Freelancing: The 80/20 Approach

I’ve been wanting to write about this for some time after having had many personal discussions with other photographers and editors. Any photojournalist who hasn’t been embedded with Bin Laden in the mountains of Pakistan is well aware of the transition our industry is experiencing. Cutbacks upon cutbacks and consolidations are daily reminders of the evolution we are experiencing. And as a result, so many young photographers emerging from J-schools nationwide, if not world wide, are faced with a shrinking marketplace. Hoping to gather experience, more and more of these young photographers are taking on spec assignments from places like US Presswire or succumbing to terrible work-for-hire agreements from (fill in the blank here). The problem with this business model is there that there is virtually no way to sustain a living when you factor in cost of doing business. Undeterred, young photographers in increasing numbers are drawn by the excitement of covering an NFL game or hanging with a celebrity in a behind the scenes shoot that they never stop to consider the future ramifications of their actions. By foregoing a assignment/creative fee, the photographer is only setting the table for even less assignment work in the future. I can tell you without argument that once publications become used to getting assignments covered on spec instead of on assignment, they will issue less and less assignment days.

As an example of that, I recently had a assignment offered to me to shoot for a high profile non-profit campaign. The editor explained that the last photographer essentially handed over everything. No licensing involved. Pure work for hire. I explained the options to the person offering the assignment so that I would retain ownership of the images. Ownership is key to generating future income through sales to other outlets, and experience clearly points to the fact that most outlets don’t usually need full ownership. Those that do want to own images, or have unlimited rights, do so for obvious reasons: Those images are valuable and they want the revenue they will generate. If they own them, or have unlimited access, they don’t have to pay the photographer for usage. But most young photographers don’t understand this. Back to the non-profit………After negotiation, it became apparent the organization wanted a work-for-hire agreement but didn’t want to pay upfront to compensate for my loss of future licensing income. They decided to look elsewhere. Although I certainly would have liked to shoot the job, I can not afford to contribute to the demise of my own business by agreeing to bad contracts.

As the industry continues to evolve, this model will become more and more common. Photographers have to make their own choices, but I can guarantee that those who continue to work  under this model will not make enough money to stay in business. As a friend and colleague once said, “Freelancing is 80% business and 20% photography.” The 20% gets you the work and the 80% keeps you in business. And he was 100% correct…………

todd