Should I work for free?????

Too many people just want to get the kudos of getting something published so they can then post on here saying "Hey.. I got published".. basically saying... I got published... look how great I am. Well... yeah... they thought you were SOOO good they valued your work at £0.00. You're a star.

The only way this will stop is when people like the ones I describe above realise that they're not doing themselves, or anyone else any favours. They're not being published because their work is great, they're being published because people know there's always a chump who will give their work away.

Only ever.. ever... give your work away if it genuinely helps you launch a career. Getting a snap in the local paper for nothing will not do that. Shooting product for a local company for nothing will probably not either. The only winner is the guy who's getting your work for free.
 
Last edited:
Depends what you want out of photography though

I gave my first print away for free when a friend asked if he could buy it off me for his lounge wall, I've since sold a couple but only have covered my costs in the price and not taken any profit

I don't do it for money, I do it to produce something that others like to look at and for the achievement I've taken that image
 
Charging a friend.. or not as the case may be has no further reaching affect on anyone else though... it's just an arrangement between friends and not exactly professional work. That's neither here nor there.

Whether you make a profit or not is not the problem either.. it's the fact that you should be rewarded for your work if someone approaches you and ask you to work for them.

I'm referring to photographers doing work for free for organisations, companies and other clients because they feel "honoured" to be asked. It's all ****s*** people. They're approaching an unknown photographer not because they admire your work, they're doing it because they'll have to pay a known photographer. Give them free work and they'll think you're a chump and keep expecting free work from you, or others when you finally get p***ed off and stop being their un-waged slave.
 
Last edited:
Simple answer is no
 
MNDec said:
But for majority of us it isn't work
Click to expand...


thats it there.. in a nutshell

Fred Bloggs hobbyist photographer takes a great/decent/rubbish pic and a paper says that's great can we use it.. we will print your name... Fred is going to snap there hand off..and to be perfectly honest I don't blame him.. That will never stop and theres no point trying to stop it or moaning about it.. Someone posts on here proclaiming they got a picture in the paper i always have and always will congratulate them...

Fred Bloggs then gets hooked on the idea and decides to go out looking for pics.. to events he knows the paper will be interested in.. he then starts to give them pics regularly to see his name in the paper.. now Fred needs a good slap and a telling off..
 
I don't know how many of you watched the video, he brought up some interesting points, but I think he missed a trick.

When he talked about 'trading services' and how it was the standard before the invention of money - he missed completing the circle by adding back in 'working for free', which is the replacement of 'hey why don't I fix your roof and you can give me some cured meat' with 'hey why don't you give me some of your awesome cured meat and I'll tell all my fiends how great it is and maybe one of them will fix your roof'.

In any other aspect of life, we'd describe that as a con, but some people see that and think 'that's great - I really need my roof fixed and it's just a couple of hours of my labour and I'll be in with a chance'.
 
MNDec said:
But for majority of us it isn't work
Click to expand...

Then why would you be shooting for a client if it's not your work? Even if it's not... why would you do it for free? I'm not talking of helping friends and acquaintances out here... I'm saying if a company approached you to work for them, why would you do it for free? For what possible reason? Publicity? Why do you need that? You're not a photographer you just said.. what do you need publicity for?

Where's the logic in your reply? Why would you not want remuneration for your work. Are you an idiot? Fancy coming around to weed my garden? I know you're not a gardener, but I'll tell everyone how great a job you did, and maybe you can weed their gardens for free too!

Why would anyone want to do ANY work for free unless it's volunteer work for a good cause.


What a stupid reply!
 
Last edited:
The logic in my reply is if, and I'm not saying my stuff is good enough, but if I put an image on facebook and someone said can I use it, I would say knock yourself out. It is my hobby, it isnt my job and I dont need, expect, want to get paid for it.

You can whinge until you are blue in the face about it undermining your business but it isnt really. Make your images so much better than mine that the paper or whatever will buy yours. If you cant do that then in this day and age you have no business anyway Im afraid.

This will only get worse for pro's not better. The quality ones, be it weddings, sport, commercial whatever will always have work. The mediocre should think about a new career.
 
You are missing the point though to be honest and it isnt comparable to weeding the garden. I have already taken the photo and it is just a by product of my hobby. If they are asking me to go take photos specifically for them it would be different.
 
The short answer is 'if you want to'

But don't have any delusions about it being gaining experience or making your name or any of that crap

As i said on threads like this before i'll do free work for charities i believe in, or for good friends who don't have the cash to pay a photographer. I'll also do free work for my employer in my day job (except that its not really free because i'm in a salaried job so i am getting paid for my time).

what i won't do is work free for commercial companies , clients i don't know, or casual acquantances
 
Yes I've never understood people who give their work away to companies ect for nothing
I'm not saying that my work is pro quality but if a company is making money from people's work they should pay for it
I have always given pictures to friends or to fellow guests on a trip for example though which is different
 
MNDec said:
The logic in my reply is if, and I'm not saying my stuff is good enough, but if I put an image on facebook and someone said can I use it, I would say knock yourself out.
Click to expand...

That's not what were on about though. We're on about being approached by people offering you work, then saying "Unfortunately there is no budget, but it's a GREAT opportunity to get published work in your portfolio" and people falling for it... and doing it, because they're idiots.


MNDec said:
Make your images so much better than mine that the paper or whatever will buy yours.
Click to expand...

Newspapers don't buy images unless it's a celebrity showing her knickers these days... and there's already a well established army of freelance papz that has got that covered. They just crowd source breaking news images. Why pay someone when you have twitter?


MNDec said:
If you cant do that then in this day and age you have no business anyway Im afraid.
Click to expand...


What do you do for a living?

Don't bother answering... it's academic. Let's assume you are a plumber.. a great one.. the best. You charge £500 an hour +


Then I set up as a hobby... I'm OK... not as good as you of course... but OK. I then decide to get my name about by working for free... it's my hobby after all, I have another job, so it's fine. You think everyone is going to pay top drawer money for plumbing jobs and repairs where there's a guy who does work that's perfectly fine and safe... just not as meticulous as you... for free? Hmmmm... Free, or £500 an hour... let me think.

So it's not a case of you being better so you're fine. Same with photography. If a company wants shots of their warehouse, offices and staff for a brochure, you think some guy in a suit who knows nothing about photography is going to shell out £750 a day to a local jobbing commercial guy when Mr Facebook will do it for free? Of course not.

However... what really baffles me.. is why you don't even TRY to get some money for your images. Do you not like money? Got too much of it already? What's the deal there.? It could be right there waiting for you for all you know. bet the guy's asking for the work are sometimes thinking... "Christ. what an idiot, I was gonna offer you £50 if we can use it on our site".. Let's not even bother thinking about paying next time... these amateur photographers are a pushover"
 
Last edited:
I was recently asked by a Zoo's PR woman if I could send any decent pics of their newborns I managed, as they were having trouble catching them at the right time. At the time she said they were for press release and I'd be credited, but being a modest lad, I said not to worry about including my name. I later emailed some, although I didn't think they were very good, but she thanked me, said they were fantastic and sent me a couple of tickets. They haven't used them :D
 
Pookeyhead said:
That's not what were on about though. We're on about being approached by people offering you work, then saying "Unfortunately there is no budget, but it's a GREAT opportunity to get published work in your portfolio" and people falling for it... and doing it, because they're idiots.





What do you do for a living?
Click to expand...

I am in construction. We used to paint peoples houses and the market became flooded with cheap house painters, bit like photography but usually for very low money, not free. Principle is smilar though.

I was faced with a couple of choices, try compete with the low price market or do something they can't do. I did the latter and now do high end hotels. The low price brigade can't do these works, yet anyway.

I do feel for the good pro photographers, there market is rapidly shrinking. They need to find a niche or be really really good at what they do. If they can't do this they are in trouble. I don't feel for the mediocre ones though and god are there a lot of those.......

Please don't think I am aiming that at anyone here, if I could be a fraction as good as you lot I would be chuffed....
 
Pookeyhead said:
I'm saying if a company approached you to work for them, why would you do it for free? For what possible reason?
Click to expand...
In my case it alleviates the need to be concerned with liability insurance (it may be different for those who live elsewhere).

Bob
 
Pookeyhead said:
Newspapers don't buy images unless it's a celebrity showing her knickers these days... and there's already a well established army of freelance papz that has got that covered. They just crowd source breaking news images. Why pay someone when you have twitter?
Click to expand...

BBC weather images?

MNDec said:
But for majority of us it isn't work
Click to expand...
I took some photos in Barbados of a celebrity ended up selling them to a local paper then from there to a large picture agency. Terms say I can't discuss or show, I sold all rights, but they were published world wide in all media and I'm sure the agency made lots of money from them but I got paid, for me, a lot of money for them. The opportunity was there and I took it, shame if I missed out on that pay day if I'd have given them away for credit.
 
Pookeyhead said:
Where's the logic in your reply? Why would you not want remuneration for your work. Are you an idiot? Fancy coming around to weed my garden? I know you're not a gardener, but I'll tell everyone how great a job you did, and maybe you can weed their gardens for free too!

Why would anyone want to do ANY work for free unless it's volunteer work for a good cause.

What a stupid reply!
Click to expand...

You are obviously right for the majority of cases, and I would not work for free except for good causes and friends, but you have to consider that the guy willing to do it for free might actually feel he is being rewarded for his efforts, even if it is not in cold hard cash. I take photos of my wife and kids every week but they are getting so used to it that I get very similar poses and looks each time and I am starting to feel I am getting stuck in a rut. Suppose a local actor comes along and asks if I will take his picture for whatever reason (for free) and I could be tempted. As far as I am concerned, I get an experienced model for free and that's a good deal for me as I also get to learn about poses etc. Cash doesn't change hands but both parties feel that is a fair exchange.

Second, you keep saying that this is work. It isn't, for the majority of people here It is a hobby we enjoy doing. We do it every day without getting paid. Give me a spare hour and likely as not I would pick up a camera out of choice. It is fundamentally different to my job which I do for the money but not for love. Why do you insist I must get paid for taking one type of photograph (one for a "client") but not another (one for me)?
 
MNDec said:
The logic in my reply is if, and I'm not saying my stuff is good enough, but if I put an image on facebook and someone said can I use it, I would say knock yourself out. It is my hobby, it isnt my job and I dont need, expect, want to get paid for it.

You can whinge until you are blue in the face about it undermining your business but it isnt really. Make your images so much better than mine that the paper or whatever will buy yours. If you cant do that then in this day and age you have no business anyway Im afraid.

This will only get worse for pro's not better. The quality ones, be it weddings, sport, commercial whatever will always have work. The mediocre should think about a new career.
Click to expand...

There are two issues with working for free - one is that it almost never is good publicity and doesn't lead to more work. There may be exceptions; I understand that fashion editorial spreads in the glossies may be unpaid. The other - and I suspect that this is the reason that professionals get exercised about the issue - is that it devalues what pros do, even if it doesn't put them out of work.

The same happens in the performance industry with which I am more familiar. If I and a group of others put a show together and spend time on training, rehearsals, props and then fail to sell the show around the festival circuit because someone else is offering a similar but less good show for free then it puts my team out of work. The good stuff doesn't get seen, and those who do charge have to reduce their costs.

Something similar is going on in journalism at the moment; publications are relying on crowdsourcing images and getting writers to take photos as well as write stories.

As MNDec said, the answer is to be exceptionally good - so that the really good stuff does still get paid for. Unfortunately free and mediocre(*) is often acceptable to those who would otherwise have to pay and the average quality of what does get seen goes down; the audience loses out and jobbing photographers (or performers) who produce acceptable but dull work lose out.

On the other hand.. I work for free where it gives me an opportunity to do something new I wouldn't otherwise have had chance to do. For instance, I have very occasionally performed for free at major charity events. Similarly, I've shot one wedding. I wouldn't do another for free (and may not do another at all!).

*I recognise that many amateurs produce work which is far from mediocre.
 
I'm not saying that if I had a picture of David Cameron giving Farage the bird behind his back that I wouldn't cash in on it big time, just that for me this is solely a hobby not work and I go in to expecting it to cost me money with which I am fine.

If someone wanted to use one of my pictures for their facebook page or whatever I wouldn't mind at all. I wouldn't be doing it for exposure or for publicity, I'd be doing it because I don't care! My images all sit on my hard drive on the whole, I have a few hundred followers on Flickr and get the odd like on Facebook. I shoot what I like, it's probably crap but it is what I like. If someone else takes a shine to one of them then knock yourself out!
 
juggler said:
Unfortunately free and mediocre(*) is often acceptable to those who would otherwise have to pay and the average quality of what does get seen goes down; the audience loses out and jobbing photographers (or performers) who produce acceptable but dull work lose out.

*I recognise that many amateurs produce work which is far from mediocre.
Click to expand...

For me this is more the issue.
I've not been a photographer for very long, only 6 months really. Since I started I have been to adult classes, been on workshops, studio days etc. I've read most things under the sun and watched Youtube videos til my eyes bleed. I have met/ looked at many pro photographers work doing all this

I have to say that in the main, the standard of professional photography is really really poor. I'm not surprised that some will try and source stuff for free or cheap off amateurs, looking at some of the pro content.

I didn't get married that long ago and like most people I have never really looked at my wedding album. I took it out to take a fresh look and it is actually quite good. I also looked at all the local wedding photographers and god is the bar really low. I would post some examples but I think that is unfair. It is no wonder the people who post here get so much work, they are actually decent photographers. That is why I don't think there is any point getting too upset about free stuff, just be better and you will be fine.
 
MNDec said:
. That is why I don't think there is any point getting too upset about free stuff, just be better and you will be fine.
Click to expand...


haha if it was that simple there wouldnt be a problem..I would totally agree with you... Two things your just not prepared to understand..

ONE; Not all free stuff is rubbish... two people could take a good pic that coudlnt be bettered.. one gives for free and one tries to sell..

TWO: people papers.. anyone will choose free pics over paid pics no matter the quality..its been proven a thousand times..
 
I didn't say all free stuff was rubbish, in fact far from it. Problem is you choose to make a living from photography, I don't. You have to sell the picture to pay the mortgage, I don't. You need to make sure yours is a lot better than mine.

As regards the second post, that won't always work, some will always choose free regardless. This isn't a new thing and it will never go away. Im general though, a lot of organisations/companies/people will pay for quality. If not the only shop in existence would be Primark.
 
MNDec said:
You need to make sure yours is a lot better than mine.
.
Click to expand...

like I say.. you just don't want to understand do you.. it doesn't matter whos is better... ...Give me 5 mins I ahve some crayons somewhere :)
 
MNDec said:
I'm not saying that if I had a picture of David Cameron giving Farage the bird behind his back that I wouldn't cash in on it big time, just that for me this is solely a hobby not work and I go in to expecting it to cost me money with which I am fine.

If someone wanted to use one of my pictures for their facebook page or whatever I wouldn't mind at all. I wouldn't be doing it for exposure or for publicity, I'd be doing it because I don't care! My images all sit on my hard drive on the whole, I have a few hundred followers on Flickr and get the odd like on Facebook. I shoot what I like, it's probably crap but it is what I like. If someone else takes a shine to one of them then knock yourself out!
Click to expand...

I'll give you another example as a amateur. I shot sunday morning sport, sometimes for events companies, sometimes for fun because I supported the team. Because I'd assisted at events, I knew what parents would pay, so I shot youth rugby games my son played in. Small jpegs loaded onto the ipad as I walked back to the clubhouse and business cards next to them with my website details on. Each digital image, full rights, full resolution was £2, delivered from my website as a download, paid via paypal. Almost all appeared on facebook (including some still with the watermark logo on so very low res just taken from the website!)

Absolutely painless and easy to do, but it tripled the money the money that team had to spend, which ultimately meant that children who wouldn't have gone on tour, did.

Photography has a value, just a lot of people don't recognise it.
 
Last edited:
Byker I'm sure there are loads of ways you could make some money from photography if that is what you wanted to do. It isn't what I want to do. I shoot what I like, it is pretty much unsellable and not good enough anyway!
 
KIPAX said:
like I say.. you just don't want to understand do you.. it doesn't matter whos is better... ...Give me 5 mins I ahve some crayons somewhere :)
Click to expand...

I do understand, you gave an example where your picture was superior by a long way to the one the club chose to use. That doesn't mean you are correct in all circumstances though otherwise you wouldn't sell any photos ever. Why do others choose to use your work instead of free stuff? Because you are good at it.
 
KIPAX said:
Be better and people will buy yours instead of freee????? hmmm


Blackpool fc may be poor on the pitch but they could afford a few quid for a pic in a news story?


This is what I took
http://www.kipax.com/gallery/index.php?action=view&album=FOOTBALL_WOM/3575&image=154


This is what they used
http://www.blackpoolfc.co.uk/news/article/blackpool-fc-under-9-girls-share-trophy-2417090.aspx

and yes.. thats me taking it ..

I rest my case :)
Click to expand...
Oh man thats below the belt mate I really feel for you.

Who took the photo do you know, a parent?
 
MNDec said:
Byker I'm sure there are loads of ways you could make some money from photography if that is what you wanted to do. It isn't what I want to do. I shoot what I like, it is pretty much unsellable and not good enough anyway!
Click to expand...

It was in response to your comment:
Problem is you choose to make a living from photography, I don't. You have to sell the picture to pay the mortgage, I don't. You need to make sure yours is a lot better than mine.

Which comes across as, It's not my problem it's yours. Thing is, by providing free content, it is our problem by devaluing photography

That's not to say there aren't times to provide free content. Local press will ofte run a story with a good accompanying image if you are trying to promote an event and want the free publicity, but I see that as an exchange of services. It's the constant torrent of free, usually poor images used just because they are free.
 
Last edited:
MNDec said:
I do understand, you gave an example where your picture was superior by a long way to the one the club chose to use. That doesn't mean you are correct in all circumstances though otherwise you wouldn't sell any photos ever. Why do others choose to use your work instead of free stuff? Because you are good at it.
Click to expand...
Isn't that his point?

His picture was far superior and yet the club still chose to use the free one. I'm sure Kipax knows the reality of his market far better than you and I.
 
I went through all this with painting for a living. Thing is, no one owes you anything. People give stuff away, work cheap or free or whatever. You have to adapt.

To be honest I don't like to see people struggle but it really isnt my problem. Because they own a camera it doesnt give them the right to get cash. The market is changing. Get better or get out.
 
jakeblu said:
Oh man thats below the belt mate I really feel for you.

Who took the photo do you know, a parent?
Click to expand...


must have been.. made plenty from the game selling to parents so no real loss but just goes to show what people will use rather than pay..
 
MNDec said:
I do understand, you gave an example where your picture was superior by a long way to the one the club chose to use. That doesn't mean you are correct in all circumstances though otherwise you wouldn't sell any photos ever. Why do others choose to use your work instead of free stuff? Because you are good at it.
Click to expand...
sometimes that only works if you're the <only> photographer there. If someone else is there giving it away - they'll take the freebie over the paying almost everytime (unless the photograph is really p*** poor)
 
As KIPAX's example shows, they'll even use p*** poor images rather than pay for good ones. Hopefully, a couple of parents will fork out for the decent pic rather than lifting the crap one from the club's website.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top