Was the federal “Department of Canadian Heritage” named ironically?
The National Post this week pointed out that the cheap stock pictures used by Canadian Heritage are from a foreign-owned picture agency and were shot by foreign photographers.
Why does this federal agency use foreign photos to promote Canadian culture? It suggested that Canadian photographers are too expensive.
Unfortunately, the National Post article is many years behind the times. The federal government’s practice of using cheap stock pictures from foreign photographers has been going on for a long time. That’s correct: the Canadian government avoids Canadian photographers and buys cheaper work from abroad.
Federal government agencies which regularly use cheap stock pictures from abroad include: Canada Revenue Agency, Canadian Intellectual Property Office, Competition Bureau, Copyright Board of Canada (one of the stock photos used by the Copyright Board is the same picture used on Iranian and Russian web sites dedicated to stealing music), Canadian Radio and Television Commission (the “Canadian” family on its home page is American), Department of Foreign Affairs, and Health Canada, just to name a few.
It’s also common for some political parties to bypass Canadian photographers and run straight to foreign-owned, cheap stock agencies.
Why doesn’t a large organization like a federal or provincial government have a central photo department? It can be run like a newspaper photo department with picture editors, assignment editors and photographers. This could greatly lower the per picture cost and vastly boost the value of the photo archives.
Are the Prime Minister’s Office and the Department of National Defence the only ones to have their own photo department?
By contrast, the US government makes it almost easy to find government-produced images. Also, unlike Canada, the US government does not copyright work produced with public money.
All of this shows a lack of understanding of photography as a communications tool (cheap stock pictures are a waste of money at any price). It also reveals a disrespect for Canadian photographers. It’s mind-boggling how shortsighted Canadian governments can be when it comes to photography.
Are Canadian photographers too expensive or are governments too cheap?
1. A provincial ministry once needed onsite photography with studio-quality lighting for group shots, portraits and a reception. Two days of post-processing were also required. Pictures were to be used on its web site and as media handouts. It also wanted 41-8×10 prints. My quote was about $1000 but the ministry’s budget was $250 including the cost of the prints.
2. A provincial ministry required photography of a reception and awards presentation. They were expecting at least 40 pictures (35 individuals getting awards plus 5 group pictures). My quote was $550. Its budget was “under $200.”
3. A provincial government agency needed five to seven days of photography throughout southern Ontario plus full copyright ownership. Each day was up to 15 hours based upon the extensive shot list and travel involved. My quote was about $1500 per day plus travel expenses (hotels, meals, gas). The budget was $1,000 for the entire project which they expected to be a three-day job.
4. A federal ministry needed its minister photographed at a Toronto conference. They needed digital files and 8×10 prints of various group shots. My quote was about $650. Their budget was $250 including all expenses.
5. A federal agency needed photo coverage of some day-long public relation tours of various businesses in southern Ontario. The pictures were intended for worldwide distribution. In previous years, it paid $800/day. But since these new tours now required full copyright transfer of the photos, my quote was $1,100/day. It turned out that its budget was “less than half of what you quoted.” (They spent more than that on each day’s lunch.)
6. A provincial agency used to pay $750/day for editorial photography. Pictures were used on web sites, as media handouts and in government publications. Over the following year, it dropped its photo rate to $450/day and then to $250/day for the exact same work.
Federal and provincial governments have no clue as to what goes into producing photography. Their budgets are stuck in the 1970s.
Added November 2017: What’s ironic, or at least somewhat funny, is how many cheap stock photo agencies have asked to be listed. Obviously they haven’t read or haven’t understood what this page is about.
