The panelists discussing the business of editorial photography. From left to right: Allen Murabyashi (moderator), Rob Tingali, David Bergman, Al Tielmans and Robert Seale. On the monitor via Skype: Robert Seale.
Topic: Business of Editorial Photography
Panelists: David Bergman, David Burnett, Al Tielemans, Rob Tingali, Robert Seale.
Moderated by: Allen Murabyashi of Photoshelter.
The focus of last week’s Photo Brigade podcast was on the business of editorial photography. Rather than present suggested inroads towards establishing a career, the group instead brought to light an industry experiencing diminishing returns as the discussion was dominated by the long shadow of the draconian contract Time, Inc presented to photographers last fall. So the question of the day was not “can one become an editorial photographer?” but “should one?” as more and more wire services are now adopting low price subscriptions and free use business models.
It may also not help that what with the advent of improved and less expensive digital equipment, everyone seems to be a photographer these days.
But what can we do about it? Here are five things we took away from the podcast.
1) Editorial photography has become a “nickel and dime” industry.
David Burnett (far right).
Industry veteran David Burnett, a professional news photographer who has worked in the business for almost forty years, voiced the above turn of phrase. And yet the other panelists seem to share his sentiment. Rates for freelancers have only gone up by tens of dollars within decades while expenses have increased and magazine budgets have been slashed. Part of this is due to the decrease in popularity in print media. Another part is due to image services offering more to publishers for even less. And then there’s that “thing” wherein exists a pool of amateurs who are not educated on rights licensing or any rights for that matter. They might be better known as “Flickr” or “Instagram.” Corporate and Advertising photography will always offer the better payout. Even though it may be less rewarding creatively.
2) Photographers need to be better educated.
Business educated, that is. This was repeated considerably throughout the podcast. More importantly, photographers need to educate themselves on their rights, particularly freelance photographers. And it turns out that those two aspects are inseparable because the better you know your rights, the more value you will see in your work. For example: if you don’t understand what “in perpetuity” means when it comes to selling your image, you’ll need to be better informed, stat.
3) Once you establish yourself as a “free guy” you will always be that “free” guy.
Rob Tingali (middle) listens on as Dave Bergmen gives his p.o.v on the business of editorial photography.
Sports photographer Rob Tingali made the “free guy” statement in response to an anecdote passed on by the moderator. It referred to a creative commons image that was licensed for free to the Donald Trump campaign. As an example of what has become increasingly commonplace thanks to image-heavy social media websites like Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest and Flickr, photo buyers are dipping into the pool of amateurs to shell out for less – for free, even – while taking advantage of the naiveté of the image creator. Sure, everyone wants to see their image displayed on every billboard in North America. But giving it away for free the first time is not a career guarantee. In fact, as Rob Tingali pointed out, in the eyes of the industry, “once you’re that free guy, you will always be that free guy.”
4) Whether you work in-house or are a freelancer, there is always a trade-off.
That’s right. The benefit of working full-time and in-house vs. being a freelance is, simply, security. You will always get paid, have health benefits, a 401 K plan, etc. However, you do not own the rights to the images you’ve shot for that company. Yet it is your company that takes on the risk. They may even expense your gear. The freelancer takes on all the risk. The trade-off here is that you definitely own the rights to your imagery. So think about that for a second… depending on how you value your imagery as a freelancer, that portfolio could be viewed as your retirement fund.
5) If you don’t have access to guys like David Bergman, David Burnett, Al Tielemans, Rob Tingali, and Robert Seale, pay attention to industry news, particularly…
… Anything that has to do with the business of photography. Towards the end of the evening both David Bergman (who now has a series on AdoramaTV) and David Burnett brought up the recent acquisition of what used to be one of the largest image providers in the world. And some might say it’s a harbinger of what’s to come. But what does this have to do with any aspiring pro photographers out there? Corbis was second only to Getty Images when it came to image licensing and (full disclosure: the author of this piece used to work there) part of the cause of its eventual demise (sorry, I meant “sale”) was due to the industry continually devaluing editorial photography. At one time rights managed images (for a specific fee an image can be used for a specific use) and royalty free (for a one-time fee you can use the image however, whenever you want) coexisted side by side in perfect harmony. Then Flickr came around. Art Directors and Photo Buyers went to first-time photographers promising them the moon for very little which shifted the economy just a little bit. And that trend brought about a new business model called “microstock” where for a single fee not only could you use an image wherever and whenever you want, but you can use up to ten of them! Sometimes fifty! Sometimes over one hundred!! Ergo, how we value imagery became predicated on how much we can buy for the lowest amount and not whether we are truly getting what we pay for.
That’s just one factor. The other involved the one-two punch of the downturn of the economy and the rise of digital’s popularity over print media. Print media being the original nurturer supplying the bread and butter for in-house and freelance editorial photographers.
But it ain’t all doom and gloom, folks. Former SI in-house photographer Al Tielemans was quick to point out that when it comes to editorial photography, nothing can replace the shooter who has developed relationships with editors, PR reps, has backstage and locker room access, knows the lighting conditions at a particular stadium or is street-wise when it comes to navigating tricky political terrain. Which is why the wording in the Time, Inc. contract is so poorly placed: you cannot take a one-size-fits-all approach to supporting your photographers. Says Tielmans, “(you can’t compare) the guy shooting football games to a guy shooting tableware and a guy shooting the ebola crisis.”
