Free Photos. How many here are guilty?

[don_narayan]

I am just wondering; how many here give photos to magazines ect. for free? How many are guilty of taking food from the mouths of thousands of photographer's babies?

[jinju]

Ill fes up. I did it twice. Once for a story on me, interview+photos. Once for an art magazine out of Paris.

[Homerhomer]

I am just wondering; how many here give photos to magazines ect. for free? How many are guilty of taking food from the mouths of thousands of photographer's babies?
------
how many of you have done taxes for someone for free and by that are taking away food from my child.

Narayan c'mon, you question sounds like a CNN propaganda;-)

I have given pics for free for education, personal projects, not for profits etc, never for profit oriented enterprise.
Peter

[don_narayan]

Well, Peter, I was going to make an exemption for the non-profit, but I know quite a few photographers that do work for non-prophets on a "for-profit" basis. Besides, they profit from the images that help bring in dollars to buy them those nice Toyota LandCruisers, pocket grease money for the local politicians ect ect ect...

But tell me, if I a photographer does work for a non-profit and doesn't get paid for it, can it be a tax deduction?

BTW, there is a good workshop up north there in Toronto... might be worth checking out, http://www.gwnw.ca/

[Homerhomer]

Well, Peter, I was going to make an exemption for the non-profit, but I know quite a few photographers that do work for non-prophets on a "for-profit" basis.
----
there is non profit and non profit, if United Way asked me for image I would charge full rate even they are charity, big bucks involved there (and wasted on admin;-), but I was happy to give away all the images I had for free to small groups here locally fighting against banning certains dogs in Ontario.

As for the tax question, laws are different everywhere, but generally speaking if you are in the business of photography you can deduct your expenses, even if you do the work for free.
Peter

[Darren]

Hi Narayon. I think you are trying to stir things up a little with the food from the mouths of babes line, but I also have no doubt you are asking a sincere question. I comfortably plead sort of guilty to the charge. I gave files to Maciek's group, Choice to Choose. My feeling is that Maciek and his group seem to be very serious about their work with poorer kids in China and that for them, evey little bit helped. I was happy to do it then and would be willing to do it again in a heartbeat if asked. I know other members of TE did the same. I also allowed for the use of some of my shots in the Triest(sp?) TE exhibition. While I don't regret that either, I am not sure if I would do it again.

Lately, I have been asked for use of some shots in books, magazines, pdfs, brochures and websites. Now, I politely require about compensation and wait for a response. most of the time I get none, but I have had replies that they are willing to compensate me, even when they didn't mention it in their first contact. This is proof for me that at least some of the time photographers are giving their stuff away when they have a real live buyer right in front of them. IF photographers never gave their stuff away, payment would be mentioned up front in most every case IMO.

The bottom line is taht because I now expect payment for use, I am getting it more and more. I am not getting rich, but it is now offsetting some purchases I am making, so that is a nice feeling.

Oh, I have mentioned this before and will probably do so again, but TE is a great place to get noticed. I am surprised at how often people ask for use of images they saw on TE. I am sure that many of the more high profile members receive quite a few more offers than me.

[don_narayan]

"IF photographers never gave their stuff away, payment would be mentioned up front in most every case IMO."

Darren, that is right at the heart of my point. But some people feel honored that someone would want to publish or use their image (nothing like a good ego boost) and feel like that is payment enough... and that really ruins it for the people that would like to make photography a profession. why would you get paid for a photo when there are thousands of people who take decent shots that will give them away?

Sorry for the mouths of babes part... but I couldn't resist

[Keitht]

If I thought that allowing my photographs to be used free of charge could raise my profile effectively I would certainly do so. It is entirely down to the individual to decide what they want to do with their own work. Most people who don't make the grade as professionals are in that situation entirely because of their own limitations and not because others are giving their work away.
Who can honestly say that they haven't done something themselves rather than paying a professional to do the work, whether it be decorating their home, driving themself somewhere, cooking .... All these actions are 'depriving a professional of income'

[james-r]

If a professional is good enough, they'll sell their images and feed their children.

Otherwise they are guilty of being in the wrong job and should assume responsibility of starving their kids in their selfish desires to attain a pipe dream.

[kinginexile]

I tend to agree with that (first sentence). The world of professional photography vs amateur sales or give-aways are 2 different things. Once a bona fide professional, photography being his/her job, it's a different league, network, access, career momentum, etc... It's like saying that paying nuth' or 5$ to see a local soccer team is depriving a bigger league player from earning a living. If a pro photographer feels threatened because, for ex., Maciej would give 4 shost for free to an indian publishing house, his skin is too thin for the job. Too tough to get there to whine over the talents in the "amateur" leagues. They have enough competition from their own (always paid) ranks to worry about.

IMO.