Question to Prof Photogs

"Constance Pierce" wrote in message

First off, I appreciate your taking time to read this . . . (-:
I design a quarterly magazine and the cover is routinely outsourced out to a photography studio. Well, my client and the photog just had an EXTREME falling out over what’s standard in the biz for contact sheets and shots taken. The photog gave her:
? two shots ONLY ~ one of which was unusable
? refused to frame her shots a bit wider for bleed (again, for a cover ~ I need atleast 1/8 inch on all sides for bleed and she totally gave us nada to work with), and
? refused to give her proofs of any kind.

Part of the problem was that my client asked that a cupcake be featured on the cover shot and the photog refused (reasons unknown to me or my client).

My client pointed out that in the contract (drawn up by the photog herself) she was guaranteed "satisfaction" and that she wanted one cover shot that had the specs she needed (bleed, cupcake, and atleast 3 proofs). Whereupon, the photog said "screw you" and my client said "well, then I’m not paying you your entire fee since you didn’t finish the job" So the photog kept the source materials (scrapbooking layouts created by the mag’s readers) and refused to give them back until the fee was paid in full.

My question ~ Is only two shots for a cover shoot standard op procedure? How many contact sheets/proofs is normal for a cover shot? And is it legal/ethical to hold other people’s property as leverage against payment? Did my client get really hosed on this deal??
I’m a graphic artist/designer and I’ve been in the position where I thought I wasn’t going to get paid ~ in those cases I withheld the artwork that I created, not the source materials. To me, that sounds really, really unethical (not to mention illegal ~ talked to a lawyer about THAT one). Too, I always provide proofs ~ and I guarantee satisfaction.

I know my client can be a bit on the flaky side, but I’ve worked with her for over two years now, and she’s never been overly demanding or unreasonable. She pays VERY well and is very easy to get along with. So it’s hard to picture her being at fault . . . so that’s why I’m asking you all! (-:

Thanks in advance your pearls of wisdom!
Connie

—
Constance Pierce
principal/designer

"you can’t polish a turd." unknown genuis

we shoot whatever the CD or AD wants, hopefully they know what they need in terms of layout
upload to his/her laptop as we go along or make CD’s (assume they won’t use the blinky ones, the ones the light didn’t fire, etc)
for editorial we get paid 2-4 weeks depends on magazine
signed contracts up front with all parties fully understanding the rights, usage and payment schedules
commercial work:
new clients half up front, half on delivery
trustworthy good paying clients: expenses up front, net 30 days

Constance Pierce wrote:

First off, I appreciate your taking time to read this . . . (-:
I design a quarterly magazine and the cover is routinely outsourced out to a photography studio. Well, my client and the photog just had an EXTREME falling out over what’s standard in the biz for contact sheets and shots taken. The photog gave her:
€ two shots ONLY ~ one of which was unusable
€ refused to frame her shots a bit wider for bleed (again, for a cover ~ I need atleast 1/8 inch on all sides for bleed and she totally gave us nada to work with), and
€ refused to give her proofs of any kind.

Part of the problem was that my client asked that a cupcake be featured on the cover shot and the photog refused (reasons unknown to me or my client).

Connie

I supply cover shots to a weekly magazine. I give them 12 pictures in the form of a "Photoshop" contact sheet print to choose from after they tell me what scene they want. When they choose which one they will use, I send them a hi res image.

I would have thought any photographer shooting for print media would allow some edge for bleed. I also think there may be more to this tale than you’ve given us. For example… The cover is not going to be only a photo. You will alter the image in the course of producing the cover.And is a "cupcake" a lewd picture of a female?

I had a run in with my publisher when they added one of my ex-client’s logo over the cover image which required me to approve of that first. I read the riot act to the Graphic Artist who did the deed and the publisher who permitted it. I would have happily walked away from the work with a "stuff you" attitude if they had repeated the deed and they know this.

At the end of the day, the Photographer needs clients and the clients need a Photographer. Provided all else is equal, only money should decide the degree of participation the Photographer will make to satisfy a client.
—

On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 20:34:19 -0500, "KatWoman" wrote:

(snipped)

the photog kept the source materials (scrapbooking layouts

created by the mag’s readers) and refused to give them back until the fee was paid in full.

The client didn’t keep a backup copy of the source material they gave the photog? Weird. Even if this hadn’t happened, loss by accident could have.

Cyli
r.bc: vixen. Minnow goddess. Speaker to squirrels.
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli
email: (strip the .invalid to email)

"Constance Pierce" wrote in message

So the photog kept the source materials (scrapbooking layouts created by the mag’s readers) and refused to give them back until the fee was paid in full.
And is it legal/ethical to hold other people’s property as leverage against payment?

I wonder if this is the right group for an unbiased answer, bearing in mind it has more than its fair share of Photographers!
As for the above question – whether it is legal or ethical is a moot point as you are unlikely to take civil action over such a matter, and were you to do so, it would be so easy to claim the items were lost but would be returned as soon as they could be found!

Re your later posting about irrelevant postings – this group have been plagued by the same cross posting idiot for quite some time, so most of us have blocked him and his fellow cretins………Soooo the only time we are even aware of his posts are when someone new refers to them! I suggest you do the same.

I think you’ve gotten a lot of good responses. I am guessing that there are personal factors going on here — either between the publisher and the photographer, or a private drama on the photographer’s side that is interfering with both work and inner calm. My two cents:

On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 14:25:08 -0600, Constance Pierce wrote:

My question ~ Is only two shots for a cover shoot standard op procedure?

No. Definitely not.

How many contact sheets/proofs is normal for a cover shot?

Enough to fully explore the subject and give the publisher good choices. Choices should not only include different bleeds, but also different placement of headlines and logos.

And is it legal/ethical to hold other people’s property as leverage against payment?

No. Are you ready to sue? If so, try to anticipate the plaintiff’s responses, and explore the weaknesses of your own case. If not, strive for calm.

Did my client get really hosed on this deal??

Don’t see how. She hasn’t yet spent any money. The photographer isn’t going to be paid for a completed assignment, and has lost a regular client.

—
Jim Hargan
Freelance Photographer and Writer
www.harganonline.com

There is no restriction or limitation on number of shots with me here as we are paid by photo session of 1/2 day or full day service charge. If shooting on film, client has to pay for the materials like Polaroid shots, films, processing and contact sheets. So more shots cost more. I just follow the AD direction to satisfy his or her needs. In digital, post production cost will be charged. Off course there is time when client needs just a simple shot and pays a minimum setup charge but never come across a 2 shots task. That’s funny with your photographer. We practice copyright here but not all i.e client will sign an agreement to use the shots for a specified usage only. Additional charges will apply for different usages from the same images.

"Jim Hargan" wrote in message

I think you’ve gotten a lot of good responses. I am guessing that there are personal factors going on here — either between the publisher and the photographer, or a private drama on the photographer’s side that is interfering with both work and inner calm. My two cents:
On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 14:25:08 -0600, Constance Pierce wrote:

My question ~ Is only two shots for a cover shoot standard op procedure?

No. Definitely not.

How many contact sheets/proofs is normal for a cover shot?

Enough to fully explore the subject and give the publisher good choices. Choices should not only include different bleeds, but also different placement of headlines and logos.

And is it legal/ethical to hold other people’s property as leverage against payment?

No. Are you ready to sue? If so, try to anticipate the plaintiff’s responses, and explore the weaknesses of your own case. If not, strive for calm.

Did my client get really hosed on this deal??

Don’t see how. She hasn’t yet spent any money. The photographer isn’t going
to be paid for a completed assignment, and has lost a regular client.
—
Jim Hargan
Freelance Photographer and Writer
www.harganonline.com

Actually, she DID pay in full ~ it was the only way to get the source materials back.

And PLEASE understand ~ to all who posted a reply (and those who didn’t) ~ I was not in any way criticiscing photographers as a whole!!

As in any artistically based industry or business, there are "prima donnas" and true professionals who care about their artwork and their clients/business. I’ve met more than my share with designers, illustrators, printers. photographers, etc. This photog, I think, was a prima donna.

As far as I can tell ~ from reading e-mails between my client and the photog, the photog DID refuse to shoot for bleeds, did refuse to compose the scene as my client wanted, and did refuse to hand over source materials (which, because of the nature of them, cannot be duplicated or reproduced other than by scanning ~ taking a three dimensional artwork and turning it into a "flat image") until she was paid in full (although she only did about 1/3 of the work).

Too, she was given the assignment and materials approx 4 weeks in advance and left it until the very last minute to provide the shots ~ the magazine hits the press the day after tomorrow and she provided the shots last Friday.

Personally, I think she was just a bitch . . . (met my fair share of those, too ~ and been one myself, I’m sure) and saw an opportunity to screw over a sometimes difficult client and get paid in full to boot. My client is not going to sue, but it has, unfortunately biased her against future contact with photographers. THAT’S one of the biggest problems I have with the whole situation . . . she made others in our industry look bad. Now, I’m sure she’s going to look for someone alot cheaper ~ so if she gets "screwed" again, she won’t be out so much money (over $1K for two shots).

In fact, if you want to feel truly sorry for her, the designer who worked on her project before me screwed her over as well. Promised her two week turnaround with half up front and then disappeared. She gave her another chance and she disappeared to get married ~ with no word . .. . she just left in the middle of the designing and only wrote her an e-mail about two months after that issue went to press.

Personally, I would have said "F-off" and never spoken to her again . . .. there’s no possible excuse for bailing out of a job without a word. She knew in advance that she was getting married ~ she could have said "Hey, look! We have to wrap this up ’cause I’m getting hitched on such-and-such-a-day and that’s that."

<sorry for the vent there ~ my client has really been through the wringer since she started this mag>

Anyway, I really appreciate all of your posts!! And again, I hope I didn’t offend anyone!! I just wanted some advice from the pros on what THEY want and expect and what they feel is fair.

Thank you so much!!
Connie

PS ~ About my getting pissed off about the cross-posting ~ just wanted to make sure that they knew they were asses. (-: Course, I gave them what they wanted ~ attention . . . but it felt good!

—
Constance Pierce
principal/designer

"you can’t polish a turd."

Not trying to be a dick here but… If you worked for me you would’nt be working anymore because I’d a fired your ass for such incompetence. Either hire a full time photographer into your company so your material cannot be hijacked and held for ransom by these damm photography dickheads who think that because they can point and shoot that they are god. Or better yet just go buy a good digital camera and shoot your own damm pictures thatway you can add as much bleed as you need will get the exact picture your looking for and you will probably have in about an hour instead of whenever the photographer wants to do it. Get off your ass because your not thinking straight, grab the bull by the horns boy and kick it in the nuts!!!!! Now go kick a hole in something I would. Just Do it, thats my motto! "Constance Pierce" wrote in message

First off, I appreciate your taking time to read this . . . (-:
I design a quarterly magazine and the cover is routinely outsourced out to a photography studio. Well, my client and the photog just had an EXTREME falling out over what’s standard in the biz for contact sheets and shots taken. The photog gave her:
? two shots ONLY ~ one of which was unusable
? refused to frame her shots a bit wider for bleed (again, for a cover ~ I need atleast 1/8 inch on all sides for bleed and she totally gave us nada to work with), and
? refused to give her proofs of any kind.

Part of the problem was that my client asked that a cupcake be featured on the cover shot and the photog refused (reasons unknown to me or my client).

My client pointed out that in the contract (drawn up by the photog herself) she was guaranteed "satisfaction" and that she wanted one cover shot that had the specs she needed (bleed, cupcake, and atleast 3 proofs). Whereupon, the photog said "screw you" and my client said "well, then I’m not paying you your entire fee since you didn’t finish the job" So the photog kept the source materials (scrapbooking layouts created by the mag’s readers) and refused to give them back until the fee was paid in full.

My question ~ Is only two shots for a cover shoot standard op procedure? How many contact sheets/proofs is normal for a cover shot? And is it legal/ethical to hold other people’s property as leverage against payment? Did my client get really hosed on this deal??
I’m a graphic artist/designer and I’ve been in the position where I thought I wasn’t going to get paid ~ in those cases I withheld the artwork that I created, not the source materials. To me, that sounds really, really unethical (not to mention illegal ~ talked to a lawyer about THAT one). Too, I always provide proofs ~ and I guarantee satisfaction.

I know my client can be a bit on the flaky side, but I’ve worked with her for over two years now, and she’s never been overly demanding or unreasonable. She pays VERY well and is very easy to get along with. So it’s hard to picture her being at fault . . . so that’s why I’m asking you all! (-:

Thanks in advance your pearls of wisdom!
Connie

—
Constance Pierce
principal/designer

"you can’t polish a turd." unknown genuis

ben dover wrote:

Not trying to be a dick here but… If you worked for me you would’nt be working anymore because I’d a fired your ass for such incompetence. Either hire a full time photographer into your company so your material cannot be hijacked and held for ransom by these damm photography dickheads who think that because they can point and shoot that they are god. Or better yet just go buy a good digital camera and shoot your own damm pictures thatway you can add as much bleed as you need will get the exact picture your looking for and you will probably have in about an hour instead of whenever the photographer wants to do it. Get off your ass because your not thinking straight, grab the bull by the horns boy and kick it in the nuts!!!!! Now go kick a hole in something I would. Just Do it, thats my motto! "Constance Pierce" wrote in message

Not trying to be a ****, well gee, I would hate to see you if you were trying. You may not realise this, but buying the best camera available will not automatically give you the camera skills, lighting skills, knowledge of contrast ratios, depth of field, and many other skills that a photographer has studied and knows how to use. Photography is not simply lining up a photo and going click.

Brian.

In his posting of Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Brian writes

ben dover wrote:

Not trying to be a dick here but… If you worked for me you would’nt be working anymore because I’d a fired your ass for such incompetence. Either hire a full time photographer into your company so your material cannot be hijacked and held for ransom by these damm photography dickheads who think that because they can point and shoot that they are god. Or better yet just go buy a good digital camera and shoot your own damm pictures thatway you can add as much bleed as you need will get the exact picture your looking for and you will probably have in about an hour instead of whenever the photographer wants to do it. Get off your ass because your not thinking straight, grab the bull by the horns boy and kick it in the nuts!!!!! Now go kick a hole in something I would. Just Do it, thats my motto! "Constance Pierce" wrote in message

Not trying to be a ****, well gee, I would hate to see you if you were trying. You may not realise this, but buying the best camera available will not automatically give you the camera skills, lighting skills, knowledge of contrast ratios, depth of field, and many other skills that a photographer has studied and knows how to use. Photography is not simply lining up a photo and going click.

Brian.

Absolutely but it is this ignorance that the camera manufacturers have been playing on for years. Remember Olympus doing it with the Late Lord Litchfield? Nothing has changed and the general public continues to be gullible. It’s like saying buy this violin and you too can make music…..yes you can make a noise with it but nobody is likely to come to listen to you play. It’s the same with a camera.

Cheers

Richard
—
Richard K

In article <121120051425081598%
net says…

First off, I appreciate your taking time to read this . . . (-:
I design a quarterly magazine and the cover is routinely outsourced out to a photography studio. Well, my client and the photog just had an EXTREME falling out over what’s standard in the biz for contact sheets and shots taken. The photog gave her:

On 16 Nov 2005 17:22:31 GMT, Hunt wrote:

I can only speak from a purely personal perspective. I furnish my clients with one (1) version of a "cover shot." This is the final, approved image, and is shot per the layout, with, or without, art direction on the project.

This is a wonderful response, Hunt. Alas, many editorial clients do not wish to give the level of detail your advertising clients give you. Many editorial buyers frequently seem to have only the vaguest idea of what they want, including such important items as headline placement. They want the photographer to make these decisions for them, and then take a few seconds to decide between alternatives. I know of one publisher — a major international player — where a single photo editor is responsible for all images in four different bimonthlies. Not surprisingly, budgets are below market and carved in stone. In contrast, advertisers pay well and micro-manage shoots.

This distinction shouldn’t exist for covers — covers are advertising. But it does. I think it’s corporate culture. Once you get used to using bad chamber of commerce images on the inside, you hate spending time, effort, and money on the cover.

—
Jim Hargan
Freelance Photographer and Writer
www.harganonline.com

In article <1ahb6x83g5122$.1bpbc5jg1blg2$>,
says…

On 16 Nov 2005 17:22:31 GMT, Hunt wrote:

I can only speak from a purely personal perspective. I furnish my clients

with

one (1) version of a "cover shot." This is the final, approved image, and

is

shot per the layout, with, or without, art direction on the project.

This is a wonderful response, Hunt. Alas, many editorial clients do not wish to give the level of detail your advertising clients give you. Many editorial buyers frequently seem to have only the vaguest idea of what they want, including such important items as headline placement. They want the photographer to make these decisions for them, and then take a few seconds to decide between alternatives. I know of one publisher — a major international player — where a single photo editor is responsible for all images in four different bimonthlies. Not surprisingly, budgets are below market and carved in stone. In contrast, advertisers pay well and micro-manage shoots.

This distinction shouldn’t exist for covers — covers are advertising. But it does. I think it’s corporate culture. Once you get used to using bad chamber of commerce images on the inside, you hate spending time, effort, and money on the cover.

—
Jim Hargan
Freelance Photographer and Writer
www.harganonline.com

Thanks for the clarification Jim. I suppose that, in light of your comments, I should not grouse, when I have to work just to get the basic specs. It almost sounds like just shooting, until you get it right – not a rewarding (or profitable) situation. Oh well, back to those pesky "ad" clients…

Hunt