Posts Tagged ‘state park’
The Real Value of Your Photography
26
Aug
2012
It’s nothing new in the world of photography to receive requests from hundreds of people over the course of a year if they are allowed use your image for free on various projects. While for the novice, this might be flattering, for any even halfway serious photographer it’s the worst kind of request. "Well, aren't you glad I asked and didn't just steal it? You just have to give it to me." — No, I don’t.
Honestly, I am actually more insulted when they ask to use an image for free than when just taking it. That way, I would at least have gotten a settlement claim out of it.
From time to time, a company or advertising agency licenses an image by going through the whole process with the required professionalism we photographers are thankful for. Clear terms, fair compensation for our work. Both sides happy. Very easy.
Apparently, this method proves to be rare, even to the largest companies out there… but read on.
I was recently asked by the [company’s product] OS Partnerships & Business Development team to license my image “Firestorm” to use in their upcoming OS update as a wallpaper choice and later on, in the same ways, in the [company’s product] browser and promotional material. I was beyond excited, not because of a huge check I saw in my near future but for such a large company recognizing my work. A company I trust with my daily online searches, personal data and much more; the company that probably knows more about me than I’d like to.
Fast forward to the licensing agreement I was asked to sign: NO COMPENSATION! Way to go, [company]. While I didn’t plan on retiring after licensing an image with [company], I was expecting at least a fair amount of compensation for a “Give us your image and we do whatever the f**k we want” kind of license.
After some serious consideration and various attempts, I could restrain myself and instead wrote a, what I think to be, moderate reply stating the following:
Dear Mrs. ___________,
I am not willing to accept the licensing agreement under the terms stated.
First off, when did [company] become a charitable organization?
Last time I checked, [company]'s yearly profit for the financial year 2011 was roughly US$ 10 billion with its stock price currently being the third highest in history. [Company] is not a small family owned business thinking everything on the internet is free. They should know better. Licensing images for wallpaper use always involves compensation. Apple, as well as Microsoft, paid the photographers for wallpapers they used in their operating systems well. (http://www.petapixel.com/2012/08/03/the-most-viewed-photo-of-all-time/ and http://www.petapixel.com/2010/04/06/the-photographers-behind-the-wallpapers/)
Why is [company] trying to claim usage rights without paying a fair amount?
I will not let my image go to a multi-million dollar S&P500 company for free. After all, it was you who approached me to license and use my photo in your browser operating system and possibly more than that, not vice versa.
[My licensing terms inserted here.]
In all honesty, would you be willing to work for free? Well, I certainly won't. Here's some further reading material, covering this exact situation: http://photoprofessionals.wordpress.com/
Looking forward to hearing back from you.
To me, it doesn’t come as a surprise I haven’t heard back from them and quite honestly, I don’t expect any kind of answer. The licensing contract they sent was a slap in the face of any photographer.
I ask you, my dear readers (who didn’t have a lot to read from me lately — sorry for that), would you be willing to work for free? Disregarding the industry. I blackened out the company’s name as I do not want start a bashing campaign or anything. I just needed to vent, inform people that even the largest tech companies out there with multi-billion dollar profits do NOT value the work of photographers.
That said, don’t sell yourself short. If I have learned one thing over the years, this is it.
I’d rather have no money in my pockets than knowing someone is falsely promoting their product with my image without paying a fair amount. No exorbitant high amount, a fair compensation.
Thanks for reading my ramblings and feel free to share with your friends, amateur and professional photographers alike, your grandma who might get a kick out of this or the advertising agency of your choice.
David
26
Aug
2012
It’s nothing new in the world of photography to receive requests from hundreds of people over the course of a year if they are allowed use your image for free on various projects. While for the novice, this might be flattering, for any even halfway serious photographer it’s the worst kind of request. "Well, aren't you glad I asked and didn't just steal it? You just have to give it to me." — No, I don’t.
Honestly, I am actually more insulted when they ask to use an image for free than when just taking it. That way, I would at least have gotten a settlement claim out of it.
From time to time, a company or advertising agency licenses an image by going through the whole process with the required professionalism we photographers are thankful for. Clear terms, fair compensation for our work. Both sides happy. Very easy.
Apparently, this method proves to be rare, even to the largest companies out there… but read on.
I was recently asked by the [company’s product] OS Partnerships & Business Development team to license my image “Firestorm” to use in their upcoming OS update as a wallpaper choice and later on, in the same ways, in the [company’s product] browser and promotional material. I was beyond excited, not because of a huge check I saw in my near future but for such a large company recognizing my work. A company I trust with my daily online searches, personal data and much more; the company that probably knows more about me than I’d like to.
Fast forward to the licensing agreement I was asked to sign: NO COMPENSATION! Way to go, [company]. While I didn’t plan on retiring after licensing an image with [company], I was expecting at least a fair amount of compensation for a “Give us your image and we do whatever the f**k we want” kind of license.
After some serious consideration and various attempts, I could restrain myself and instead wrote a, what I think to be, moderate reply stating the following:
Dear Mrs. ___________,
I am not willing to accept the licensing agreement under the terms stated.
First off, when did [company] become a charitable organization?
Last time I checked, [company]'s yearly profit for the financial year 2011 was roughly US$ 10 billion with its stock price currently being the third highest in history. [Company] is not a small family owned business thinking everything on the internet is free. They should know better. Licensing images for wallpaper use always involves compensation. Apple, as well as Microsoft, paid the photographers for wallpapers they used in their operating systems well. (http://www.petapixel.com/2012/08/03/the-most-viewed-photo-of-all-time/ and http://www.petapixel.com/2010/04/06/the-photographers-behind-the-wallpapers/)
Why is [company] trying to claim usage rights without paying a fair amount?
I will not let my image go to a multi-million dollar S&P500 company for free. After all, it was you who approached me to license and use my photo in your browser operating system and possibly more than that, not vice versa.
[My licensing terms inserted here.]
In all honesty, would you be willing to work for free? Well, I certainly won't. Here's some further reading material, covering this exact situation: http://photoprofessionals.wordpress.com/
Looking forward to hearing back from you.
To me, it doesn’t come as a surprise I haven’t heard back from them and quite honestly, I don’t expect any kind of answer. The licensing contract they sent was a slap in the face of any photographer.
I ask you, my dear readers (who didn’t have a lot to read from me lately — sorry for that), would you be willing to work for free? Disregarding the industry. I blackened out the company’s name as I do not want start a bashing campaign or anything. I just needed to vent, inform people that even the largest tech companies out there with multi-billion dollar profits do NOT value the work of photographers.
That said, don’t sell yourself short. If I have learned one thing over the years, this is it.
I’d rather have no money in my pockets than knowing someone is falsely promoting their product with my image without paying a fair amount. No exorbitant high amount, a fair compensation.
Thanks for reading my ramblings and feel free to share with your friends, amateur and professional photographers alike, your grandma who might get a kick out of this or the advertising agency of your choice.
David
Mono Lake Was Just The Beginning – Stop California State Park Closures
04
Dec
2011
This May, California government announced to close 70 of its 278 state parks, in order to save $22 million. The parks on the closure list represent thousands of acres of land, recreation areas and wildlife reserves, which are an essential part of our ecosystem.
One of the parks on the list was the bizarre, yet beautiful Mono Lake State Reservation area, pictured below during a crisp August sunrise over the calcium-carbonate spires rising from the interaction of freshwater springs and alkaline lake water, just east of Yosemite National Park and the Eastern Sierra Nevada.
Mono Lake, which covers roughly 65 square miles, is considered one of North America’s oldest lakes with a probable age of over 1 million years. Aside from the beauty these alien-like tufa-towers provide, Mono Lake is an essential part for the well being of our ecosystem. Each year, as many as 65,000 California gulls are hatched at the shoreline of the lake, making Mono Lake the second largest breeding colony behind Utah’s Great Salt Lake. Additionally, the waters of the lake are home to 4 to 6 trillion brine shrimp – a species only to be found at Mono Lake.
So why the past tense? This past Friday, December 2nd 2011, it was announced that the Mono Lake State Reservation area was taken off the closure list. What a relief. But does it really change much? Will it have an impact? Why did this first success not go viral? How can I help?
I am not from California – heck, I’m not even from the US. So some might wonder why keeping those parks is so important to me. Well, the answer is pretty easy. Because the landscapes, historic structures and sights need to be protected for future generations – the reason they were created in the first place. I’m not here to preach, far from it, actually. It would just be sad to see these beautiful areas gone for good. The old saying, “You won’t miss it until it is gone” certainly applies here for many, it seems. There was no public uproar (at least none that I remember), it wasn’t on every station but I do believe that it needs to be, more people need to know about this, more people need to care about the lands in danger. I am sure most know everything about the divorce of Kim Kardashian though. (Add cynical commentary here.)
Just a couple of hours ago, I came across a project that really grabbed my eye and is the reason for this blog entry. The guys behind “The First 70” require funding for their documentary film about the state park closures.
With passion and a lot of commitment, they want to show the beauty of the parks in all their glory, as they think, and I fully agree with them, the whole case didn’t quite grab the media outreach it deserved.
Without further ado, please watch the trailer below and consider helping them out by either contributing at or by sharing this blog entry, the link to the trailer and other info across the interwebs.
The First 70 Trailer from Heath Hen Films on Vimeo.
For a full list of parks on the closure list:
http://my.calparks.org/site/PageServer?pagename=2011ParkClosures
Thank you.
04
Dec
2011
This May, California government announced to close 70 of its 278 state parks, in order to save $22 million. The parks on the closure list represent thousands of acres of land, recreation areas and wildlife reserves, which are an essential part of our ecosystem.
One of the parks on the list was the bizarre, yet beautiful Mono Lake State Reservation area, pictured below during a crisp August sunrise over the calcium-carbonate spires rising from the interaction of freshwater springs and alkaline lake water, just east of Yosemite National Park and the Eastern Sierra Nevada.
Mono Lake, which covers roughly 65 square miles, is considered one of North America’s oldest lakes with a probable age of over 1 million years. Aside from the beauty these alien-like tufa-towers provide, Mono Lake is an essential part for the well being of our ecosystem. Each year, as many as 65,000 California gulls are hatched at the shoreline of the lake, making Mono Lake the second largest breeding colony behind Utah’s Great Salt Lake. Additionally, the waters of the lake are home to 4 to 6 trillion brine shrimp – a species only to be found at Mono Lake.
So why the past tense? This past Friday, December 2nd 2011, it was announced that the Mono Lake State Reservation area was taken off the closure list. What a relief. But does it really change much? Will it have an impact? Why did this first success not go viral? How can I help?
I am not from California – heck, I’m not even from the US. So some might wonder why keeping those parks is so important to me. Well, the answer is pretty easy. Because the landscapes, historic structures and sights need to be protected for future generations – the reason they were created in the first place. I’m not here to preach, far from it, actually. It would just be sad to see these beautiful areas gone for good. The old saying, “You won’t miss it until it is gone” certainly applies here for many, it seems. There was no public uproar (at least none that I remember), it wasn’t on every station but I do believe that it needs to be, more people need to know about this, more people need to care about the lands in danger. I am sure most know everything about the divorce of Kim Kardashian though. (Add cynical commentary here.)
Just a couple of hours ago, I came across a project that really grabbed my eye and is the reason for this blog entry. The guys behind “The First 70” require funding for their documentary film about the state park closures.
With passion and a lot of commitment, they want to show the beauty of the parks in all their glory, as they think, and I fully agree with them, the whole case didn’t quite grab the media outreach it deserved.
Without further ado, please watch the trailer below and consider helping them out by either contributing at or by sharing this blog entry, the link to the trailer and other info across the interwebs.
The First 70 Trailer from Heath Hen Films on Vimeo.
For a full list of parks on the closure list:
http://my.calparks.org/site/PageServer?pagename=2011ParkClosures
Thank you.
