Charging well and once is not something you should fall into and how you charge should change with different industries.
Architects and interior designers are a low exposure market. They need good photography but use it in a low volume, because of this licensing time limits are not that much of an issue. And any way, architects and ID tend to keep their most recent projects at the foreground of their marketing. But that does not mean they should have free reign with our images. Doing so would either lead you to making less than you can & should, or you will overcharge your clients. Are either of those smart business practices?
I have two different licensing agreements for Architects and ID. The basic one is my Standard Licensing (listed below) and is what most architects need. I charge based on where they are located, because NYC firms will have greater image exposure then rural firms. The exposure is what makes an image valuable.
Standard licensing covers use in (1) portfolio, both in print and on one static company website, (2) private wall display, (3) in print and/or digital duplications for use in client’s own promotional materials, direct mailers and e-mail marketing campaigns, and (4) submission to professional competitions. Client may submit images for editorial review but does not have the license to publish any image; editorial/client must contact photographer if images are wanted for either in print or digital publication.
The life of this licensing is indefinite. This licensing is granted to the buyer only, is non-transferable, and non-exclusive. Licensing is not granted unto the buyer until photographer is paid in full; photographer retains all copyrights.
Additional licensing, including use on social media platforms and paid space advertising, will be negotiated separately.
I then have a social media add on which I charge based off of firm size; the amount of contributors to social media outlets will determine the number of followers and image exposure.
Social media licensing includes use in any and all social media outlets that the client has direct ownership of; examples could be the firm’s blog, Facebook Fanpage, Twitter background, etc. Also, employees, while employed, involved in the project may use the images on their Twitter page or blog. Use on outlets outside of the firm’s control can vary upon each outlet and must be approved first. © Joseph M Kitchen must be printed under every image when being used in any outlet; the only exception is when the image(s) is being used in a background.
When working with Hospitalities I work completely different and put time limits on use.
Why is this important? Because the more exposure an image receives the greater the return the user will get, increasing the image's value. And since needs vary, the value an image will have to a specific firm will also vary. In order to be fair, you need to take into account the exposure that that firm will have or you will end up over charging most firms, not business professional.
In terms of publications, your images are business supplies to the editorials they are printed in. They only have a magazine because they have images to print in that magazine. They are making money off of your images because they can sell magazines to the public and sell ad space in the magazine. You need to at least try to charge the magazine, although it is better to concede then alienate your client.
Last, if you charge once and well, do you also give the right to your client to allow other parties to use the images? This is also not fair for them; your clients should only pay for their licensing not others. And if your clients charge others to use your images, that is not fair to you. It is not uncommon for me to sell licensing to others involved in the project weeks or months after the images have already been delivered to the commissioning party and paid for. And if more than one firm commissions me, I still charge an extra 30% for the extra licensing because the image will gain more exposure. Also, I only apply this to my standard licensing with professionals in the design and building industry.
I have found that most clients are reasonable with licensing once explained in a way they can relate to. If they insist on not being reasonable then they probably have little respect for photography and/or are cheap. Do you really want to work with people like that? Are you going to get anything from them like worthy recommendations or leads? You need to have the guts to say no and walk away if they are unreasonable. If they respect your work, they will come back to you; I know this from experience.
P.S. You should also be charging for your post production time.
