Author Topic: Approached by a client - need advice (Read 37852 times)

mara · « **on:** September 27, 2017, 04:01 »

hi everyone!

I have been approached by a client directly who asks me to license them 250 images of mine, non exclusively. They would only use my photos in their company. It is not for reselling.
They found me on RF microstock agency site, so it is not a RM deal. They obviously know the RF prices.
I think they wouldn't need exclusive licence for that.
Do you have some experience with this and how much would you ask for it?
Also do you know of some licensing contract or something which I could use for this?

thanks

Brasilnut · « **Reply #1 on:** September 27, 2017, 05:06 »

Hi and good morning. Let's try to break this down as there's a lot to work with here:

Quote

They found me on RF microstock agency site, so it is not a RM deal.

Ok, for whatever reason they think it's cheaper to license directly with you than going through the Agency. This obviously works in your favour as you'll keep all commissions.

I don't see the connection between them finding you in RF microstock so it can't be a RM deal. Why not? They seem to be quite clear about what the purpose of those images is, so you may draft a RM license agreement. Plus, you're going direct so there's no conflict (I believe) in licensing it RM directly if it's on microstock as RF - need to check the contributor agreement with the Microstock agency you're signed up to and have those images. If they have such restrictions, consider pulling those images out altogether if you believe you'll make more from this deal than those quarters with subs at such agencies.

RM could be more interesting for you in this case as you can limit the usage for a time period and they would have to go back to you to renew the agreement if they wish to extend. There's also restrictions on usage (if it's for a website OK but if they want to make brochures it may not be possible). The client would most likely want RF though. Perhaps offer both options.

Quote

Do you have some experience with this and how much would you ask for it?

I don't have such experience licensing directly (which I would love to do), although I can share on the second question.

Getty Images has a handy tool for pricing an RM image:

http://www.gettyimages.ca/purchase/price-calculator/sb10069475ab-001

I went ahead and put together some generic information and it came up with a huge sum of 790 euros which Getty would charge (see attached). If you're at Getty you would receive 30% (I believe), so that's 237. That's pretty steep if they're available on Micros as RF which tends to be an argument which putting some premium images on micros is shooting yourself in the foot when it comes to this sort of situation.

I couldn't find a calculator for pricing RF images but in any case the calculation is much simpler.

For RF (one payment, multiple usages), it's more simple and you can negotiate a bundle package. Something along the lines of 250 images for $1,250 ($5 per image). I'm afraid it may prove difficult to negotiate higher than that. Look forward to what others have to say on this.

Quote

Also do you know of some licensing contract or something which I could use for this?

Here's a good place to get started.

https://www.diyphotography.net/photo-licensing-look-basics/

Good luck!

Alex

Pauws99 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 27, 2017, 06:15 »

I'm not sure why they just wouldn't use the agency if you already had them on sale RF I'm pretty sure they wouldn't want to pay "inflated" RM prices. Seems an odd request to me.

mara · « **Reply #3 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:02 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on September 27, 2017, 06:15

I'm not sure why they just wouldn't use the agency if you already had them on sale RF I'm pretty sure they wouldn't want to pay "inflated" RM prices. Seems an odd request to me.

yes, i thought that as well.
If I am not cheaper than the site they found me , I think they will but there

niktol · « **Reply #4 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:02 »

Quote from: Brasilnut on September 27, 2017, 05:06

For RF (one payment, multiple usages), it's more simple and you can negotiate a bundle package. Something along the lines of 250 images for $1,250 ($50 per image). I'm afraid it may prove difficult to negotiate higher than that. Look forward to what others have to say on this.

That's $5 per image.

mara · « **Reply #5 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:06 »

thank you very much Alex for your thorough answer.

"For RF (one payment, multiple usages), it's more simple and you can negotiate a bundle package. Something along the lines of 250 images for $1,250 ($50 per image). I'm afraid it may prove difficult to negotiate higher than that. Look forward to what others have to say on this. "

I also thought of something like that. like 5-7$ per one image.
I don't believe they would go with Getty RM prices per one image.
I think they want bulk images prices and they want it cheaper than SS or other sites.
We didn't discuss image resolution but I am not sure if there is a point to do that.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #6 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:09 »

As I read it for example they could licence 350 images from SS for £119 (uk currency) so your "bid" would probably need to be pitched below that I guess.

niktol · « **Reply #7 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:09 »

Quote from: mara on September 27, 2017, 07:06

thank you very much Alex for your thorough answer.

"For RF (one payment, multiple usages), it's more simple and you can negotiate a bundle package. Something along the lines of 250 images for $1,250 ($50 per image). I'm afraid it may prove difficult to negotiate higher than that. Look forward to what others have to say on this. "

I also thought of something like that. like 5-7$ per one image.
I don't believe they would go with Getty RM prices per one image.
I think they want bulk images prices and they want it cheaper than SS or other sites.
We didn't discuss image resolution but I am not sure if there is a point to do that.

Very much depends on the kind of license they want. Before they say what they want from these images, it's practically impossible to give even the ballpark.

mara · « **Reply #8 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:12 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on September 27, 2017, 07:09

As I read it for example they could licence 350 images from SS for £119 (uk currency) so your "bid" would probably need to be pitched below that I guess.

i think that maybe counts if they have subscription. on demand the prices are higher

mara · « **Reply #9 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:14 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on September 27, 2017, 07:09

As I read it for example they could licence 350 images from SS for £119 (uk currency) so your "bid" would probably need to be pitched below that I guess.

they want to use it in their software. for displaying. so i think it is a regular licence

Pauws99 · « **Reply #10 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:14 »

Quote from: niktol on September 27, 2017, 07:02

Quote from: Brasilnut on September 27, 2017, 05:06

For RF (one payment, multiple usages), it's more simple and you can negotiate a bundle package. Something along the lines of 250 images for $1,250 ($50 per image). I'm afraid it may prove difficult to negotiate higher than that. Look forward to what others have to say on this.

That's $5 per image.

and still three times the going rate of RF images....good luck with that one!

Pauws99 · « **Reply #11 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:15 »

Quote from: mara on September 27, 2017, 07:14

Quote from: Pauws99 on September 27, 2017, 07:09
As I read it for example they could licence 350 images from SS for £119 (uk currency) so your "bid" would probably need to be pitched below that I guess.

they want to use it in their software. for displaying. so i think it is a regular licence

Yes thats a standard license https://www.shutterstock.com/subscribe?clicksrc=header

ShadySue · « **Reply #12 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:16 »

Quote from: Brasilnut on September 27, 2017, 05:06

Getty Images has a handy tool for pricing an RM image:
http://www.gettyimages.ca/purchase/price-calculator/sb10069475ab-001

I went ahead and put together some generic information and it came up with a huge sum of 790 euros which Getty would charge (see attached). If you're at Getty you would receive 30% (I believe), so that's 237. That's pretty steep if they're available on Micros as RF which tends to be an argument which putting some premium images on micros is shooting yourself in the foot when it comes to this sort of situation.

Like Alamy, the price on the 'tool' on Getty means little in reality, and someone buying 250 images would get a discount, not to mention all the discount codes which they offer regularly. Many sellers on Getty get 20%, though some still get 30%

I'm imagining the person was thinking of a 'benefit you and me' deal.
So for example, if they would have to spend $250 to get 250 images (number pulled out of thin air) and the tog gets 30% (ditto), you'd get $75. So they're probably hoping you're going to charge them $100. You're still getting more for the same sales, and they're saving money. In this hypothetical scenario, you could try anything less than $250 - unless you see they'd need to buy extended/enhanced licenses for their proposed uses at the cheapest agency you sell your files on. (Added: I see you've estabished that a standard licence would apply.)

They won't pay you more than they'd pay on your cheapest agency, and certainly not more for less usage and you've explained that they don't want any sort of exclusivity, so why would they pay higher RM prices? Arguably non-exclusive RM should be cheaper than RF.

mara · « **Reply #13 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:23 »

yes but since it is a company, i am not sure a single monthly subscription would work for them.
If they need some sort of custom account than I think the price is not what they can get in such a subscription.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #14 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:24 »

Quote from: mara on September 27, 2017, 07:12

Quote from: Pauws99 on September 27, 2017, 07:09
As I read it for example they could licence 350 images from SS for £119 (uk currency) so your "bid" would probably need to be pitched below that I guess.

i think that maybe counts if they have subscription. on demand the prices are higher

I think you can take out a subscription for one month. The OD is useful for those who want a small number of images over a long period.

mara · « **Reply #15 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:29 »

[/quote]

i think that maybe counts if they have subscription. on demand the prices are higher
[/quote] I think you can take out a subscription for one month. The OD is useful for those who want a small number of images over a long period.
[/quote]

i don't think a single subscription can work for this.
And other subscriptions are much more expensive

Pauws99 · « **Reply #16 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:30 »

Quote from: mara on September 27, 2017, 07:23

yes but since it is a company, i am not sure a single monthly subscription would work for them.
If they need some sort of custom account than I think the price is not what they can get in such a subscription.

Depends how many people are downloading the images....getting complex but I don't think £100-£200 is the wrong "Ball Park"

mara · « **Reply #17 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:31 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on September 27, 2017, 07:30

Quote from: mara on September 27, 2017, 07:23
yes but since it is a company, i am not sure a single monthly subscription would work for them.
If they need some sort of custom account than I think the price is not what they can get in such a subscription.
Depends how many people are downloading the images....getting complex but I don't think £100-£200 is the wrong "Ball Park"

i don't think it is only about downloading but using of images in a project too
thanks

niktol · « **Reply #18 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:32 »

I'd ask specifics on budget/use before speculations. In the past I had some very interesting responses, including the one that could make me vulnerable to a serious litigation. It wasn't typical at all, but had me scratching my head.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #19 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:34 »

Another way of looking at it is SS pay out about 30% of their income to contributors at 38C for RF subs That means they are getting about $1.20 per RF image

Pauws99 · « **Reply #20 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:36 »

mara · « **Reply #21 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:42 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on September 27, 2017, 07:34

Another way of looking at it is SS pay out about 30% of their income to contributors at 38C for RF subs That means they are getting about $1.20 per RF image

hm, i don't know. don't think they would contact me if that would be their subscription and price per image.
thank you

Pauws99 · « **Reply #22 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:46 »

Let us know how it turns out...hope you get a good result

mara · « **Reply #23 on:** September 27, 2017, 07:58 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on September 27, 2017, 07:46

Let us know how it turns out...hope you get a good result

thanks

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #24 on:** September 27, 2017, 08:04 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on September 27, 2017, 07:34

Another way of looking at it is SS pay out about 30% of their income to contributors at 38C for RF subs That means they are getting about $1.20 per RF image

Subs are not that much, SS makes a loss on subs if every client downloads their allowance. But that doesn't happen so SS makes a profit.

So the OP client might be looking for a cheaper price directly from the artist which in this case looks like something like this

If the client buys directly from SS > 350 Images $169/month = $48 cent per image. Which is more than the $38 cent the OP might get. But 100 images more than the client needs.

So I would offer the images for 250 * $50 cent = $125 dollar. Save the client $44 dollar and the OP gets $30 dollar more. Win win.

StanRohrer · « **Reply #25 on:** September 27, 2017, 08:23 »

Mara, I had a potential customer approach me like this. All of the above discussion points are valid considerations on pricing. However, with a direct deal you can also offer customized image processing (crops, retouching, adjustments, noise reduction for large use) specifically for the customers uses. The customization will help to keep pricing at least near the top of the agency pricing, if not higher. In my case the images were similar to clip art but, with negotiation discussions, they desired all the same special backgrounds. I already had Photoshop separate layers and Actions close to what was needed. So it was fairly easy edits that would have been very hard for them. If you can bring more image value to them then pricing is a bit less limited.

In my case, the images were to be used for resale as wall art. So, extended licences applied via microstock and helped raise the pricing limits. I was quite willing to offer my easy updates in exchange for 100% commissions. If you can't work this angle of money vs time and delivery, then let them buy from microstock (I've played that game as well). When making a direct transaction you will have to be in charge of the billing, receipts, and tax calculations. Assuming the deal is not a scam of some sort, you still have time involved with making the deal and getting it carried through to completion.

One of the signs of a scam is very easy price negotiations that end in a value higher than normal. Then you receive a check for more than the agreed amount and have instructions to send some of the money on to third party (for expenses or something). The customer check eventually bounces after you have forwarded good money from your wallet. You are left with a lighter wallet and maybe loss of images (image copies).

Mantis · « **Reply #26 on:** September 27, 2017, 08:31 »

Quote from: StanRohrer on September 27, 2017, 08:23

Mara, I had a potential customer approach me like this. All of the above discussion points are valid considerations on pricing. However, with a direct deal you can also offer customized image processing (crops, retouching, adjustments, noise reduction for large use) specifically for the customers uses. The customization will help to keep pricing at least near the top of the agency pricing, if not higher. In my case the images were similar to clip art but, with negotiation discussions, they desired all the same special backgrounds. I already had Photoshop separate layers and Actions close to what was needed. So it was fairly easy edits that would have been very hard for them. If you can bring more image value to them then pricing is a bit less limited.

In my case, the images were to be used for resale as wall art. So, extended licences applied via microstock and helped raise the pricing limits. I was quite willing to offer my easy updates in exchange for 100% commissions. If you can't work this angle of money vs time and delivery, then let them buy from microstock (I've played that game as well). When making a direct transaction you will have to be in charge of the billing, receipts, and tax calculations. Assuming the deal is not a scam of some sort, you still have time involved with making the deal and getting it carried through to completion.

One of the signs of a scam is very easy price negotiations that end in a value higher than normal. Then you receive a check for more than the agreed amount and have instructions to send some of the money on to third party (for expenses or something). The customer check eventually bounces after you have forwarded good money from your wallet. You are left with a lighter wallet and maybe loss of images (image copies).

That was my very first thought based on the OP post. If they already know about these images being available for cheap on SS, they are either trying to get their hands on the images an easier way or are just * cheap...trying to peel a few cents off the total price. I would offer a price of $10 an image. If they don't take it send then to your "agency".

SpaceStockFootage · « **Reply #27 on:** September 27, 2017, 08:32 »

As discussed, unless they've already mentioned some specific reason why they want to license directly, like licensing terms... they're probably just looking to save a bit of money. If it was me, I'd charge them 50% between how much I would get if they bought them through 123RF... and how much it would cost them if they bought them from me at 123RF prices.

So, not sure of the 123RF commission structure, but if they sell an image for $5 and you get $2.50... I'd charge them $3.75

If they still question that price then they're not really in a position to argue... you're both meeting in the middle. You could charge more, and they might pay it... but all things considered, it looks like they're looking for a bargain and if they're looking for a bargain, then they might just keep contacting other contributors, rather than bite the bullet and buy your images through 123RF.

mara · « **Reply #28 on:** September 27, 2017, 08:44 »

Quote from: StanRohrer on September 27, 2017, 08:23

Mara, I had a potential customer approach me like this. All of the above discussion points are valid considerations on pricing. However, with a direct deal you can also offer customized image processing (crops, retouching, adjustments, noise reduction for large use) specifically for the customers uses. The customization will help to keep pricing at least near the top of the agency pricing, if not higher. In my case the images were similar to clip art but, with negotiation discussions, they desired all the same special backgrounds. I already had Photoshop separate layers and Actions close to what was needed. So it was fairly easy edits that would have been very hard for them. If you can bring more image value to them then pricing is a bit less limited.

In my case, the images were to be used for resale as wall art. So, extended licences applied via microstock and helped raise the pricing limits. I was quite willing to offer my easy updates in exchange for 100% commissions. If you can't work this angle of money vs time and delivery, then let them buy from microstock (I've played that game as well). When making a direct transaction you will have to be in charge of the billing, receipts, and tax calculations. Assuming the deal is not a scam of some sort, you still have time involved with making the deal and getting it carried through to completion.

One of the signs of a scam is very easy price negotiations that end in a value higher than normal. Then you receive a check for more than the agreed amount and have instructions to send some of the money on to third party (for expenses or something). The customer check eventually bounces after you have forwarded good money from your wallet. You are left with a lighter wallet and maybe loss of images (image copies).

hi Stan,

I am surely not very comfortable to have such deals. I think I would demand paypal payment before I deliver the images. Although I heard there are paypal frauds as well. I guess there is never 100% certainty.
I think there is no reselling involved here.
Do you have maybe an example of blank licensing contract?

mara · « **Reply #29 on:** September 27, 2017, 08:46 »

I also don't intend to offer single subscription prices.
And team subscriptions are much more expensive and I think there are only yearly deals, so I believe they want to get a deal because of that.

Brasilnut · « **Reply #30 on:** September 27, 2017, 08:48 »

Quote

I also don't intend to offer single subscription prices.
And team subscriptions are much more expensive and I think there are only yearly deals, so I believe they want to get a deal because of that.

Would you be willing to pull your images from Microstock altogether in the hope of negotiating a more interesting deal with this potential client?

That's the thing about Microstock, once you stick your images on there, there's little negotiating room left. That's why I refuse to put my premium images on there since there's no incentive for clients to negotiate directly and if they do how much more can you offer?!!

StanRohrer · « **Reply #31 on:** September 27, 2017, 09:58 »

Quote from: Brasilnut on September 27, 2017, 08:48

[snip]
That's the thing about Microstock, once you stick your images on there, there's little negotiating room left. That's why I refuse to put my premium images on there since there's no incentive for clients to negotiate directly and if they do how much more can you offer?!!

That certainly is a dilemma. Microstock has given me exposure where those outside contacts have returned a decent pay. I figure I would have never gotten that outside exposure without being on microstock. Microstock has also given me inquiries where the client was hard topped at the microstock price. Those would disappear at the point I said I can't even amortize my Email and negotiation time across the payment structure at their (microstock) price point.

Part of microstock selling is to let the agent cover all of the transaction time and costs. Doing sales via automated web site reduces human overhead and helps with the price structure (or the race to the bottom - depending on your view).

Asking a client for "roughly what budget do we need to work within" can help separate the out the low payers - if they will answer. This needs to be a back and forth discussion, voice if possible. More than about 2 Emails and the customer will drop off. So have your costs and negotiation points decided well up front.

mara · « **Reply #32 on:** September 27, 2017, 10:22 »

Quote from: Brasilnut on September 27, 2017, 08:48

Quote
I also don't intend to offer single subscription prices.
And team subscriptions are much more expensive and I think there are only yearly deals, so I believe they want to get a deal because of that.

Would you be willing to pull your images from Microstock altogether in the hope of negotiating a more interesting deal with this potential client?

That's the thing about Microstock, once you stick your images on there, there's little negotiating room left. That's why I refuse to put my premium images on there since there's no incentive for clients to negotiate directly and if they do how much more can you offer?!!

Unfortunately I think that ship has sailed since that images on Microstock are already downloaded many times and I am not sure if there would be a purpose of pulling them out now.
Besides, this client doesn't want an exclusive licnse nor the rights to image. I presume they just want a better deal

mara · « **Reply #33 on:** September 27, 2017, 10:25 »

Quote from: StanRohrer on September 27, 2017, 09:58

Quote from: Brasilnut on September 27, 2017, 08:48
[snip]
That's the thing about Microstock, once you stick your images on there, there's little negotiating room left. That's why I refuse to put my premium images on there since there's no incentive for clients to negotiate directly and if they do how much more can you offer?!!
That certainly is a dilemma. Microstock has given me exposure where those outside contacts have returned a decent pay. I figure I would have never gotten that outside exposure without being on microstock. Microstock has also given me inquiries where the client was hard topped at the microstock price. Those would disappear at the point I said I can't even amortize my Email and negotiation time across the payment structure at their (microstock) price point.

Part of microstock selling is to let the agent cover all of the transaction time and costs. Doing sales via automated web site reduces human overhead and helps with the price structure (or the race to the bottom - depending on your view).

Asking a client for "roughly what budget do we need to work within" can help separate the out the low payers - if they will answer. This needs to be a back and forth discussion, voice if possible. More than about 2 Emails and the customer will drop off. So have your costs and negotiation points decided well up front.

yes, microstock sure has its good sides. Although, lately it has been tougher and tougher and I am just a small fish in a pond. I have been thinking of selling on my own but I am not sure since my portfolio is not very big and I don't have a large audience. This is interesting, to ask them about the budget. But I think they might want to see the prices out of microstock and I am not sure they would be the first to say the price.

Shelma1 · « **Reply #34 on:** September 27, 2017, 10:31 »

If they're asking to get the images from you they don't have a subscription. They have no idea how much your royalty is vs. how much the agency keeps. Ask them how they found you. Offer them a price equal to what that agency would ask for individual sales. If they ask if you could give them a discount ask what they were thinking. Try to get as close as you can to the top price.

FORGET about asking for just over your royalty because that's what you usually get. They don't know that.

Keep in mind that one of the reasons you're licensing through agencies is convenience. You don't have to go through back and forth emailing clients. You don't have to gather all the files up and send them over. The agency does all that. So you need to be compensated for your time.

mara · « **Reply #35 on:** September 27, 2017, 10:59 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on September 27, 2017, 10:31

If they're asking to get the images from you they don't have a subscription. They have no idea how much your royalty is vs. how much the agency keeps. Ask them how they found you. Offer them a price equal to what that agency would ask for individual sales. If they ask if you could give them a discount ask what they were thinking. Try to get as close as you can to the top price.

FORGET about asking for just over your royalty because that's what you usually get. They don't know that.

Keep in mind that one of the reasons you're licensing through agencies is convenience. You don't have to go through back and forth emailing clients. You don't have to gather all the files up and send them over. The agency does all that. So you need to be compensated for your time.

hi Shelma,

yes, i think that also. I have no intention to charge them my royalty amount.
And that is surely more work for me to go through the process without the agency.

Pixart · « **Reply #36 on:** September 27, 2017, 11:38 »

A flashdrive of images has quite a lot of value in itself. It would take forever to download and organize 250 photos, especially if there's daily limits etc. But then - that puts more work on your side also.

StanRohrer · « **Reply #37 on:** September 27, 2017, 17:13 »

Quote from: mara on September 27, 2017, 08:44

Quote from: StanRohrer on September 27, 2017, 08:23
[snip]

hi Stan,

I am surely not very comfortable to have such deals. I think I would demand paypal payment before I deliver the images. Although I heard there are paypal frauds as well. I guess there is never 100% certainty.
I think there is no reselling involved here.
Do you have maybe an example of blank licensing contract?

I am not a lawyer. I have not had this license reviewed by a lawyer. I'm sure there are things that could be picked apart. Adjust the wording to match the terms and conditions of your specific agreement.
======
COPYRIGHT and LICENSE

All photos in this CD/DVD/FOLDER/COLLECTION are Copyright 2017 [PHOTOGRAPHER], All Rights Reserved. Exceptions are noted below. All rights not specifically granted herein remain with the photographer. This is a Rights Managed Photograph License allowing for specific photo uses.

Permissions granted below shall not exceed a period of _20_ years, beginning at the date indicated with the signature below, and contingent upon the photographer receiving full payments as agreed.

Permission is granted to the _[BUYER COMPANY]_, as represented by _[BUYER NAME]_, for photos to be used for commercial and/or noncommercial use. Uses shall be defined to include: printed flyers, printed brochures, printed advertisements, printed news articles, printed editorial articles, motion video advertisements, motion video news articles, motion video editorial articles, Internet electronic advertisements, Internet electronic news articles, Internet electronic editorial articles, and _[BUYER COMPANY]_ Internet Web Sites.

Photographs may be adjusted, altered, or modified as derivative works for the aforementioned uses.

Photo credit is requested, but not required, for images displayed, and shall be of a form similar to “Photo Copyright [PHOTOGRAPHER], All Rights Reserved”.

Permission is granted to companies engaged in the business of printing, copying, or otherwise replicating such images, at the request of the _BUYER COMPANY_ to perform the requested services, with or without an exchange of valuable consideration for their services. The use of the images by such company, other than required for the direct services requested by the image holder, is strictly prohibited.

Notice: The use of the photos in return for money or any other valuable consideration is strictly prohibited. The photographer retains the right to license images to third parties.

Notice: No Model Releases are available from the photographer for any people represented in the provided photos.

Notice: No Property Releases, nor Trademark Releases, nor Event Releases, are available from the photographer for any equipment, nor location, nor event, nor company logos, nor any intellectual property rights, represented in the provided photos.

Description of this Collection Image Content:
Image File Names, Descriptions:
   xxxxxxx.jpg   description
   xxxxxxx.jpg   description
   xxxxxxx.jpg   description

[PHOTOGRAPHER], Photographer
[ADDRESS]
[CITY, STATE, COUNTRY, POSTAL CODE]

[EMAIL]
[TELEPHONE]

Signature: ___________________________      Date: _______________

mara · « **Reply #38 on:** September 28, 2017, 06:05 »

thanks a lot Stan

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #39 on:** September 28, 2017, 09:32 »

The customer can get 350 images for 169 dollar on Shutterstock, so trying to get 3, 4, 5, 10, dollar per image is not going to work. Anything over 169 dollar and the client will just go to Shutterstock, IMO.

Artist · « **Reply #40 on:** September 28, 2017, 10:54 »

better ask client what are their estimated budget.

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #41 on:** September 29, 2017, 06:29 »

Quote from: Artist on September 28, 2017, 10:54

better ask client what are their estimated budget.

The answer will be 100 dollar even though they have a 1000 to burn.

Mantis · « **Reply #42 on:** September 29, 2017, 20:59 »

Quote from: Semmick Photo on September 29, 2017, 06:29

Quote from: Artist on September 28, 2017, 10:54
better ask client what are their estimated budget.
The answer will be 100 dollar even though they have a ~~1000~~ $10,000 to burn.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Approached by a client - need advice (Read 37852 times)

niktol

niktol

niktol

Semmick Photo

Semmick Photo

Semmick Photo

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors