I take a trip to White Castle once a year, against my better judgment usually. This time, I tried (and Instagrammed) their new “Impossible Slider” which is a burger that isn’t made from animals, but tastes and looks like it came from something that mooed.
White Castle noticed the post pretty quick, giving me an emoji high-five. But then it came: they asked for free photography.
In the cheery, corporate way that companies ask, someone from White Castle wrote: "Hey there! We love this picture so much. We would like to repost it to our social pages for advertising purposes, but need you permission to do so. Just reply to us with a simple “yes” or even a “👍” to give us your approval! Thanks a bun! (Plz excuse the puns)"
Some misspellings were thrown in there to make it look genuine, even. But clearly, they don’t love the photo enough to pay for it. I replied with (and messaged): “@whitecastle I am a photographer, and so much like selling these tasty burgers are your livelihood, photography is mine - I’m happy to discuss purchasing the photo at a reasonable rate for advertising, would you let me know if you are interested in that! Thank you!”
The response was less than cheery: “Hey there! Unfortunately we are no longer interested. Thank you!”
The company didn't even bother to ask me about a price. They know that if I say no, the next Instagrammer will say yes. Just take a look at their Instagram feed, where plenty of people who don’t make their livelihood off of photography have obliged.
Confusing Usage Rights
I'm singling out White Castle as it's the most recent example of this happening to me, but this scenario is far from uncommon on social media. In the last few years, I've had Mazda, Newsday, Krispy Kreme, Canon, and Syracuse University all approach me for photos, and they're not always clear about how they will be used.
Sometimes I've said yes, and sometimes I said no. If it was a cute photograph of my son, or a photograph that showed pride in my alma mater, I agreed to the request. But if the requester treated me poorly, as did White Castle and Newsday, I said that they couldn't use my photo without paying me. At that point, the interest in the photos disappeared.
At times, the companies really overreach - Newsday wanted to use my photo on their social media and print editions of the newspaper. I've been paid for photos that have appeared in their newspaper in the past. I've been paid for words I've written for them. Why should I be treated any differently if the photo came from social media? Oh, right, because they got plenty of other folks to give them free photos with their #dayinthelifeli hashtag.
With Mazda, what seemed to be an agreement to only feature my photo on the official Mazda USA social pages spiraled out of control as many regional and international Mazda dealers started using my photo. They all apologized and took the photos down whenever I asked, though.
I was OK with Syracuse using my photo for social media, but I should have been more careful when their request added the "various media" bit - my son ended up on the school's alumni calendar and I didn't know until I got one!
Universities generally build up a lot of school pride, and so it's one thing for an alma mater to request a photo. It's another thing for a corporation to do the same.
The biggest problem demonstrated here is that there is no uniform way companies are requesting and using photos on social media. They all make the request that appears as if it's only to repost on social media, but in reality, some companies are looking to get a lot more mileage out of these photos, and in my case, my inattention to detail led to it happening unexpectedly.
Token Gestures
In all of these cases, I'm always taken aback at how brusque the conversation quickly turns when I suggest any form of compensation. While I allowed Krispy Kreme to use my photo on their social media, I did ask for a small token, even a coupon for free doughnuts which could easily be emailed. The answer was no.
Many of the people taking these photos aren't photographers, and so perhaps it doesn't make sense to compensate people monetarily. But wouldn't it be a nice gesture if Canon offered a voucher for 20 percent off a purchase at their online store for every photo they used on their Instagram page? How about a digital coupon from White Castle for a free Impossible Slider? It's only $2, and it would at least make me feel like I didn't pay to be featured on their Instagram page. I didn't get my Impossible Slider for free, so it's only breaking even.
It's not even about the money here. It's about giving a small bit back to your customers who are loyal enough to create a social media post to promote your brand, rather than pushing them away with a negative response. It's still not a freelance photography rate or anything, but anything is always better than nothing.
White Castle's comments on my Instagram page, and their cold response to my request for payment.
I let White Castle know that I was going to write about this response. I'm still hoping they, or their Impossible Burger partner, will perhaps make it right, but that's probably wishful thinking.
What's abundantly clear though from the whole experience, is that the system of compensation on social media is broken. Many, many companies mine social media for their promotional materials, and every photo they get free further breaks the system for photographers trying to make an honest living.
Share Your Strategies
Do you have your own strategies when dealing with requests for photos from your social media? Share them in the comments below!
yup sadly so many are willing to give for what they see as fame ? are narcissistic self absorbed society we have become is all about me me me me me and the companies know it and use it
I'm a professional food photographer and have already lost count of how many times this has happened. But with that said, I think pro photographers (or anyone aspiring to be pro) have to realize that this trend is only going to keep escalating. Good photos are a dime a dozen, as are people willing to give their images away for "free." That isn't going to stop. Better to keep evolving your skill and finding new, creative ways to sell your work. This is one of many reasons why I'm shifting focus to video--takes a lot more skill to do.
I'm a brand owner and a photographer - the former led to the latter. I've been on both sides of this issue, in a way. For the business, I've asked to use others' work, and also receive requests for free products, sometimes saying so they can promote it on their account (ie "for the exposure").
I don't exactly see an issue with asking to re-post or to get something for free (re-posting without permission is a completely different matter). I can say no, or offer a coupon code instead. Photographers can say no or ask for compensation in return.
Now, where I do see an issue is with the culture of devaluing art and expecting to get it for free. I don't hold that mindset, but I have contributed to the culture and practices of those who do (sorry everyone).
We don't ask photographers to use their work for free any more though. We've always produced original content, and to supplement that, we now work directly with photographers or reward followers/fans for their pics.
So you took a photo, Whitecastle asked to use it, you said pay me, they said no, you tag them and hashtag them anyway, giving them free advertising?
Lots of interesting comments here. Really happy to see this article written. The summary of professional photography is that it's unfortunately, in the eyes of many no longer valued. With the avalanche of DLRs since 2007 and smart phones around the same time, everyone is a "photographer". It's a sad state, but it's reality. Many photographers are too keen to get social accolades (aka likes, comments) in place of monetary gain. The only redress is to change the landscape by doing what the author of this article did: push back against the insulating demand for free photos. Trying to make them empathic won't help; forceful public shaming like this article does may. Name the companies that fail to have a proper marketing ethos. In the end, they look un-professional; without class and dignity. There really needs to be a cultural change. I believe the "I'm a photographer" influx era is over. It's peaked. The re-emergence of professionalism is just around the corner.
Good article! Really goes to show how little large companies value our work at times. I had a nice experience with a local smoothie bar. They saw us taking portraits outside and welcomed us in and said we're free to use their space and even gave us free shakes, I sent a few low-res images for them to stick on social media as a thanks, more so because they were so friendly from the start and never asked for anything.
I was reached out to by the bass player for a band I'd photographed for some media outlet. He saw one of my photos from the set and emailed me to see if I'd send him full-res/RAW files for a shot for both social media AND to print as the cover of the magazine he manages. I told him that I'd be happy to discuss licensing and terms depending on his budget. He then berates me through several messages, telling me that I would kill for exposure like that.
Oh yeah, he used that word. At that, politeness went out the window and I told him that "exposure is a leading cause of death among the homeless. Think about that for a minute. What good is exposure when, the opportunity you're telling me is the pinnacle of my field, refuses to pay for any of it?"
That should be an even simpler scenario to deal with... ask him the last time his band played just for "exposure".
Do you mind me asking - did further work directly attributable to that event come your way, and did they pay you for the photo? Because this one looks like it was definitely a lot of work ... It's also a wonderful photo.
Awesome shot! Obviously you're the owner of the picture so in the end it's your right to do whatever you want with it. But I think this is a common enough scenario that there are a couple of things worth considering:
1) Even if their intentions were completely honest and their only goal was to promote you, they have to understand that any time a business uses content that features their product (especially something of professional quality), they stand to benefit from it, regardless of what their primary intentions are. And if they stand to benefit from it, it becomes worth something, regardless of whether or not they *want* to pay for it. I think this is something that people need to consider more often, because it puts the value of the content in perspective. A business can never be 100% altruistic because at some point they benefit from it, whether it's directly through sales or from good PR (which can lead to more sales). People need to be honest about that, on both sides.
2) Everyone has to decide for themselves where they draw the line with providing work/content for free, and I can certainly understand your position given the fact you were already compensated through other means and there wasn't any extra work involved on your part. That being said, I think it's extremely important that any time somebody offers to provide their content for free, they do so with a disclaimer that normally they would charge for it and they're granting a specific exception for the reason of "xyz". I think this would go a long way to helping shift the tides (even slightly) back to the expectation that businesses should pay for content. Again, even if their original intentions were good, failing to educate them on the value you place on your work could lead them down a path of failing to understand the value of content in the future.
I agree with you, but I think you're being a bit hard on who ever wrote or write these requests:
Keep in mind, that there are two aspects to social media for companies. Marketing and communications/customer service. And, where as marketing is often handled by an external marketing company, the communication part isn't.
As a result you'll find, that in a lot of small and medium sized companies basically it's the receptionist or some one similar that your talking to. The person who is answering customer questions by phone, mail and, yes, social media. Questions like: how long are you open today, whats the special this month, etc. And, as that person is "on facebook all day anyway..." he or she is normally tasked to keep an eye open for anything that refers to the company (like some unexpected sh##storm brewing in the net) and to "create a bit of noise" on the account while they're there.
These people don't have a budget and sharing those casual, mostly amateurish photos made by consumers and that aren't part of any official marketing strategy (even if your picture might fit a current campaign perfectly) And can you blame the company for using free stuff if they get it like that?
So instead of feeling insulted by them wanting to share it for free, ask them if they liked it and if they might point you to some on in their company who could be interested in buying the rights. Keep in mind, you're actually asking some one in customer service (who likes your photo) for a contact on their marketing department. Expecting them to take time of their work to look up and speak to some one who, even though he's working in the same company, might be a total stranger to them, just to sell them your photo and make you some money is expecting a lot. After all, that's not their job.
Allowing for a *really* generous amount of leeway here, even if the majority of cases are due to the scenario you described, it only excuses them the first time. Once somebody tells them that images are copyrighted and that they may have to pay for them, there's absolutely no excuse for them to not know any better the next time. At the very least, even if they continue their search for free photos, they can't possibly say they "didn't know any better" or act surprised when somebody calls them out on it. It doesn't matter how far down the totem pole they are... even if they're the lone employee on a deserted island, if they're on Facebook, they have an Internet connection. And "copyright" is a pretty easy Google search.
"And can you blame the company for using free stuff if they get it like that?"
Sure you can. Wouldn't you blame a company for polluting waterways due to illegal dumping even though they could get away with it? Happens all the time, doesn't make it right. Just because somebody has a job doesn't mean they're good at it, and doing a poor job doesn't then justify doing a poor job.
That sucks, but really, since everyone is taking decent and even sometimes very good photos on their smart phone, what can a professional photographer do about this? I'm sure those hobbyist photographers are happy to give away their images to these requests. It would seem that the pros who reasonably expect some compensation are, well, screwed, and are on the wrong side of things in terms of where society, technology, and content sharing is heading. Am I correct here?
One thing to watch. An account will steal your image, then block you on IG. I've caught my images on an account that blocked me. You can look them up on Picbear.com and there are apps to track who blocks you. Accounts that feature yoga, beauty, female images with no credit to anyone are suspect if they begin following you.
you take a random ass picture with little composition and no retouch and want to sell it?
lol
Clearly someone liked it well enough to use in advertising, so they could and should pay for it.
That double standard is killing me… A company sells products and would never give them for free. The product of a photographer is the photograph, even if for some it's just an ad accessory or a hobby. So what sort of wire is jumped in their brain so that they couldn't give away their own products but carelessly use someone else's ?
White Castle looked at your photograph and evaluated it as having no value to the company. Ouch !
The way I see it you have two options:
Option A: You can spend your time raging and blogging about the Evil Empire which doesn't value your work.
Option B: You can look at your image and try to figure out what is it about your shot that made them value it so low? You could spend your time investigating if White Castle ever pays for photographers ? If they don't, spend your time figuring out which companies do. If they do pay professionals, figure out how to improve your photos so they become something White Castle absolutely needs to have for their campaign and is therefore willing to pay for.
It's your choice.
Professional photographers should have no expectation of any income from social media use unless it is commissioned. I disagree that it is a "poor practice" for White Castle because 1) WC sometimes does get photos for free if they ask enough times and B) you are dealing with a low level intern at an outside ad agency who has no ability to authorize spending marketing $$$.
Question of what to do if the situation is where the company posts your image without your consent, and then when you ask them to purchase the image from you, they end up just removing it, though it’s been up for hours, and they have already gotten over 3,000 likes on it. What am I to do as a photographer trying to get paid.