Saturday, November 7, 2015

Working For Free - Commentary and Responses to Selected Comments



(This is the third article in a three part series)

Since so many people have come into this discussion on David's site, I thought I'd highlight the sentiments of several posts, and respond to them/what they've written.The reason for this is that there are many perspectives to this, and almost all of them are either flawed, or fatally flawed. So, I'll show quotes, and then provide a response:

(Continued after the Jump)


"...4 or 5 bands have called and asked for pricing and ... and I said "...its on me", ... it would be a great way to get a couple done to get into that market...."
Yes, you'll get into that market being known as "free". The record labels will use your work in all sorts of marketing, PR, and advertising, CD labels, and so on and so forth, for free. More profits to the music labels - don't you think musicians have screwed themselves enough over time and given the farm away to the music companies? If you're not sure, read this blog post I did and listen to how Elton John fought to fix his early career mistake.
"Free is good (for now)! I just did a free shot for a young actress who is trying to make ends meet as many starving artists do...It was great to practice my Strobist techniques and not feel super pressured. It was a valuable experience for for me because the lighting was challenging."
As to that starving artist thing, I wrote a few pieces - The Proud Starving Artist ; 10 Ways to Remain a Starving Artist. Romanticizing being a "starving artist" isn't really a good thing. It's nice when you're sipping a chai tea latte with your beret in the local java house listening to beatnicks recite their slam-poetry wearing Birkenstocks and having not showered in 8 days, but other than that, it's a bad idea. Doing a trade-for-prints/trade-for-CD deal is what c-grade models and photographers do who almost never become pro-level photographers, unless maybe you're in Los Angeles, where there are thousands of models.

One commenter said it well in response to the concepts outlined above:

"In my world for example, the idea of TFP (Time for Photos) is a joke. "Models" don't value your skill and think the equation is stacked in their favour. Photographers don't grow in the one area that matters most - the confidence of knowing what they do is inherently valuable."
"Before reading this, I had actually thought of the idea of shooting portraits for my neighbors for some Christmas portraits on my time."
This isn't such a bad idea, especially since having good neighbor relations is a good thing. BUT, next might be the invite to the wedding/mitzvah, and the suggestion "hey, why don't you bring your camera, we'd love to have some photos, and since those that you did of the family were so great, we thought we could save some money - did you know how expensive these things are? - by just asking you to bring your camera." Now, you're working that day, and some wedding/mitzvah photographer in your community is out a few grand. And, when you say "gosh, that was a few years ago, I charge for these things now..." the lame response will be "come on, we're neighbors, and you're going to be there anyway." Yes, being there as a guest is one thing, as a working photographer it's completely different. Make absolutely certain that you tell your neighbor that this is a one-time deal, or, better yet, knowing what your neighbor does for a living, ask for an exchange of services.
"This is exactly the push I need to go ahead and do something I've been thinking about doing, but was worried about the hit my perceived value as a photographer would take."
Yes, your perceived value will take a hit. I PROMISE. More importantly, your own feelings of self-worth and self-respect may take a precipitous dive, and it will have a (possibly sub-conscious) effect too.
"This is a great back door business plan that I for one plan on implementing."
90% of all businesses fail in the first two years. This business plan all but ensures you'll be among that 90%. Since unemployment is at a 34 year high (Half-million jobs vanish as economy deteriorates, 12/5/08), you might want to head down to the unemployment line and see about filing in advance of your plans' failing.
"I had also thought of approaching the local humane society not too long ago (have you seen most of the pics on petfinder.com??) ...taking photos of dogs and cats that nobody owns -- man, talk about NO pressure!"
Ok, I think this idea falls into that of one of the few that might work. However, this suggests that you might want to go into the field of pet photography (a lucrative one) (check this link - for information on how it can earn you $110k a year shooting twice a week), but that would be a part of that/a photographers' "giving back to the community" efforts. Or, the local humane society should/could have an arrangement with a place like PETCO (Pet Photography At PETCO) that would be a part of PETCO's giving back.
"Recently, I offered to shoot one of my company's employee celebrations for fun, and the results were very rewarding -- I got access to shoot a major corporate event (300+ people) for a Fortune 500 company, got recognized for my photos on a national level throughout the company w/ over 25k hits on the site the pictures were hosted on, and even got an award and free photo printer for my effort. All for only wanting some event-shoot practice. Not bad, considering I could have just gone and shmoozed instead like everyone else (I hate shmoozing.)."
A free photo printer? Let me guess - it was probably one of the dozen printers that the company got for free when they ordered the last batch of CPU's from Dell or HP? "I got access" ? Weren't you going to go there already? As someone who has shot for over 1/2 of the Fortune 500 companies, I can tell you that I've earned $1k (and more) shooting company picnics, holiday parties, and so forth. It's not glamourous, but it helps pay the bills. That is, unless you have someone willing to do it for a clip-art-inkjet-printed award and a free printer. And who insured your personal gear against spilled sodas or any other accidents? Sorry to sound so grumpy here, but this is just a bad idea.
"Exactly what I've been doing. I have a lucrative day job but I can't do it forever...I've been picking and choosing photography projects ...and get me some much needed experience...and I've been doing them for free. And loving every minute of it!"
That lucrative day job that you can't do forever? Guess what? You can't do photography for free forever either if that's what pays the bills, regardless of if you're "loving every minute of it"! It's called "You could be doing 'self-assignments', where you go out and try things out in your evenings and weekends."
"Every job I've ever gotten through photography has been through word of mouth or from someone seeing my work personally... and all because I usually did something for free."
This would then, have people passing the word "hey, that's the guy that will shoot for free. /Congrats! You’ve become the guy that works for free. Expect to hear from buyers who know: “Call him - maybe you'll just need to buy him lunch!"
"I've been doing some portraits for friends for fun, helping people get new facebook pictures and getting to experiment with lighting, new techniques, new gear, and so on...Plus when you start putting up shots on facebook, you start workin' the connections and offers may start coming in, friends of friends wanting shots done too, but like you said, that's just gravy."
Here's a video piece I did on this subject (From Intern to Executive - Your Corporate Photo ) that talks about doing this, and it's something to bill for. Otherwise, the offers will be for or come from people who want things for "fun" and "for free". Yes, then friends of friends will want them - again, for free. This type of work, for many people, is meat-and-potatoes bill-paying work, not the "gravy" for someone with a day job.
"I always cringe a bit when I hear the notion of doing solid work for free because, if done in mass, the law of supply and demand indicates that number of paid gigs will be suppressed and exacerbate the current recession."
Agreed.
"I am by no means a great photographer, although I can create images that help sell my clients goods. One of the reasons that I was able to build up a client base was my own feeling around the essence of the work, that I was being hired to perform a service and not creating "art". My intuition in this has built my business, as keeping the costs low for my clients has enabled them to increase their advertising placements, as the per ad cost was lower, which in turn has led to more work for me. "
Hmm… Not sure about your general answer here, since this dude might actually be making a good living, given his geographic area and what his costs are. He might be like those furniture studio shooters in the South who have so refined costs that everyone is making money, but it sure isn’t “art”, but it does take imagination and effort! Yes, more low-paying work for you, and in turn, the business has more money to buy more ads (at going rates, of course) and grow their business since they don't have to pay you much. What you're talking about - perform a service - is akin to the commoditization of photography that has taken hold of the stock photo industry. Your intuition is off, and I am guessing you're not interested in turning it on and straightening it out. Why bother? The businesses you are doing cut-rate work for are more likely to prosper at your expense. That's akin to the sentiment 'I take a small loss on every job, but I make it up in volume.' I wrote A Triumph of Hope Over Experience, where I write "Remember when the client said 'I don't have much money, but if you'll do this one at this price, I will make it up to you with the next one'?" When they can afford a great photographer (since you state 'I am by no means a great photographer'), they won't call you, they'll call a great one, and pay them accordingly.
"I'm also volunteering my services for my church. Easy stuff - little events, staff photos, etc - but with a 1000+ member church, somebody's bound to ask somebody for a photographer sometime, and I'm hoping somebody remembers my name."
I see the value in this point - if it's done from a marketing standpoint. Perhaps you should ask for a trade in the church bulletin, where pictures of the last coffee klatch after services has a "Photos by John Smith - www.JohnSmith.com", and a small ad that parishioners can read on the back page of the bulletin during the pastor’s rambling sermon, "for family portraits, or wedding photography like that in this bulletin, consider John Smith - www.JohnSmith.com".
"I am an amateur who is now the company’s in house photographer...I got this because I shoot some corporate-charity work for fun, the company and charity liked the pictures, then I was asked to photograph a Director (which I decided to do for free), and on the back of that I became our in-house photographer...I suspect many people could blow me out of the water photographically, but the guys I beat off the role for the company pictures might have been ‘pros’ but they were also ‘poor’."
Nice. You're essentially admitting that you've cost a professional photographer assignments, contributing to, as you put it, they're being "poor." Corporate charity work is lucrative work, and many a photographer earns a living doing just that type of work. Then, you're doing a free portrait of a corporate Director, thus costing another photographer a portrait assignment.
"Two days ago I made the same deal, since I love having my day job (IT freak) and my night work (Photo freak). I am passionate with photography and I prefer working without constraints (meaning that 99,9% of my projects are self funded) , this attitude gave me the opportunity to gain "access all areas" and make backstage photos,"
Fortunately, one of the things about location photography is that you can't outsource it. "IT freaks" on the other hand? They're a dime a dozen and being outsourced faster than you can say "f8 and be there." When India's night work takes over your day job, and you're left with empty server racks and a personal budget that limits your bandwitch/Internet connection to dialup, don't bother trying to get into the field of photography, especially trading to "gain 'access to all areas'" and so on, since that's already been ruined by others (The Business of Rock & Roll Photography - 5/30/08).
"I'm a young amateur photographer, still in school, and I'm just about to start doing this: take photos of the people I want to for free to have fun and build a portfolio I can be proud of. Money? Later. Reading your writing made me more secure about what I'm about todo."
Excellent. One more amateur student photographer emboldened to care not about money. That's a nice "starving student/starving artist" badge of honor, but about 6 months after graduation, when Sallie Mae comes a callin' for the beginning of the payback for the student loans that got you that degree, money will become much more important to you. Then again, when you have to buy a home and start a family too, "evil-money" will rear its' ugly head. That security you feel for what you're about to do is only because mom and dad are/were paying your bills during school and you can afford to work for free. That's nothing to be proud of - a portfolio built upon free assignments that may well have cost others the monthly rent.
"this summer and fall shot Metallica, Mastodon and Status Quo amongst others. Still free (well kind of, free for myself as my day job would have been the client), but now I'm published in major magazines with a credit for shooting Metallica."
"will work for photo credit" is one of the more asinine mentalities that is pervasive today. This is the type of post I told David he'd be encouraging, and thankfully, it made it past his moderation for all to see. Last July I wrote - Spec Comparative to Salary, where I detail that for many years, I was hired by Rolling Stone and it’s sister publication Us Weekly to cover concerts and celebrities on Capitol Hill and at the White House. Then, along came a “photographer”, who also had a design business where he did some of the graphics for concerts in town. He would then frequently shop them around, because he wanted to see his photos in Rolling Stone. After a year or so, when one of the annual festivals came around and I called about my regular assignment, the editor said “I am not assigning it this year, we’re getting spec work from {so and so} and we won’t be needing you.” Poof – away goes a $250 guarantee against usage, plus expenses, plus my ability to generate revenue off those images. Had I said “oh, I’ll do it for spec, just get me a credential”, I would be not only subsidizing a media conglomerate with between $250-$600 in expenses, where they would only ending up paying the $150-$175 for the use of the one image, meaning that, in a best case scenario, I would loose $600 minus the $150 for the “privilege” of shooting the assignment, IF they used mine. He continued to work this way, and among his poor decisions, was one to drive over a hundred miles each way to a concert near Richmond, Virginia, for free.
"I agree with what you say. I'm recently graduated from a photography school here in Paris and since graduating have been shooting like crazy, mostly for free. What do I get from it? Experience. I'm still learning, every single shoot without fail I do I come away with some lesson learnt. My book improves on an almost monthly basis, I'm making contacts, working on an exhibition series and know that once the economy turns around I'll be in a much better place than had I sat on my ass waiting for the phone to ring with paid assignments."
That’s some great school in Paris where you DIDN’T get experience!!
In order to get clients, you don't "sit on [your] ass waiting for the phone to ring with paid assignments", you market yourself to people who are willing to pay. Yet, contributing to the mentality of shooting for free as a good thing means there will be far fewer paying assignments to go around. Those contacts you're making? They're contacts that know you as "free and cheap", and not someone worthy of investing in valuable/assigning an important and lucrative assignment photography. C'est la vie.

Again, more broad-brush mis-interpretations of what David and Chase intended when they wrote their pieces. Not much more to say about that:
1) "I'm an amateur photographer and as such see that I have no choice but to work for free if I am to progress in photography. To hear that you as a pro feel it beneficial is refreshing. "

2) "As a student who plans on entering the business in the next couple of years, I Find your post to be very inspirational...This post has been another nudge in the right direction, and personally I give much more weight to what I read on this blog and Chase's as well..."

3) "Between your comments and chase's about really shooting WHAT you want and worrying about the immediate cash payback later on is very inspirational...Personally, since I'm just a beginner, I NEED the cash, but it's always important to not forget why we take photos: cuz we love it."
Then there's:
"PIXELS are FREE!!!!!!! I just shot 13 guys from High School , all for FREE to help them out in a "Man Pageant" . The Pageant is to help raise money for a high school junior with Lukiemia. I did all their individual portraits in a tuxedo , shot on black. Then I designed the poster for the show. I had my printer donate them for FREE. They are selling them to raise more money. Tonight is the show and yes I'm shooting it like a fashion show. I will post the poster on flicker for everyone to see. FREE PIXELS & WARM FUZZY FEELINGS. PRICELESS"
No, actually, pixels are NOT free, but thanks for contributing to that mis-information campaign that clients always promote,(ie: "can't you just copy the files to a CD and give it to me?" No, I can't, unless you can handle huge raw files on your office computer, which you can't.) Further, cameras/camera shutters have a lifespan of a few hundred-thousand frames. Divide the number of frames you shot for the 13 people by the cost of the camera, and you'll see they weren't free. Digital cameras have a lifespan of about 18 months. Two $3k cameras during that time equates to a depreciation of about $333.33 a month. This doesn't factor in the massaging (otherwise known as ‘post-production’) of those pixels in that computer of yours with Photoshop. That's not to say that doing work for a pageant for a junior high school with the proceeds going to a cure for Lukiemia isn't a good thing, it is, and while you likely did not take work from a local event photographer (but you might have), to say what you did was "free" is, in point-of-fact, inaccurate. What's "PRICELESS" is your misguided beliefs about what it takes to be in business. Oh, and what's also "PRICELESS" is the amount of money you can deduct from your taxes for your charitable deeds - zero.
"in today's digital world, your up-front costs are close to nothing. 10 years ago, shooting for free meant eating the cost of film, processing and maybe 'Roids unless the client paid your costs. Today, all a free shoot costs you is your time."
See above - no need to repeat myself.
"I just recently asked a local Congressman if I could do some free potraits. I don't have a lot in my portfolio, and would like to do something like that. I just have to wait for him to get out of session in DC. Then, everything is a GO, they loved the idea."
Let's see - a little research tells me that, If you're zip code is 61115, and you're speaking about your Congressman, and that would be Rep. Donald Manzullo. I see from your profile photo, you are posing with a 4x5. You know those cameras aren't cheap - but they're also antiquated and used by just about no one these days. That portrait, used by Manzullo, will be a part of his brochures, website, and campaign ads and so forth. You can see here that in the 2007-2008 cycle, he raised $1.3 million dollars, with $79k coming from the healthcare sector, $56k from insurance groups, $56k coming from the banking industry, and top contributors like United Technologies ($14k) and AFLAC ($10k) all ponying up, thanks, in no small part, to the smiling face of the good Congressman you depict in your free photo. Congressmen (and Congresswomen) pay all the time for professional portraits, but now there's one less paying portrait, and more money in his/the Congressman’s coffers to help out the banking industry, since he is on the House Financial Affairs committee. Well done.
" I have been a free photographer for some time now....As soon as I quit trying to earn money I had offers and requests coming at me from all directions. It has always been my intent to use my abilities to bless others and help those who could use my photographs to benefit the world or their business.... So often money is the measure of success and I really need to to work on getting my thinking away from that."
"...As soon as I quit trying to earn money I had offers and requests coming at me from all directions...." OMFG. Of course you did, just like a drunk girl in a bar who hops up onto the slippery oak bar-top with a low skirt and no underwear and says "if you see anything you like, I'll be in the back offering it for free..." and then she has a line-up for the back room. No surprises there. You're not "bless[ing] others" in the photo community, it's your approach that is a curse on the photographic community and the scourge of much of what is good and right with the mission of photography. What would you say to the 500k+ folks who lost their jobs last month?? And where are those new cameras, computers, printers and supplies coming from??
"I am a photo student and we get the "this would be a great experience for you and will help you build your portfolio...and we will even...(just wait for it)...give you a photo credit," offers all the time. We get them from people who can and should pay, but someone usually takes it for free. "
Yes, there will always be someone willing to do it for free. Check into "How to Do It Without Ruining it for Others" for some insights. Just because the bar girl above is giving herself/’something’ away for free, doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. It appears your perspective is that you're not interested in doing free work like that, and that's a good thing.
"You can see why this can very easily get very complicated - and dangerous. Some people - such as Chase Jarvis - know how to navigate these things. And make sure that if that “free” awesome assignment somehow become a hit - he’ll be able to profit in it - and not get caught feeling left out. "
Yes, Chase, and a handful of others, do know how to safely navigate these waters. Chase, et al, are the ocean-going vessels out in the stormy seas, and the vast majority of people reading and LEARNING from David's blog post are the cabin cruiser/rowboats out on choppy seas, ill-equiped to weather the storm or navigate the waters. Yet, with bravado, they will set sail, Gilligan and the rest of the crew.

Here's a well-spent 3 minutes with Harlan Ellison to wrap this up. I am purposefully putting it at the bottom of ALL THREE pieces to improve the chances that you watch it at-least once:


THE REST OF THE SERIES:
PART 1 - Professional Photographers vs. "Hobby" Status (i.e. Working for Free)
PART 3 - Working For Free - Commentary and Responses to Selected Comments

RELATED LINKS:

From several perspectives, I've written extensively on this subject. Here are several links to those pieces:

A Triumph of Hope Over Experience
A Collection of Inconvenient Facts
Free Not Working for Thee?
Businessweak - Amateurs vs. Pros?
Just Say "No" Just So Oversimplified
Speculative Photography - An Introduction

We also wrote all about working for free for places like US Presswire - US Presswire - Introduction.
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
Posted by at
Labels: ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)