Re: [Leica] Re: Korda sues

[Donal Philby <donalphilby@earthlink.net>]

Austen,
I understand your position re "we done paid fer that."  Indeed, that is
certainly a way of doing business.  Many publications and corporations
are working as much as possible to get such done.  And in some cases it
makes sense.  I am about to start a project for a doctor's buying club. 
They are currently using Stock photos that they have seen elsewhere
since buying limited rights to them and don't want to feel generic.  So
I am being hired to shot a bunch of people pics in doc offices and their
office and I will bill them heavily, but will have nothing when I
finish.  They will get unlimited, exclusive rights.  

But in many instances, the subsidiary "stock" sales often keeps me in
business in the lean times and provides a stabilitzing effect on my (and
most photographers') income stream.

Everything is what we negotiate.  If you get a job and are happy with
the money and want to give up any additional income, that is certainly
your right and I would defend your right to conduct business that way. 
But most of us know that without additional income from extended use
rights, we are not for long going to stay in business.

A lot of the industrial stuff I have shot is valuable often just because
it is difficult to get access to, say, refineries.  Indeed, I have
recently been told by two stock agencies that their current files of
industial images are drying up because of corporate demands for
exclusivity.  The irony is that when the same corporation suddenly need
a stock photo for another brochure, there may no be one available for
them.  Similarily, the major news magazines have restricted their
assignments in the last several years and are now finding that they
can't find stock because no one had the access to situations that news
mag assignments give you.   So photographers are double losers, no
assignment income, no stock income residuals.

One of the rationales for the use rights for photographers is that it is
an incentive to create great work, because if the image work for the
advertiser, the campaign will extend, grow bigger, etc., and the
photographer is rewarded for his/her talent and contribution.  

The other thing is that, contrary to your statement,  we DO often pay
for what we use.  Architects (naval and otherwise) charge for the number
of boats or houses built from a set of custom plans.  Software is for
one computer, or the fees go up.  

It is based on value received.  If you call me for an estimate, I'm
going to ask you some questions.  Do you need billboard rights?  How
about broadcast rights in China or Mongolia?  Do you need web use?  Do
you need web archive rights, only display rights for a week.  Or perhaps
only for your small brochure, 5,000 copy run.  Would you prefer to pay
for worldwide exclusive rights forever, or just for the brochure rights
if that is all you need?  

I charge a lot more for greater useage.  Conversely, I charge far less
for limited use by my client.  It works both ways.  What if you went to
the store and they only had rice by the ton?  Photographers give clients
the ability to buy a kilo.  Then buy another kilo next week when they
get hungry again.  Or not buy any if they don't like the texture.

And as an artist (well, okay, give me the benefit of the doubt! ) I need
(psychologically and materially) to retain the rights in order to stay
in business.  

To understand payment for use rights you must move from trade union
factory work mentality and consider value received for what is, in the
end, not something mass produced, but something unique to the
photographer, no matter what the client's contribution.  

Trust me on this.  I've owned an ad agency and hired photographers--and
no matter what images I or an art director started out wanting, the
photographer ends up with something usually far different--virtually no
matter what level of involvement we might contribute.  It is the nature
of the creative process and the uniqueness of each of our
personalities.  

The artist is valued highly in less "civilized" societies.  The way we,
in this society, show appreciation, is to fork over the money. 

Trust me on this, too:  I like to be appreciated.

donal
- -- 
__________
Donal Philby
San Diego
www.donalphilby.com