Local Newspapers

Anyone have an idea what local newspapers are likely to pay to publish
photos?

Thanks

Jeff.




Jeff

"Jeff" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:ktiNa.1431$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Anyone have an idea what local newspapers are likely to pay to publish
> photos?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jeff.
>
>

Damn all.

If you want your name against the photo - you have to pay THEM !!!!

Mike

Jeff,

The NUJ guidelines can be found here. I have found them to be a useful guide
and negotiating baseline

http://media.gn.apc.org/feesguide/photo.html

In my experience you will be lucky to reach these rates unless you have
something special in which case you would be contacting the nationals and
not local papers :0)

HTH
Mike

=============================================
Mike French, Meonshore Studios Limited
Freelance Photography and New Media
web: www.meonshorestudios.co.uk
mail: (E-Mail Removed)
=============================================

"Jeff" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:ktiNa.1431$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Anyone have an idea what local newspapers are likely to pay to publish
> photos?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jeff.
>
>

In article: <ktiNa.1431$(E-Mail Removed)> "Jeff"
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
> Anyone have an idea what local newspapers are likely to pay to publish
> photos?

That's not really a question that I can answer without you quantifying
what it is that you'd want the paper to publish and how important it might
be to the paper publishing it.

In general, though, for 'run of the mill' stuff then you're looking at
20-30 quid/pic but that's a very vague generalisation based on what I'd do
at my newspaper. We tend to commission freelances on the basis of per job,
not per picture - do a day's work of 4-5 jobs and you'd be clearing about
100 quid or so, plus expenses. You won't get rich submitting the odd pic to
local newspapers, whoever they are, though.

However, anything 'earth shattering', you'd be better of approaching
nationals, as they have the budgets and the space for that sort of thing. A
pic of a UFO piloted by Elvis Presley, landing on the Loch Ness Monster
should earn you enough to retire on once syndicated....

--
Neil Barker, Picture Editor, Burton Daily Mail Ltd.

On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 16:59:42 +0100, (E-Mail Removed) (Neil Barker)
>A pic of a UFO piloted by Elvis Presley, landing on the Loch Ness Monster
>should earn you enough to retire on once syndicated....

Bloody hell Neil, I wish I knew that before I deleted that very image
to make room on the CF for a pic of Lord Lucan riding Shergar. Didn't
like the composition though so I deleted that as well. Err... any jobs
going?

--
Regards

John Bean

In article: <(E-Mail Removed)> John Bean
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
> On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 16:59:42 +0100, (E-Mail Removed) (Neil Barker)
> >A pic of a UFO piloted by Elvis Presley, landing on the Loch Ness
> >Monster should earn you enough to retire on once syndicated....
>
> Bloody hell Neil, I wish I knew that before I deleted that very image
> to make room on the CF for a pic of Lord Lucan riding Shergar. Didn't
> like the composition though so I deleted that as well.

Tut tut tut.

As I tell my photographers, "The picture editor wants your pictures, not
your excuses...."


> Err... any jobs going?

Pah ! To someone who deletes such a cracking, world-shattering image ?

Errrmmmm....

Well actually, in about 4 months, quite possibly we'll be looking to expand
photographic a tad, if all goes to plan.

--
Neil Barker

"Neil Barker" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article: <ktiNa.1431$(E-Mail Removed)> "Jeff"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> >
> > Anyone have an idea what local newspapers are likely to pay to publish
> > photos?
>
> That's not really a question that I can answer without you quantifying
> what it is that you'd want the paper to publish and how important it might
> be to the paper publishing it.
>
> In general, though, for 'run of the mill' stuff then you're looking at
> 20-30 quid/pic but that's a very vague generalisation based on what I'd do
> at my newspaper. We tend to commission freelances on the basis of per job,
> not per picture - do a day's work of 4-5 jobs and you'd be clearing about
> 100 quid or so, plus expenses. You won't get rich submitting the odd pic
to
> local newspapers, whoever they are, though.
>
> However, anything 'earth shattering', you'd be better of approaching
> nationals, as they have the budgets and the space for that sort of thing.
A
> pic of a UFO piloted by Elvis Presley, landing on the Loch Ness Monster
> should earn you enough to retire on once syndicated....
>
> --
> Neil Barker, Picture Editor, Burton Daily Mail Ltd.


Thanks Neil (& others)

I didnt expect to get rich from it, its just that I took some shots of a
National chess event played locally where the local team were runners up and
received their prize from almost local MP Tony Banks, so its not earth
shattering but has enough points of interest to be worth printing. At least
the paper thinks so.

I told them that I would be happy to receive their normal rates, whatever
they are, so I thought I'd check to see what its likely to be, before I
break open the champagne! £20-25 per pic was the kind of figure I had in my
head which you have confirmed.

Jeff.


>

"Jeff" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:ztGNa.3300$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Neil Barker" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > In article: <ktiNa.1431$(E-Mail Removed)> "Jeff"
> > <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> > >
> > > Anyone have an idea what local newspapers are likely to pay to publish
> > > photos?
> >
> > That's not really a question that I can answer without you quantifying
> > what it is that you'd want the paper to publish and how important it
might
> > be to the paper publishing it.
> >
> > In general, though, for 'run of the mill' stuff then you're looking at
> > 20-30 quid/pic but that's a very vague generalisation based on what I'd
do
> > at my newspaper. We tend to commission freelances on the basis of per
job,
> > not per picture - do a day's work of 4-5 jobs and you'd be clearing
about
> > 100 quid or so, plus expenses. You won't get rich submitting the odd pic
> to
> > local newspapers, whoever they are, though.
> >
> > However, anything 'earth shattering', you'd be better of approaching
> > nationals, as they have the budgets and the space for that sort of
thing.
> A
> > pic of a UFO piloted by Elvis Presley, landing on the Loch Ness Monster
> > should earn you enough to retire on once syndicated....
> >
> > --
> > Neil Barker, Picture Editor, Burton Daily Mail Ltd.
>
>
> Thanks Neil (& others)
>
> I didnt expect to get rich from it, its just that I took some shots of a
> National chess event played locally where the local team were runners up
and
> received their prize from almost local MP Tony Banks, so its not earth
> shattering but has enough points of interest to be worth printing. At
least
> the paper thinks so.
>
> I told them that I would be happy to receive their normal rates, whatever
> they are, so I thought I'd check to see what its likely to be, before I
> break open the champagne! £20-25 per pic was the kind of figure I had in
my
> head which you have confirmed.
>
> Jeff.
>
>

Hoorayyyyyyy !!!
Got a photo credit in the local rag this week !!!
Still no chance of a payment though.

From what others have said, I think there are two sorts of local
newspapers - real ones and those owned by newscorp.

A large part of our weekly local is made up of syndicated stuff and stories
from the other papers owned by the same mob. Rather than go out and look for
news, they seem to expect interested parties to provide it for free :
similarly with photos - they no longer have their own photographer and pick
up stuff from the daily evening paper in nearby Southampton.

Its driving our mayor round the bend - people invite him to attend their
functions in order to gain some publicity for their good causes, only to
have it totally ignored by the rag. Even him giving the paper a weekly diary
has not helped.

Must stop ranting - sorry

Mike

"Mike Hunter" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...

>
> Hoorayyyyyyy !!!
> Got a photo credit in the local rag this week !!!
> Still no chance of a payment though.
>
(snip - too depressing to quote again)
>
> Must stop ranting - sorry
>
> Mike
>
-----------

LOL, Mike, you call that a rant? Working journos and snappers have been
saying the same thing for years on the consolidation of media ownership in
fewer and fewer bean counting corporate hands. To them, the only thing a
"chapel" is good for is to pray in - preferably journos and the odd snapper
in that "chapel" praying to keep their jobs for another few months!

Why work, say "they", when we can buy in a few stories, smear some paper
with ink, and milk that for everything we can across the breath and width of
our stable of newspapers? Why bother with pesky things like staff - who,
after all, will actually demand to be paid decent wages - when there is a
whole raft of part-timers and freelancers out there hungry enough to
practically GIVE us everything we can print? Why bother with truly local
news and events when they really won't fit in with our "image" as (choose
one or more...) wannabe regional, national or international news
organisations?

Hell, we can get all the pictures we need, say "they", from Rex Features
(and other picture agencies) - so why bother with local photographs and
photographers (unless they GIVE us their work for free - or beg us to use
it - preferably BOTH!) If they don't have what we want, at the price we
want, and the terms we want, and it is not available as stock photography -
well - we probably don't need it anyway! Damn those locals (say "they"), and
for reasons "they" can not understand even their employees, who only want to
play games and not give "them" "world-wide rights" "for all time" "in any
media". And, those damn journos and snappers, say "they", actually have the
balls to demand "moral rights" too! Tut! Tut! We should not be using
anything unless it is "all rights" for a single payment say "they" - why
bother? Unless we can buy it in cheep with "all rights", and use it 'til the
image fades from old age, we don't need it!

You want a rant Mike? There are a few of us out here that can give you a
REAL rant on the subject.

LOL - that you got a picture credit is payment enough? The hell it is! I'd
have been inclined to tear it up in front of their eyes and deposit it on
their office floor.

PS: No offense to Neil Barker - he knows I am right. "...We tend to
commission freelances on the basis of per job, not per picture - do a day's
work of 4-5 jobs and you'd be clearing about100 quid or so, plus
expenses...." But, what Neil also KNOWS is true, and what he doesn't say, is
that that same freelancer, after non-reimbursed expenses, after taxes, after
paying his business expenses and equipment replacements and upgrades, and
the rest, might be clearing - what? - £5 grand a year?

As for writers...not to be left out here, well, think a penny a word (and if
you are lucky a by-line - Whoop-de-f**king-doo! - by-lines don't put food on
the table) from some of the publications. And they want in exchange? All
rights, for all time, in any media!

Journalist

"journalist-north" wrote:
>
>LOL, Mike, you call that a rant? Working journos and snappers have been
>saying the same thing for years on the consolidation of media ownership in
>fewer and fewer bean counting corporate hands. To them, the only thing a
>"chapel" is good for is to pray in - preferably journos and the odd snapper
>in that "chapel" praying to keep their jobs for another few months!
>
>Why work, say "they", when we can buy in a few stories, smear some paper
>with ink, and milk that for everything we can across the breath and width of
>our stable of newspapers? Why bother with pesky things like staff - who,
>after all, will actually demand to be paid decent wages - when there is a
>whole raft of part-timers and freelancers out there hungry enough to
>practically GIVE us everything we can print? Why bother with truly local
>news and events when they really won't fit in with our "image" as (choose
>one or more...) wannabe regional, national or international news
>organisations?
>
>Hell, we can get all the pictures we need, say "they", from Rex Features
>(and other picture agencies) - so why bother with local photographs and
>photographers (unless they GIVE us their work for free - or beg us to use
>it - preferably BOTH!) If they don't have what we want, at the price we
>want, and the terms we want, and it is not available as stock photography -
>well - we probably don't need it anyway! Damn those locals (say "they"), and
>for reasons "they" can not understand even their employees, who only want to
>play games and not give "them" "world-wide rights" "for all time" "in any
>media". And, those damn journos and snappers, say "they", actually have the
>balls to demand "moral rights" too! Tut! Tut! We should not be using
>anything unless it is "all rights" for a single payment say "they" - why
>bother? Unless we can buy it in cheep with "all rights", and use it 'til the
>image fades from old age, we don't need it!
>
>You want a rant Mike? There are a few of us out here that can give you a
>REAL rant on the subject.
>
>LOL - that you got a picture credit is payment enough? The hell it is! I'd
>have been inclined to tear it up in front of their eyes and deposit it on
>their office floor.
>
>PS: No offense to Neil Barker - he knows I am right. "...We tend to
>commission freelances on the basis of per job, not per picture - do a day's
>work of 4-5 jobs and you'd be clearing about100 quid or so, plus
>expenses...." But, what Neil also KNOWS is true, and what he doesn't say, is
>that that same freelancer, after non-reimbursed expenses, after taxes, after
>paying his business expenses and equipment replacements and upgrades, and
>the rest, might be clearing - what? - £5 grand a year?
>
>As for writers...not to be left out here, well, think a penny a word (and if
>you are lucky a by-line - Whoop-de-f**king-doo! - by-lines don't put food on
>the table) from some of the publications. And they want in exchange? All
>rights, for all time, in any media!


Good for you, Journalist!

Excellent post, accurate (sadly) in *every* respect.

As a freelancer, I did a lot of work over the last two years for a
publishing group that owns several regional and local newspaper
titles, mostly for very low rates (or for free). I hoped I would be
able to establish regular ongoing business with better rates ... they
were interested only in regular ongoing business for next to nothing.

When I declined their 'kind offer', the picture editor told me he had
over a dozen freelancers who would do the work at less than a third of
the price I asked. He admitted that the quality of my work was
significantly better but wasn't interested in paying more for it.

I could not make a reasonable living at *my* price let alone *theirs*!

I believe that newspapers and magazines are increasingly working on
the basis that they only need to supply a small quantity of low
quality editorial in order to sell lots of copies that contain vast
amounts of hugely profitable advertising.

Tony