| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
David Hobby ---"Four Reasons to Consider Working for Free"
David Harpe, Photographer
 |
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 1:40 AM on 12.05.08 |
->> Well isn't that special.
You could write a book on the number of ways he's wrong...oh wait! Someone already has!
http://www.amazon.com/Best-Business-Practices-Photographers-Harrington/dp/1...
It's interesting how David has taken four "tenants" that have been used for years to justify working for free, wrapped it around the current economic crisis, and repackaged it as some sort of imperative for today. |
|
Jeff Stanton, Photographer
 |
Princeton | IN | USA | Posted: 2:03 AM on 12.05.08 |
| ->> Five: The bank doesn't take free on deposit. |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
 |
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 2:05 AM on 12.05.08 |
->> || SportsShooter.com: News Item: Posted 2008-05-28
Free is Killing Me!
Matt Brown says too many people are giving away photographs for free or dirt-cheap.
http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/1989 |
|
Jock Fistick, Photographer
 |
Brussels | Belgium | | Posted: 4:21 AM on 12.05.08 |
->> David is clever - he has used a buzz phrase "Working For Free" that he knows will get everyone's attention :-)
This is nothing new - photographers "self-assign" all the time. It is called a personal project. And personal projects often turn into something that can make money. And if not - the photographer benefits from the creative exercise and hopefully has a new addition to their portfolio. It's not the same thing as doing an assignment for free - or giving the work away after the fact. And I don't think giving a portrait subject a print qualifies as giving one's work away - it is the least we can do if a subject is giving their time. |
|
Primoz Jeroncic, Photographer
 |
Kranj | SI | Slovenia | Posted: 5:47 AM on 12.05.08 |
->> I agree with Jock. One thing is giving your work away for free, the other thing is doing something for yourself... and if it pays on the end even better. For first part (giving your work for free) there's no excuse in my mind. No economy crisis or anything else. No matter what, I still need to eat on the end of the day, and stores, even if it's economy crisis, still want my money for their bread and milk. Second part is ok. If you have some time, it's actually cool thing to do something which helps you get better, or at least it gives you some fun. But at least for me, that doesn't mean I will be giving those photos away for free. If it's for my fun, I will keep them for myself then if noone wants to pay for them.
But no matter what, I have feeling that Hobby didn't really talk about second part. As he writes in beginning, he has non-shooting day job. Cool, so he can actually shoot for fun without worrying about going to store on the end of the day. Some don't have this luxury, so once again... economy crisis up or down, we still need money to eat, drive to those great locations where you will change your photos for free access etc. Without non-shooting day job things get a bit harder to accomplish then ;) |
|
Walter Calahan, Photographer
 |
Westminster | MD | USA | Posted: 7:26 AM on 12.05.08 |
->> Gimmick writing.
Did he get his strobes for free?
The trouble is corporate America has work on the assumption that all the money goes to the CEO, and the rest of us work for free.
Retail sales in November dropped to a 35 year low. Why? The rich are no trickling on us.
Too bad I can't mark is Blog 'Inappropriate.' |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
 |
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 7:45 AM on 12.05.08 |
| ->> It's skewed logic. I understand the whole personal stuff theory and all, I mean I think most of us do that....I just don't think the whole..."let me shoot you for free, no holds barred you can do whatever you want with the photos" makes much sense. it kind of sounds like he wants to make portraits like annie leibovitz and he thinks he'll be allowed to by offering to do it for free. and he mentions people might look at you suspiciously for offering to shoot them for free, hmmm ya think? very strange logic indeed. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
 |
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 9:01 AM on 12.05.08 |
->> Time-for-prints as a concept is old as dirt. It was a mainstay of the portraiture semester in photo school where I went. There were two modeling schools within 2 T stops and the school had a large bulletin board where photo students and aspiring models would pin contact info. The only thing 'NEW' about what was written was giving away usage too.
I'm not so sure that I would be willing to go that far, but unless he is shooting subjects that would generate usage licenses he's not really giving anything away either. Seems like a bunch of bits and bytes about nothing to me. |
|
Tom Sperduto, Photographer
 |
Edison | NJ | USA | Posted: 9:02 AM on 12.05.08 |
->> I agree with Jock also, and I also think what David is saying in his blog is not wrong.
Let's face it, not every assignment that comes down the pike is going to be shooting what you love. But, the choice to accept that assignment or turn it down is up to you. It's very difficult at times, but I have decided to turn down assignments if they do not get my juices flowing in other places besides my wallet.
I don't ever want to be on assignment again when I am checking my watch because I am dying inside. If I am not shooting what I love to be shooting, or have enough faith in myself that I can, I would choose another career and I have put all my eggs (and my families) in this basket.
I am one of those photographers who HAS to be a photographer. There is nothing else I can do in my life that will let me sleep at night.
I recently got asked to shoot a three day gymnastics event with 600 athletes that would allow me to sell picture packages directly to the parents. This is an assignment that does not excite me at all, but paid very well at a time when assignments are scarce. The only reason I was asked is because my 3-year-old daughter attends the school and they knew I was a photographer - clicking away while my daughter tumbles on the mat for free of course.
I chose to not shoot this assignment because it's just not me. However, I told them I am a portrait photographer and showed them portraits of a recent self assigned (for free) personal project on before and after portraits of ultra marathon runners. They loved it and I am now shooting portraits of all 600 gymnasts at the event, doing what I love, and getting paid very well for it. I am also hiring three photographers to shoot the action shots of the event.
I personally have received most of my assignments in 2008 (my best year yet)from self assigned personal projects that I love shooting. I never consider these "free" assignments.
More, an investment in my future to continue shooting what I love and not just what will pay the bills. |
|
Brian Tietz, Photographer
 |
Fort Myers | FL | USA | Posted: 9:12 AM on 12.05.08 |
->> I like Strobist.com and respect that Hobby has really carved out a niche with "making the most of what you can with what you have" with regards to lighting.
I understand about contributing for good causes and think it is part of our duty as photojournalists to give back to the community, and taking on personal projects is a great idea to stay inspired and hone your craft.
The problem is making a blanket statement like that and having it misunderstood by the part-time photographers just starting out who make up a good chunk of his audience.
Especially bad when this advice comes from a guy who's making over 6 figures with zero overhead from his blog.
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/webguide/2008-04-22-strobist-blog_N.htm |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 10:40 AM on 12.05.08 |
->> And I don't think giving a portrait subject a print qualifies as giving one's work away - it is the least we can do if a subject is giving their time.
Jock,
From David's blog:
"So, I am approaching people I want to photograph and offering to do it directly for them, at no charge. AND THAT INCLUDES FREE USAGE, TOO -- no holding back. That is my offer -- I photograph you, and in exchange for your time you get what I hope will be high-quality images to use in any way you want." (emphasis added)
What he's proposing is more than a TFP...
Dave |
|
Bruce Twitchell, Photographer
 |
Coeur d'Alene | ID | USA | Posted: 10:40 AM on 12.05.08 |
->> Step one- write controversial article.
Step two- drive traffic to your website
Step three- profit |
|
Tom Sperduto, Photographer
|
Edison | NJ | USA | Posted: 11:26 AM on 12.05.08 |
->> David - Good point.
My personal projects (bedroom portraits, ultra marathon runners) are shot on my time, on my dime, and those who give their time always get a print.
The images are also sent to my stock agency because everyone also signs a model release. I don't shoot anyone who refuses to sign it, and they sign it first.
It would be very bad if people were farming out pictures that need to be licensed for use.
A lot of different feelings on this subject, a very good discussion. |
|
Lennart Wiedemuth, Student/Intern, Photographer
 |
Ennepetal | NRW | Germany | Posted: 11:46 AM on 12.05.08 |
->> I work closely together with a jeweler and the first time I told him how much I wanted for shooting all his magazin photos, he looked at me and said: "You must be kidding me! I thought you got a digital camera, it doesn`t cost you anything."
At that point I wanted to take my gear and leave but than the bussines guy in me got out (thanks dad).
After a long talk he was fine with it and I was thinking "Wow, you drive four cars, got two houses (Germany&France) and only eat french meat but make such a big thing out of 3000€ for photos to advertise with?"
Btw he runs his own magazine about jewelry. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
 |
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 12:08 PM on 12.05.08 |
->> Trade-for-print, self-assignment, speculation, personal project...
No one "gives away" work without the expectation of anything in return immediately or at some point in the future financially if they are IN THE BUSINESS of making photos or visual products.
A capitalist at heart, I use the terms research and design, inventory management and production, market testing, risk-reward research analysis, capital investment, marketing, advertising, self-promotion to describe the same activities. Regardless, all the activities have three things in common - the photographer fronts cash or sweat equity to create the project or work. Risk, which some are better at calculating better than other based on experience, market timing and other factors and eventually $$$ either directly or indirectly through the marketing of the project or work. While many here may feel that investing one's time in and energy in creating a product to sell in the future is an noble less act, from a business perspective it is a vital practice in growing a robust business and staying ahead of the competition.
If there is no desire for financial gain, then 'giving away' work is one that satisfies an emotional need, like those in the category we fondly call PWCs, who shoot and give away photos to be liked, accepted, or admired by peers, team members or the player's families. Does this devalue the work of photographers? Only if that photographer shoots like a PWC. |
|
Martin McNeil, Photographer
 |
East Kilbride | Lanarkshire | United Kingdom | Posted: 12:13 PM on 12.05.08 |
->> There's a very fine line between mutual gain and being taken advantage of... you have to have a keen mind for negotiation to ensure that you're not being exploited in any given scenario.
The problem, as I see it, is that far too few new and aspiring (and even veteran) photographers perform the necessary due dilligence to ensure that they're not being exploited when they elect to work for "free"... either that or they're so giddy with excitement over the 'privilege' they're being granted that they're ready to excuse a multitude of sins in return for the access they're getting. |
|
Darren Whitley, Photographer
 |
Maryville | MO | USA | Posted: 12:25 PM on 12.05.08 |
->> Some of my dissatisfaction with my career is the idea that everything I do has to require some sort of compensation.
I had a good visit with a friend who is a photographer about this and I've come to the conclusion I need to do photography not just for money, but for my own enjoyment. In order to find myself artistically, I'm trying to keep my mind open to find enjoyment from my profession.
I have a great job. It's one I enjoy, but I need to have fun at this. There's plenty of stress.
I knew the latest topic would get this board talking. Stop the paranoia. Just make some damn photos. If you initiate the project, use your heads. |
|
Mark Davis, Photographer
|
Decatur | AL | USA | Posted: 12:25 PM on 12.05.08 |
->> Four words describe Four Reasons to Consider Working for Free - "You Will Go Broke"
With Hobby having a six figure income from a blog, if true, that sums his situation up well. His situation is not much different than a corporate CEO willing to work free.
If you are NOT running a successful photography business ONE MUST READ John Harrington's book "Best Business Practices for Photographers" - This book will change that if you apply what you read.
Mark Davis |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 12:31 PM on 12.05.08 |
->> Look at the big picture... (grin)
When Mr. Hobby started his Stobist website he did it and maintained it for free for some time. Now it generates a six figure income. I would call that a very good investment. I only wish I could be both that smart, dedicated, and flat-out lucky. |
|
Mark Davis, Photographer
|
Decatur | AL | USA | Posted: 2:14 PM on 12.05.08 |
->> Bruce said it best:
"Step one- write controversial article.
Step two- drive traffic to your website
Step three- profit"
Mr. Hobby: Smart, Dedicated and flat-out taking advantage of SS forum. (grin) |
|
Tom Davenport, Photographer
 |
Hayden | ID | USA | Posted: 2:19 PM on 12.05.08 |
->> Hey Bruce, Mark,
I'm missing something here. I went to his website and it didn't cost me anything. Is there a way to have people come to your sight, not pay you anything, but still make money? I'm not being a smart alec here, just want to know.
Tom |
|
Bruce Twitchell, Photographer
|
Coeur d'Alene | ID | USA | Posted: 2:42 PM on 12.05.08 |
->> Tom,
The visitors are not necessarily paying but the advertisers are. The more visits there are to his site, the more he can charge for advertising. |
|
Tom Davenport, Photographer
|
Hayden | ID | USA | Posted: 2:53 PM on 12.05.08 |
->> Bruce,
I understand the concept, but if you do the math, those seven advertisers up there right now are paying a whole lot more than even high end magazine ad rates base on the six figure income statement. Unless of course, you include the decimals.
Tom |
|
Bruce Twitchell, Photographer
|
Coeur d'Alene | ID | USA | Posted: 3:33 PM on 12.05.08 |
->> Getting info from this USA Today article on July 8-
http://www.imaginginfo.com/web/online/News/Strobist-Blog-about-Lighting-Pho...
"His site attracts 1.6 million page views a month."
"So far, he's making more money than at The Sun. He won't say how much, only that revenue is more than six figures, all from photographic-supply advertisers. His overhead is zero."
I think part of the key is the zero overhead factor. I don't know how much he charges for advertising, but I do know that causing controversy often leads to an increase in revenue. |
|
Jock Fistick, Photographer
|
Brussels | Belgium | | Posted: 4:57 PM on 12.05.08 |
->> Bruce - That is what I was getting at when I said David is clever - he knew this would generate a discussion and drive traffic to his site - ChaChing! But you said it much more succinctly than I did. :-)
Now as for giving usage away for free - I think it is a bad idea regardless of the circumstances - but as Eric stated above - when it comes to making a series of portraits - what is he really giving away? If these people that David will photograph are that high profile - do you really think they are going to try and exploit the fact that they have an image of themselves that they can do WHATEVER they want with? My guess is that they are way to busy to even think about it. The only situation where I think this could bite him on the ass is with a high profile athlete or celebrity that could use the image for an endorsement deal - and in that case (or anything similar) I think it is a terrible idea - extremely bad business - both for himself (David) and the business of photography at large.
And as Brian stated above - there are a lot of students and inexperienced photographers that will read his blog and could easily get the wrong idea - so six figure income or not - giving away usage is just bad for business - his and everyone else's. And it is a bad message to send to those that don't know any better.
And quite frankly - I think it is unnecessary. Anyone that high profile can probably afford to pay for any usage they might want - and if they are open to the idea of having their portrait made in the first place - not having to pay for the session and receiving a really nice print of themselves would be enough to get you in the door.
So, in summary - personal projects - GOOD - giving "something" back to anyone who helps you in your endeavor (be it a print or otherwise) - A NO BRAINER - giving away usage - VERY VERY BAD AND COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY. |
|
Luke Sharrett, Student/Intern
 |
Norfolk | VA | United States | Posted: 5:14 PM on 12.05.08 |
| ->> Look what "work for free" has done to newspaper staffs across the country. Newsrooms are taking deep staff cuts as more and more "submit your own" photos and news stories are showing up on newspaper pages online. That's probably one of the contributing factors as to why David Hobby no longer has a staff position with the Baltimore Sun... |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 5:43 PM on 12.05.08 |
->> If these people that David will photograph are that high profile - do you really think they are going to try and exploit the fact that they have an image of themselves that they can do WHATEVER they want with?
"High profile" people (or more specifically, the people that WORK for "high profile" people) are not likely to sign ANY photo release without a lawyer looking at it. When the release come backs from the legal team, the photographer will probably be lucky if it contains a clause to let him even SEE the photos he took - much less SELL them... :-)
The point is - high profile people are not going to trust an unknown/aspiring person to do anything around them...they can't afford the risk. There are always exceptions, of course. But the odds of a Donald Trump level person allowing an unknown photographer access to take a portrait AND sign a model release are thin...lottery odds.
Which basically sums up the entire "consider working for free" argument. It's a lottery-grade gamble.
But even worse, it's a gamble with risks. There are risks and potential downside inherent in any photography project regardless of compensation: injury to the subject or bystanders due to equipment failure or simple trip and fall, damage to the equipment due to accidents, or just getting sued because the subject didn't like the photo you took.
All of these things, while unlikely if you're careful, can happen. Yes you can insure against them. Insurance costs money, and filing and handling claims and the inevitable lawsuits can cost a lot of money. All of this is part-of-doing-business when you are getting paid for the gig, and should be factored into your rate if you're running your business correctly.
If you are getting paid to do a gig and something happens, you can at least have comfort in the fact that it happened because you were doing a real job for money, not playing photo lottery on a freebie shoot. |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 5:44 PM on 12.05.08 |
| ->> (comes back - oops, a tyop :-) |
|
John Thawley, Photographer
 |
Bonita Springs | FL | United States | Posted: 10:47 PM on 12.05.08 |
->> Isn't this what CNN calls an "I-reporter?"
Honestly, I hope all my colleagues in the field of motorsports photography adopts to this model... sooner than later. ;) |
|
Fraser Britton, Photographer
|
Ste Anne de Bellevue | QC | Canada | Posted: 11:55 PM on 12.05.08 |
->> Just FYI, the specialized niche marketing services on the web pay very, very well. Crummy, low impression ad networks with smiley ad creative usually pay between 75c- $1 CPM (cost per thousand). They are easily accessible and anyone can signup if you have a website that fits their TOS (no porn, no warez, nothing illegal.)
HIgh end, niche networks can pay anywhere from $5-$20 CPM. $6-9 is about the average.
Quick math would say that at 1.6 million impressions, he is easily making $1600/month with crummy ads alone. Multiply that by about 7.5x if he has decent ad networks, or 5-10x if he is using commission based affiliate networks.
Content is king, no matter how controversial. |
|
Colter Ray, Student/Intern, Photographer
 |
San Marcos | TX | United States | Posted: 1:09 AM on 12.06.08 |
->> First off, anyone who threw David Hobby under a bus in this post needs to lighten up. The man has done great things for advancing photography in many ways for both myself personally and many others.
That said, I think a lot of his article has been taken out of context. Read Vincent LaForet's take on the subject, it is much better explained. I think David was just looking at the possibilities - he realizes that food still needs to be put on the table. Hell he worked at a newspaper for 20 years to do just that.
He is just looking at the situation from a different perspective that could actually prove beneficial in the long run to photographers who correctly embrace it. |
|
Colin Lenton, Photographer
 |
Philadelphia | PA | United States | Posted: 5:30 PM on 12.06.08 |
| ->> I have to agree with Colter - alot of the commenters here seem to have not read past the headline on Hobby's post. |
|
Debra L Rothenberg, Photographer
 |
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 5:33 PM on 12.07.08 |
->> ok,my first job at a daily I worked at least 60 hours each week and made $10k
My second job-a daily Gannett paper-was the same, but I made $13k. We were supposed to get "comp" time-we never did. Granted it was 24 and 22 years ago, but that salary was low, even then.
So basically, I was working for free, or, for health benefits.
I was told then "someday we'll look back on this and it will all seem funny" (a quote from a Springsteen song). Well, it's still happening today (fortunately not to me) but to many of our young staffers out there across America who still have staff jobs.
And it still isn't funny |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 5:50 PM on 12.07.08 |
->> John Harrington adds his insight
Whew....John needs an editor... :-) |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 6:05 PM on 12.07.08 |
->> colter and colin, I think if you read harrington's articles you'll see where he agrees with some of the things these guys have said but the point many are making is that there are a HUGE number of photographers out there who will take the "work for free" statement as the green light to justify giving away their stuff to get ahead. I think most will agree that mr. hobby has done a terrific job with his blog....but the problem is not GETTING the real message. this blog cuts to the chase:
http://shiftingcareers.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/09/when-to-work-for-free/ |
|
|| Sponsor Special Deals
NEW 12x12 & 9x12 PhotoBooks
|
Available from:
Adorama Camera
|
Price: $0.00 |
Notes:
NEW Adorama PhotoBook sizes 12x12 & 9x12 (Portrait Orientation) PERFECT for Portfolios! Present and distribute your portfolio, create albums for clients, or just enjoy showing off your own family and vacation photographs. There’s no better way to preserve and display your photographs than in a real photobook from AdoramaPix. Our PixPublisher is simple to use and best of all works from any web browser. There’s no software to download or learn to use. Drag and drop your images into a themed template of your choice, or design your own layout. Resize your images, add borders, frames, backgrounds, captions or other descriptive text. It’s your book! SPORTSSHOOTER MEMBER SPECIAL-- 25% OFF USE COUPON CODE PXBKSP12 Good through 11.15.09
|
|
-- More Info -- |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|
