Freelance photog contracts

[TrooperBari]

Do you folks have your freelance photographers sign contracts? If so, what kind of stipulations do they have regarding re-selling of photos?

Our paper, hardly a big-time operation, has one (1) staff photographer. We've stayed afloat by using a couple freelance photographers, one mediocre shooter who charges $100 per photo and one guy who runs his own photography business. The latter shooter is reliable, competent, charges $35 per assignment and gives us a multitude of free shots in exchange for putting his business in the photo credit.

Or rather, he did until today. In the past, we had an unofficial agreement to not sell any of the free images, which would represent direct competition to his business. If anyone asked, we steered them toward his Web site. Now, though, our editor insists our one (1) reliable freelancer sign a new contract, one which gives our paper the right to sell every photo we publish, whether we pay for it or not. Said reliable photog now will not shoot for us any more, leaving us with our staff shooter (who, bless his heart, gets great stuff despite being ridiculously overworked) and Captain C-Note (whose day job prevents him from shooting anything before 6 p.m.).

If anyone has an idea as to a way around this impasse, feel free to respond here or PM me. Otherwise, it looks like I'll have to dust off my barely adequate photography skills.

 

[Chi City 81]

Your avatar perfectly sums up the situation in which your greedy ******* of an editor put you.

 

[TrooperBari]

Your avatar perfectly sums up the situation in which your greedy ******* of an editor put you.

Yup. Did I mention this happened at the start of the busiest week of the year? Y'know, one of the few reasons people come to this verdammt corner of the state?

 

[FuturaBold]

The latter shooter is reliable, competent, charges $35 per assignment and gives us a multitude of free shots in exchange for putting his business in the photo credit...

Your editor needs to know that is a pretty smokin' deal, especially if he's good ...

 

[Blue_Water]

If you have a good photographer that is only charging $35 per assignment, and your editor wants more out of him, then you have no hope. Your editor is clearly clueless.

 

[gretchd]

There's no way your guy should ever agree to that, and for your editor to put you in that position is ridiculous.

 

[Hank_Scorpio]

Why was the $100 shooter allowed to get that high of a price? Most papers I've been at, it's one set price per photo, no matter what.

 

[TrooperBari]

Your editor needs to know that is a pretty smokin' deal, especially if he's good ...

He's quite good. He also takes the occasional news assignment, so we're not the only section ham-boned by this move.

--------------------

If you have a good photographer that is only charging $35 per assignment, and your editor wants more out of him, then you have no hope. Your editor is clearly clueless.

You have no idea how close to home that hits. :)

--------------------

Why was the $100 shooter allowed to get that high of a price? Most papers I've been at, it's one set price per photo, no matter what.

Said editor agreed to pay it. This was before I got here, but that shooter used to charge $75 and send photos with no cutlines. When the paper asked him to start e-mailing cutlines with his shots, the charge went up to $100.

Yes, it makes my brain hurt, too.

 

[Hank_Scorpio]

Sounds like it should be the other way around.


Let the guy who charges $35 now charge $100, but the newspaper also gets free reign to re-sell those photos, which would allow the paper to recoup that $100.


The editor needs to stand up to the other guy and say, this is the rate, if you like it, we'll continue to give you assignments. if not, bye bye.
Of course your editor won't do that tho. I've worked with wishy washy, spineless editors like that before.