|
|
 2+ months ago, I made this post - " They've Been Ordered" - referring to my order being placed for my Nikon D3 and my Canon 1Ds Mark III camera through Adorama. Now, I have the pleasure of inviting you to click on over to them as well to do your own (holiday) shopping. Hit that link above, and get an extra battery for friends and colleagues. Buy that young, up and coming photographer a wonderful D3 or 1Ds Mark III. All this, because they've opted to run an ad on the blog. Please take a moment to click over and peruse what they've got to offer. Why, you might ask, have I begun using them? It's not because they're an advertiser (but that'll sure help in the future), it's something else. (Continued after the Jump)
One name: Jeff Snyder.
As I said in a previous post, Jeff is their Pro Sales guru, and he's my longtime friend and fellow professional photographer , who used to be at Penn Camera (when he wasn't out covering assignments), but now he's moved up to the big leagues, yet still based in DC.
The other day, despite having no car available, he made his way to an informal lunch amongst several DC photographers, because he had a pair of D3's to show off. He wasn't selling them, nor taking orders on the spot, he was showing them off like a proud parent would to people who count him as a friend first, and a supplier second. I appreciated that he made the special trip, and hung out with us for awhile, but then again, that's just Jeff.
To e-mail Jeff and get to know him better, click this link: jsnyder@adorama.com
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
 Last week, I read on the Digital Railroad Member's blog that Charles Mauzy, currently the President, now get's promoted to Chief Executive Officer. Nisselson? He gets promoted to Chairman of the Board. Atleast that's how I saw it. All I thought was "Good for Evan, and Good for Charles. Next..."How's it getting reported elsewhere? EPUK reports "Digital Railroad (DRR) founder Evan Nisselson has stepped down as the company’s CEO. The post will be taken over by current DRR president Charles Mauzy, with Nisselson continuing as company chairman." Stepping Down?(Continued after the Jump)
That piece was then picked up by PDNPulse, here.
I see Even all over the place. That picture on the right is one I made with my iPhone while at a White House News Photographer's Association conference, where Evan was on a panel about the future of still/video. He's out championing DRR, and what they're trying to do for photographers. The role of the CEO is to manage the day-to-day operations, the role of the Chairman is to be much more strategic about the company. With Evan on the road, it actually makes much more sense that he step up into a role that's better suited to him, and leave the day-to-day operations to Charles. My guess is that, as founder of DRR, it's taken some time for Evan to get comfortable with anyone other than himself sheparding his "baby" along from day to day, just like a first-time parent who is unsure about leaving their child with someone else. It takes time and trust to build before you're comfortable with that. It seems Evan is now comfortable enough with Charles to do just that.
So, I called Evan, to get his take on all this. Evan said "I got several calls, among them from Reza (a NGS photographer, ) and others, all of them are supportive of the evolution, and look forward to this helping the Digital Railroad community." That seems pretty much in line with what I thought.
So, to be doubly sure I was thinking things through, I next talked to Charles. Charles said "Evan will continue to, and in fact, expand his role as spokesperson for Digital Railroad and will continue to provide inspiration and vision as the Chairman of the Board, something he's done from the company's inception."
Yup, that pretty much is what I thought, and why I didn't write about this in the first place. It's essentially a non-news event, suitable, as they did, for a mention on their blog.
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
Recently, I was giving a presentation, and we were discussing contracts, and someone in the audience mentioned Conde Nast's (heinous) one. They didn't suggest it was heinous, I did.
I did, because I've read it. When you demand "All rights throughout the universe..." in your contract, the author who penned that is a pompous ass, period. Add onto it the pay of $350 for the day, and now you're just a huge pompous ass. Then, someone else in the audience piped up, validating something I've known for many many years. What's that you say? (Continued after the Jump)
They said "I've done a fair amount of work for them, and I can tell you, my contract pays me much more than $350 an assignment."
Bingo! I knew it!
I've personally experienced the one off horrible contract proffer from more than one editorial (and corporate) client, only to raise my thoughtful objections to the terms, and get the more reasonable ones with better pay, and fewer rights demands. This was a few years ago, and at this point, 90+% of the time, I'm working with clients based upon my contract, negotiating to meet their needs. However, I've yet to see the elusive "other" Conde Nast contracts. You know, the ones who pay fair, only want "world", or "US", or "one time" rights? It's a given that Annie's contract's not the same as the new guy's. But, where are those in-between Annie and the Newbie?
This holds true too for places like Time, Men's Journal(wink), Wired, Sports Illustrated, and so forth. So, this is my call for contracts.
Here's what I'll do. Send me your contracts. I will not reveal my sources. You can send it in anonymously from your gmail accounts set up just for that purpose, or you can send it with your contact information, so we can discuss it (privately).
What I want to do is highlight the differences between the newbie-photographer, the work-horse photographer, the showcase-photographer, and so forth. Some of the language is standard, but the assignments rates and rights packages are no doubt different. That's the meat on the bone.
If you have a sweet deal (higher percentages, etc) with Getty/Corbis/Alamy/Jupiter/et al, send it in, and others, please send in the standard/first-offer contracts, so I have a baseline of the latest contract.
If no one sends them in, then I'm off to other valuable postings. However, if I get the various ones in, I'll post the differences, which will help everyone out. Send them to me by clicking the "E-mail a topic Request" link over on the right, and let's see what you've got.
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
 Far be it for me to celebrate another's (ongoing) downward slide....ahh shucks, in this case, why not? Back in July I wrote ( OnRequest - Realizing the Obvious, 7/12/07) about how David Norris, founder of OnRequest, had finally admitted what everyone (except he, and his deluded investors) knew, that it was a bad business model, convincing up to five photographers to all shoot a job on spec, with one of them - if any - with the chance of being paid. It was like the traveling elixir hawkers of old, promising the world to those in need of a cure (or an assignment) with the promise of potential "riches". Norris, who is touted recently in Seattle Business Monthly's The Top 25 Innovators and Entrepreneurs, was thankful that his payroll would be lighter in the coming weeks, laying off eight staff, as reported here by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. So, who's reporting what? (Continued after the Jump)
Just as the towns-folk would come upon these potion-peddling charlatans on the wagon trails between communities, alone in a ditch with a broken spoke, and pass by, without nary a helping hand, so too are we to proverbially pass by and (thankfully) watch as Norris' empty promises and creditor demands of continued profitability levels engulf him, forcing him to cut expenses - a.k.a. people - as he staves off the wolves of failure. It's as if what goes around comes around, and it's a commin' around. On one hand, he's celebrated (in the Seattle BM piece): "...OnRequest has developed unique tools for helping companies brand their products and track their images. It can analyze a company’s artwork and find out if a firm’s unoriginal images are also being used by other businesses, an embarrassing problem that happens more often than companies realize." Right, that's called the risk of Royalty-free imagery. "....OnRequest grow by about 400 percent in 2006 and the same rate of growth is expected this year. The company’s success has caught the eye of the venture community, as well, with a number of local firms investing millions in the startup." Hmmm, maybe not so much. When it's reported in the Seattle PI piece: The cuts, which occurred Thursday, were not tied to problems in the overall stock photography business, said Norris....He said the company has experienced record revenue over the past several quarters, a trend he expects to continue this quarter. Then again, maybe not, unless you cut more staff, which is a common tactic for organizations looking to appear more profitable than they are. Yikes! This is his fourth startup. Perhaps those with the VC purse-strings will recognize that Norris' risk to success ratio is a bit askew towards the risk side, so there's no fifth startup? Perhaps someone will see him in a ditch, with a broken spoke and just let well enough alone.
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
 Here's a look back over the past 11 months at the top 10 posts, to date. Thanks! - #1 ~ Photo Booth Rig - The 'in detail' demonstration of a really cool photo booth where people can make images of themselves, and get a print, in under a minute!
- #2 ~ Nikon D3 Spotted in the Wild - The photos of a D3 being used on assignment. This was post skyrocketed to this position because of several link-ins from other sites.
- #3 ~ The Conundrum of Doing Nothing - This post, in such a short period of time saw a grassroots spike in readers. The bottom line - doing nothing can be very profitable!
- #4 ~ A Must Watch - Do You See Yourself? - I'd like to thank YouTube for this post's success. It's clearly resonated with people when you see a writer talk about the importance of getting paid.
- #5 ~ Don't Really Make Photos - This is only a test - Apparently the rest of you also thought it absolutely hilarious that a newspaper would require all it's freelancers to bring in every piece of equipment they own, and to be tested on their abilities!
- #6 ~ US Presswire - Introduction - Many of you apparently 'saw the light' and spread the word about this in-depth piece on how bad shooting spec, especially of sports, is for you. It wasn't without it's detractors, of course..
- #7 Anatomy of an Assignment: 3 Minutes and Counting - This post will always hold a special place for me, as it was the basis for the AssignmentConstruct site.
- #8 From The 'Are You Kidding Me' Department - It's remarkable that two posts about the downside of spec sports shooting makes it into the top 10 list. I presume it's a combination of SportsShooter referrals as well as the large number of people shooting sports.
- #9 The Marketplace is now open - A piece on Digital Railroad's (then) new Marketplace service for stock licensing made headlines, and the top ten.
- #10 The Art of the Retoucher - This was a very early post, about how amazing retouchers work, and links to some of their samples.
Now go! Check 'em out! Up next? My top ten favorite posts...
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads. (Comments, if any, after the Jump)
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
I get these calls all the time - "We're a non-profit..." which is usually proceeded by a request for a lower rate. I'm guessing you do too. I'm not saying that you should never do pro bono work, or give back. However, don't let it be based upon who rings-you-up, but rather, after a period of reflection to decide for whom you would like to offer your services. Understand, being a "non-profit", a.k.a. "Not-for-Profit" organization is a tax designation ( IRS FAQs about Operating as an Exempt Organization), and, as such, allowing a tax structure designation to dictate the acceptability of a discount would mean that an LLC or a S-Corp, or a Sole Proprietor would all potentially enjoy different pricing. I don't see the landlord cutting them a break, or the electric company, or the cost for a computer, or the cost of a case of copier paper, or.....you get the point. Why are we to discount our services? (Continued after the Jump) We're not!
A few words from the IRS' Exemption Requirements:To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code...it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates....Organizations described in section 501(c)(3) are commonly referred to as charitable organizations. Organizations described in section 501(c)(3), other than testing for public safety organizations, are eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions in accordance with Code section 170....The organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests...Section 501(c)(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative (lobbying) activities they may conduct. This delineation would certainly reduce the number of valid claimants who suggest they are charitable/non-profit.
Further, when the organization has nice downtown office space, and their staff are paid competative wages with a 401k, and their event is in a nice hotel or downtown venue and they have quality floral arrangements, or, their executive you're doing a portrait of has a beautiful view of the city and dresses in high quality suits, why should you bear the brunt of cost-savings requests?
You shouldn't.
Don't think though, that you can deduct your services.
The IRS's Publication 526, which is a a publication discussing how to claim a deduction for charitable contributions, lists on Page 2:
Not Deductible As
Charitable Contributions
Value of your time or services
back on February 10th (An Original Picasso for $50? That's what they say) I suggested "don't bother with the get paid then donate route...", but upon further review, if you want to be seen as a donor, and treated as such, it's not a bad idea.
When you're working for a charity, send them an estimate and then invoice for the full amount of your services, get paid, and agree that you will provide that amount back (less expenses, if that's your deal) by check, through their donation mechanism. This sets them up to recognize the true value of the work you do do. Further, you are then listed as a "donor" in their literature, and are extended an invitation to attend other events where a photographer may not be present, as a guest. While your donation may be in-kind, it places you on par with others who may have donated the same amount in cash.
So, while this won't help your tax status, since your donation and your income cancel each other out, it could be a good way to actually make a donation. and certainly affords you the ability to cover your expenses when the deal is a pro bono one.
(With thanks to a helpful SF ASMP member who posited this nugget of information, well worth expanding upon!)
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
 I'd like to think that the reason we have the good fortune of 50,000+ views in the last 30 days, and have exceeded 300,000 since we started, is because there's something of value you, dear reader, get from these postings. What though, are you doing with that knowledge? I'd like to think that you are using these insights, whichever apply to you directly, or in a modified form specific to your needs, to make your business a better run, more efficient, effective, and, yes - profitable operation. What are the additional benefits to you, or that you can obtain? What, if anything, are you obligated to do, in return? (Continued after the Jump)
Something. Last week, The Conundrum of Doing Nothing rose to become one of my more popular posts, topping 5,000 people reading it. One of the points was that by doing nothing, you set yourself up to do something. Each time I give a presentation, I end with the "ask" of the audience to take whatever they've learned from the evening, and pay it forward. It's the last slide of my presentation, and the last sentence of my book. I firmly believe that if we, collectively, pay forward whatever we learn about how to operate our businesses right, we will all benefit.
You might think to yourself that you, yourself, can't make a difference. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is an old parable, of the starfish. There are many variations, here's one:A father and son walked along the seashore as the sun was rising, amidst thousands of starfish left by the retreating tide. The father was picking up the starfish and tossing them back into the sea. His son queried his father "Why do you do that? There are thousands of starfish here, many will die. What difference does it make?"
The father, paused, starfish in hand, said "Son, it makes a difference to this one", and returned it to the sea. Such is the power of one.
So too, might you feel as if whatever effort you make to do things right, or help others, won't make a difference. One refrain I hear from time to time from photographers is "if I say no to the bad deal, what does it matter? They will find someone else to take it." While I refer you back to Arlo's thinking on this one, so too, might you consider the The Butterfly Effect:The flapping wing represents a small change in the initial condition of the system, which causes a chain of events leading to large-scale phenomena. Had the butterfly not flapped its wings, the trajectory of the system might have been vastly different. Your efforts, even in small ways, can - and do, make a difference. While you may never see the difference made, it's those types of efforts, the ones you make for which the yield is unknown to you, is among the most altruistic.
So, I encourage you to recognize your own power, as just one individual, and that your efforts are akin to the butterfly effect, and actually are making a difference. As to the additional benefits to you? The benefit of knowing you're doing well, by doing good.
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
|
|
2 ... 2 ...