Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Zachary Goulko on June 08, 2009, 03:33:56 pm
-
Hi guys,
I have numerous product images shot for an international ad campaign for a large luxury brand. They will be used for an international ad campaign, in multiple major magazines (1+ million circulation each). What would you charge for 150 insertions per year total, for 2 years per image?
Normally I use FotoQuote, but I'm not sure if it's accurate.
Just wondering what the other pros are charging.
-
oh young shooter I find your knowledge of their media buy quite impressive, fotoquote has taught you well, but you are not a professional advertising photographer yet!
..my point being that what you seek is up to you to obtain, part of the business, not knowing anything else than what you have put down leads me to say, I have an idea what it is worth if I was shooting it.. but this is your estimate..what are you worth? it is fine to make a ballpark on what the shot is worth, but why does abc photographer get 5grand and pqr gets 50grand?
We are not dealing in wigets with equal value..even though on paper it is the same "unlimited international ad use for 2 years".
. good luck with the international luxbrand campaign.
-
but you are not a professional advertising photographer yet!
thanks for your evaluation and helpful reply
-
thanks for your evaluation and helpful reply
hey I was kidding using the star wars dialog.. okay maybe my reply was not what you were looking for..sorry about that, but that was what came to this smart ass's mind.
no offensive meant...
In the old days of APA we would have estimating seminars..get 3 photographers and a make-beleive art buyer with 3 different jobs.. each photographer would price out each job and compare, showing the breakout.. creative fees would be left out but it was interesting to see how different people would estimate for expenses. Regarding creative fees..I usually add 20-50% percent for international..and the same for 2years vs. one year buy.
-
my agents do all this, but i know that the photography fee includes one region for one year .
but for international usage, 100% per region, ie europe + 100%, asia/pacific + 100%, united states + 100%, etc.
i have been paid 3 to 4x my day rate depending on their need.
sounds a lot, but they will be spending big to advertise in all these areas, so you are making kind of a percentage of the advertising.
its on the fee that gets charged extra, not the production and costs of the shoot. so you argue that they are getting a good deal compared to having to reshoot for each region.
paul
-
hey I was kidding using the star wars dialog.. okay maybe my reply was not what you were looking for..sorry about that, but that was what came to this smart ass's mind.
no offensive meant...
In the old days of APA we would have estimating seminars..get 3 photographers and a make-beleive art buyer with 3 different jobs.. each photographer would price out each job and compare, showing the breakout.. creative fees would be left out but it was interesting to see how different people would estimate for expenses. Regarding creative fees..I usually add 20-50% percent for international..and the same for 2years vs. one year buy.
Sorry, I'm not a fan of Star Wars, so I didn't pick up on the dialog. Didn't mean to be rude.
I guess there really isn't a set "industry standard" pricing guideline to go by. My estimate came to just above 4k per image, for unlimited international ad usage, (2 years). However, these were originally shot for web usage an retouched for low res. Therefore the 4k usage is about 20 times more than was charged for production, so it's a bit of a hard decision.
Thanks Paul Moore and Paul Jones for your input.
-
I have not yet crossed the threshold into these big usage advertising jobs, but am starting to nibble at the edges from time to time. I've also been very active in ASMP, and discuss these issues regularly with other photographers. Here are a few things I’ve learned along the way.
The average cost to an advertiser to run a full page ad in a national consumer magazine is over $50k. So multiply that times your 300 insertions over two years and you get a total amount they are paying for advertising with your pictures of $15 Million dollars. (Adjust accordingly if they aren’t full page ads.) That’s a lot of money.
If they like your pictures enough that they will spend $15 million to run ads based on them, they like them enough to pay you a serious chunk of money to do so.
I sometimes do a really rough calculation just to put things in perspective. I figure if the “order takers”, uh… I mean “account executives”, at the advertising agency can charge a 15% commission on the amount of the advertising buy just to place the ads in magazines, the photographer ought to be able to get a measly 2% of the ad buy. So that comes to $300,000 in this case.
Don’t shy away from expecting these kinds of big payments. Despite what Paul joked about with his Star Wars thing (which I didn’t get at first either) if you are being hired by a big corporation to do a big shoot that will be used in a $15 Million ad campaign, you are, in fact, a professional advertising photographer.
Theoretical examples aside, here are a couple of real world cases I know of that are appropriate to your situation.
A colleague who has worked for me as an assistant is shooting a little bit on his own. He was asked to quote on a two day studio shoot, about six shots, very minimal production, with about another day of pre- and post-, for a product that was going to be advertised in consumer publications, unlimited use, two years. The AD at the ad agency, who he is friends with, advised him not to come in too low or he’d look like an amateur. She let it slip that the other photographers estimating the job were coming in at the $200,000 range. For a one day shoot. He didn’t end up getting the job, but he was in the running for it.
Another young colleague contacted me recently for help estimating a job. It was for a small consumer corporation that was doing national advertising in a real niche market. They wanted two pictures done in the studio, minimal production, in a one day shoot. I did some rough guess-timating with usage, etc., and suggested that since they wanted unlimited magazine use for a year, but in a limited number of appropriate magazines, to come in at about $20k. He ignored my advice, and came in at $30k, and got the job and everyone was happy. This is a guy with very limited previous experience shooting commercially, and he got $15k per image for a fraction of the usage you’re talking about.
How many images are we talking? If I understand correctly, it sounds like if you originally shot them for only $200 each. You should not use that as your basis for calculating a completely different usage, but should start from scratch ala FotoQuote. And the retouching should start over, too, if you need to re-do them for high-res.
Hope this helps. Good luck. You are about to enter the big time.
David
-
I've moved away from that industry long ago so my opinion on this and 25 cents will get you a 25 cent Coke.
How about steering the conversation towards a percentage of the media buy?
In the 70's and 80's (the hay-day's?) we used to do that because it made the art/photography costs look so very cheap.
For example let's say the media cost of the campaign is 500,000K (which may be low). If your fee was 1% of the media cost that's 5k.
Your negotiation gains some strength when you ask "Isn't the art used in this campaign worth 1%? (or 2% or 5% or whatever).
Find out what the media budget is first. Then play with the numbers and see what percentage works.
If you quote a percentage that's too high then negotiate down in small fractions like 6.895% down from 7% etc.
Large drops make the fee look arbitrary with no real basis.
The #'s below are made up but illustrate this.
Do some homework and get valid #'s
Each Magazine gets 20K to 300K per insertion
The printers who print the magazines get 75K to a bazillionK to print each issue.
Distributors get 150K per issue distribute
The agency gets 450K in fees for the campaign PLUS mark-ups on all of the above.
The AD on this campaign gets 100-200+K/year
And last but not least...the photographer gets ?
Create a context to give your client some perspective:
I'm sure I've left out people who are making money in the campaign.
Good luck and keep us informed.
-
David is on the money...
Take his advice if nothing else.
ASMP is a very good arena for different types of photographers learning about scale and volume, a good place to make friends if you haven't already.
Remember 300k is nothing to a client if they have a $15 million magazine ad budget over 2 yrs...
Anything less than 300-500k would make you look quite in experienced and amateur..
good luck
S
-
I have not yet crossed the threshold into these big usage advertising jobs, but am starting to nibble at the edges from time to time. I've also been very active in ASMP, and discuss these issues regularly with other photographers. Here are a few things I’ve learned along the way.
The average cost to an advertiser to run a full page ad in a national consumer magazine is over $50k. So multiply that times your 300 insertions over two years and you get a total amount they are paying for advertising with your pictures of $15 Million dollars. (Adjust accordingly if they aren’t full page ads.) That’s a lot of money.
If they like your pictures enough that they will spend $15 million to run ads based on them, they like them enough to pay you a serious chunk of money to do so.
I sometimes do a really rough calculation just to put things in perspective. I figure if the “order takers”, uh… I mean “account executives”, at the advertising agency can charge a 15% commission on the amount of the advertising buy just to place the ads in magazines, the photographer ought to be able to get a measly 2% of the ad buy. So that comes to $300,000 in this case.
Don’t shy away from expecting these kinds of big payments. Despite what Paul joked about with his Star Wars thing (which I didn’t get at first either) if you are being hired by a big corporation to do a big shoot that will be used in a $15 Million ad campaign, you are, in fact, a professional advertising photographer.
Theoretical examples aside, here are a couple of real world cases I know of that are appropriate to your situation.
A colleague who has worked for me as an assistant is shooting a little bit on his own. He was asked to quote on a two day studio shoot, about six shots, very minimal production, with about another day of pre- and post-, for a product that was going to be advertised in consumer publications, unlimited use, two years. The AD at the ad agency, who he is friends with, advised him not to come in too low or he’d look like an amateur. She let it slip that the other photographers estimating the job were coming in at the $200,000 range. For a one day shoot. He didn’t end up getting the job, but he was in the running for it.
Another young colleague contacted me recently for help estimating a job. It was for a small consumer corporation that was doing national advertising in a real niche market. They wanted two pictures done in the studio, minimal production, in a one day shoot. I did some rough guess-timating with usage, etc., and suggested that since they wanted unlimited magazine use for a year, but in a limited number of appropriate magazines, to come in at about $20k. He ignored my advice, and came in at $30k, and got the job and everyone was happy. This is a guy with very limited previous experience shooting commercially, and he got $15k per image for a fraction of the usage you’re talking about.
How many images are we talking? If I understand correctly, it sounds like if you originally shot them for only $200 each. You should not use that as your basis for calculating a completely different usage, but should start from scratch ala FotoQuote. And the retouching should start over, too, if you need to re-do them for high-res.
Hope this helps. Good luck. You are about to enter the big time.
David
Thanks again guys for all your input.
This is a bit of a tricky situation, because the actual product shots (my images) will only cover a portion of the page. The background beauty image will cover the entire page. This is why I'm having difficulty coming up with the proper numbers.
Also, it is the client's ad agency that hired me and not the client directly.
-
In my opinion, if you originally shot the product for the web at $200, you will be doing well if you can get additional usage of $4000 per image. To get four grand these days for a product shot is very good, regardless of usage. Particularly if it started life as a web product shot at a mere $200.
Of course, you'll hear plenty of conflicting opinions, but this is product after all, not fashion. There are plenty of very good, top of the game product photographers who will be happy to reshoot for considerably less than your usage and these are tough times. What I'm saying is, don't shoot yourself in the foot or get ideas of grandeur based on boasts from people who don't actually do what you do, who may have the connections and business acumen, or who have done in the past, the past was different, the past is gone forever, and no-one is going to tell you how much they are getting on a regular basis now.
The reason being that every job and every client is different, there is no fixed rate. All these calculations based on percentage of total media budget and the like simply don't hold water in today's world.
One of the things about being professional is having the ability to obtain the maximum amount of money that a client is willing to pay, and to do it discreetly and with intelligence. Every client is different, just because they are big, it doesn't necessarily mean that they have a culture of paying silly sums. Some clients are very clued up and know where to get good quality for a very reasonable sum. Try and suss out from the account manager how much they pay normally, (as you would like to be competitive, blah, blah) but take it with a pinch of salt, naturally.
My own policy is to be a bit more expensive than the competition, (as far as I know) and it works for me, although I do lose quite a few of the cheapskates, no big deal.
By the way, shooting for the web for $200 loses you respect (and that's why I wish you luck with your extra usage). Still, for many people, lots of little $200 jobs can be far better than one $4000 every three months.
Edward
-
I second Edwards opinion.
A few things talk against getting those tens of thousands mentioned above:
- If you made them for 200, and they seem to know that, why would anyone even think of paying more than 20 times that?
- it is still life, not fashion. there are a very few still lifers who are able to charge a lot, really lot, but most work in the middle range. not fair, but reality
I think going for around 2-4000, but with new retouching should be ok.
-
This is an esoteric topic. It is completely subjective on how much you and others value your work. I have seen pretty lame work getting paid high sums and real excellence being ignored. It is possible to be a successful photographer without actually being a great photographer. I have sadly discovered it is 90% marketing and public relations, and 10% photography. You can make more money with photography being good at marketing and not so good at making actual photographs than the other way around. Of course being a great photographer helps, but it is definitely not the only requisite to make it work.
Whatever you do, don't quote too low. That does no good for your reputation and at best will get a few more bucks. Nothing else.
These are hard times and there are a lot good professionals out there, and millions of wannabe's armed with Canons willing to shoot for free just for the tear sheet. Competition is very fierce and I see a lot of gigs going down by absurdly low prices.
-
Maybe you could ask an agent that has a roster of artists that shoot fashion/still life to help with an estimate for a small fee? Who knows, you might be able to land an agent at the same time?
-
Maybe you could ask an agent that has a roster of artists that shoot fashion/still life to help with an estimate for a small fee? Who knows, you might be able to land an agent at the same time?
I just remembered these guys:
http://www.d-65.com/priceassist.html (http://www.d-65.com/priceassist.html)
Nick-T
-
In my opinion, if you originally shot the product for the web at $200, you will be doing well if you can get additional usage of $4000 per image. To get four grand these days for a product shot is very good, regardless of usage. Particularly if it started life as a web product shot at a mere $200.
Of course, you'll hear plenty of conflicting opinions, but this is product after all, not fashion. There are plenty of very good, top of the game product photographers who will be happy to reshoot for considerably less than your usage and these are tough times. What I'm saying is, don't shoot yourself in the foot or get ideas of grandeur based on boasts from people who don't actually do what you do, who may have the connections and business acumen, or who have done in the past, the past was different, the past is gone forever, and no-one is going to tell you how much they are getting on a regular basis now.
The reason being that every job and every client is different, there is no fixed rate. All these calculations based on percentage of total media budget and the like simply don't hold water in today's world.
One of the things about being professional is having the ability to obtain the maximum amount of money that a client is willing to pay, and to do it discreetly and with intelligence. Every client is different, just because they are big, it doesn't necessarily mean that they have a culture of paying silly sums. Some clients are very clued up and know where to get good quality for a very reasonable sum. Try and suss out from the account manager how much they pay normally, (as you would like to be competitive, blah, blah) but take it with a pinch of salt, naturally.
My own policy is to be a bit more expensive than the competition, (as far as I know) and it works for me, although I do lose quite a few of the cheapskates, no big deal.
By the way, shooting for the web for $200 loses you respect (and that's why I wish you luck with your extra usage). Still, for many people, lots of little $200 jobs can be far better than one $4000 every three months.
Edward
Ed,
Let me clarify my original reply.
This was a 4 day shoot for 70+ images, hence the price. Post-production however was not included, and was another 3 days, so the total was a little more than double that per image. Based on my daily rate, and the simplicity of the shots, I could not charge more, especially in these times.
Also, given information I had received from the account manager, my rate was only slightly smaller than 2 other "respectable" photogs in my area. I don't see how this loses me respect.
However, this was for low-res images, with limited web usage, and what they're requesting now is a completely different ball game.
-
Maybe you could ask an agent that has a roster of artists that shoot fashion/still life to help with an estimate for a small fee? Who knows, you might be able to land an agent at the same time?
Thanks Terence for the great idea.
I have already contacted a couple of reps in NY, and they'll be getting back to me shortly. Maybe I'll even get a rep out of the whole deal.
-
Hi guys,
I have numerous product images shot for an international ad campaign for a large luxury brand. They will be used for an international ad campaign, in multiple major magazines (1+ million circulation each). What would you charge for 150 insertions per year total, for 2 years per image?
Normally I use FotoQuote, but I'm not sure if it's accurate.
Just wondering what the other pros are charging.
There was a publication that the AOP Association of Photographers in UK used to publish, can't remember the title, don't know whether it's still in print, but now know this post is not very helpful, can someone in the AOP help me out?
kindest
Andy
-
Keep the figure reasonable, certainly less then it would cost to reshoot the project. Product photography is not that difficult to reproduce and unless there's something unique about your delivered images they are just a commodity to your client. When I price automotive work usually it's a buyout but occasionally I'm asked for a price for just web usage and then upgrades would be what I would charge for the buyout or national usage. Jim
-
Just going to pop in and say I had a look at your site and really enjoy your work Zachary. Good luck with the gig.
-
There was a publication that the AOP Association of Photographers in UK used to publish, can't remember the title, don't know whether it's still in print, but now know this post is not very helpful, can someone in the AOP help me out?
kindest
Andy
You're not referring to 'Beyond the Lens' are you? All of the methodology for working out pricing is on their site, or on copyright4clients.com (as far as I know, this is still the case; been a while since I checked)
-
Just going to pop in and say I had a look at your site and really enjoy your work Zachary. Good luck with the gig.
I second that.
I liked the music too and one of the few times I didn't turn it straight off, though I'm sure it will really annoy other people.
-
As far as ad full page rates, $50K is way high, what magazines are these? I work with a number of the top Conde Naste pubs and a couple high end specialty paper oversized mags, and I have not done any full page at $50K, in fact that is at the top end of a spread price. Maybe $50k spread gets you first few pages, or inside cover? Most advertisers that are doing a 1 or 2 year get such a cut rate since they are doing it for the multiple issues. Even a 1off I can't see $50K. But it all depends, as there are magazines that can demand this...which ones...? Unless these might be big agencies that have long ago negotiated these rates? Anyway...
I agree with E_Edwards,
I don't know how it was at other times, but things are very tough for product these days. lots of stuff going overseas, getting done out of cgi, then getting the work chopped up..etc.
Still life is really moving.
I would love to see an example of a $200 web shot...blurr the tag if you have to for sake of protection, but I actually love your fashion much more than your still life, but still $200 sounds rather low for any lux brand.
Good luck on the prioject, and don't forget to get prop release for promo purpose.
Cheers!
-
I don't have much to add.... I'm not getting jobs like this yet either, but I did want to add that I also checked out your website and love your work too. Beautiful fashion images... top notch retouching too. Sending you an e-mail actually
-Jon