Rates for architecture and sports
- Thread starter juliet
- Start date
- Status
I'm having some problem degisting the below so I ask around and this is what I got:
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for "perpetual rights for all markets and all mediums- $25 000 per image + costs" as was said by you and I'm also all for rights manangements.
But untill SG have
1) reach the level of union control like in the US
2) big company with big budget like in the US comes to SG
3) SG have a market as big as the US ( so that company will pay the US rate ),
I think it would be better to inform everyone here what is the normal practise rather than just what we hope the market to be.
If what you said is true, than you're either a very good marketeer or the client must be really uninformed. I wounder how many clients like that are there in SG.
Oh, by the way, there's a big flaw with your marketing and you're undercutting yourself.
To renew all usage for add. 1 year = $10500.
Therefore total usage for 2 years = $10500x2 = $21000.00 ( $21K )
But
Some of the better known photographers in SG ( amounst the top 10 ) are charging around $2K-3K A DAY This guy can charge $2k for 1 shot???
$2K for Print ad release for 1 image? Pls see above rate of top 10 photographers in SG
Shooting for web usage is amounst the lowest paid in the industry, but $1500 per year for 1 image, though unheard of, may still be possible.
For $5K you can get one of the best in Malaysia ( they're as good as their counter part here in SG but cheaper ) to shoot a whole day with full release and still got change to spare.
We ( my friends and I ) must be getting old, we can't remember or even heard of anyone paying $10.5K for one image, to be used for one year only, which was shot locally, a year ago.
So $10.5K for 1 image, for 1 year usage is considered a small amount for 1 PO?
This is the same for any trade, what is the connection between this and rights management?
Easier maybe, cheaper going by your cal. , no way. It can be done by some of the best much cheaper.
So, is that the underlining reason why you keep asking people to charge high? So that we can charge the same as in the US?
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for "perpetual rights for all markets and all mediums- $25 000 per image + costs" as was said by you and I'm also all for rights manangements.
But untill SG have
1) reach the level of union control like in the US
2) big company with big budget like in the US comes to SG
3) SG have a market as big as the US ( so that company will pay the US rate ),
I think it would be better to inform everyone here what is the normal practise rather than just what we hope the market to be.
If what you said is true, than you're either a very good marketeer or the client must be really uninformed. I wounder how many clients like that are there in SG.
Oh, by the way, there's a big flaw with your marketing and you're undercutting yourself.
To renew all usage for add. 1 year = $10500.
Therefore total usage for 2 years = $10500x2 = $21000.00 ( $21K )
But
Key word: perpetual rights for all markets and all mediums. and it's only for another $4000.00 more. Going by your cal. you're seriously undercutting yourself.
Thank you.
Though I don't shoot buildings as my main income, I'll pass your info to a friend of mine who shoots archtecture as his main income. From time to time his clients will fly him overseas just to shoot 1 building and he's not charging anywhere near $25K, yet.
I'll thank you on his behalf.
Cheesecake
Senior Member
If going by $, yeah lor, can't even fight with a young wedding photographer ;p but if going by expericence and skills ................ :bsmilie: .................... Oh no !!! did I just implied that he's undercutting the market :bigeyes: but he's charging much more than me 
Bottom line... charge whatever you deem fit. You can't waste time talking about rights management with every client that comes your way. It just doesn't work here. If you can afford to choose your clients, good on you. If not, then too bad but I hope you can make it one of these days.
Agree with Eikin. URA will never pay so much. Sometimes, they do not even acknowledge photographer's name. URA got the photos from organized competition, use it for free.
Well, must agree that those who get the meat are real lucky. We got to try harder... :dunno:
I had refrained from coming to CS because of how forumers like to bash people who shares something which they are not ready to accept. I come back after a few months, bravo, I see the culture still as negative and unforgiving as ever. Probably worse.
Why are you guys so uptight about the magic figure '25k'? It's just a reference figure for perpetual rights. It happens on a day-to-day basis with publishers. The reason why it's restricted to the publishers, and not photographers, is now clear as a sunny day.
I wrote a book and wanted to use one image of Chek Jawa. I'm sure many of you have beautiful images of Chek Jawa right? My company decided to use one of the published images, for all you know, taken by one of you guys here! For all you know, signed away the perpetual rights at 100 dollars nett. I was quoted 2.5k to use that photo. Just one photo of a sand dollar. That's all. 2.5k. My company paid.
Now imagine 10 other writers use that same photo. There you have it, 25k.
Just because you're not charging it, doesn't mean it's not happening. Sheesh.
Why are you guys so uptight about the magic figure '25k'? It's just a reference figure for perpetual rights. It happens on a day-to-day basis with publishers. The reason why it's restricted to the publishers, and not photographers, is now clear as a sunny day.
I wrote a book and wanted to use one image of Chek Jawa. I'm sure many of you have beautiful images of Chek Jawa right? My company decided to use one of the published images, for all you know, taken by one of you guys here! For all you know, signed away the perpetual rights at 100 dollars nett. I was quoted 2.5k to use that photo. Just one photo of a sand dollar. That's all. 2.5k. My company paid.
Now imagine 10 other writers use that same photo. There you have it, 25k.
Just because you're not charging it, doesn't mean it's not happening. Sheesh.
That is why I stick to my own outings. Sometimes, we can offer a helpful word or two. If others wish to find reason to squabble over it, its their problem.
TS ask a question and is seeking opinions. Everyone is free to give advice or their own opinion. I've questioned the "$25K issue" because I know that locally it's just not market practise to charge that amount just for 1 image no matter what kind of release is given. If this is in the US where the market is so much bigger than in SG, it's possible. But not locally.
Others may want to keep quiet and it's well within their rights, but some of us who know better should speak up. It would be a sad day for CS if all of us keep quiet when we see wrong info given freely here. Put yourself in the TS's shoe, you ask a question, someone give you a reply which may not be accurate but you don't know it. Would it serve you or CS any good to take that advice or would it be better if someone comes in and question that piece of advise?
Some of us posted for the sake of clearing up a possible misconception for the benifit of the TS as well as other readers here.
I don't consider this as being up tight or squabbling, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
Cheers
Others may want to keep quiet and it's well within their rights, but some of us who know better should speak up. It would be a sad day for CS if all of us keep quiet when we see wrong info given freely here. Put yourself in the TS's shoe, you ask a question, someone give you a reply which may not be accurate but you don't know it. Would it serve you or CS any good to take that advice or would it be better if someone comes in and question that piece of advise?
Some of us posted for the sake of clearing up a possible misconception for the benifit of the TS as well as other readers here.
I don't consider this as being up tight or squabbling, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
Cheers
BTW, this is not bashing someone just because of something were not ready to accept. It's correcting a misconception. The $25K is also not just a refercence point but an actual fig given as an advise.
But than again, you may look at it diff.ly
Cheers
But than again, you may look at it diff.ly
Cheers
yqt bro, though we've never met, I want you to know I have a lot of respect for you as a photographer, and an experienced professional from whatever interaction I have with you, one way or two way, here in CS.
If we can have a positive mindset, we'll look past the '25k' figure, and see what opportunities lies behind what ckuang is suggesting. I believe that with your experience, you will not say 'it's not possible' without credible first hand experience to back what you say. Unlike many people who simply shoot off their mouth in sarcasm pretending to be experts.
What I'm saying is this. If we simply quote our customers "Oh, we charge 25k per shot", most of us will have no phone calls and end up swatting flies behind the desk while surfing CS. But instead, what we can do is quote "The image is for a single use only. Based on our experience, most of our clients do not use an image more than once."
25k sounds ridiculous, but 250 per use isn't. Over a period of time, maybe one of these photos, or some of these photos is going to fetch 25k. That's not an impossibility.
If we all rights-managed our photos, many of us won't be exploited the way we did. For a professional industry to sustain, this has to be the way to go. Not price undercuts. Instead of competing with each other on how low we can get, we should instead be competing with each other on how best we can justify our high price: "Oh, 250 per shot may sound expensive, but I think you would really need just one good photo for a full page ad, instead of 100 useless ones and lots of wasted time, and an unhappy management."
Think about it. Here we are, quarreling amongst ourselves how 25k is ridiculous. If a potential client comes along and read CS (and trust me, there are many), then CS has just made 25k an impossible figure.
We shouldn't be advocating how 'no choice lah, we have to charge 200 if we want customers, everyone is charging so low.' We should instead be sharing with each other on what possible opportunities there is to maximise profits. No matter how ckuang's suggestion may seem unfeasible based on our immediate experience, we should instead try to see what opportunities lies in the reason behind his suggestion instead.
As I mentioned in my example, the publisher who bought the rights from the photographer is happily charging again and again for single use. Imagine if the photographer had signed an agreement to take a cut whenever the publisher sells single-use right, how much more would the photographer who shot the sand dollar would be making? That's our intention of sharing. To better the community. And in my opinion, shouldn't get the bashing and barrage of sarcasm I see here in the thread.
If we can have a positive mindset, we'll look past the '25k' figure, and see what opportunities lies behind what ckuang is suggesting. I believe that with your experience, you will not say 'it's not possible' without credible first hand experience to back what you say. Unlike many people who simply shoot off their mouth in sarcasm pretending to be experts.
What I'm saying is this. If we simply quote our customers "Oh, we charge 25k per shot", most of us will have no phone calls and end up swatting flies behind the desk while surfing CS. But instead, what we can do is quote "The image is for a single use only. Based on our experience, most of our clients do not use an image more than once."
25k sounds ridiculous, but 250 per use isn't. Over a period of time, maybe one of these photos, or some of these photos is going to fetch 25k. That's not an impossibility.
If we all rights-managed our photos, many of us won't be exploited the way we did. For a professional industry to sustain, this has to be the way to go. Not price undercuts. Instead of competing with each other on how low we can get, we should instead be competing with each other on how best we can justify our high price: "Oh, 250 per shot may sound expensive, but I think you would really need just one good photo for a full page ad, instead of 100 useless ones and lots of wasted time, and an unhappy management."
Think about it. Here we are, quarreling amongst ourselves how 25k is ridiculous. If a potential client comes along and read CS (and trust me, there are many), then CS has just made 25k an impossible figure.
We shouldn't be advocating how 'no choice lah, we have to charge 200 if we want customers, everyone is charging so low.' We should instead be sharing with each other on what possible opportunities there is to maximise profits. No matter how ckuang's suggestion may seem unfeasible based on our immediate experience, we should instead try to see what opportunities lies in the reason behind his suggestion instead.
As I mentioned in my example, the publisher who bought the rights from the photographer is happily charging again and again for single use. Imagine if the photographer had signed an agreement to take a cut whenever the publisher sells single-use right, how much more would the photographer who shot the sand dollar would be making? That's our intention of sharing. To better the community. And in my opinion, shouldn't get the bashing and barrage of sarcasm I see here in the thread.
Hi shinken, glad that you've posted the reply.
Yes I do agreed with you on what you've posted and that's what I'm already doing with my clients. My rates are not the higest but they are higher than some studios. I charge my clients what I feel is my worth though I know that I'll lose some jobs along the way but, clients are coming round to see thing my way and agreed with me. Well, once in a while I have to do some lower budget jobs for then as PR, but that's life.
I can see the purpose in rights management, rights management is after all a progression of the photography industry, and who don't want more money in the bank. But we have to do it one step at a time. Do it too fast and too hard and I won't be just swapping flies but my wife will be swapping my head. I'm slowly starting to add in rights management into my work and though clients are resisting, at least it's a start.
I guess the issue here, in this thread is not against rights management but the amount that is being suggested which, in today's context, is just not there yet, at least not for many studios locally. That being the case, my postings were to counter the possible misconception that may arise.
Look at it this way, how many clients are paying $2K for 1 shot to be used in-house? And how many photographers even dare to quote that kind of price for 1 shot to be used only for in-house? Even you only need to pay $2.5K for a final image for your book which is to be published.
Anyway, it was nice "chating" with you but I got to go home now but I'll come back here when I get the chance.
Cheers
Yes I do agreed with you on what you've posted and that's what I'm already doing with my clients. My rates are not the higest but they are higher than some studios. I charge my clients what I feel is my worth though I know that I'll lose some jobs along the way but, clients are coming round to see thing my way and agreed with me. Well, once in a while I have to do some lower budget jobs for then as PR, but that's life.
I can see the purpose in rights management, rights management is after all a progression of the photography industry, and who don't want more money in the bank. But we have to do it one step at a time. Do it too fast and too hard and I won't be just swapping flies but my wife will be swapping my head. I'm slowly starting to add in rights management into my work and though clients are resisting, at least it's a start.
I guess the issue here, in this thread is not against rights management but the amount that is being suggested which, in today's context, is just not there yet, at least not for many studios locally. That being the case, my postings were to counter the possible misconception that may arise.
Look at it this way, how many clients are paying $2K for 1 shot to be used in-house? And how many photographers even dare to quote that kind of price for 1 shot to be used only for in-house? Even you only need to pay $2.5K for a final image for your book which is to be published.
Anyway, it was nice "chating" with you but I got to go home now but I'll come back here when I get the chance.
Cheers
- Status
Similar threads
