Greedy Photographers?

[Deaf Pilot 1]

I'm working on a website for a bizjet company, and I uploaded the following barebones website for the company employees to review and provide feedback. Only the front page is considered done... the links are active but the pages are pretty much blank for now.I emailed the photographer of the photo used on that front page, requesting permission to use that photo in that manner. He emailed me back saying that he required $450 for a license to use that photo.Truly disappointing, as I was highly pleased with my effort on that... I will be changing the photo, but for the next day or two, it will be up there while the company guys review the site, and I thought you guys would like to check it out too.$450... just to use that photo as a background... Greedy or Sensible?http://www.idratherbeflying.net/fjc/

[Guest oyvindhansen]

The photo looks good, but it's not terribly unique, and was probably cheap to make as it's taken on the ground. I wouldn't pay $450. -

[Wolfko 0]

I think the price is quite reasonable. From time to time our company has to pay for copyrights of pictures, which we use for our brochures, posters etc. A couple of months ago we needed a photo for an approx 2 x 3 m display, which we use at consumer and trade fairs (I'm in the travel indistry). For an only one (!) year's epermission to use that pic on the display, we had to pay EUR 420.00 (which is approx. the same, what that guy charges you).These are common prices in this market.Wolfgang

[Guest SoarPics]

Hi Todd,Speaking as a photographer, the price he quoted isn't out of line. Just curious... what were the terms of use he offered at that price?Of course, you don't feel the price is fair so you certainly shouldn't do business with him. The photo isn't particularly unique and something to substitute it would be rather easy for most amatuers to create.Cheers,Greg

[Guest]

quite a reasonable price, depending on the duration of the contract and the size it will be used at.For a commercial site (which yours is) $450 per year sounds about right, were it not as a backdrop but a feature photo you'd pay that much for a month.

[CF104 0]

If the photographer is a professional and does it for a living then no it is not out of line. My wife is a professional commercial photographer and what you are paying is a licensing fee and that is standard in the industry. What you will get is probably a single use license and if you wanted to use it again for another project, expect another to pay another fee. In the end the photographer still owns the image and copyright.Cheers,JohnBoeing 727/737 & Lockheed C-130/L-100 Mechanichttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/ng_driver.jpg

[Guest Captain Barfbag]

I was going to say, "For $450 you can get a pretty good digital camera and go take the picture yourself." But then I looked at the picture on the site. Y'know, I couldn't take that picture with my 5mp digital camera, or even with my ancient-and-honorable Canon FtB film camera with its array of lenses. I might get something close if I got lucky, but I'd have to say that's not a bad shot. Some photographers can make little kids smile. I think this guy knows how to make airplanes smile.

[Guest glnflwrs]

You could probably go to the aircraft manufacturer's website and get pics from them royalty free, especially if your customer is a dealer for them.Glenn"If God would have wanted man to fly He would have given him more money"