I am currently having a dispute with a publisher who has printed 8 of my images in a magazine before any agreement on price.
He realises that he is in the wrong, but is horrified at the prices which I have quoted him (taken from NUJ guidlines):
Category B (small consumer magazine)
Full Page £210
½ Page £120
¼ Page £85
1/8 Page £75
He states that he normally uses agency stock images and usually pays between £10 and £30!!!
Anyone heard of payments as low as those?
Best wishes
Phil
Posted by David Kjaer on March 11, 2008 at 6:20 AM
Hi Phillip
He certainly would not get the prices he has mentioned from any mainstream UK agency. That said I don't think the guidlines quoted by NUJ are realistic for a small consumer magazine - give me a call if you remain unsure of what to charge!
David
Posted by Danny Green on March 11, 2008 at 6:22 AM
Hello Phil
I wish I could get those prices, they are very very high, BBC Wildlife are one of the best rates going in the magazine sector and they don't even come close to this. I am not saying that these are wrong prices they should be what we should get but not in this day and age.
Danny
Posted by Elliott Neep on March 11, 2008 at 6:24 AM
Not heard of prices as low as that from and agent, but have been proposed such low sums from very popular on-the-shelf magazines. That NUJ list does look rather optimistic. Probably 20-30% optimistic!
Feel free to send a PM and I'll tell you what I am quoted.
Log onto Alamy and use there price calculator, then deduct 30% for a non-through-a-agency sale.
For what it is worth I think that those prices are about 10% to high for all but the full-page if it is a front cover.
T
Posted by John Robinson on March 11, 2008 at 7:08 AM
Phillip
On average I get £20-£30 for say a quarter to half page. £60 for a cover. Thats on a well known bird watcing magazine. Trouble is that everyone's a photographer these days ! There are hundreds of snappers out there ready to give their stuff away just to see it in print.
I used to get £50 for a quarterpage in Birds magazine and that was twenty years back !
JohnRobinson
Unfortunately, accepting low fees is the reason why a lot of people end up getting their photos published (no disprespect to anyone on this forum - it wasn't meant that way, but is a simple statement of fact).
So called 'vanity publishing' is the main reason why some magazines expect low prices from everyone and whilst there are people willing to submit for free or for low rates, then it will continue to happen.
In this case, the guy in question has actually contravened the law never rmind anything else so stick to your guns and tell him in furture, you would be prepared to negotiate but this time, it's pay up or else!
As to using stock images - same story. The idiots who supply microstock sites shaft everyone else.
Barrie
Posted by Nigel Blake on March 11, 2008 at 8:38 AM
Being sensible, whether you're willing to negotiate any further really depends on your relationship with the publisher and whether you think you'll work (or want to!) with them again.
Posted by Danny Green on March 11, 2008 at 9:03 AM
Barrie
I agree to a certain extent but I am not in a strong enough position to argue my case. Some of the stuff I have had published is low in price but if I didn't send it someone else will. I think vanity publishing is a bit unfair, I have found that I have generated more work from these things at a later date. One example is I have supplied images to the local wildlife trust for cheaper rates over the years but I have just done a very nice commision for them on the back of it. Its a judgement we have to make as photographers and you have to start somewhere.
The prices you've quoted don't look too high to me (they look like standard-ish agency rates), but take them as a starting point and perhaps build in a discount for the number used.
The rates that he is quoting are available from royalty-free and micro-stock agencies- anyone heard of istock at $0.11 per picture? - but probably not from a 'traditional' rights-managed agency.
The key here is whether you want an ongoing relationship or you think that bridges are burnt now anyway (I suspect the latter) so talk directly to them and haggle from a rate that you think reflects the value of your work. I would suggest an early-payment discount/late-payment penalty because they may be tempted to see how seriously you want your cash after you've invoiced...
Nasty position to be in, good luck.
Andrew
Posted by Paul Ashton on March 11, 2008 at 1:52 PM
I'd suggest that the publisher has left himself wide open as he's used your images without prior agreement. I'd send him an invoice. If he refuses to pay then go to the small claims court but be able to back up your figures with previous sales.
Phil,
Send them an invoice for a grand. They are in the wrong and they have obviously thought that if they got away with it they'd be quids in: they haven't and if they are allowed to only pay what they would have done if they'd asked in the first place they will use the same tactics again on some other tog who might not notice. I had a well known rock band do the same thing to me earlier this year and they have agreed a settlement of more than twice what it would have cost them if they had the decency to go about it in the right way.
Using images without permission is a bit like going offside in rugby, if your not clobbered for doing it, you'll keep doing it.
Oops did someone mention rugby
J
Posted by Gavin Parsons on March 12, 2008 at 7:15 PM
This opens a whole new debate about what publishers are willing to pay for images. There are to many magazines paying far too little for images in the UK. Professional photographers in the mainstream work out that they need to make around £500 per shoot to pay for their time and equipment costs. How many wildlife photographers make that? Its very easy to say that every one is a photographer these days and that's true, but how many f those 'photographers' take outstanding images? Very few, but when the bottom line is important, magazine publishers don't seem to care what they print. That's doing us professional photographers out of work and killing their own industry as before long people will give up buying publications with poor quality pictures.
So I say teach the publication a lesson. It's easy to say and hard to do I guess, but do you really want to use a publication that pays so little money that means wildlife photography is consigned to eing a hobby!
Thanks very much for all your inputs, it is always useful to have plenty of ammo before going to war!
Just to put a closure to all this, I e-mailed the publisher and made him a slightly decreased offer so long as he pays within 7 days, to which he has agreed.
I realise that some may think the prices expensive, but think what it would cost to send someone over to take the images (which were landscapes of a secluded nearby island)? I do believe that we sell ourselves short when it comes to images for publication, and I would recommend the NUJ freelance site to all for further reading: http://www.londonfreelance.org/feesguide/photo.html
Thanks again for the input,
Best wishes
Phil
Posted by TREVORWILSON on March 13, 2008 at 7:51 PM
Hi
Glad you got your fee sorted in the end. It does'nt always work out that way. I found two of my pictures published in a international selling book which has just been published. I approached the publisher and was told "sorry these things happen" I researched the fees in the same location as you and requested my fees only to be told I was holding them to ransom over the pictures and was offered £20 and that I would havwe to do what ever I needed to recover my fees. I instructed them to remove my pictures from the print re run and am seeking legal advice..
They even had the nerve to say "we are only a small company" had to bite my tongue to prevent screaming down the phone..
Hello Trevor
I would send them an invoice for the amount recommended by NUJ and give them 7 days to pay, warning that interest will be accrued after that time. If no payment is received, then take them to the small claims court.
That is the route which I was going to take, it's cheaper than solicitors.
Best wishes
Phil
Posted by TREVORWILSON on March 14, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Hi Phil,
Tried the letter and and time to pay routine. All with no response so telephone and was accused of holding them to ransom. Legal assistance is through a insurance policy I have, currently having the facts assessed. If that fails it's to the small claims court.
Cheers
Trev
Hi Trevor - might be worth your time looking into using the late payments legislation on them too. They might be a small publisher...but that's no excuse as they're the 'professionals' and should employ people who know what they're doing. If you haven't already ,then issue them with an invoice for the amount you'd have charged and inform them that they have so many days to pay. After that you can then begin to claim interest on the 'late payment' as well as a processing fee...
Good luck with taking them to the cleaners and don't give up on them - it's your work they're making a profit from when all's said and done.
Discussion
19 repliesHe realises that he is in the wrong, but is horrified at the prices which I have quoted him (taken from NUJ guidlines):
Category B (small consumer magazine)
Full Page £210
½ Page £120
¼ Page £85
1/8 Page £75
He states that he normally uses agency stock images and usually pays between £10 and £30!!!
Anyone heard of payments as low as those?
Best wishes
Phil
He certainly would not get the prices he has mentioned from any mainstream UK agency. That said I don't think the guidlines quoted by NUJ are realistic for a small consumer magazine - give me a call if you remain unsure of what to charge!
David
I wish I could get those prices, they are very very high, BBC Wildlife are one of the best rates going in the magazine sector and they don't even come close to this. I am not saying that these are wrong prices they should be what we should get but not in this day and age.
Danny
Feel free to send a PM and I'll tell you what I am quoted.
Log onto Alamy and use there price calculator, then deduct 30% for a non-through-a-agency sale.
For what it is worth I think that those prices are about 10% to high for all but the full-page if it is a front cover.
T
On average I get £20-£30 for say a quarter to half page. £60 for a cover. Thats on a well known bird watcing magazine. Trouble is that everyone's a photographer these days ! There are hundreds of snappers out there ready to give their stuff away just to see it in print.
I used to get £50 for a quarterpage in Birds magazine and that was twenty years back !
JohnRobinson
Unfortunately, accepting low fees is the reason why a lot of people end up getting their photos published (no disprespect to anyone on this forum - it wasn't meant that way, but is a simple statement of fact).
So called 'vanity publishing' is the main reason why some magazines expect low prices from everyone and whilst there are people willing to submit for free or for low rates, then it will continue to happen.
In this case, the guy in question has actually contravened the law never rmind anything else so stick to your guns and tell him in furture, you would be prepared to negotiate but this time, it's pay up or else!
As to using stock images - same story. The idiots who supply microstock sites shaft everyone else.
Barrie
I agree to a certain extent but I am not in a strong enough position to argue my case. Some of the stuff I have had published is low in price but if I didn't send it someone else will. I think vanity publishing is a bit unfair, I have found that I have generated more work from these things at a later date. One example is I have supplied images to the local wildlife trust for cheaper rates over the years but I have just done a very nice commision for them on the back of it. Its a judgement we have to make as photographers and you have to start somewhere.
Danny
The rates that he is quoting are available from royalty-free and micro-stock agencies- anyone heard of istock at $0.11 per picture? - but probably not from a 'traditional' rights-managed agency.
The key here is whether you want an ongoing relationship or you think that bridges are burnt now anyway (I suspect the latter) so talk directly to them and haggle from a rate that you think reflects the value of your work. I would suggest an early-payment discount/late-payment penalty because they may be tempted to see how seriously you want your cash after you've invoiced...
Nasty position to be in, good luck.
Andrew
Send them an invoice for a grand. They are in the wrong and they have obviously thought that if they got away with it they'd be quids in: they haven't and if they are allowed to only pay what they would have done if they'd asked in the first place they will use the same tactics again on some other tog who might not notice. I had a well known rock band do the same thing to me earlier this year and they have agreed a settlement of more than twice what it would have cost them if they had the decency to go about it in the right way.
Using images without permission is a bit like going offside in rugby, if your not clobbered for doing it, you'll keep doing it.
Oops did someone mention rugby
J
So I say teach the publication a lesson. It's easy to say and hard to do I guess, but do you really want to use a publication that pays so little money that means wildlife photography is consigned to eing a hobby!
Just to put a closure to all this, I e-mailed the publisher and made him a slightly decreased offer so long as he pays within 7 days, to which he has agreed.
I realise that some may think the prices expensive, but think what it would cost to send someone over to take the images (which were landscapes of a secluded nearby island)? I do believe that we sell ourselves short when it comes to images for publication, and I would recommend the NUJ freelance site to all for further reading: http://www.londonfreelance.org/feesguide/photo.html
Thanks again for the input,
Best wishes
Phil
Glad you got your fee sorted in the end. It does'nt always work out that way. I found two of my pictures published in a international selling book which has just been published. I approached the publisher and was told "sorry these things happen" I researched the fees in the same location as you and requested my fees only to be told I was holding them to ransom over the pictures and was offered £20 and that I would havwe to do what ever I needed to recover my fees. I instructed them to remove my pictures from the print re run and am seeking legal advice..
They even had the nerve to say "we are only a small company" had to bite my tongue to prevent screaming down the phone..
I would send them an invoice for the amount recommended by NUJ and give them 7 days to pay, warning that interest will be accrued after that time. If no payment is received, then take them to the small claims court.
That is the route which I was going to take, it's cheaper than solicitors.
Best wishes
Phil
Tried the letter and and time to pay routine. All with no response so telephone and was accused of holding them to ransom. Legal assistance is through a insurance policy I have, currently having the facts assessed. If that fails it's to the small claims court.
Cheers
Trev
Good luck with taking them to the cleaners and don't give up on them - it's your work they're making a profit from when all's said and done.