Work for Free?
The big thing in the photography blogosphere this morning seems to be David Hobby’s front page post – “Four Reasons to Consider Working for Free.”
Chase Jarvis brought it up on his blog. And even Moose Petterson rushed in to post as I am here – I’ve got to run out the door.
But here’s what I will say (quickly) – talking about, or getting involved in any online discussion about “working for free” is like tying Kryptonite to oneself. It is a LOADED question and discussion.
I’m very very much against working for free. In fact I don’t like people working or interning for me for free. It’s just not good business. Period.
That being said – there is value is what David Hobby is saying. But it needs to be CRYSTAL CLEAR: if there is an INCREDIBLE assignment – where there TRULY is no funding behind it (either due to the people putting it on – or these days the economic reality) AND it is a portfolio/career builder – THEN and only THEN should you consider it.
Big name actors do occasionally work for free, so do big name talent in all areas – IF THE PROJECT is AMAZING – and not backed by a HUGE company sitting on cash. This is a VERY IMPORTANT DISTINCTION.
IF YOU ARE WORKING FOR FREE – simply to get “a” job – you risk destroying the entire business for everyone. In fact – your dream job – that you do for free – will be a job that some qualified person will no longer be getting paid for. And you’ll hurt that person’s chance of feeding their family in accepting to do that job for free. It’s quite that simple.
That being said: you do AT TIMES (and that’s the key – this is 1 project a year at most maybe – as Chase is suggesting – and I agree to that) need to develop your book – expand your horizon and your book – and roll the dice. I.E. – I’m a qualified to do “x” but have never done and proven that I can do “y” – so I’ll do it for little or nothing – BUT – one time only – AND I RETAIN THE RIGHTS! i.e. – you and I can use it for self-promotion and so can I. BUT you can never generate any profit for it – if you do – we split it. If anyone makes ANY money – we all benefit – that’s KEY.
You can see why this can very easily get very complicated – and dangerous. Some people – such as Chase Jarvis – know how to navigate these things. And make sure that if that “free” awesome assignment somehow become a hit – he’ll be able to profit in it – and not get caught feeling left out.
What worries me – is that most of David Hobby’s readers – are not pros. And when they offer to do things for free – they don’t have Chase’s business acumen. And they may do more harm than good to our industry – that is already struggling. If everyone starts working for free – it’s OVER for everyone. So I think we need to make this more clear out there – and help define this more carefully for everyone – both for the pros and the advanced amateurs.
So if you want to – do it max once a year. That’s my suggestion. DON’T LET IT BECOME A HABIT.
And by the way: this is coming from the guy who shot a little film called “Reverie” and did it “for free.” Canon did not pay me – or fund anything. It was something that I did on my own. I spent my own money to fund the production – and reeped great professional benefit from it. It was a big win for me and my career – no question about it. I own the work and copyright OUTRIGHT and made that clear.
BUT – when Canon asked to use the video after I produced it. I made sure they paid. And they paid well. A lot more than I would have made had I been commissioned to do the project in the first place. That’s the important part here.
This was supposed to be short … now I’m late and have to run out the door.
Very well said.
Personally I don’t believe in free work at all. regardless. I wish people would start taking responsibility for their craft and their profession. So many times I hear “why should I care if its hurting another photographer, so what if they have a family to feed” The thing is, one day that photographer will be them… I remember not that long ago that the photographic community was really quite united or together to some degree, but new doors have opened and there’s a flood of new people vying to succeed. It’s so important that we as a photographic community reach out them and bring them into the house. Thanks for talking about this because it’s vital to the survival of our and thier business, or to have at least some degree of longevity.
Free work should be left for personal work. It’s short term pain and long term gain.
Best Wishes.
This is another reason why us photographers must stay at the pinacle of our skill level and on top of the new technology that is both building our ability to create products and eroding our ability to protect and profit from those intellectual products. People think that because they can “take picture” that they will be able to remain as calm and collected as needed. What they fail to see is how we are shooting photographs and video while everyone else is experiencing the moment.
Those skills are two of the main reasons why we get paid to be at amazing events. And why we shouldn’t work for free.
I will contribute this post for free. Just this one.
I wish all these people worked for free forever — the herd needs thinning out. Go ahead and speed things up.
I think Hobby meant well when he wrote the post — the spirit of it was right. But i just wish he’d not used the word “free”. I wish he’d used the word “pro bono”, as in, if you’re just sitting around doing nothing in this awful economy, then get off your ass and go find a group, or organization, and shoot something where you get something out of it, and they do too. (Just make sure you don’t get sucked into only doing what THEY want).
Or why not the word “Go test for yourself”. The word “test” is so much better than “free”. Go find a body of work that you believe in, and shoot something now that you have the time.
The word “free” just has too many bad connotations.
What I fear is that all these people are going to read these articles and then go suck up to some for-profit company, and then bend over and do a job for “free” just to get their foot in the door. The Jarvis guy should have known better to have used the word “free”. Because, you just know, once you ever shoot something for free for a for-profit company, you can’t ever charge them down the road, without unspoken resentment. It’s just human nature.
Hobby and Jarvis both should correct and qualify their statements.
David Hobby Reply:
December 5th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
@Free Post
I strongly considered using the word(s) pro bono instead of free. But that made it seem like what I was talking about was pure charity. Which is far from the truth.
I think the point that is being missed by some (due to my lack of clarity, no doubt) is that the photographer is far-and-away the biggest beneficiary of these kinds of projects.
You are deciding, you are proposing, you are executing — all with the express goal of creating the exact type of work you would like to be paid (by others) to produce.
No work is being lost because of the project, as it would not have existed but for your initiation.
And in the end, you are hired to create what you show you can create in your portfolio. I simply see this as a win/win way of jump starting the exact content you want in your portfolio.
That someone else also benefits from it should not lessen the experience for you. Quite the opposite, I’d say.
And for the record, I am not approaching potential clients with these proposals. I agree, that would be shooting myself in the foot. It is the picture that is driving the process, not the client.
Most photographers are not out there shooting for money 24/7/365. There are pockets of time that can be put to use in other ways.
This is just my suggestion as a possible way to charge your creative batteries and do some good for yourself and others at the same time.
But to each his own, certainly. And thanks for your thoughts.
Free Post Reply:
December 5th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
David,
I’m sure your intentions were honorable when you wrote that, and you do make some good points, but when you choose a headline like that, it’s just like screaming “Fire” in a crowded theater. It’s borderline irresponsible. Words matter.
And then, when other people blog about your post, then they of course quote your Headline, which is again, more people screaming Fire in a theatre. It’s just exactly the opposite of the intended message, at least from my eyes.
The headline comes off like Desperation, or Bend Over. Even if you read the full story, the headline is just plain wrong. Young photographers will read whatever they read into your headline. And that cannot be a good thing.
“Testing”, or “Pro Bono”, or “shooting for yourself in slow times”, to me is a much more responsible Headline. Although, of course, it doesn’t have as much drama.
Just one opinion.
drmauro Reply:
December 6th, 2008 at 4:37 am
David, I’m italian and I’ve got to translate from english these blogs, so I did for yours. And I’ve to tell you that I’ve clearly understood what you told about working “for free”, that’s because I’m only an amateur (advanced??) and I’ve got a sort of day job; so I don’t need (fortunately or sadly) to earn money from shooting. I’ve found incredible all of this noise about working without asking for money: it’s just the way I’m used to! But, pay attention, I’m not stealing anything to anyone, because I shoot for fun, for growing up as a ‘photographer’ (seems so odd call me like this) and to express myself as human being: I’m not going to shoot for assignments given by someone could pay for, I’m taking photograph of people, places and scenes that nobody would pay me for, ever!
Stealing jobs is a very very bad habit, but I don’t know, it seems to me that here we are talking about different things. Words are very important, but free means not only “no money” but also “no chains”. It depends on who we are and our values.
william Reply:
January 16th, 2009 at 2:25 am
good
Thank you for clarifying this. This is why blogs by professional photographers are so valuable to amateur photographers and photography students. There is so much unshared knowledge and you provide a life lesson that will never be taught in the classroom. I have heard this before, but never explained as well. I think now is as best a time as ever to go over ways to navigate the business in times of economic downturns. This is not the first, nor will it be the last time the economy will tank, and it is up to us as individuals to figure out ways to stand out and be more creative without sacrificing our livelihood or the livelihood of others.
I think I can put this simply. Those working for free because no one will hire them are not at all a risk to those working for free to expand networks and fill portfolios.
If you feel threatened by this, maybe you need to step up your game. It doesn’t actually depreciate the market as much as so many people think. If someone wants free photography, chances are that they get the result of that – sub-par.
Anyone that’s willing to work for free probably should be working for free. Anyone that knows the value of their work will charge for it.
The fan boy club ambiance is becoming boring.
Signing out.
Cheers!
Vincent Laforet Reply:
December 5th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
huh?
If you want to work for free, the only client you should consider should be yourself.
In my experience (backed up here by Vincent’s observations about Reverie) shooting personal work almost always expands your client list in the long run.
I have no problem with pro bono work. I have certain charities (usually First Nations) that I love to help out.
But giving work away generally helps no one.
Fun and spirited discussion. But what’s funny is that my blog post from last night is not making any “big” claims. Every single photographer in the world has worked for free before, at some point, without exception. Period. Vince, you get it, as do some readers (although a good chunk of the discussion online today misses it). The simple concept really hinges on the word “work”. For example one could think of it in terms of “personal work” or “giving back” or “hunting for something interesting”. Do those labels change reality or simply perception? Sure prudence here is prudent, of course. Underscore that. I know the value of my work and can navigate those waters comfortably. So can lots of people. It’s been happening since the beginning of photography, since the beginning of business, and the beginning of time. Reverie is a great example and there’s thousands of other examples just like it.
I’m interested in fueling the discussion in part as an awareness builder and as someone who’s trying to call it what it is: nothing new. Certainly interesting, but nothing new. And my blog post yesterday was aimed at punctuating that, albeit more publicly, from the perspective of a busy pro as differentiated from an aspiring strobist, a struggling pro, a college student, or anyone else.
Let’s not forget how cool it is that we can share in this discussion in real-time from around the world.
Vincent Laforet Reply:
December 5th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Thanks Dave and Chase for posting here. Good to have this discussion going – especially amongst all of these blogs – and the mixture from one blog to the other.
Vincent,
I’m really happy to see so many people addressing this post today, it is an important discussion to have and one that I know is of great interest to so many people. I am glad to see your comments on this and agree with most of what you say from the business side of things.
Now as you said this is a loaded conversation which is open to all sorts of interpretation and it would of course be to the detriment of most to not discuss as many aspects of it as possible so it’s great to look at it from another angle.
I’m curious about what you think regarding the altruistic side of this concept, what about the budding professional who wants to break into this industry and doesn’t have the resources, connections or knowledge of a seasoned pro? Do we stay out of the conversation and continue to photograph kids and puppies for a little piece of what the business of photography has to offer? Is there even room in this marketplace for a large group of people looking to go pro to explore this idea? How do we work as a community to protect what we all love and hope to one day benefit from as well without contributing to the apocalypse?
Because it is so open to interpretation I am offering my interpretation of the idea.
I am a graphic designer who has always had a passion for photography and have been working hard for the past couple years to hone my skills. I am at the point where taking my camera out and shooting daily urban life, kids, weddings etc. is not enough to get me a body of work that I would consider marketable. Nor do I have the resources to hire models, assistants, makeup and hair, props, transportation and the like to do the work I would love to do. But I do have a camera and a passion for the work so I, like most out there, have to keep looking for ways in which I can make a difference in my portfolio. Creative ways of executing something that will stand out in the crowd.
This concept of shooting for free I think does have it’s place, there are so many things that we do not think about on a daily basis, many places where our work is needed and not provided because of this idea of “What’s in it for me?”.
Perhaps we could discuss some ideas where this type of approach would apply well. My initial thought is community, so many great non profit organizations who have an idea but no voice, is it wrong of me to work with them pro-bono in the hopes of creating something worthy of a portfolio. Or as you said with “Reverie” to do something without the promise of profit but perhaps the hope of through the work I produce?
How do we discuss the idea without writing a ten commandments of photography, how do we guide and steer this idea in a direction that works for everybody? I’m asking because I am one of those people interested in hearing what the community has to say. This is an industry that I am just starting to become a part of and of course I would want to protect it for my own future, the future of others working towards what I am working towards and of course those of you who I respect and admire. I look to all of you for guidance on so many aspects of this industry and this is no different.
I agree 100% that it is not my place to go to a company who has money to spend on a professional and offer my services for free taking that job out of the marketplace. Especially since once I do make to the level you are all playing at I certainly wouldn’t want to see that happening to me. But I am of course looking at all avenues to break out into the professional marketplace. How did you get here, what was your path? What bumps in the road have you hit and overcome? What made the biggest difference for you? At what point did you become marketable?
Someone stood up and said something that has made a great impact. Now that this question is out there in the public eye is it not the responsibility of the people who are at the leading edge to step up and guide those of us who may make up the next generation through education. It used to be that the current professionals learned what they needed to know about the business and art of photography through apprenticeship. Since that happens less and less and the technology has opened the floodgates, to anyone who has a passion and a camera to make it to the top, without the moral and value education that so many current shooters got along the way; could it be that this is a lesson that the current amateur community is in need of?
For me it’s not that I need the moral or value lessons but I do need guidance in how to make it without hurting the industry I am becoming a part of because come hell or high water I will be there eventually, I guess it’s just how I get there that I am concerned with. I would never want to jeopardize another shooters living for my own advancement but I will do whatever it takes to make it as a professional shooter and that is probably how a lot of people feel. Without conversations like this we all just do what we think is best and when weighing the options if we don’t have the benefit of the education some of those variables don’t even come into play where i’m sure they should.
I look forward to how this all plays out and learning a great deal from this conversation!
Vincent,
If you are worried about inexperienced business people entering the photography profession and charging nothing, then maybe you and Chase Jarvis could provide everyone with insights on how to negotiate the business side of things.
Vincent Laforet Reply:
December 5th, 2008 at 10:07 pm
Februus – I think we’re all going to try to do this as best we can. Understand that we don’t know it all – and don’t claim to. And we’ve also got our businesses to run – outside of this blog. So we’ll give it our best shot I’m sure. I guess I’m saying that i’m incredibly busy right now and probably won’t be able to get into it as far as I’d like to just now.
You guys have got it ALL wrong! It’s supposed to be “MONEY for nothing, and chicks for FREE…” Duh!
Okay, I do feel that many pros who were in business only as skilled camera operators and NOT as artists, well… They will, and SHOULD, go under. Most already have. True artists are picking up a 5D and exposure etc. is no longer a barrier. Sure, they may fail in business, but there is always a fresh supply, and it is their legal right to TRY. If WE as pros can’t beat them artistically, we need to come to terms with the fact that an era has ended. With almost every parent and their 450D + 70-300 IS at the kids’ soccer games, there simply may NOT be enough business for a pro to do that as their full-time job anymore. Tough luck, figure something else out or get a 9-5.
As a wedding photographer however, the stakes are quite different because it is a once-in-a-lifetime event that can encompass every single kind of lighting and shooting situation possible. I would go as far as to say that you are downright foolish to let uncle Joe shoot your wedding for free.
I don’t say this to protect my own business; I’m actually almost completely booked for spring / summer 2009 already, even in this recession. I say this to hopefully convince brides to hire a professional, period. But don’t take my word for it, try uncle Joe for yourself! Just be sure to blog about how the images & album turn out…
So that’s my take on “free”. Good for some, suicide for others.
Respectfully,
=Matt=
Vincent Laforet Reply:
December 5th, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Oh I’m not going to touch this one – but I just can’t let you get away with saying that “wedding photography” is more important than any other photography out there… just had to say that. You don’t think that Eddie Adam’s photograph of the assassination had just a little bit more relevance than the most important wedding image in history? sorry – couldn’t let this one go. All images – from a variety of fields and disciplines matter in their own way… I think you need to see that it’s not just sports photographers that need to be worried about soccer moms – you should be just as worried – or in fact not at all – the point I’m trying to make is: don’t think that since you’re a wedding photographer you’re any more immune from this than anyone else… that is: if you even need to be immune (yes I am playing devil’s advocate… )
Matthew Saville Reply:
December 8th, 2008 at 1:44 am
@Vincent Laforet, …Oh, Vincent, trust me if James Nachtwey came to my door and told me to just stop taking pictures right then and there, I’d humbly do it. I don’t think a single one of my images is ever cherished by more than just a couple people, let alone world-changing or truth-revealing.
I do also agree that wedding photographers are not immune. Many have gone out of business already. If it comes down to it, I’ll pack up shop too. My only creed is to simply urge brides to think twice before letting their uncle or cousin shoot their ONLY wedding (hopefully) as his or her FIRST wedding ever…
And don’t worry, I’m a friendly Smugmuger, I don’t pick fights, just like to debate. Say hi to Andy for me next time you two hang out!
=Matt=
Dan Anderson Reply:
December 5th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Maybe for your market you are doing well, but most wedding photographers in my market are dying because joe digital rebel will shoot your wedding for super cheep and give it to the bride on a CD, unedited. In my market, we are seeing the end of the full time pro wedding photographer.
This isn’t killing me though since I don’t specialize in just one type of photography.
Also, it seems hard to get Joe Public to appreciate the cost of pro photography. I guess that’s why I am glad most of my clients are editors, art directors, and public relations directors.
Matthew Saville Reply:
December 8th, 2008 at 2:12 am
@Dan Anderson, …true, uncle joe is indeed drowning the baseline market of wedding photography. If one’s business model involved shooting 50-100 weddings per year for $1000-$2000, well I’d be surprised if they lasted THIS long!
Still, it is a tragedy to see so many brides left with mediocre or even boring images, and no album of course, just a CD… On DPR you see post after post from newbie wedding photographers asking for critique of their perfectly exposed, perfectly sharp, boring wedding photos. The scary thing is that they usually get praise. People’s standards have taken a nose-dive. That is what I fight against. Even if I get trampled out of business by uncle joe in 2010, I’ll STILL strongly exhort every bride I meet to hire a wedding photographer whose work they truly admire and have followed for as long as possible. When it came time to hire MY wedding photographer for my own upcoming 2009 wedding, well, I’m paying $3000 (a LOW price in my book, but all I can afford) for someone whose work I have admired for years, in fact it was them who inspired me to get into portrait / wedding photography in the first place…
Take care and good luck in business,
=Matt=
Heathcliff Reply:
December 8th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
@Matthew Saville,
To say that anyone SHOULD go under is a pretty crass thing to say. Where do you get off ? True artists… please ! There are far more important issues in the world to be recorded by professional photographers than just mere weddings, and if the industry carries on the way it is we’ll be in real trouble…
I would love to get paid to explore my hobby, but at this point I don’t think I could find someone to invest in any project of mine. If someone were to tell me, “I’ve got this concept in my head that I’d like to capture as an image and I want you to help me achieve that” I would jump at the chance to do it – compensation or not.
The reason being that I love learning, love photography, love capturing images, but I hardly have the time to do it (I know time is made, not found, but reality+job+3kids=little free time). So, if I had something tangible to work on it would help me focus and make that time available to get it done.
For me a pro bono assignment would mean a learning opportunity, and at this stage in my hobby that would be worth more to me than money (although experience doesn’t buy choice glass 😉
Hi there Vincent,
I’m really enjoying your blog. I just recently found it as I am new to photography (I just bought my first camera in June). I have, however, been a working illustrator now since 2002 (when I graduated) and so I can relate to the topic.
I have made it my habit to NOT work for free…ever. It isn’t good for anyone. Something that you might want to address to your readers as well though, and just as bad for the industry, is working for extremely low rates. You don’t know how horrible it is for me to see freelancing illustrators come in to the companies where I’ve worked, and take on projects where they work for peanuts. It drives me up the wall. I’m in no position to tell them that they should be charging more though…conflict of interest. Something tells me that my boss wouldn’t like that. As a fellow artist though, it kills me. I feel like grabbing them and telling them, “WTF! Why would you charge so little?! Don’t you know you’re hurting us all?!”. It really is terrible…and at times I think that does a bigger harm to our industry than folks who work for free. Employers don’t get used to getting work for free. They know how lucky they are when they get someone to work on a project for free (in my opinion). They DO get used to getting work for cheap though.
My thoughts,
Jose Saenz
http://www.moremojo.blogspot.com
Vincent– I’m not asking this to be obnoxious, but more from a “spec” business perspective, which seems to be how you viewed the making of Reverie. Did your collaborators work for free as well? If so, did they benefit when Canon decided to compensate you for the use of the film, or was that negotiated up front when you contacted them to work on the project? I’m trying to get an idea of how such a situation might work. It seems like a touchy kind of thing from a business/personal perspective, especially if friends are involved.
Vincent Laforet Reply:
December 5th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
Sure – some of the people on Reverie were paid up front. Those that worked for free each received a nice bonus check from me when Canon paid me. Everyone shared in the benefit in the end.
Vincent, I’m glad to read your opinion backs up the gut feeling I had after reading that post last night.
Sounds to me like Hobby is saying ‘enjoy photography as a hobby for a little while and use any free time you have to build your portfolio with more interesting (to you) work’.
This sounds fairly reasonable to a non pro with a day job, but for somebody who intends to pay the bills working as a photographer, it just doesn’t compute to ‘work for free’.
I guess the difference might be like a pro journalist who works on his novel in his free time. The novel might eventually sell, but you don’t give away the journalism for free!
FYI: I’ve been reading from the beginning and enjoy your work! been showing tons of people the videos from the 5dmk2 and also your tilt-shift work!
I’m no pro. Hardly an amateur. But seems that Hobby was “preaching” more to you guys then he did to us with a day job. All we do is for free anyway, but it’s funny how you seem to be so afraid of “us” taking your job only because we do things for free. I would think you guys know how to value what you do and what you are paid for.
I’m all for balanced view, but after reading your post it felt as if your strongest point was money oriented, while David’s was oriented towards exploring, developing, learning and enjoying. And now we even know that Canon paid you well at the end. How nice of you. I guess the same reason why you have such a long list of the pro gear that you use, to show us which “work for free” that what you do is well paid.
This post was written for free as well 😉
enjoy the day…
greetings from Croatia
Hmm.
Work for “free”.
So if I shoot for “free”, and, let’s say a big monthly says come “work'” for us, we think we can afford you, are they going to give away their “product” for “free” too?
Work for “free”, a concept put forward by someone (David Hobby) who apparently can afford to follow this approach, unlike the rest of the rabble scraping by refusing to lick so low to the “clients” we already chase after for scraps….
In a related idea Mr. David Hobby, how can I get your wonderful DVD[s] free, I really could use them to improve my chances of getting some “free” work. I’m not too proud to grovel, just too proud to work for “free”.
Dani Reply:
December 10th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
@Kim Brown,
I am sorry, but I think you missed an important piece of David Hobby’s puzzle.
“When a company or organization asks you to work for free they may be (okay, probably are) taking advantage of you. When you are in control, no one can take advantage of you. You have the ability to offer your work for free, but you retain the ability to decline a request to work for free.
And to be clear, I am not talking about merely showing up at some company with a blanket offering to work for free. That’s insane. I am talking about having a photo in your mind that you want to make and pulling together the resources to make it happen. You are the prime beneficiary, but there is gain in it for your subject, too — which is what makes it very likely to happen.”
I am what you would consider a part-time pro. Part-time because I am retired and only take the jobs I want to take. i am not cheap and lose business to those who do not want to pay my prices. I try to uphold reasonable pricing for what we all do.
However, this past spring I decided to get into taking senior portraits. I really did not have a good selection of images of that age group. So I found a lovely young lady and made a deal with her (and mom) to use her as a model. I did a 4 hour shoot with many clothing changes and locations and got a ton of KILLER images. I did that for free. From it I had several paying referrals. The one free shoot on MY terms paid off in spades. I already have bookings for the upcoming 2009 senior season.
I did not work for free – I entered a partnership with another individual for mutual gain.
I also do pro bono work and shoot for Now I Lay Me Down To Sleep. Fifteen of those in 2008. Something many of YOU might consider. One of the most rewarding things I have done in my life.
Cliff
Bob Klyczek Reply:
December 5th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Cliff=
I think you’re the first to get David’s concept!
Congratulations!
Nate Kinnison Reply:
December 7th, 2008 at 1:04 am
@Cliff Lawson,
You hit it on the head with your phrase “entered a partnership with another individual for mutual gain.” The idea is that you aren’t doing an “assignment” from somebody else for free, but a self-directed project that in the short/long run however you want to look at it, provides for your professional business and fleshes out your portfolio.
Approaching a company that you want to work for in hopes of shooting-for-free until they want to pay is moronic thinking from a business standpoint. Why buy the cow if the milk is free? Why should the business hire you if you work for free – your work has no apparent value.
David Hobby’s example of photographing the Chefs and food for that local blog that doesn’t have anything going on photographically is a fine example of how an individual could take control of their own artistic endeavor (if building a portfolio of food and editorial portraits is the goal) and use it for mutual gain. I don’t think this undercuts anybody. The end result is a stronger portfolio that will be used for contracting more paid work.
In the end, the byproduct that is created (by those who understand what David Hobby is saying) turns out to be a machine of exponential growth for the business of photography. If 5 photographers undertake a personal artistic collaborative project that showcases a particular type of image, not only do they become more marketable showcasing a personal vision and style within their portfolio, they also create an extended network of people that would see the value in having quality photography in their operation and would likely be willing to hire or refer in the future. If these 5 photographers each undertake a personal project that in-turn generates 2 additional paid jobs…that’s 10 jobs added to the photography industry. I realize this is overly simplistic, but let’s look at things on a larger scale.
There will always be scabs to undercut the hard working individuals of our industry, but we can’t worry about this as an industry because there is nothing we can do to enact change except to show our work to prospective clients and give them a reason to buy into a professional photographer. Increase awareness of why what we do is valuable.
It has been fun reading everyone’s views on ‘working for free.’ What I’ve found is that if you stick to ‘not working for free’ companies will find a way to pay you for the job. Yes, it may be a very small amount, but it’s something. Even the most strapped companies will pay you if it means that what you provide will bring increase their sales, etc.
Now, that said, I agree with others that doing free work for good reasons – charities – is something that I will do. Donating a print for auction. Doing a logo design, or web design. . .
And, if you are just building your portfolio of shots it might be beneficial to offer up free headshots, etc in exchange for being able to use the prints to advertise your own work.
I have, at times, done work in which I did not receive payment for a year or two. These were projects that were ‘launching’ a new company and it is understandable that some are ‘cash strapped.’ Just make sure you have a solid contract if you do this. But, it is an option to getting through these hard times.
KC
Well said. Your emphasis, as well as Chase’s, is spot on.
These lines have to be tread very very carefully.
I like the limit of ONE a year MAX!
Damien Franco
…sure reminds me of…
“I won’t get out of bed for less than $10,000 a day.” – Linda Evangelista
Vincent Laforet Reply:
December 5th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
Without Linda – almost all of the other models would have to do it for free… thank god for her and the other models who set high standards – then the rest of us can be out there happy to scramble for the crumbs… do you really want Linda to set her prices lower? Ask yourself that – seriously… think about it.
Kim Brown Reply:
December 5th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
Given that the global market for “professional” photographers markets continue to shrink, I personally find the concept “ill conceived” at best. Any idea such as this, especially comparing a photographers monetary standing to the likes of a model or actor (some apparently work for “free”, yet their contracts are seriously back loaded, hardly making their work “free”), is equal to, to keep within the theme… comparing a top of the line pinhole camera to the Hasselblad H3DII-5….I mean, they both take pictures right?
While there are of coarse people who work for “free”, it’s simply arrogant for anyone to say we “should” work for “free”, even once a year. Let those who say it’s a good idea (esp. the “name” photographers who piped up) post their gross and net income, and I bet you’ll see some numbers seriously out of proportion to the rest of us.
Annie Leibovitz has a $2 million +- annual contract with Vanity Fair, does she work for “free”?
Vincent Laforet Reply:
December 6th, 2008 at 12:01 am
Kim – tell you what – why don’t you post your gross and net income on a public forum? Seriously? Do you understand how out of line you are by asking for anyone to do that? And Annie Liebovitz’s annual contract is a pitance – when you see that many of her productions (for one shoot) are north of $250,000 in expenses each….
You’re missing that the “numbers” are irrelevant here – as our our net incomes – we’re discussing principles here and concepts. Not attacking one another – but trying to have an mature exchange of ideas.
Kim Brown Reply:
December 6th, 2008 at 1:15 am
My point is very simple.
The “pros” seem to find work for “free” as something “acceptable” (by “pro”, I lean towards the Chase types (no offense meant)), as their financial situation is far more in the black than the VAST majority vast vast vast majority. It’s easy to say “yes I can see the advantages of this idea” when you have a bank account that contains a balance of four digits (including the decimal point). Most photographers these days are living job to job, hoping the check is actually in the mail.
Tim Reply:
December 6th, 2008 at 11:11 am
I understand Kim’s point. Most shooters don’t demand the kinds of fees that you, Vincent, and Chase command. But the flip side is that the ‘upper’ level shooters weren’t always at that level. They grew there.
To each his/her own, but personally, I refuse to make excuses about what level I’m on as a shooter. I’m good, but we can all be much better. The point that Hobby and others are making is that a way to grow into doing the kind of work you want to do is to create personal, self-funded projects that will aid that growth.
Like others have suggested, perhaps the word ‘free’ should be replaced. I’m adamant about maintaining licensing control over all of my images so any third party usage for any collaboration I have with someone must come through me.
It’s a matter of finding what works best for you to help you get to where you want to get without hurting yourself, other photographers or the industry.
Kim Brown Reply:
December 6th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
@Tim,
Thanks for following my point Tim.
I agree entirely with your comment “the ‘upper’ level shooters weren’t always at that level. They grew there”, but here’s the rub…..when they were at “our” level, I both doubt they would be willing to work for “free”, and I would venture, they would be just as unimpressed to hear those “established” pro’s with the $$$$$ fee’s speaking about working for “free”. It’s kind of sad that they (those commenting here) seem to have forgotten how it feels, however unintentional, to be told do some work for “free”. My point about their posting their incomes (and Vincent’s somewhat offended reply at such a thought) is that they probably net, on one or two jobs, what most readers here may “gross” in an entire year of effort. It’s too easy to look down and cast philosophy and enlightenment down upon the masses, however well intentioned, while commanding kingly sums to take a “photograph”. I admire the big guys who posted here, they shoot some amazing stuff, but you were us not so long ago, and given the fickle nature of things these days, may once again return to our ranks.
Nate Kinnison Reply:
December 7th, 2008 at 1:22 am
@Kim Brown,
Listen, it’s not about the money or the salaries. I AM a relatively new photographer to the industry and my work is solid, marketable, and consistent. We are not being told to “work for free” – we are being told to build our portfolios using a proactive approach!…to not sit and wait for the work to come to us, but to get off our butts and create a market for ourselves. How is actively building your portfolio and creating a network with others on a collaborative project bad for your business!? If anything it creates an awareness on behalf of the public what solid photographic work will do for a business or other cause.
I’m not talking about shooting a wedding for free, but shooting a bridal session of a past client, or of your local supermodel in a remote location for prints to showcase what you can do as long as it builds your portfolio and increases the chances of you being hired in the future.
Isn’t this marketing at it’s core?
Matthew Saville Reply:
December 8th, 2008 at 2:41 am
@Nate Kinnison, (and @Kim Brown,) Indeed, everybody has to start somewhere, and shooting “for fun” is, well, FUN, and good experience. Not EVERY photographer can afford ArtCenter / Brooks. Many of the successful pros in MY field (weddings) have almost no formal training. They probably shot “for fun” quite a few times when they were just starting out. They probably still shoot for fun, if a great opportunity comes along. Surely Vincent made Reverie for fun!
But it is the MAGNITUDE of the digital shoot-for-free phenomenon that has panicked the everyday pro. It is NOT the casual shooting for fun, or for charity, etc. that sends out a shockwave to the everyday pro. It is this tidal wave of D-rebel and 5D touting amateurs who are shooting TONS of photos for free. It is the moms with their new 450D + 70-300 who are threatening the little-league pro’s business. It is the dads with their new 5D mk2 who are setting up the tripod in the living room and making their own christmas greeting card this year. …By the millions…
Respectfully,
=Matt=
You’re dumb, dumber than I thought. Free is great. Hoddy had it right, you don’t. Anyone who thinks a collapsed industry like print could die anymore than it already has because other individuals want to pay-it-back or pay-it-forward and to do their own thing to get ahead is only thinking about themselves. Shame on you. What more do you want in this industry, but to solidify your place as being published and making money. Grow-up and realize you’re not that great, your time will come to an end just like those before you and others will backfill your space. This won’t mean a thing to you because you will have moved on to either film/video or to seeing yourself as the next Arnold Newman or something…
Hoddy’s point was very simple. In tough times people learn to innovate. That’s the message. From innovation, comes change, sometimes even new paradigms. That new paradigm might not include you, unless you grow yourself. But you can’t control the whole industry, you know that, so don’t try to poison the soup or the chef’s ingredients.
Get over yourself, make you’re money however you see you should and stop trying to tell others what is good for business or for them.
Vincent Laforet Reply:
December 6th, 2008 at 12:04 am
Who the hell is Hoddy? It’s David Hobby.
dumber Reply:
December 6th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Who the hell is Vincent Laforet? It’s Vincent Lafool.
Marshall Reply:
December 6th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
@dumber, Good way to undermine any argument you might have had.
nada Reply:
December 6th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Remember, to keep smiling just like that picture to the left or you’re image will be tarnished. Child…
Nate Kinnison Reply:
December 7th, 2008 at 1:31 am
@nada, REALLY? – come on…if you have time to chime in like that, why don’t you spend it in an anger management class and spare us the rant.
David Hobby’s point has nothing to do with “tough times” spawning “innovation.” It has to do with getting off your butt and being proactive about building a portfolio all the while creating a market for your own personal style.
Nada Reply:
December 9th, 2008 at 1:08 am
@Nate Kinnison,
“David Hobby’s point has nothing to do with “tough times” spawning “innovation.” It has to do with getting off your butt and being proactive about building a portfolio all the while creating a market for your own personal style.”
Uh, which is called “innovative” for most…
Signing up for anger management classes today, thanks for your advice.
This is an important and good clarification (in my opinion). Regardless of your stance, these discussions on high profile blogs will allow photographers to make informed decisions with their pricing strategy.
79XXX, bien joué! Et bravo!
Everyday I get emails and requests for me to work for free or “TFP”. I have to say I’m with Vincent on this. I don’t “work for free”, however, I have got many shots in my portfolio that weren’t for a paying client.
The majority of these shots were because, and to quote Vincent’s own original post… I knew how “to do “x” but have never done and proven that I can do “y” “. So the way I look at it, I was my own client as I set the brief and commissioned myself. My payment was that I gained knowledge that I didn’t have before. Many of these images have since helped bring in more clients, which again is payment.
Jay McLaughlin
Vincent, scroll down to the bottom of this page. The very last line reads “Powered by WordPress 2.6.1.”
I don’t know if you paid someone to install or customize WordPress for you, but I use WordPress on my own blog and I know that hundreds of people chose to work thousands of hours to create WordPress, they chose to make it available for free, and that’s the software we’re both using. There are paid alternatives to WordPress (for instance, Movable Type), but you are not using any of them.
A debate that is fairly similar to the one you’re conducting now took place in the software profession throughout the 1980s and 1990s, with similar polarization. It’s largely over now. There are lots of people who work for free, there are plenty of people who are paid ridiculously well for their software efforts, and there are many in between. Many of the people who “work for free” also profit from their work, through individual consulting gigs or by building service-based businesses such as wordpress.com that are built upon the free software that they’ve created. Indeed, if you look at almost any of the major software offerings from Apple or Adobe (for example), you’ll find lots of open-source software embedded in the commercial products you use every day. In other words, the software industry has largely made peace with “free,” and there’s still plenty of money to be found in the business.
So I guess I’m wondering if you believe the professions of photography and software development should be treated differently. And, if so, why?
I ask because I am both a professional software developer and an amateur photographer, and I find the parallels fairly interesting. Substitute “software” where David wrote “photography” and my career looks an awful lot like the success stories posited by his article. In the early 1990s, I did a bunch of free software work. I released open-source libraries that solved some major problems that Mac developers were facing at the time. I did it just because I enjoyed it. What I didn’t anticipate was the visibility it gave me. My “free work” led fairly directly to getting to know some of the more important people in the software community and, from there, to some great offers of employment. I’m still enjoying a very successful career in software today in large part due to that free work.
If I can launch a successful software career on the back of free work, why should an aspiring photographer — or a working photographer looking to rebuild a slumping career — do anything different?
Jeffrey Friedl Reply:
December 6th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
His blog is served by Apache and hosted on Linux, both of which were huge efforts involving millions of man hours…. all done for free by people who still had to feed their families (for most, with their day job… police officer, photographer, engineer….). Yet, the world hasn’t collapsed yet.
Isn’t the “for free” a fake misconception? Lately what I’ve seen is more people making little extra money from photography when they have their regular income from other profession that pay their rents and put food on their children’s mouth.
For a professional photographer, my advise is, if you have to work for free – go ahead, but as a software developer, a doctor, a bank employee, or even as a police officer. NEVER, but NEVER as a photographer except for the reasons already stated by Vincent. It’s just a matter of business fairness, don’t you think?
Andrew Reply:
December 10th, 2008 at 6:43 am
@Mario Proenca, Why’s it fair that photographers should make more money than say, a starving artist? Or an actor waiting tables while hoping for a 1 in 1000 chance at a bit part?
There’s no such thing as “business fairness”. There are a lot of photographers who can do a “good enough” job for 90% of jobs. People will undercut you on price on this kind of work. If you can’t match their price cuts, you have to offer something that people will value more or you’ll lose customers.
If a pro can’t beat an amateur who’s working for free, then the pro should either get better or find a different profession. “Free” should be the least of your worries.
Mario Proenca Reply:
December 10th, 2008 at 7:36 am
@Andrew, An amateur is an amateur, a pro is a pro, and the big and only difference is that one does it for fun – amateur, the other as his job. It is this that most people don’t understand – having the money to buy good photo equipment and some spare time to do some photos (good or bad ones) doesn’t make you entitled to “work” on the business. For that, either you become a pro and start your career evolution or stay as an amateur and enjoy your luck to produce work for your own satisfaction.
Just imagine that I had some good money to spend and start baking some bread, as an amateur baker, and giving it for free in my entire neighborhood. The guy who does it to pay his bills would either kill me of kill himself as I would be ruining his market and his only job. I could even do better bread than him but at that time either I would enter the game and become a pro with all the associated risks or stay out of the business and bake just for myself and for fun.
Andrew, in summary, what I mean with business fairness is that either you get into the profession and become a pro with all the risks and pro market competition or stay out of the park where you’re not playing fair with those who do it as a sole profession. This doesn’t mean that there aren’t amateurs much, much better than pros – there are lots of them out there, but if they see their talent and are willing to get on the photo business, then take the risk and let off their full time 9 to 5 jobs and start living and paying their bills with their fantastic photographer job.
Nice post, probably I will write something about it in italian on my website, because I think this question is very important, I really agree with you Vincent.
Hey, I know where Canon got some of the money to pay you so much or the video. They flooded the market with kits instead of bodies. No one who would buy this body would want that lens. Since you seem to have their ear you might mention to them that this was a cheap money grubbing stunt that people will remember for a long time in the current environment.
Vincent,
FWIW, I think your comments on the matter are even toned and appropriate. As anyone could have predicted, this has turned into a mini shitstorm because it is such a sensitive topic. There has also been speculation that Hobby posted this in order to draw traffic to his site. I don’t know the man personally but, I think his thesis is too well thought out to be nothing more than a traffic grab. As well, I get the impression that he is trying to be a steward to the profession.
Unfortunately, his audience might have been the wrong one to float this concept to because many of his readers are semi pro, young new shooters and serious hobbyists. This is an audience that will still pay to see their byline in a publication and in many cases, never seek to make a living shooting and thus, can afford to “buy exposure”. That said, many won’t likely be able to make the fine distinction between “pro bono”, career advancing work (like Reverie) and taking income away from full time shooters by shooting for low end clients gratis.
In the end, you can’t stop the tide or hold back the hordes. Pros just need to keep raising the bar (like you did with Reverie) and keep marketing themselves within their niche (check out Tim Tadder’s work, not a lot of weekend warriors can do this with two pocket strobes and a MacPro). Lastly, keep sharing and educating shooters about the value of photography and how important it is not to commoditize the work.
I’ve always said, if you have a piano, you have a piano but, if you have a camera, you’re a photographer.
Totally agree with Vincent’s comments. Working for free might be OK in those circumstances when there is some future, assured, benefit from doing so, whatever that benefit may be (financial, reputation, recognition, portfolio enhancement for example). But as a general practice, not a chance. Would you have the same faith in a free lawyer compared to one who insisted on charging you for his/her services? Why do we regularly compare “cheap cars” with “expensive cars”? It’s a matter of quality – you get what you pay for.
Those who take advantage of free services, after some period of time, frequently realize that they would have been better off paying. I have lost count of the number of times clients complain about using cheap or free stock photography for their marketing materials, only to see another company, often a competitor, using the same photography.
I have to disagree with Dan’s comments about having a camera and being a photographer. If you have a piano, you are not necessarily a pianist. Likewise, if you have a camera, you are not necessarily a photographer.
“Working for Free”. What a great headline. But in fact, nothing is ‘Free’.
“Pro-bono”, “testing”, “for stock” however you describe it, is usually working on spec (on speculation) of some reward, whether monetary or not.
Many more of us are doing more spec work due the current economic conditions.
Not a bad thing in my opinion unless we give it away without reward.
There’s an interesting thing happening on this post, and I think it has as much to say as the post itself.
Almost (that’s almost) every response has in one form or another agreed with “the Strobist’s) idea. That Vincent and Chase also thought favorably also have been almost universally applauded as well.
Now, everyone is entitled to their own opinion without question, but I wonder….what would the people adding their comments say if perhaps Chase had said “what a terrible idea”, what would the flock do?
I’m not commenting on the topic, simply the near unwavering support of an idea voiced by a “name” in the business, and agreed to by other “names”.
If someone such as myself, a “total who the hell’s that” posted this idea, would it get the same support, my bet…nope.
Just an interesting observance.
If amateurs can provide work close enough to your own that the clients can go with them, then it is not the amateurs with the problem, nor the clients, but your business plan. The world does not owe you a job.
Unfotunately the pro-bono and project/assignment uniqueness aspects of Mr Strobist’s original posting wew (predictably) lost on the 5D weilding masses.
We’ve now got people looking like they’re going to ring up IBM and offer to shoot their annual report for free for the experience.
The problem with working for free is once you’ve done that for a client, you can never charge proper rates. The next time your “client” (not really a client if you gave your services for free) comes a-calling for an assignment you may decide “hey I’ll charge a little bit for this one”. But you won’t get the gig, because down the road there’s another 10 guys doing exactly what you did…offering to work the gig for free – doh!
Not only that but word of mouth will have you as the “guy that works for free” in your local area. So many newbies see this idea of working for fre or for “a credit line” thinking they are “getting a foot in the door” but really they are screwing the very chances of earning a decent living in the job they so want to aspire too.
It’s a shame these threads always seem to end up as “amateur or enthusiast v pro” because that’s not the argument. However some of the smugness that the enthusiasts seem to have may well be wiped out next year when their cube-farm job is done by an Indian or Chinese worker at 1/100th of the cost and they have to hock their shiny new 5D into the pawn shop to make the mortgage repayments?
When push comes to shove, especially in a recession, cheap will almost always be good enough. Nobody looks a gift horse in the mouth least the wily publishers who will chew you up and spit you out.
PP
Matthew Saville Reply:
December 8th, 2008 at 2:59 am
@ProPhotographer, I used to fear this theory was true, that the industry would almost cease to exist as more and more photographers shot for free, got labeled as the guy who shoots for free, and then could never rise above that price tag because of the next 10 photogs also willing to shoot for free.
But over the past four years I enslaved myself to rising above such a situation. I shot a couple times for friends just for fun, and instantly realized how much work it was. It was like pulling teeth to rise above a $0.00 price tag, but here I am now looking to pull five figures a month in 2009.
It *is* possible. Un-deniably, the industry is at least undergoing a change of the guard. And maybe it’s unfair or at least unethical for each new aspiring pro to trample on the older pros, but surely the legal right is there to TRY starting a business. And DEFINITELY it is in all of our clients’ best interest to keep a high standard for professional photography. Because if dad and his D3 can get just as good photos as you or I can get, well, you and I aren’t entitled to a job by any means.
But I for one am determined to totally rock dad’s world, blow him away with my images and make a living doing so… So far so good…
Respectfully,
=Matt=
Mario Proenca Reply:
December 8th, 2008 at 4:38 am
@Matthew Saville,
Another side of this “work for free” issue isn’t just the strict “work for free” that we, pro photographers, have do deal with. It is also a legal question that even the governments aren’t seeing – and they should because they are loosing millions of bucks in taxes.
As pro photographer, every work will have a corresponding invoice that justifies to the client their spent money and for us to pay our taxes and keep away from problems with authorities. On the other side, those “dads” and “cousins” even if not working for free, they’ll work for “almost free”, which I can’t figure if it isn’t worst than “real free”, and won’t issue any invoices nor pay the taxes.
Have a look of what is happening in stock agencies like Alamy, iStockPhoto and so on… the great majority of the contributers will grab their cameras during their full time job’s holidays, snap some 50MB travel photos, sell them there and when payment is to come (if it happens), they don’t have to issue any type of invoice to the agency. They just have to receive their bucks in their bank accounts, which hopefully will pay part of their nice family holidays.
Then there are the other “work for free” guys (so many I unfortunately know), that have their contracts with their newspapers and magazines and after their shift will go out to produce some imagery for almost nothing – $75 bucks /day rate. Some of them even selling their work (400 hi-res images DVD) to other mags and papers for $100.
Okay, what bothers me here, is not as much as if I’m really afraid of loosing all the work – which for certain I won’t, but these people undermine the market and lowering the bar for what companies usually are willing to pay for a an assignment of for the usage of produced images.
Here’s a great example: UK photographer Nick Knight produced Portugal’s latest travel promotion campaign for, allegedly, 500,000 Euros. Now the Portuguese minister is contracting Steven Klein for about 1,000,000 (one million) euros for the next 2009 campaign. Guess what?!… some of the guys (“pros”) who are working extra time for just a couple of bucks/day rate started a national online petition (which of corse I’m against) to stop Steven Klein for earning his money and for the work to be “distributed” to national photographers.
So if it isn’t for free, there will always be someone willing to kick your ass with a “let me do it – almost for free”.
So glad this topic has been brought up, esp by vincent, whose photgraphs i really dig. I am 100% against working for free. Self promotion, yes, of course. i shoot alot for small underground mags in the us, canada, and all over europe. some of the people behind those mags are my friends. photographer/stylist couples who started a magazine, etc, people like us. i always make sure if i am asked to contribute it represents my work 100% – no compromise. When i get asked to shoot a catalog or ad for free, it gets turned down instantly. no second thoughts. it is simply not an option. anyone who feels they need to practice there are plenty of other path to choose from. free work only leads to more free work. think about it. you really dont believe that a “client” will pay you once you have shot for free for them.
Excellent post! In my opinion, people in general don’t appreciate “free.”
For more on this subject, check out my interview with professional photographer & writer Richard Wong at http://fieldreport.wordpress.com/2008/08/04/outdoor-adventure-baby-boomer-lifestyle-photographer-sherri-meyer-interview/.
One of the early photography jobs I had, the owner had a strict rule: either clients paid the full rate, or nothing–no “friendly discounts”. He was active in the small community, and had a lot of friends who were hitting him up for little things all of the time, and he’d decide on a case-by-case basis what to do. Then he made sure the “client” who got free work understood that it was charity work because he supported their cause, and they shouldn’t always expect it. Then they’d resist, and he’d jam his free work down their throats. He felt that discounts made the distinction too blurry–that people should know that they were taking advantage of him, and that he was permitting it for a specific reason and project. He would NEVER had done free work for any commercial undertaking or organization, though.
For instance, he was very active in the local amateur theater. Once he sent me to shoot promos for their play, and they didn’t pay a cent for anything. . .but I got paid my full rate, by him.
In retrospect, I think it was an excellent plan, and I’ve continued it into my current work. It’s an effective way of networking and gaining real clients, if it’s done properly. Many times in a small community the person you help with one of their charitable projects will remember you when they have business to do.
On the other hand, I have also turned down commercial “free” (“your photos will be all over our annual report!”) work with a derisive snort, making it totally clear that no, the commercial power company, for instance, is not a charity, and felt good doing telling them so.
It’s all about knowing where to draw lines. I think this is particularly important in a small community, which is a situation many of you aren’t in.
All stock photographers work for free until they hopefully sell an image. So why not build your portfolio and experience using your own money.(you paid for college why not your portfolio)
Just be sure to hold true to the real “value” of your work and not sell at below market just to get “some” income back from a self made project otherwise you will encourage clients to keep looking for “portfolio” building photographers every time… which does seem to be happening more and more..
ProPhotographer Reply:
December 8th, 2008 at 8:30 am
@Matt,
“All stock photographers work for free until they hopefully sell an image”
Nope that’s not how it works here. I make images that *sell* as stock, that’s what I shoot. I’m in business to make money. No hit and hope here. sorry.
PP
Matt Reply:
December 13th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
@ProPhotographer, been shooting stock for 30 years… not all sell … and I pay for my expenses upfront.
He Said, She said.
Harrington say’s this.
Hobby say’s that.
LaForet proclaims this.
Jarvis say’s that.
He Said She said.
Why do so few people seem to understand that David Hobby’s post has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with WORKING FOR FREE. I understand the essence of his post to simply be thus: If you have the time, and want to diversify, create your own project, and get your “models” (be it people, architecture, whatever) on board by offering to do it gratis — TFP as it were. This has nothing to do with “working for free”. What it really is about is “develeloping and proving your skills by getting others to collaborate with you for free” — in cases where normally you would NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY to do that kind of shoot.
As for all the posted rants by people not wanting to have their business undermined by having other photographers replace their gigs for free — they clearly did not read David’s well thought out post.
Kim Brown Reply:
December 8th, 2008 at 12:24 am
@James,
His (David’s) “well thought out post”, is from the position of an established photographer. The readers of his (and other) blogs are mostly at the very low end of that food chain.
Well thought out…perhaps, but given that pro photographers are already on the endangered list thanks to cheap DSLR’s and cellphone cameras combined with the “I wanna’ be a paparazzi too” mentality, any mention of “work for free” is probably not going to generate an entirely fuzzy feeling of happiness throughout the land.
Kunty McGee Reply:
December 8th, 2008 at 12:52 am
@James,
They don’t understand because the title is “Four Reasons to Consider Working for Free”… whether or not David Hobby wanted it or not, he’s a cult leader. And, unfortunately, a large portion of his blind followers are lowest-common-denominator types. No offense to them, they’re just buyin’ up the presorted gear from mpex.com and passin’ their virtual photography class with flying colors… it’s awesome.
I think he has a responsibility to reevaluate who his audience is and make certain he’s communicating as clearly to the largely-populated bottom end of the spectrum, as he is to the clever cream-of-the-crop. Especially when he’s going to drop a bomb like this. I’ve already seen ads on craigslist that are offering up FREE PHOTOGRAPHY to any local company that needs it. Wow, look at those cult flunkies go! It sucks because, like you said, they don’t get it. But there’s an army of them! And their leader is setting them out with live ammo on a mission they don’t fully understand.
Maybe he doesn’t realize the power he has, but I hope he figures it out before making another irresponsible post. I actually think it was a fine post, but only when taken with all the finer points underscored.
Vincent, Thanks for taking the time to write your thoughts on this topic. You very clearly articulated a lot of things I felt after reading the strobist entry. I hope many will read this and at least see this from another angle before nailing up their “free photography” signs.
K. McGee
As a photographer and as someone who works in the photographic field (for Canon) I couldn’t agree more. DO NOT WORK FOR FREE. If it is a really great cause give them a really great discount. If the work is for commercial purpose, charge what your work is worth. We did not pay Vincent to produce Reverie and happily paid handsomely for its use (I would have liked to pay a little less but felt that the end product was worth every penny spent). I felt that we would reap great benefit from Reverie so I felt we should pay. Trust me, it was worth every penny spent and gray hair this project produced. If you want your customers to value your work you must do so also. The only way to do this is by charging a fair price. Don’t overcharge and don’t undercharge. In order for your images to be valuable to your clients you must value them first. Canon never asks photographers to work for free but we offer a fair price for the intended usage.
My 2 cents.
congrats on a lots of things Vincent. Standing up for the industry by making the up and comers aware of the dangers of simple shooting for free. i like the idea of ‘method to the madness’. Reverie is a terrific example. well done man. p.s. we met at the canon seminar here in vancouver canada, last summer.
I just watched “The Making of Reverie” (very cool BTW) and noticed that the “video support and hosting donated by SmugMug.” As someone who hosts a handful of websites I couldn’t help but translate the conversation from photography to web hosting. It seems to me that not paying/charging for this service is devaluing it for others.
As Dilbert’s creator Scott Adams (Hi Scott) has said repeatedly in his blog, we are “living in a commodity world.” Anytime the barrier to entry is low, as it is for photography, web hosting, etc., there will be many competitors. Photography has largely become a commodity but what will never become a commodity is good communication, customer service, and success. Like Chase pointed out, “be undeniably good,” there is no commodity in that.
When you work for anyone for free you have risks without rewards. My mom told me “son, you take risks to reap rewards” Who argues with their mom?
I can work for free for myself. I’m a much better client than the client who isn’t paying me and I retain the right to all my work.
With usage rates dropping all the time and photographers coming into the business willing to do the job for less, the last thing we want to do is to start working for free
The most recent example is from the tiny town where I spend weekends outside the big city: a local “trust fund” baby, every year or so, wants to *prove* he’s not a wannabe, that he’s a “pro.” He creates, on spec, and licenses, for free, for local p.r.; a wintertime tourism draw that adds a couple of million dollars to the local economy, or a private prep school that bills millions for private tuition, or a private hospital that generates millions in annual revenues. He gets the pleasure of thinking himself a pro, while they collect the revenues.
I am still wondering what makes a “pro” versus a “semi-pro”. As a writer, I became a professional with my first magazine submittal and have not looked back. I get paid for writing. I get paid when people when people want to use my images for their marketing. I get paid when there is an agreement to pay me. Same for technology. I truly believe that I would be in a stronger position today if I hd agreed to work for nearly free wages 15 years ago. But I had to earn at least enough to pay my bills.
I’m all for offerring folks the chance to use my work, and I’ll shoot for free but discuss how they want to use the image before we decide how I will deliver. Maybe this is not normal, but I don’t know if I’m a pro or not so I don’t really care. I just know that sometimes the money is great and other times I’m glad I have a couple income streams.
As for the field dying, I don’t think that is really happening. I think all fields have tighten their belts, and those that can stay afloat will. The market sucks. That makes it ever important for people to carefully choose how they spend their money. For weddings, it may be a once in a lifetime event, but most brides don’t look at the images more than a few times. It sounds great to charge way above market for wedding photos, but I’m thinking the current recession will force brides to look at their budgets and reconsider how they allocate scarce funds.
Work for free if you can, but don’t give away the farm. Make sure you have something in return. That is my take.
Nancy
Where you wrote “And make sure that if that “free” awesome assignment somehow become a hit – he’ll be able to profit in it – and not get caught feeling left out.” was the real gem of advice. I found encouraging your stance on copyrights. I need my day job still but I don’t break out the camera for free (other than a few rare family gigs that were my idea and great pleasure – rare). Thanks for bringing that article to our attention. Your pictures stun.
Be interested to hear your critical distinction between semi-pro or wannabe and actual true “pro.” Have a good one.
WORD!
thank you for this post.
I wish there were more thinking like you.. seeing the whole thing and not only themselves.
Our branch and the media branch (at least here in Germany) is not easy… everyone’s trying to beat down the price and it’s getting worse.
thanx and greetz from Germany…
(hope I’ll get my 5D this Saturday *g*)
Well Said.
If someone who is a so called pro cannot compete with hobbyists doing gigs free just for the kicks – you’re doing something wrong. And no, the industry is never going to be the same, cheap and good (enough) SLRs are lowering the barrier of learning advanced techniques. With the market flooded by knowledge, its simple supply and demand economics. The supply of “good enough” photogs is simply more than ever.
K. McGee Reply:
December 11th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
@Kalle,
So, IN with enough free knowledge to be “good enough”, OUT with quality, ethics and a general respect for the pool you’re pissing in?
This “good enough” attitude is possibly more dangerous than giving the photography away. Now you’re out there teaching the client side of the pool you’re pissing in that “good enough” is all they need… perfect.
The biggest problem with your attitude is that anyone “doing gigs free just for the kicks” should NOT be putting themselves in a position of competing with a pro for a paying gig. This shouldn’t even need explaining, but it obviously does… it’s like Coach Hobby injected his team with steroids, now they’re putting their new powers and attitude (‘roid rage) to use by vandalizing the neighborhood. Good times for everyone.
Vincent, I think the medium to low end market is hosed at this point. I am doing decent, but I don’t share anymore, it is deadly to do so. It is SO ironic that the very same people who want to know where to sell photos, how to light and how to “Break in” are the ones saying, the amateurs with digi-cams are taking the market down so if we don’t like it, tough!
It is the attitude that gets me, really.
And here is what I wrote to David Hobby, we’ll see if he posts it:
“OK, in theory this sounds good. It has been going on for years actually and in the film only days, it was not frowned upon too badly. But these are different times. Ad revenues have plummeted and if this economy stays on the low end for too long, it could forever change consumer spending habits and the way ads are valued in kind.
What bothers me the most is you do not once go into the potential impacts this could have on the very industry you are trying to break into if it is done en masse. And also, here is the big one: Not once do you mention a very important missing link….By doing this kind of work, you are in the position to educate the person you are collaborating with about the actual business, which has zero to do with how good your portfolio or your strobes are by the way. You make no mention of doing this. It concerns me greatly that you are disseminating this kind of shooting for free without taking the steps to educate who might be a future client. How about crafting some inroads for that to all of these unexperienced future business people on your blog?
And lastly, I have noticed a lot of you take workshops of all sorts and often regard the well known names who made a name for them selves with film years ago. Well, here is a little inside info….the information they are sharing with you now would help you craft a business in photography oh, about 15-20 years ago, but not now. These guys are great shooters, many are my friends, but they have made their fortunes, put money away and have nothing to lose and everything to gain in making 10k-20k in teaching workshops. The catch phrase for business today is a nasty one. “The best way to make money in photography today is off of other photographers” That is what a well known workshop teacher said in a closed group setting..
So the bottom line is you are teaching people how to build a portfolio for a job that might not exist in the future because of the precedent it sets without the educating of the subject about proper fee scales being a part of the condition. A great portfolio is going to be of no use to you if you and hundreds of others like you have simply diluted the fee scale in trying to build your style and look.
It does not matter how good you are, if you are not a good business man or employ one, you are never going to make it. I hope you can see this, it should be crystal clear, honestly…”
I used to make it a habit of helping budding shooters, I used to have publically viewable web sites, but no more. I am completely revamping the way I do business, I don’t have a choice, photography is who I am.
But for the people who say things like: “I am an amateur, I have no intention of making money off of my photography so I don’t have anything to lose, so suck it up or change your game.” How in the heck can you expect to continue to gain information from pros with an attitude like that?
Vincent,
I also wrote a posted an article on the debate over free. Please check it out over at
http://blog-pix.blogspot.com/2008/12/free-photos-part-1.html
and
http://blog-pix.blogspot.com/2008/12/free-photos-part-2.html
I’m very surprised at the heat of the flames in this thread. I am new to the field and my progression I think is pretty typical. First, friends and family commenting on my work — “you really should quit your day job, etc.” Next, I entered some photography contests and won a few awards. OK, maybe I can do this for real — but I needed a well rounded portfolio to show potential customers shots that they could relate to. My kids are grown (no grandkids yet) so I offered to shoot a few hours of my friends kids (from infants, to toddlers, to tykes, etc.) In exchange for a few hours of modeling (and signed releases), I gave each family a photo book. What did I get for this “free” work? Tons — print requests, lots of referrals, and a more robust portfolio. As one poster pointed out — this IS Marketing 101. I didn’t “steal” anybody’s shoot. This is my personal TRIAL program, and it’s a win/win for everyone involved. Those of you with established reputations don’t need to do what I did — but to get the referrals, I needed to get these friends pics of their kids in their hands…
I just had to come back to this blog and drop a note that no one will read because of it’s age but I need to.
I am seeing almost every day someone jump on the bandwagon and write about working for free. Why would anyone want to do this? Because it a fun profession? When My boy and I first met Vincent, Jared asked him how he became such a good photographer and Vince responded “A LOT of Hard Work”
Now, if you work for ABC company and CBC company called you and asked you to come over and work for them but for free.. would you? NO? Then why in heavens name would you do this for free? Because it’s fun, glamour? WHY?
Now, here is the biggie. I’ve not yet seen one single person that writes it’s ok to work for free even write one line about maybe offering their camera and talent to a worthy cause, A Charity, How about an Asst. Living home for some portraits and make them feel better. Wanna work for free? THERE is your chance. And if you have children, you could bring them to help assist you. Now that’s working free that’s worth something.
For all the writers that hide behind their keyboard and tell you to work for free, I wonder how much Charity they do that helps? Never mind, I already know the answer.
I agree with Vincent Laforet; and I am not a successful photographer. I do mostly weddings and senior portraits. My business is growing, but it is far from my leaving my day job. It can be taxing to the spirit when one wants to start up a business one can’t afford, in a city filled with seasoned pros (whose work I’m in awe of and respect). Despite this, I don’t provide jobs for free or an amount that would ultimately force me to pay out-of-pocket so I can put it in my portfolio. Even my own projects require someone else’s time and my money. Everything costs. Nothing is for free. But none of that matters.
I’ve never forgotten the one thing about photography we all know to be true: being top-shelf was not the reason we picked up our cameras in the first place. The cameras we broke, rolls of film we bought and computers we changed; the time spent learning, self taught or apprenticed, just to get it right and show it. We simply DID it and loved it. Was it for free then? No. Our work gets out there because of who we are, what interests us and how we capture that. Somewhere along the way, a love for what one does gets noticed. Our opportunities come from this. This isn’t meant to be for free because it never was free to begin with.
Hey! I like your page 🙂
If u are looking for Paid Surveys this is the place 4 you.
Start advancing your paychecks at http://tinyurl.com/9clvwn
Great stuff! Happy new year.
What worries me – is that most of David Hobby’s readers – are not pros. And when they offer to do things for free – they don’t have Chase’s business acumen. And they may do more harm than good to our industry – that is already struggling. If everyone starts working for free – it’s OVER for everyone. So I think we need to make this more clear out there – and help define this more carefully for everyone – both for the pros and the advanced amateurs.
————————–
nelsa
<a href=”
Someone stood up and said something that has made a great impact. Now that this question is out there in the public eye is it not the responsibility of the people who are at the leading edge to step up and guide those of us who may make up the next generation through education. It used to be that the current professionals learned what they needed to know about the business and art of photography through apprenticeship. Since that happens less and less and the technology has opened the floodgates, to anyone who has a passion and a camera to make it to the top, without the moral and value education that so many current shooters got along the way; could it be that this is a lesson that the current amateur community is in need of?
————————————–
nelsa
“vincentlaforet”
That being said: you do AT TIMES (and that’s the key – this is 1 project a year at most maybe – as Chase is suggesting – and I agree to that) need to develop your book – expand your horizon and your book – and roll the dice. I.E. – I’m a qualified to do “x” but have never done and proven that I can do “y” – so I’ll do it for little or nothing – BUT – one time only – AND I RETAIN THE RIGHTS! i.e. – you and I can use it for self-promotion and so can I. BUT you can never generate any profit for it – if you do – we split it. If anyone makes ANY money – we all benefit – that’s KEY.
———————————-
nelsa
“vincentlaforet.com”
It seems nobody is looking for anyone to work for free. I offered to do for someone dominant but still nobody took the chance to use me. I cwould use my spare time to do online jobs like PTC, posting links etc.
slaveboy_foryou@hotmail.com
I’m not a photographer, but I felt compelled to chime in here (even if it’s kind of futile considering there are more than 120 comments that amount to a pretty overwhelming cacophony of thought but whatever).
I don’t agree with Vincent. I understand his argument and his desire to protect his industry, but castigating photographers for undercutting the competition doesn’t seem like the wisest move to me. It seems you guys are fighting against very large market forces right now (not unlike many other industries). In addition to that, photography has changed immensely, as I’m sure you don’t need to be reminded.
But undercutting is a constant issue in most industries. And keen businessmen learned long ago that good businesses don’t simply go after the undercutters — they react. They progress. It’s one thing if a monopolistic company undercuts its smaller competition, but if a lesser photographer decides he wants to work as a photographer and chooses to undercut a more talented photographer to get the job, I don’t see the reward in blaming him for it. If the company hiring a photographer believes it will be rewarded by paying less for less accomplished photography, it shouldn’t be discouraged from doing so. This is how industries and markets work.
Now, I’m not arguing about the social value and importance of photojournalism or any of that stuff. (I think they’re both important.) I’m looking at photography solely as a product, a commodity, a thing to be sold, which it is. And looking at it from that perspective, it seems to me photography is simply worth less than it was, I don’t know, two, three decades ago. Digital cameras became popular, the industry flooded with amateurs and so forth and competition became more intense.
And when things became more competitive, the market demanded more from photographers. If a bajillion people can go to a Major League Baseball game and get all the key moments in focus and properly exposed, realistically, the value of those photos are going to be worth less. If that’s solely what you do, you should be prepared to be paid less (or even quit). If you’re unable to change when market factors change, you’re not going to survive, and I think it’s pretty futile to collude on Web sites like this and demand that everyone not to work for free or undercut. Because, at the end of the day, if a photographer can find some reward to undercut — personal or monetary — he’s going to do it. And if one guy can do it, another one will. And another one. And another will. And it will go on until the market finishes correcting itself or implodes. Pleading with photographers not to undercut or work for free for personal gain accomplishes little. It’s just pleading to save work for people the market — and the audience — has decided is less valuable.
Truly gifted people will survive. People who can offer something people want. Vincent’s argument is pretty ironic if you think about it. Because even as he says those things, he’s done the things necessary to survive in what truly is a brutal and unforgiving industry (most industries are, actually). He’s established himself as a brand. He’s a creative photographer, creating photos people want, performing at an extraordinary level. It’s also in his best interests to say what he’s saying. If the industry weakens, so will his income, but he’s going to remain at the top of the pecking order, regardless. It’s the rank and file who should be worried.
my best friend has been in an Anger Management class for 2 months now, he improved a lot when dealing with anger.””~
The Houston Rockets Discount Air Max did not win the draft lottery, an outcome as surprising as traffic gridlock on the city’s freeways during rush hour.
The team carried a 98 percent Nike Air Max chance of picking 14th to Secaucus. Aaron Brooks’ Nike Shox Series spresence could not inspire a miracle.
The Rockets’ Air Jordans Shoes primary offseason target is clearer than a new pane of glass. The team’s followers know. General Manager Daryl Morey Shox R4 2009 could stand to work on his poker face.
Chris Bosh Nike Air Max 90 should know what to expect at midnight on July 1—Morey’s smiling face at his doorstep with a plea and an offer.
How might a lottery selection, albeit the last one, affect the Rockets’ chances to land the coveted forward?
The Toronto Raptors Air Max 95 Womens, Bosh’s current squad, will pick one slot higher at 13th.
After Wall, Turner, DeMarcus Cousins, Derrick Favors, and Wesley Johnson Nike Air Max 2009, the order of the rest is anyone’s guess. All but two of the players in the top 20 of most mock drafts are forwards are centers.
Most think Turner will become a forward, as he bulks up his Air Max 2003 Mens body and bolsters his confidence on the NBA Air Classic BW level.
Morey could package the player plus the draft picks acquired from the New York Knicks Vibram FiveFingers KSO in the Tracy McGrady deal in a sign-and-trade for Bosh.
The last time the franchise picked in the lottery, the brain trust opted to trade the rights to Rudy Gay for defensive specialist Shane Battier.Before that, the team snagged Yao Ming Air Max Shoes
Proper hair care for healthy hair is one of the important aspects of personality grooming ,Don’t think that thin hairisn’t beautiful hair. By taking care of your hair, you canmake it look its best. The best part is, you won’t have today for the professionals to do it. You can keep your hair healthy,soft and shiny. Hair Transplant is a good solution..
欢迎您来燕子，娟子的博客空间转转，看看我们最新的照片，及书法作品
http://blog.sina.com.cn/lsj7208
online jobs are easy to get by but a high paying online job is difficult to get,”,
for those of us who cannot control anger, i think that anger management should be a reuirement to have a quality life ;;’
This blog is basically superb, I assumed I do know a good deal, but I’m so mistaken, like the previous saying the extra you already know, the additional you come across out how little you know. Thanks for the info.
I do enjoy the manner in which you have framed this particular matter plus it does indeed offer me some fodder for thought. On the other hand, coming from what I have witnessed, I simply hope when the opinions pack on that men and women stay on issue and not start on a tirade associated with the news du jour. Yet, thank you for this outstanding piece and though I can not necessarily agree with the idea in totality, I value your perspective.
If you want to work for free, the only client you should consider should be yourself.
That’s really true said,i am some how agree with what you said.
Generally I do not read article on blogs, but I wish to say that this write-up very pressured me to try and do so! Your writing taste has been surprised me. Thank you, quite nice post.
Wow, wonderful blog format! How lengthy have you ever been running a blog for? you make running a blog look easy. The whole look of your website is excellent, as smartly the content!
I just like the helpful information you supply to your articles. I’ll bookmark your weblog and test again here regularly. I am quite certain I’ll be informed many new stuff right here! Good luck for the following!
Vincent Laforet Reply:
December 5th, 2011 at 6:03 pm
Thank you!
Woah this blog is great i really like studying your posts. Keep up the good paintings! You understand, a lot of persons are hunting around for this information, you could aid them greatly.
Helpful info. Fortunate me I discovered your site accidentally, and I’m shocked why this coincidence didn’t happened in advance! I bookmarked it.
Wow, superb blog structure! How long have you ever been blogging for? you make running a blog glance easy. The overall look of your web site is excellent, let alone the content material!
Woah this blog is fantastic i really like studying your posts. Stay up the good paintings! You already know, many people are searching around for this info, you can aid them greatly.
Magnificent post, you received a new reader. Cheers!
Unquestionably believe that that you said. Your favourite justification seemed to be at the net the easiest thing to be mindful of. I say to you, I certainly get irked while other folks consider concerns that they just don’t know about. You managed to hit the nail upon the top and outlined out the whole thing with no need side-effects , other folks could take a signal. Will likely be again to get more. Thanks
I like the helpful information you provide for your articles. I’ll bookmark your blog and test once more here frequently. I am rather certain I’ll be informed many new stuff proper right here! Best of luck for the following!
Hi there very cool web site!! Guy .. Beautiful .. Amazing .. I’ll bookmark your blog and take the feeds additionally?I’m happy to find numerous useful information right here in the put up, we’d like develop more techniques in this regard, thanks for sharing. . . . . .
I do accept as true with all the ideas you have introduced in your post. They’re really convincing and will certainly work. Nonetheless, the posts are very short for newbies. Could you please extend them a little from next time? Thanks for the post.
Thanks a lot for sharing this with all of us you actually know what you are talking about! Bookmarked. Kindly also visit my site =). We can have a hyperlink alternate contract between us
Wow, incredible blog layout! How long have you ever been blogging for? you made blogging look easy. The overall glance of your web site is great, let alone the content material!
So many times I hear “why should I care if its hurting another photographer, so what if they have a family to feed” The thing is, one day that photographer will be them…
This is the sorts of information they would not want one to learn about. Very invaluable although not in the plenty. I choice they can be fuming until this gets these days.
I will read your site monthly and recommend it to my classmates.
Fantastic website. Lots of helpful info here. I’m sending it to some pals ans additionally sharing in delicious. And certainly, thanks for your effort!
I believe that is among the most important info for me. And i’m happy reading your article. But wanna observation on some general issues, The site taste is wonderful, the articles is in point of fact great : D. Just right job, cheers
You can certainly see your skills in the paintings you write. The sector hopes for even more passionate writers such as you who aren’t afraid to mention how they believe. At all times follow your heart.
Excellent post. I used to be checking constantly this blog and I’m impressed! Extremely useful information specifically the remaining phase 🙂 I take care of such info much. I was looking for this certain information for a long time. Thank you and good luck.