Business Proposal

[jjeling]

I need some input on this if anyone is awake.....

Today I was approached by my golf club for some images to be published by Readers Digest magazine and internet.

There was a pole to rank the best public and private golf courses in the country and the club I work at was voted in at #7. There were over 600,000 people who voted in the pole and I am assuming there are many many more who read the magazine and view the internet publications as well, not everyone votes in these poles.

It sounds crazy, but our club does not have any quality images of their own of the golf course. I am literally the first person to ever really bring them high quality images in an artistic sense.

The general manager asked me if I could come up with 10-20 images, at 300dpi, and 10-30 megs in size(per Readers Digest). No problem. He also asked me how I think I should get paid to do this job. Hourly, or p/picture. I have decided that it would be p/picture however. I'm assuming Readers Digest wants the raw files so they can edit and do as they please in order to publicize them. This means all I have to do is take the pictures, and give them raw files, no time spent editing, which is why I chose p/picture.

With this in mind, I am also considering the number of people who will be viewing the pictures. I will be given full credit to the pictures, in both publications. The club will also be allowed to use the images to market themselves as they feel fit. Unfortunately, I also have to consider my experience. This would be my first "official" publication, which would be viewed by potentially millions of people.

With that in mind, my time and efforts are clearly going to be worth something. I've been considering $150 p/picture which equals out to $3000. I would probably consider going as low as $100, but that is a breaking point. My other alternative, which they did not mention is a flat rate of $3000. Meaning, I would take as many as need and spend as much time doing it as necessary. This is after all going to be potentially seen by millions of people and $3000 seems quite minor.

Anyone input from someone with experience with this would be greatly appreciated. Even if you don't have experience, please let me know what you think. It is my first "major" job and I could use some help deciphering my thoughts and rationale.


Thanks again guys. Wish me luck!

[AcadieLibre]

Well first of all wtg and good luck with it. I would personally float the flat rate idea by them. It works out for you and them in the end. You know what your final income off it will be and they know they can have all rights to the photos as long as your credited and they know ahead of time the final cost so they can budget it and for them it is a tax write off so it will cost them less than the 3 grand in the end anyway. Unless I am selling a framed photo at a gallery it is I found in my best interest to try and get a rate for the entire project. That being said you do have to sit down and work out the details on what both sides expect, the terms and all the other contractual crap that you should have in writing so everyone knows where they stand. Since you will be doing all the work it is a project and not just a photo shoot.

I think your price is fair, but I would always ask more than I want, like my dealer told me when I first started to price my work, you can bargain down but you will never bargain up. Offer 20 photos so they can use some, keep some on file for future promotions such as fliers and such. Always try to work with firm numbers, 10 - 20 photos is no good, you need a firm number. If they only use 4 they still have 16 for other uses. Have a set price for the project. If they don't want to go flat rate go per photo and you should be asking in the range of around $250.00 a photo if its on a per photo basis. Thats cheap for the exposure they will get from your photos. If it is a #7 ranked club by users it would be in their interest to have a solid well done portfolio they can use to promote the club and since golf courses rarely change looks the photos are good to them for 10 to 20 years depending on the change in foliage.I would also try and keep anything that would date the photos out of them. Anyway sure you will get other opinions this is only my

Also be open to negotiate and go in with a written proposal so they have something they can look over and you just look more professional. It is a good opportunity for you to get some national exposure so best of luck. Oh if they only want 10 photos or how many they decide on adjust the flat rate accordingly. It is not just the photo you are charging for, but time, use of your equipment, post processing and all the other things that go into a project such as this.

[tomorrowstreasures]

http://www.robmiracle.com/2009/08/22...raphy-pricing/

Rob Miracle mentioned he gets $3000 for releasing copyright per image --
Not sure when/where rob disclosed that info though. - (i did not take time to reread this article i am linking here. )

JJ- if the magazine gets to toy with your image, it is no longer your image. the copyright is to protect your image from the time you take the photo until like 70 years after your death - can't remember the exact amt of time. the protection means - that unless you release it, no one can alter, use, print, etc.

you are worth more than 100$ an image.

[Marko]

Nice JJ

A.L. makes many good points. I might go with a flat rate for X number of images.

One thing to be aware of is I would doubt RD would want RAW files (unless they told you otherwise). They likely want images that are ready to go. This may mean that you WILL have to spend time in PP. In all my recent pro work I've been asked for high quality colour corrected Jpegs at 300 DPI. Make sure you know the post processing expectations BEFORE you agree on the deal.

Hope that helps - Marko

[tirediron]

One thing to be aware of is I would doubt RD would want RAW files (unless they told you otherwise). They likely want images that are ready to go.

Almost all publications want print-ready images. The only thing they're likely to do is to crop them to suit the particular spot in they have in mind. That said, DO. NOT. GIVE. UP. RAW. IMAGES. EVER!!

[tomorrowstreasures]

Almost all publications want print-ready images. The only thing they're likely to do is to crop them to suit the particular spot in they have in mind. That said, DO. NOT. GIVE. UP. RAW. IMAGES. EVER!!

Building up my port, i gave away every raw image i took. so, we are talking THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of susan images floating about ... most all of people .... but then again, they are very much beginner images .... hmmmm.

[AcadieLibre]

If the price is right they can have the RAW files, it comes down to what they are willing to pay. I sell concert images in RAW to a few mags but the pay is enough that they could have my camera along with the RAW images as far as I am concerned. It all comes to what they are willing to pay, so NEVER is not in my vocabulary when it comes to making money. The shoot I was in Montreal for when I had my mishap, I sold the RAW images to the Bands management and it is enough to pay my mortgage for a couple of months so I see no reason not to sell the RAW files. I go to all the work to get the job and then say no and lose out on the money over the RAW image file? Must be nice to pass up thousands of dollars over what image file they want. Once I sell the image they have the right to use it however they want if it is in the contract and again if the money is enough. If you pay my $250 a photo you likely get a JPEG, you pay me $2,000.00 an image you are more than welcome to the RAW files.

[tomorrowstreasures]

If the price is right they can have the RAW files, it comes down to what they are willing to pay. I sell concert images in RAW to a few mags but the pay is enough that they could have my camera along with the RAW images as far as I am concerned. It all comes to what they are willing to pay, so NEVER is not in my vocabulary when it comes to making money. The shoot I was in Montreal for when I had my mishap, I sold the RAW images to the Bands management and it is enough to pay my mortgage for a couple of months so I see no reason not to sell the RAW files. I go to all the work to get the job and then say no and lose out on the money over the RAW image file? Must be nice to pass up thousands of dollars over what image file they want. Once I sell the image they have the right to use it however they want if it is in the contract and again if the money is enough. If you pay my $250 a photo you likely get a JPEG, you pay me $2,000.00 an image you are more than welcome to the RAW files.

question - once you release the file, are you then giving up rights to your own image?

[Marko]

Interesting A.L. - I prefer to send JPG because i have some control over how the sucker looks. I'd prefer to send .PSD over RAW for the same reason.

That said, if they want RAW I'll send RAW...actually straight RAW files are less work.

Just curious A.L., do you also send an XMP file with the RAW? Or do they get a raw RAW (LOL) My issue is quality or perceived quality. RAW files need to be worked before they look good.

[AcadieLibre]

Marko I get very, very few requests for RAW images but on occasion I do. It is usually when they want to use the photos on a CD cover or other promotional material where they have a Graphic Designer hired to do the work. When I do any graphic designing I prefer the RAW file also that way I can manipulate it to fulfill my vision of the end product. So it is rare but I am willing to give them the RAW file like I said if the price is right, most want the JPEG and I prefer to sell the JPEG but like I said on rare occasions they require the RAW file but most take the JPEG just on price alone. I have had requests for photos to be a few different formats and I am willing to accommodate what they require.