Is Shooting for a Bad Magazine Good?

[benjikan]

Is Shooting for a Bad Magazine Good?

Today on a generalist Photo Forum under the Portrait Fashion category, someone from a small independent and in my opinion based on what I saw on their web site, not very good fashion magazine, placed an ad for photographers for their magazine. Now that seemed strange in the first place, which I go on to explain in the copy below. Here is part of the content of her query.

I have left out the name of the magazine and the name of the person.

"..We are looking for an up and coming photographer each month to shoot images for our cover. This is an unpaid commission, but provides great exposure as the cover stays on the front page for one whole month.."

Hello ...

My concern is that if you are coming to a forum to seek out photographers for your magazine, then that speaks volumes about the credibility of your magazine. I have been in this strange business for over 20+ years and do know one thing; the minimum one should know is where the sources are, where the press offices are which agents represent which photographers and what are the agencies representing the models etc. Now, perhaps you are new at this, so I will consider this query as naive, but, I do know that if I had to put production together and I wasn't the photographer, I would know exactly where to find them.

That tells me, that getting exposure in your magazine could be considered poison in disguise, wrapped in a sweet chocolate covered coating. Why? Because anyone in the know would see immediately by the content, layout, choice of talent and advertisers what your standing is in the Fashion community. This may sound cruel and arrogant, but the reality is, in looking at your web site, I would recommend to anyone wishing to shot for this magazine the following..."buyer beware..."



Getting to shoot for VOGUE,Harpers, Elle, Marie Claire, Numero, V, W, or ID has and never will be a question of "How Much Do I Make?" that is a joke! You couldn't pay VOGUE enough money to shoot for them. The status associated with doing so is the following..."Once you are in VOGUE, you ARE in Vogue" and your phone will slowly start ringing off the wall to shoot Ad campaigns that command 5 too 6 figure numbers. There is a very simple barometer in this business. The less credible the magazine, the more perks it should provide for the team, as the exposure the team get, may be more detrimental to them than if they hadn't at all.



If you want a photographer, stylist, AD, make-up or Hair stylist, set designer, etc...just order Lebook. Now if you didn't know about Lebook, you should NOT be in the Fashion Business. If you want to play the game, learn the rules.

http://www.benjaminkanarekblog.com/?p=1220

[Photo-John]

Ben-
You provide one view, and an interesting and valid one at that. But you're working at a different level than me or most of the other photographers here - maybe than all of us put together

When I read the statement from the editor or photo editor, what I saw was a grab for free content. The "free exposure" lure is all too common because seeing your work in print is so powerful for beginning photographers. It gets old quick, though. It doesn't pay for new gear, it doesn't cover expenses, and it lowers the value of all photography. Plus, as you suggest, that exposure doesn't mean you'll make any money. If everyone knows you gace it away for free, why would they be interested in paying? I liken it to prison rape - once you give it up, everyone's gonna take it.

[jetrim]

Ben-
You provide one view, and an interesting and valid one at that. But you're working at a different level than me or most of the other photographers here - maybe than all of us put together

I think it is a very valid point though, to ALWAYS be aware of your reputation, and what affects it whether you are currently considering "going pro" at some point in the future or not. I have given away rights to an image, it was a calculated move in case I decide to get more serious in the future. I considered the customer and the use before I agreed. What I got in return was a tear sheet from a prominent mag (not as prominent as Vogue or Elle but up there none the less) with a photo credit. If I ever were to decide to go pro, I'd have that for my portfolio putting my work a quarter step above my "unpublished" competitors. I wouldn't have done it for just some crappy local rag or newspaper ad.

Interestingly enough, that "poison" thing works both ways too. At the time I agreed to the above mentioned deal, I learned that the design firm that had designed the store, was looking to bring in a pro photographer to take shots of the location for promotional purposes. I approached my contact and asked for an opportunity to provide images, and submitted proofs on CD for review. To the best of my knowledge, the CD was never even looked at before I was flatly refused. Some time later I had the occasion to sit down with the owner of the design firm who was nice enough to show me the work they had bought. I mentioned the CD and he had no knowledge of it. He had seen the ad work and proclaimed the shot chosen was better than what their "pro" had provided (without trying to sound conceited - it was). Bottom line was, prominent pro beats unknown amateur every time, even if the quality isn't as good.

[megan]

I agree with both of the responses. Hey, when you're just starting out, it does sound like a great opportunity. However, if you don't value your work, no one else will. The mindset that digital is cheap and easy because you're not paying lab costs is an illusion - we all know that instead, the $$ goes to laptops, software, cameras, peripherals, etc. I go by the old adage - "Time is money." You want my time, you give me money.

I was friendly with a pro photographer that used to shoot for a medium-sized music label. They had a famous photographer shoot a musician for the cd, and the work came out like crap. They called my friend in, the budget blown and now tight, to re-shoot. They paid him low, used his work, and credited the big name photographer on the CD. Next time they called my friend, they lowballed him again. He declined.

If they can get you for cheap, they aren't going to want to pay more. Bottom line.
So if they can get you for free, they will never pay you more than that. No tear sheet in the world is worth that. (Yes, if you refuse, you're still at square one with no tear sheet, but at least you have your integrity intact.)

Megan

[Photo-John]

I was friendly with a pro photographer that used to shoot for a medium-sized music label. They had a famous photographer shoot a musician for the cd, and the work came out like crap. They called my friend in, the budget blown and now tight, to re-shoot. They paid him low, used his work, and credited the big name photographer on the CD. Next time they called my friend, they lowballed him again. He declined.

Wow - that is a terrible story. That would have me in their office and in their face. Lame.

[shiggy]

I agree with both of the responses. Hey, when you're just starting out, it does sound like a great opportunity. However, if you don't value your work, no one else will. The mindset that digital is cheap and easy because you're not paying lab costs is an illusion - we all know that instead, the $$ goes to laptops, software, cameras, peripherals, etc. I go by the old adage - "Time is money." You want my time, you give me money.

I was friendly with a pro photographer that used to shoot for a medium-sized music label. They had a famous photographer shoot a musician for the cd, and the work came out like crap. They called my friend in, the budget blown and now tight, to re-shoot. They paid him low, used his work, and credited the big name photographer on the CD. Next time they called my friend, they lowballed him again. He declined.

If they can get you for cheap, they aren't going to want to pay more. Bottom line.
So if they can get you for free, they will never pay you more than that. No tear sheet in the world is worth that. (Yes, if you refuse, you're still at square one with no tear sheet, but at least you have your integrity intact.)

Megan

Dang. From the client side, this is why there are "kill fees" written into deals. If the work is not used, the payment is XX% of the full fee. I have been on both sides of such agreements. Does not feel good to enforce it or have it applied to you, but is it better than the alternative.