Portraits for Clinic

[rachellebelle]

I am an aspiring portrait photographer currently working full-time as a receptionist at a spa/massage clinic. My boss has asked me if I would be interested in taking individual staff portraits to be posted on our website for staff profiles. Of course I would love to! I have a diploma in photography and have also completed portrait courses. My question is, should my boss pay me for my photography services? Please keep in mind, he is kind of a cheapskate and I would need to be very clear and justify my reasons for wanting the money.

Thanks

 

[Designer]

Are you going to make the photographs at the office and on company time? Is there anything in your DDR that includes the phrase: "performs additional duties as required"?

 

[vintagesnaps]

That's what I was wondering...Would this be done during your regular work hours? If so that could probably make it work for hire and the company would own the copyright (I think, you'll need to look it up and find out, seems like that would make it part of your job duties).

If you do this on your break or before /after work that could probably make it a separate contacted service.

Try American Society of Media Photographers for info. on contracts, licensing, releases, determining pricing, etc.

 

[KmH]

Yes, your boss should pay you.
You are describing a commercial photography shoot that will produce photos for a commercial use.
Since you are in Canada, contract, licensing, releases, etc info from the ASMP may not be all that helpful.

The way commercial photography work is priced you would charge for your time and talent (a Creative fee), and a separate charge for use licensing of your copyrighted photographs.
I am not familiar with Canadian 'work for hire' (WFH) statutes, but I do know that Canada made some major changes to their copyright laws in recent years so they more closely gibe with US copyright law.
In the US, a statement in an employment contract saying "performs additional duties as required" would not be sufficient for an employer to claim copyright ownership of photographs made by an employee whose normal job duties do not include doing photography. Even if you did the shoot during your regular work hours does not automatically make it a WFH situation here in the US.
In the US, for WFH to be in effect, both parties (employee/employer) need to sign an agreement stating that WFH applies.

A use license would define that the use of your photographs would be restricted to just 1 media type - the clinic's web site.
The use license would define what maximum size (pixel dimensions) your photographs could be used at, and for what period of time.

Use licensing of a photograph for clinic web use only (at up to 400 x 400 px) would be about $35 a month - per photograph.
If the clinic uses 10 photos, the monthly use licensing fee would be $350 for all 10 photos.
Instead of a monthly rate you could charge a yearly rate and give a discount for a 1 year use license.
One photo @ $35/month would be $420 for a year of use. So you could discount that to somewhere in the $350 to $400 range, per photo, per year.
If the clinic uses 10 photos that would be $3500 to $4000 per year for the use of 10 photos on the clinic web site.

 

[Derrel]

If the clinic uses 10 photos that would be $3500 to $4000 per year for the use of 10 photos on the clinic web site.

Annnnnnnnnnnd at that price, the clinic's management could go out and BUY a complete camera, lens, and lighting system, use it all to shoot the images, and then write it off.

A yearly use fee of $3,500 to $4,000 per year for TEN headshots is an utterly,utterly unrealistic fee. Seriously. Wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy more than the job is worth. Anywhere in North America. The use is a medical clinic's web site? OMG--this is NOT a one million-circulation monthly magazine..this is a web site's staff mugshot section, fer Chrissakes!

This job can easily be completed by a local professional shooter for $400 in the actual real world in which we all live in. A business manager who would agree to $3,500 to $4,000 use fee for some mugshots made by the receptionist would be an utter idiot. It's NOT like she is Peter Hurley...

 

[Nevermore1]

I agree with Derrel on this. No office is going to pay a current employee that kind of $ for a use fee especially when theu can fo down the street and get the same pics with unlimited use for a few hundred if even that much. Also, I suspect the boss is thinking this should be considered part of your regular duties since you say he can be cheap. When I worked at an animal hospital (in the US) it wasn't the least bit unusual for one of use to go out and mow the grass or pick weeds as upkeep of the hospital.

If I were you I would ask for maybe $200-300 and request that you be given credit on the site for the photos and make it clear that if they want you to do more in a year then you would need to discuss pricing and terms with them again at that point in time (do it this once to get the exposure/experience but don't let them make a habit of asking you to do cheap photos for their site).

 

[vintagesnaps]

Keith's right, the ASMP info. may not be useful for you, I didn't catch that you were in Canada. I think he's right on the money that usage of one photo per year would be in the range of a few hundred dollars, at least for commercial, promotional use. I think though for staff portraits the price range would be more in line with portrait photography.

I might think about checking out pricing of portrait and commercial photographers in your area to get an idea what the going rate is like. That might help you show your employer how much it could cost for the company to hire/contract a photographer, so you price within range while keeping it reasonable.

Typically for commercial or business use photo credits aren't used; they're more likely to be seen in magazines or newspapers. So I wouldn't expect the photographer's name will be on the photos, and to me working for 'exposure' is not appropriate instead of being paid.

Whatever is decided it would probably be better to have a contract that specifies a time frame for usage (most likely 1 year). I'm not sure if doing this for a current employer is necessarily the best idea; I'd think about pursuing opportunities elsewhere so you can be hired and contracted for your photography work without any conflict(s) doing this for a current boss.

 

[Designer]

And of course, the question that hasn't been asked yet: Are your photography skills at the professional level?

 

[tirediron]

Of course we can't say for sure without knowing every detail of your employment agreement, but it's very unlikely that this would be a work for hire agreement, or considered within the reasonable bounds of "and other duties as required..." lingo. As far as pricing goes, if you can get $3500 for this job, let me know, I'm moving to where you are.

For reference, my price would be $175 to show up and between $25 and 50/head depending on how much work was required (is there a suitable background? Do I bring one? Do I have to come twice because some people can't show up for the first session? etc). I wouldn't bother trying to seek a license fee for this sort of work, but would just go straight charges.

 

[rachellebelle]

Are you going to make the photographs at the office and on company time? Is there anything in your DDR that includes the phrase: "performs additional duties as required"?

Unfortunetly, I never signed a contract. This is just a privately owned business and I was employed just as they were moving into their new location. Typically photography services are not expected from an administrative position however.

 

[rachellebelle]

And of course, the question that hasn't been asked yet: Are your photography skills at the professional level?

I specialize in portrait photography and I do have paying clients. I have all the necessary equipment to create professional shots.

 

[gsgary]

I would leave well alone let him get someone else because it will probably cause problems

 

[KmH]

Salesmanship is a needed skill if you hope to make money doing retail photography - portraits of individuals for their private use.
Portrait photography of individuals for their private use is a different business from portrait photography for a commercial use.

Salesmanship and negotiating skills are needed if you hope to make money doing commercial photography.
Charge what you think the traffic will bear, but use best business practices when it comes to the paperwork needed to protect your interests - your contract and use licensing.

The use license used for portraits of individuals for their private use is often called a Print Release and is substantially different from the use license needed for a commercial use.

While a small business could buy a camera, lens, and lighting system, the production of professional quality portrait photographs requires someone have the knowledge and skill to use the equipment effectively. Someone also needs to have the post production skills needed.
The knowledge and skill the photographer brings to the table is the difference.

If one can cover their business costs shooting a job like that for $400 - more power to them.

 

[tirediron]

Salesmanship is a needed skill if you hope to make money doing retail photography - portraits of individuals for their private use.
Portrait photography of individuals for their private use is a different business from portrait photography for a commercial use.

Salesmanship and negotiating skills are needed if you hope to make money doing commercial photography.
Charge what you think the traffic will bear, but use best business practices when it comes to the paperwork needed to protect your interests - your contract and use licensing.

The use license used for portraits of individuals for their private use is often called a Print Release and is substantially different from the use license needed for a commercial use.

While a small business could buy a camera, lens, and lighting system, the production of professional quality portrait photographs requires someone have the knowledge and skill to use the equipment effectively. Someone also needs to have the post production skills needed.
The knowledge and skill the photographer brings to the table is the difference.

If one can cover their business costs shooting a job like that for $400 - more power to them.

If we were talking about shooting the top floor Wal-mart executives, I'd agree with you 100% Keith, and on this, I don't disagree with you in principle, but the reality is, I don't imagine any small medical clinic is going to pay those rates. They'll pick up a Craig's List pro for <$100 or just forget it altogether. One of the problems that we're facing is that many people no longer see the difference professional work makes because they're so used to cell-'phone snaps and so on. Assuming all went as planned, this should be <90 minutes on site, and <30 in post. Add in another 30 for e-mail/telecon with the client, and you're at 2.5 hours for >$400. That seems reasonable to me, and certainly fits in well within my business calculations.

 

[dennybeall]

Do you like the company and the people and want to keep working there? Personally I'd be happy to do it and only ask that any expenses be covered. It would be a great opportunity to hone your craft and get a couple of kudos in the process. Everything is not always about the money.