Got a phone call from a business, here in Toronto, looking to hire a photographer. The caller said that they’ve never hired a photographer before and admitted they weren’t sure “how it works.”
The company wanted executive portraits for its web site. Business portraits are the most common request that a corporate photographer gets. There are many uses for such pictures and smart businesses like to update their photos every couple of years or so.
I suggested the best way to do the photography, how the pictures could be delivered and then gave an approximate cost for the required usage. That last bit, about the price depending on the usage, caught the caller by surprise.
Aha! Licensing.
Here’s the deal about licensing:
A photographer is running a business. The purpose of every business is to make money. The best way for a photographer to make money is to license the use of a picture rather than just selling it outright. Yes, a photographer can make money selling pictures outright if the fee is high enough. But in most cases, few clients would be willing to pay such a high fee because there’s simply no reason to do it. Why pay for more than you need?
Let’s talk software.
Virtually every piece of software comes with a license. In most cases, the license allows the user to run the software on one or two computers. Why license the software and not just sell it outright? Licensing allows the software company to make money and stay in business.
But imagine there was no software licensing. Would it be fair that a person who buys one copy of the software has to pay the same price as a business that buys five dozen copies? Not fair? Welcome to licensing.
Back to photography.
Two reasons why photographers can make money by licensing pictures:
1. Licensing allows the fee to correspond to the value of the pictures. More value = higher fee. Less value = lower fee.
2. A picture might be licensed again in the future which can mean new revenue to the photographer.
For example:
Customer A (an insurance broker) wants a portrait that will be used only on his business card.
Customer B (a real estate agent) wants a portrait that will used on her business card, in her sales sheets, in her monthly newsletter, on her web site, on local billboards throughout the year, on lawn signs and used as media handouts.
Should these two portraits have the same licensing fee?
If yes, then should the fee be low to accommodate Customer A’s small use or should the fee be high to account for Customer B’s large use?
Even though the portraits may be the same, photographically-speaking, licensing would allow for a lower fee to Customer A, (due to his lower usage), and a higher fee to Customer B, (to account for her higher use and, thus, higher value of her portrait).
Remember, like all businesses, a photographer has to make money. Charging appropriately is the only way.
Photographers will license any right a client needs. After all, more licensing means more income and that’s the point of business.
Some clients will ask for “all rights.” In almost all cases, “all rights” is never needed and it would be very expensive.
“All rights” includes such things as: editorial reproduction rights in all publications around the world, TV broadcast rights in all countries, worldwide commercial rights, book publishing rights, resale and relicensing rights, merchandising rights, electronic and web rights, and more. Is it worth paying for all those rights when you don’t need them?
Licensing generally depends on three factors:
1. How the pictures will be used (e.g. in a magazine, on a web site, in a TV commercial);
2. Where the pictures will be used (e.g. locally, nationally, worldwide);
3. How long the pictures will be used (e.g. once, one month, a year, forever).
It’s not as complicated or as difficult as it might sound. Talk with your professional photographer. They’d be happy to work out a license to fit your exact needs.
