Whether you're a photographer, videographer, or a retoucher, you've probably been asked for free work once in your life. Recently, I've noticed an enormous increase of job postings from companies or individuals who are seeking free photography or videography work, or in their own words, "volunteer work." In the past, free work ads were a relatively rare occurrence, but recently they have become quite commonplace. It is possibly related to the increase of photographers in the market as well as the increase in the number of photographers or videographers who want to dive into the market. It's not difficult to offer an explanation for the growing trend of free digital imaging work, and it is even easier to find a solution that might overcome the problems caused by it: Never ever work for free in any circumstances.
Most amateur and enthusiast photographers tend to switch to full time and earn their living by performing their art and craft. As a known fact, getting into the market is a little bit of a hassle, especially considering there are probably 10 times more photographers in the market than to 5 years ago. Therefore, even doing it for free, having a "published work" for photographers, is considered as an essential step for being noticed, and in some cases, this is totally wrong.
First of all, there is an ugly truth about working for free. You will never get paid work from a client whom you've worked for free previously. Once you work for free, you and your work will be marked as "worthless." It's based on human psychology. And if you still hope to be noticed and get paid work from another client in the future, well needless to say, by the merest chance, maybe you'll be noticed. If we cast aside being naive and optimistic, no one will even appreciate your effort. Besides, as an artist, you have enough expenses not to present your craft for free:
- Value of your time
- Cost of your equipment (including insurance and maintenance cost)
- Your annual marketing expenses
- Your photography related subscriptions
- Annual cost of software that you use
http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/626542527
Nobody will care about these expenses except you. Every time you spend your time for free work, you are going to make a loss of your own savings, depending on these expenses. That's why, you have to be strict about not working for free. First, for yourself, then, for the whole industry. For instance, some magazines don't pay photographers or retouchers because they are aware of the fact that they can easily find any other contributor willing to work for free. But, what if every single contributor rejects their free work offer? Well, in the long run, they'll have to take this work seriously and make payments to their contributors. That's why we are all responsible individually to determine a market standard.
Being not paid before doesn't mean that your work and time is worthless
Working for free isn't the initial step for being a professional. On the contrary, you have to be paid for being a professional. If you don't have a professional piece of work to convince your future clients for paid work, then keep building your portfolio at your pleasure. Because, when you're hired for free, you won't even have a chance to add your own taste to the images. You'll be an operator with a fancy camera. At the end of the day, maybe you won't even use those images on your portfolio.
Likewise, don't expect good production from a client who doesn't have a budget for paying a photographer. As we all know, good production is key to good photographs. That's one of the reasons why you should spend your "free" time for your own personal projects.
Collaborations
If you are invited for a free project and no one is paid, then feel free to collaborate, hence you'll all be free without any limitations, and everyone will benefit from the final pieces on their portfolios.
Volunteering/Internship Trick
Now, even some big companies and clothing vendors post ads on job seeking websites and they're seeking volunteer photographers for their e-commerce business. Yeah, they are making money from their business, yet they don't deem photography worthy. It's funny though, they sell their products because of those photos! So it's better not to apply for these kind of jobs.
Conclusion
- Working photographers need money like all other people.
- Clients buy the photographer's time and experience in return of the money they pay, and they get photographs of course.
- Amateurs get angry with clients, professionals educate them. So, when you're asked for a free work, explain the reasons to the client and why you should be paid.
- If you think life is too short for acting professional, just do not reply to those requests.
- If you are willing to work for a specific person or brand, don't ask to work for free on your behalf, ask for a test work to prove yourself.
- Free work is never appreciated and respected.
- Social media shoutouts don't work, so don't work for free in exchange of social media marketing.
- Every dream has a price. You're not obligated to work for free for startups with no budgets, because every startup has marketing budgets. Let them spend for their "dream."
- Do not rely on job offers stating sentences like "great opportunity to show your skills." No one cares about your potentials, they just want their job done.
- Never ever believe in people saying "I'll recommend you to all my network." This is the greatest lie in history.
- There is actually a movement started about this issue. Check out the related Facebook group: Stop Working For Free.
In my opinion, the best way of getting a well-paying job is having a good portfolio. Spend your time efficiently to build your portfolio. Don't let vigilant companies or people use you and your time. These are based on my personal experiences. Please share your opinions and experiences in the comments section below.
Thank you for this article. There is one thing that I don't think is quite true however: "You will never get paid work from a client whom you've worked for free previously".
If there is a company/brand that I really want to do work with that will benefit my portfolio, I will offer to do a shoot for them free of charge - and more often than not they will come back to me for more work (paid).
It's a great way to get your work shown to your ideal customer.
Hi Reejan, thanks for your comment,
well, in my opinion, once you make a free shoot, you are no more the desired photographer in the eyes of the client, you became a photographer easy to reach and ready to shoot in any budget. That's why I usually tend to convince my clients with my portfolio, not with free shoot. If the brand is so big, then I only offer one image for test, if they are indecisive about working with me.
I agree. I would much rather give a returning client a small discount than a free shoot. If every photographer gave the first shoot for free then a business could literally get 100's of free shoots in any given market before having to pay out a dime for photography services. And the fact is, that's what many of them do.
I think if you approach a company about shooting something for them free of charge.. And it is a project outside of there normal marketing cycle then it is all good. But if you approach them and offer your services free of charge and they fill you into a slot that they had money set a said for then you are doing a disservice to your self and a disservice to the rest of us. Even if you get work out of the out of it later.. You lost an opportunity for someone (maybe you) to make money doing Photogrphy. I would encourage you to always ask for money first.. Then if they say we can not pay you because of xyz.. Then and only then coincided offering your services for free. And if you do offer them up... You should offer free photos to them in a collaborative way. Do not bend over backwards for them. That is a sure fire way to be taken advantage of.
Yes, sorry, that is exactly what I meant. I offer a free test to show my ability and deliver 1 or 2 final images - not a full on shoot. I should have worded that differently.
I have done this on several occasions and they now hire me on a regular basis (paid work).
You do have to be careful about how you go about it, and make sure it is clear that you are willing to do a test shoot, and that they aren't expecting a full shoot with rights to use the photos commercially.
Yes, big brands do have the money to pay, and so they should - but offering them a free test is a great way to get your foot in the door which usually opens up many other doors.
I think the big difference here would be that you are approaching a company with an offer to work for free this time because you value their product and want them to see the value in yours, this might work and they might hire you next time when the budget allows. The advertisement above is for a company that doesn't see any value in paying for a photographer and probably never will no matter how good a job you do. Offering your services free is a bold move, asking you to provide your services for free is a d!*k move.
That's one thing I really don't understand! E-commerce companies make money via photographs but, somehow most of them don't have budgets for photographers. We cannot change these individuals or companies, even you do the best shoot of your life, they never value that.
Another thing, free client will bring you another free clients, and you will be working for free all time :))
If a company doesn't have a line on their budget for a photographer they're going to eaten alive by someone who's better funded and knows what the f*ck they're doing. Shooting content so you have something to present in your interview is one thing but anytime a company wants me to shoot for free I refer them to a good friend of mine.
He's a bankruptcy attorney and chances are they're going to need one, and soon.
I quit even looking at Linked-in's photography job postings years ago for the simple reason that it would make me so mad at how many companies wanted "Volunteer" photography. It made my blood boil! Basically they are saying that it's okay for everyone in the organization to make a paycheck EXCEPT for the photographer. Don't they know how insulting that is to us as a group? Unfortunately there always seems to be someone who will do it for free.
You made a good point Joseph, that is totally insulting, ignorant and dodgy.
Unfortunately a lot of fools out there accept free work for "exposure." And while you could argue that clients with with no budget aren't your clients anyway, the saturation of photographers doing free work only fuels the attitude that photography in general is worthless. "That we love what we do so we're willing to do it cheap. "
One thing I don't get is the following. You would never walk into a store and negotiate the price of a tv, or a burger at restaurant or with your barber or with uber. But for whatever reason people seem to think it's acceptable to try to shortchange photographers.
That's a good point Christian, well I think effort and time is non-measurable notions and people don't take photography/videography serious enough for calling it as a "job"
That is insolence imo, and that's why I want all photographers reject these requests strictly as a union. Well, maybe in an another world, I wish that will come true.
This is an important issue facing all professional photographers. And it is vital that a photograph knows their costs. There are resources on the internet that provide educational materials on pricing. First and foremost is the National Press Photographers Cost of Doing Business Calculator, https://nppa.org/calculator. This is available for everyone to access. It provides a dollar figure, for your own circumstances, of how much it costs you to put your cameras and equipment in your car, before you even drive to the job. When first using the CDBC, a key bit of information to factor into the equation is how many days per year will you be shooting. Unless you know exactly what this number is for you, based upon last year's tax returns, I suggest you enter in 12 or so days, certainly no more than 24. More than one person has been amazed at how high the cost of doing business per shoot is for a photographer. And remember, this is your cost. Working for less than your cost means you are paying the client. To make money, you have to charge more, which is usually done by adding on licensing fees.
Also available to everyone, is material on pricing compiled by the American Society of Media Photographers, asmp.org. http://asmp.org/links/1#.V0OFQGOPBuw
The sad truth of the matter is that you do not have to have a degree or a license or even training to take pictures for someone yet alone call yourself a photographer. All you need is a camera...not even a GOOD camera and maybe if you want to "look" somewhat credible...a business card for $25 for 500 at any print shop. Most people I know that shoot for free do so because they "just do it for fun" or "aren't in it to make money". These people are the enemy to professional photographers and I let them know when I get a chance. Politely mind you but I definitely give them an ear full.
You are totally right and actually, this is a really important matter in terms of the future of photography. Okay, %99 of the photographers start as an amateur, but results of providing a service for free just for "satisfaction" or "fun" as an amateur concerns all the community
But do they provide good quality photos? :)
I know several that can provide acceptable photos for the application. Maybe not nationwide advertising campaigns or even billboard work but certainly good enough for web use and digital advertising. In small towns like mine the difference between "excellent for a price" and "good enough for free" is already in a lot of small business owners head. I try to educate my clients and fellow photographers of this destructive characteristic every chance I get. Some just don't care.
Thanks for sharing this James, this looks like a very useful link, all the entries should be annual costs I think, right?
Yes, Burak, you start with your annual expenses, money set aside in an account for equipment replacement and repair, software subscriptions, vehicle maintenance, health insurance, retirement, etc. That will give you the price you pay to be a photographer,that will give you your "cost of doing business". Then divide that by the number of paid shoots you do in a year and and that will give you your cost per job.
Thank you James, asmp.org is full of useful information about photography business, I've been still reading for the last couple of hours
I think there's too much stigma around "working for free". Sometimes it can be great for your business. It's all about the expectations you set, though. You must establish that if you do, it's a one-off (in order to establish a relationship/trust).
I recently reached out to a local business with some free headshots/product shots. I enjoyed it, they loved it, and are interested in hiring me for future endeavours and promoting my business within theirs. If I had've stuck my nose up at "working for free" it would have been a missed opportunity and a great relationship.
That said, if someone comes to you or if someone is *looking* for a photographer, they need to be paying. The only exception I would make if it was somebody suuuuper famous that the value of the marketing exposure I would get would far outweigh what I would normally be paid.
Later on, have you got any work with a budget that compensate the cost of your previous effort as well?
and the next guy that comes in the door and offers free headshots they will say did a great job and we'll promote you and we'll use you the next time. And the guy after that who walks in and offers free head shots they will say did a great job and wow, we love your work and we'll use you again. And the next guy who walks in...see where I'm going with this?
Exactly!
There could be many advises pro and against free work and other stuff.
Let the market work it out.
I'd say: work for free! Loose money! Learn to recognize hyenas and vultures. Learn on their expense. Learn to make them to finance your education... Just make sure you are getting what you want, and not necessarily what they need. They don't pay so who cares. Clients with real budget will not risk hiring free photographers for that reason ;)
There was a local photographer acquaintance I know that recently had a bunch of sessions. He had the most outrageous deal trying to get clients in. He told me that he lost over $200 per session giving away print credits, and other freebies. He said he figured they would buy more prints and he would make money that way. Not one of the sessions bought a cent more than what the print credit covered.
so?
Sadly, when I was starting out I did some of these "free" jobs. I was credited and had tons of promises of future paid work. Out of roughly 10 of these, not once did I get a single call or future job from doing these free jobs. I learned my lesson and it would take something I really liked or believed in to get me to take photos for free again.
If it's a shoot for free, then a massive watermark smack-bang through the middle of each and every image shouldn't be a problem. After all, you were sold on the promised exposure, right?! Every now and then I see images used on business sites with the shutterstock watermark still on it.
If a startup asks for a free shoot, simply demand stock option in return. If photography is really a big part of their business, they would most probably consider to offer you an option.
That's a good point Ugur, but sometimes stock photography license fees could be more expensive than hiring a photographer, and as you said, they should offer an option; but recently most of the startups only seek for volunteer / intern etc.
I can't tell you how many times I've either been approached and/or have seen ads that you refer to in your article requesting "volunteer work" I am glad you wrote this article. It is now and will remain relevant especially as more people pick up a camera.
Thanks Jason, unfortunately you're right. Asking for free work has been very common in photography and design business, which is so sad.
first of all I agree with this post, but FStoppers editors have had a back and forth on this. it seems every 3 months a new article saying it's ok to work for free comes out and then one like this counter-acts it. why is that?
well, I'm not an editor, I'm a writer and this is my strict opinion about working for free :)
that's cool, and I agree with you too. but I just have been sitting back watching the ups and downs.
It is important to understand crystal clear that $$$ is how our society measures value. Your article does a very good job of putting common myths in proper perspective. It is certainly alarming that established companies sometimes create projects or internships with zero budget for the photographer/videographer and think that it is reasonable.
However, never working without pay is not the right answer either. Since your portfolio clearly has value, you should constantly be working on projects to build your portfolio, and it is far better to build this in trade projects than it is by waiting for clients to hire you. They key is to work on trade projects only on your own terms to achieve your specific goals. Often the expenses of a shoot can be reduced through thoughtful trades. For example, trading photos for a fashion shoot to all participants is an industry established practice and far cheaper that hiring the model, stylists, clothing, and location our of your own pocket.
For every project you are offered, you need to perform a cost analysis of how long it will take and assign it a value as if you were quoting a paying client. When you perform a smart analysis of offers for trade shoots, you will clearly see that almost every offer does undervalue your work and should be rejected or renegotiated.
I'm about to piss off a LOT of you.
I think I speak for a growing number of photographers who make some of their income through photography, but the lions share of our income through a full-time, non-photography job. I love photography. It would so rad if one day it was my full time job. Until it is, I will shoot for free anytime I like. You can write a billion articles why I shouldn't and I'll still do it.
If it is a company I love/admire/respect, and they honor me with a request to shoot with them, I will. Even if the pay is $0.00. It's that simple. I don't even give a shit about "exposure." I care about shooting things that interest me, working with people that inspire me, and working with companies that make products I'm passionate about.
This, "hybrid-photographer", who doesn't make his/her income solely from photography, IS the new normal. Find ways to adapt to the changing landscape or get left behind. I love photography and will do it my way.
I'm not wrong, i'm the new "right".
Signed,
The future of photography
bwahahahaha...huh? So you think it would be rad if it were one day your full time job but you'll do it for free if you want to? So how many other full time jobs are you willing to take on for free? I think the "wake up" moment comes when you realize that you will NEVER be able to do it as a full time job as long as you continue to work for free. Income from photography goes up making you rely on the other job less and less. Do more paid photography jobs...income from photography passes other income. Now you don't need that other job...see how that works? The attitude you portray almost suggests that you don't care about photographers or the profession of photography. I don't understand the mentality behind this "It's all about me so screw you" society.
I think you miss read his post. He makes is income in another market and his photography is his passion that he shares because he enjoys it. I'm sure the market for his main career isn't nearly as flooded with competition as photography is and there's more of a barrier to entry like needing a degree or needing many years of work experience. Anyone can pick up a camera now-a-days and shoot great photos. You cant walk into any company and offer to be their new sales director without meeting any of their job requirements and not expect to get laughed out of there in a hurry.
I love photography as much as the person who's trying to make a living of of it but I'm not going to be stupid and think that they're out there to make money for me as well. They can only make money because they have demand for their work and as each new photographer enters their market it buts incentive for the clients to pay less and less because they can get someone else instead.
"It would [be] so rad if one day it was my full time job. Until it is, I will shoot for free anytime I like." - pretty sure I read that correctly.
I do make decent coin shooting photos of people in tuxes and dresses. It won't be long till it adds up to a salary worth quitting my day job over. My wife just went full time, in photography, in April and is doing well. We don't worry about what other people are doing or how much, or little, they charge others. If people want to pay us, awesome. If they don't want to pay, and their is no benefit to us shooting for free, we won't. It'll be what it is.
Michael nailed it.
Mac, I think you are having an illusion of "working with people who inspires you" well, non-paying clients never inspired me, I even rejected worldwide clients who offered enormous amounts of discounts. You say this is the future of photography, which we think there is no future of photography if it goes in this way. Photography is the easiest way of expressing yourself. It's not like painting or music, you don't need a talent. Just grab a camera, build a website, email dozens of clients offering a free work. Voila, you're a photographer now. So, you can keep giving your free time to money makers for satisfaction and "inspiration", but real photography business don't work like that. We are full time photographers and we have to take action for our future. This is the most normal thing at the moment.
Cheers
Great article - spot on. A local car dealership asked me to cover an event for free. I said I would do so in return for the use of one of their upper-end vehicles for a month. End of correspondence. They obviously do NOT work for free. ;)
I'm going to get down voted like crazy for this. Photographer wages will keep going down further and further as the number of people taking photos increases. Its supply and demand.
"But, what if every single contributor rejects their free work offer? Well, in the long run, they'll have to take this work seriously and make payments to their contributors. "
The above quote taken from the article is the exact same thing as creating a cartel. Obviously it's suggesting that we don't organize like a real cartel but keep in mind that they're illegal in the United States and also there's WAY too many people shooting for this idea to be realistic. People make decisions based on their own perceived best interests.
I always like to suggest that the photography industry pushes for a licencing requirement to take photos. There are few things keeping competition form entering your market. YOUR PEERS ARE NOT OUT THERE TO MAKE YOU MONEY.... THEY ARE THERE TO MAKE AS MUCH FOR THEMSELVES! look at the industry for hair stylists. You cant just open up a shop to cut hair because you bought some nice scissors and have a little bit of talent and interest. Most states require you to get a license. This is what the photography industry needs right now. The license laws make a barrier to entry for new competition and also makes it so that the actual working professionals are the ones who really cared enough to do all that it takes to become a working professional.
While the advancements in technology have certainly made it the best time to pick up a camera and take beautiful pictures that benefit is exactly whats hurting wages because everyone is trying to undercut each other to the price point of zero just so they can maybe get noticed and successful. While it's the best time to take photos it's the WORST time to try make any money off of it.
You can value your work all you want but ultimately the client is the one who determines value. Demand...
Not sure why you think you would get down votes for this. Licensing might be (???) what is needed in this industry. Just like you have to have a license to sell liquor or to fish commercially or to cut hair or practice law. A state license would ad a barrier to entry and would offer a protection under law for unauthorized photographers in the professional market. I'm not sure this will ever happen or should...probably some serious downside ramifications to this as well. Interesting point of discussion though.
The reason why I expect to get down voted is because articles like this one and many others like to play off the arrogance that our community has. Our community doesn't like hearing that they're unrealistic. I lost hope for our industry as soon as I first started seeing other articles compare our services to that of a lawyer or doctor. "You wouldn't ask your dentist for free work, so why is it OK to ask us?" as if the service that a photographer gives is as valuable to society as a doctor who had to pretty much dedicate their entire life to and had to jump through countless hoops and risk a life of dept if they didn't reach their professional goal. Opposed to the photographer who quit their day job bough a used camera on craigslist and as soon as they made their Facebook business page we're supposed to consider a real professional. It's so arrogant. "You wouldn't expect your grocery to give you free food".... yeah? well if you could get it for free, you would. That's my point. The rules of supply and demand point to more and more free digital media. Unless somehow competition leaves our market there's no hope to expect everyone to value our work.
Another point I'd like to make is that an article like this on Fstoppers is hilariously ironic. A site that teaches people how to take better photos and how to run a photography business (helping flood our industry with inspired photographers) plays host to articles that tell us we need to also charge more because the other pro's cant keep up with the drop in expected prices. It's having your cake and eating it too. Other Industries that don't share our pain of free services usually have things called trade secrets. If something is easy and you can make money doing it you shouldn't let everyone onto how you do it. KFC keeps it's a secret for good reason. Same with Coke.
This article is preaching how we should "value our work" also very ironic because this site is all about sharing how to edit and shoot better.
I'd like to point out that I love photography but I also consider myself realistic as to where the fault is for having to compete with people who shoot for free. It's the fault of the people who tell everyone else how to create better images and make money.
I agree that our profession is not in the same realm as doctors and lawyers but that does not mean it has no value. Beyond that, a successful business model demands that you make more money than you spend. The plea to charge money for your services to me is more about educating people on good business practices. Letting them know that what they are doing has a value. Many of them that I know complain about not having money for the good lenses and bodies like I have but they still do free work. I'm sure my other comments did not point to this as my main reasoning but there it is. It's less about them stealing my jobs because truly they are not.