"Emily L. Ferguson" <elf@cape.com> wrote/replied to: >>This approach sounds like a sure way to kill the entire deal. > >Yup. That's the core problem with consolidating publishing right >now. Murdoch and the Associated Press, Getty, and Bill Gates, who >wholly owns Corbis, all get rich while the people who create the >intellectual property they get rich on don't have health insurance >and forfeit their future. It seems to me there's such a glut of images of all kinds on the market right now that any photog except one who's already made a name could be happy to get any work, and maybe just maybe make a few extra bucks from images after the shoot. I'd take 200 bucks for a few hours shooting, hopefully make more on prints, and keep the rights any day. I used to do commercial work like this. $150 minimum, $50 an hour after that. Large built in profit on all the prints. Customers were real happy, I should have stuck with this type of shooting. Everyone has to start somewhere and work their way up. Everyone starts low, just happy to make a few bucks, but starts collecting clients and an impressive portfolio. I myself basically started all over this Spring when I decided to get seriously into Bird and Nature Photography by investing over $5000.00. It might be a few years before I get famous or start to make any cash from it, but in the meanwhile I'm going ahead and shooting lots and working on technique. I'd be happy to sell any prints for any profit at this point :-) Your points are well taken and should be kept in mind, but for the beginners, let's just try not to scare off any customers but keep the rights to our images, and make _some profit_. Jim Davis Nature Photography http://www.kjsl.com/~jbdavis/
