesn't quite cut it when someone or a business is profiting from my images - I expect cash or equivalent in return.
Click to expand...
My thoughts too.
I've found local rags are happy to pay, albeit a fairly low figure, when they approach someone for usage.

Personally when I see a nice photo in a magazine even if it is credited I will remember the name for a scan few seconds until I look at the next article. Then the name, the credit is gone. In my opinion a credit in a paper or article is completely worthless and letting a publication people but using my images for a worthless piece of texts does not benefit me one bit.
 
ghoti said:
More and more, pro photographers are going to have to demonstrate how their work is tangibly better and more useful than that of the millions of hobbyists who have no interest in making money from photography and are happy to supply work for nothing. Shouting at the tide never helped anyone. They have to adapt.
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with choosing "tangibly better" and everything to do with more profit for greedy shareholders and pleasing accountants ... why pay if you can get it for free ... when everyman and his dog is prepared to give away their work for free.
 
Ask the papers if you can have some free advertising and see what they say?

I got asked for a footie photo for a local paper, but they wouldn't pay, so they didn't get it. Now I would've got my name printed in the local paper and had my ego massaged but if you give one photo for free at what point do you start asking for money?
 
If a newspaper or magazine wanted to us one of my photos (unlikely but one can dream) then I would want paying for it.

They use the pictures to help sell their papers/magazines so there should be a cost incurred.

But I do take photos for 2 chairty events eahc year and I will not charge them as A I take part in the evnets so I'm there B I would rather the money be used in better ways then paying me to take photos
 
gramps said:
Nothing to do with choosing "tangibly better" and everything to do with more profit for greedy shareholders and pleasing accountants ... why pay if you can get it for free ... when everyman and his dog is prepared to give away their work for free.
Click to expand...
It is about being "tangibly better" because they get away with it because most pro work is not effectively better or more worthy than the work of decent amateurs in the eyes of the audience for the paper or magazine. If a pro can show that they can provide extra reason for the readership to care, then they will continue to be able to make money.
Whether it's a good thing or not is almost irrelevant: that's the way the market is going; because loads of decent amateurs simply do not care if they're not making money or even if someone else is making money from them for free. They can be well aware that it's a "freebie" for the paper and their owners and simply not give much of a hoot. They're quite happy to do without the hassle, tax declarations, etc that come with commercialising their work.
As I said, the market is moving in that direction. People who do nothing but stand and moan about the tide coming in will drown.
 
I raise money thro' sports photos for a charity but won't put them on line if a pro turns up. It's their livelihood.
 
Not sure that anyone complaining of someone doing their job for free should be described as a moaner :thinking:

However I see the trend of pros running workshops increasing quite dramatically, which should help to perpetuate the problem :)
 
gramps said:
I wonder if Professional Landscape Photographers, of whom they are many in the UK, would agree?
Click to expand...

Who cares? We can do what we like with our own images. Businesses and markets change. If there is no market for what you are offering any more, you need to find something else to do.


Steve.
 
gramps said:
Yes that's part of today's problem, very few care about anything anymore ... until it directly affects them!
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, when you base a business on a practice which is primarily an amateur pursuit and the equipment to do it is available to anyone, this is what happens.

Photography has gone from a specialist service to something anyone can do - as have many things.

e.g. if you were involved with a school running a summer fete or were holding a car boot sale, would you go to a printer to get some posters made or would you write it up yourself in Microsoft Word, print it out and photocopy it?

Also, hardly any of my musician friends pay a studio to record now. Thanks to digital recording technology, anyone can afford studio quality recording in their own home. I wonder if EMI and Sony are on musicians forums moaning that it's not fair that people are recording themselves!


Steve.
 
Steve Smith said:
Also, hardly any of my musician friends pay a studio to record now. Thanks to digital recording technology, anyone can afford studio quality recording in their own home.
Click to expand...

Not really a fair comparison. That's akin to paying to have film processed. Do they expect to get paid when they play to an audience, or for people to pay for CDs or to download their music?
 
Ed Sutton said:
Not really a fair comparison. That's akin to paying to have film processed. Do they expect to get paid when they play to an audience, or for people to pay for CDs or to download their music?
Click to expand...
Comparisons aside the realities are what they are and there is no getting away from that no matter how much people try and delay the inevitable.
 
There is no other job like a photographer, so comparisons are very difficult. In the case of newspapers, they want photographs immediately. So without the old style press photographer (who I think we can all agree is pretty rare nowadays) they will take whatever shots they can get hold of, if they can do so without paying money they will. Whilst there are people on here who may not like that, it is where we are at this present time and is unlikely to change. Just look at your own areas and think how many papers have closed or drastically changed how the work over the last ten years? Now whilst I would hate see the end of the "professional" (as in a photographer who earns his living from taking photographs) tog, we are not going to stop people giving away their photographs if they want to. So whilst I have sympathy for the professionals, they only way they are going to survive is to adapt.
 
Steve Smith said:
Unfortunately, when you base a business on a practice which is primarily an amateur pursuit and the equipment to do it is available to anyone, this is what happens.

Photography has gone from a specialist service to something anyone can do - as have many things.

e.g. if you were involved with a school running a summer fete or were holding a car boot sale, would you go to a printer to get some posters made or would you write it up yourself in Microsoft Word, print it out and photocopy it?

Also, hardly any of my musician friends pay a studio to record now. Thanks to digital recording technology, anyone can afford studio quality recording in their own home. I wonder if EMI and Sony are on musicians forums moaning that it's not fair that people are recording themselves!


Steve.
Click to expand...

But if you don't have a system in which to train young photographer,where the hell the new generation of photojournalist/news photographers going to come from,its alright as say just photographing a garden/summer fete.
But what about bigger stories that you send them on later in their career,who going to do that work ?
 
Steve Smith said:
Who cares? We can do what we like with our own images. Businesses and markets change. If there is no market for what you are offering any more, you need to find something else to do.


Steve.
Click to expand...
that hits the nail on the head. It really gets to me when people think they are owned a living and that someone shouldn't do the same thing for free. If people want to give away images for the credit and glory then they should go right ahead.

Before I am jumped on I should point I work as both a software engineer and an Electrician. Would I get very far trying to stop free, open source, software development? Would I get very far telling everyone to stop doing DIY electrics? (assuming they do a safe job of course)

I am not trying to do down people trying to make a living from photography (I wish I could....) but Steve is right, if you can't make a living in the current market then you need to reconsider your career. Harsh maybe, but a fact.........

I am also not saying we should not give sympathy to those that loose their jobs, I've been there. But again you can't fight the market (something the unions often fail to understand.....)
 
Agree with what has already been said. I sympathise with those that lose their jobs etc, but if you are a pro photographer these days, and the freebies are affecting you, you should be looking at ways of adapting your business and looking for other potential sources of revenue, not bitching about it.
 
brman said:
Would I get very far telling everyone to stop doing DIY electrics? (assuming they do a safe job of course)
Click to expand...

the govts done that for you already with part P etc
 
Sharky said:
Comparisons aside the realities are what they are and there is no getting away from that no matter how much people try and delay the inevitable.
Click to expand...

Very true, this is a sign of the times. However as a professional with much higher overheads than an amateur, I work on the simple principle that my output does not go anywhere for free (unless it's for a cause I support). I see no point in allowing any third party to use my photography when there is no benefit whatsoever to me. I would think that everybody involved in the newspaper or magazine is paid, from the editors right down to the people who clean the office. I find it morally unacceptable and frankly blo*dy unfair that I should be expected to contribute to their profits when there is no reciprocation of any kind. Amateurs suffer from vanity and newspapers will capitalise on that, and I daresay some of the editors will probably snigger into their cappuccinos each time someone bites.

I was contacted last week by quite a large and exclusive chain of garden centres. I was told they were seeking a photographer to photograph their most recently built centre for their new brochure and catalogue, including exhibits and plants. It sounded nice, so I asked what the pay was. I was told that the reward would be a quarter page advertisement at the back. It doesn't cost very much to advertising in these things and the adverts certainly would not be significant in terms of bringing in business. I politely explained that but was told that they felt it was fair reward for "a couple of hours work". I suggested they contact a keen amateur or student, who might find the practice useful. I was told that was not an option because the images need to be top professional quality, the print run will fall into many thousands, and the catalogue is of course designed to sell all of their goods. Need I say more.
 
Steve Smith said:
Also, hardly any of my musician friends pay a studio to record now. Thanks to digital recording technology, anyone can afford studio quality recording in their own home. I wonder if EMI and Sony are on musicians forums moaning that it's not fair that people are recording themselves!


Steve.
Click to expand...

Interesting as I know a couple of bands who use/used studios and producers due to the quality and ideas. What standard are these musician friends? Whilst I know some who break in with home produced music, the successful/commercial music is still mostly produced in studios.

Maybe not a good analogy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top