- This topic is empty.
Second shooter – how much?
-
Hi All,
If anyone would like to post publicly what they think a fair rate for a second shooter is, I’d appreciate it. For me the magic number is 300 euro – shooting from morning preparation to the start of the wedding meal. Shooter with own full frame camera and consistently giving a good number of standout images that make it to the final album, and confident and good with people. Pretty much what you would want a second shooter to do, someone you can trust to turn up, be nice, get some great shots of the groom getting ready and various alternative angles during the day as well as helping with off camera flash etc and leave a really good impression on the bride and groom. With own car and willing to have some short journeys mixed with longer ones without extra costs.
I’m just interested in whether this is a reasonable number, the amount a second shooter gets will of course start low as many will work for very little to get experience but eventually settle to reflect the amount of preparation, responsibility, risk or messing up, pressure, energy needed on the day, and their own personal financial circumstances – ie how much their day job pays. So the 300 euro number for me is enough to ensure it’s worth it for the second shooter to pay taxes and still feel the amount is really worth it for a long term arrangement.
Anyone care to offer an alternative logic?
Thanks!
Stevesold5 wrote:
Shooter with own full frame camera and consistently giving a good number of standout images that make it to the final album…
With own car and willing to have some short journeys mixed with longer ones without extra costs.I’m just interested in whether this is a reasonable number, the amount a second shooter gets will of course start low as many will work for very little to get experience but eventually settle to reflect the amount of preparation, responsibility, risk or messing up, pressure, energy needed on the day, and their own personal financial circumstances – ie how much their day job pays. So the 300 euro number for me is enough to ensure it’s worth it for the second shooter to pay taxes and still feel the amount is really worth it for a long term arrangement.
Anyone care to offer an alternative logic?
Sounds like you are wanting another photographer to agree to do Work Made For Hire – but you only want to pay them for ‘their time’ here, to do this work for you – after they have already created the images using all of their own equipment, time & experience – so as you can use their images for whatever you want.
Is that about right ??
We recommend all clients read the information at: http://www.copyright4clients.com” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;
That’s kind of what I meant.
A second shooter to take extra shots for the client.
Yes I would expect they would use their time and experience to do this, not too many other ways they could get the shots.
No, I wouldn’t like to see clients images being posted on blogs, facebook or anywhere else by a second shooter.
And I only mentioned that they would have a full frame camera, in my case I supply a 35mm f1.4, 85mm f1.4, 70-200 f2.8, 600ex-RT flash, mini softbox, batteries, memory cards and backup equipment and lots of training and advice including setting up all of the formal portraits the second shooter is shooting so it’s not exactly the squeeze you seem to be suggesting that I’m putting on anyone. And I’m definitely not posting here looking for a second shooter, I’m just curious if my idea of a fair rate is really fair. As it happens I don’t add any profit to my second shooters cost, and I have loads of extra processing time but it does make my work look better with lots of variety in the shots which is my main concern.Of course there is always the opportunity for the second shooter to say that it’s not worth it even though there is very little pressure, no clients to book, no post processing, no invoicing or chasing up payments, no advertising or marketing or meetings that end up without bookings etc. To be honest if someone asked me to second shoot a wedding and I just had to turn up, shoot, hand over the card I’d definitely do it if the price was right.
So my question remains as to what would be a fair price, you appear to believe it shouldn’t happen on principle which is fair enough, everyone to their own opinion.
Looking at another example – If I had a leaking roof and I asked a roofer to drive to my house, spend the day fixing the roof using all his own tools, and I paid him 300 euro to fix it and it took him a day’s work, would it be such a bad deal for him? Why so different just because you are using an “artist” who in most cases is starting out and looking for experience.
sold5 wrote:
Looking at another example – If I had a leaking roof and I asked a roofer to drive to my house, spend the day fixing the roof using all his own tools, and I paid him 300 euro to fix it and it took him a day’s work, would it be such a bad deal for him?
Building Sheriff quotes an example price of £150 per day for the services of a roofer.
Repairing a leaking roof will cost on average £405 – which is about 488 Euros – but then they are probably mostly using Canons rather than Nikons, so will need to bring their own lenses here, to be able to consistently create a good number of standout images that will make it to the final album – while you stand around offering them lots of training and advice about how to do their job. :DAs for your question: what would be a fair price – it’s a fair price if you both agree it’s fair – so it’s just a matter of asking around to see if there is someone out here that would be happy to do this work for you, based on this being the terms of the agreement – which you would obviously want to be very clear about, so as to avoid any mis-understandings down the road, as to who owned the Rights to the work that was going to be done here, etc, etc.
We recommend all clients read the information at: http://www.copyright4clients.com” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false; – you being the client in this case, who is wanting to use another photographer’s work, to make your work look better.
Love the thinking and attitude behind your responses Ashley. I wouldn’t be handing over the copyright to outstanding pictures I took as a second shooter, I would be asking for a cut of that sale if my picture was requested by the client on top of the fee for the day. And then a cut of any further uses of my pictures.
Dave.
BallistiX wrote:
Love the thinking and attitude behind your responses Ashley.
It’s just like when hiring an assistant, who will turn-up with their two hands in their pockets on the day – on top of paying this person so much an hour for their time here, you would also then either need to supply the them with everything* they would need to do this work for you or agree to pay them to hire everything* out that they would need to do this work for you.
All of which would need to be agreed to and possibly paid for in advance – or else except they would need to mark everything up, to cover their out-of-pocket expenses here.It’s the same as if you were employing someone – the employee would naturally expect the employer to supply them with the tools they need, to do whatever work it was that the employer wanted the employee to do for them.
So what this person would be billing you for here, would be very different to someone who was simply asking you to pay them for ‘the use of their work’ instead.
Just the same as if someone asked you to agree to do Work Made for Hire – rather than ask you to provide them with some images (your work) for them to use – you would then bill them for everything* THEY needed, as well as for your time and any other expenses such as travelling costs, insurance, etc, etc.
*Cameras, lights, stands, tripods, computers, lenses, back-up equipment, etc, etc, or just an iPhone.
Then there are also some other details to consider:
1) Formal Contract between yourself & Second Shooter
2) Does your insurance cover more than yourself.
3) Your need to indemnify the Second Shooter.
4) Your need to replace any & all of their equipment that is Damaged or Stolen as a result of your client or their guests actions.
5) Since they’re legally employed by you (even just for the day), this also means you’re responsible for ensuring that they get their break entitlements.I am curious, what happens in the event of over 50% of the Album contents being those images shot by your Second Shooter? Unlikely, but stranger things have happened.
(This post may be the results of insanely strong pain medication)
Being employed by you also means you are responsible for their PAYE and PRSI returns. Your Public Liability insurance usually includes Employee Liability but your Professional Indemnity only covers yourself I believe. Copyright could be a nightmare if the second shooter is not employed by the Photographer and fulfilment of the proper conditions of employment are not adhered to. If the second shooter is only hired on an informal basis then copyright stays firmly with the second shooter.
With regard to copyright, section 23 of the Copyright Act 2000 states the following;
(1) The author of a work shall be the first owner of the copyright unless—
(a) the work is made by an employee in the course of employment, in which case the employer is the first owner of any copyright in the work, subject to any agreement to the contrary,
(b) the work is the subject of Government or Oireachtas copyright,
(c) the work is the subject of the copyright of a prescribed international organisation, or
(d) the copyright in the work is conferred on some other person by an enactment.
(2) Where a work, other than a computer program, is made by an author in the course of employment by the proprietor of a newspaper or periodical, the author may use the work for any purpose, other than for the purposes of making available that work to newspapers or periodicals, without infringing the copyright in the work.
Section 21 defines the Author as follows;
21.—In this Act, “author” means the person who creates a work and includes:
(a) in the case of a sound recording, the producer;
(b) in the case of a film, the producer and the principal director;
(c) in the case of a broadcast, the person making the broadcast or in the case of a broadcast which relays another broadcast by reception and immediate retransmission, without alteration, the person making that other broadcast;
(d) in the case of a cable programme, the person providing the cable programme service in which the programme is included;
(e) in the case of a typographical arrangement of a published edition, the publisher;
(f) in the case of a work which is computer-generated, the person by whom the arrangements necessary for the creation of the work are undertaken;
(g) in the case of an original database, the individual or group of individuals who made the database; and
(h) in the case of a photograph, the photographer.
GCP wrote:
If the second shooter is only hired on an informal basis then copyright stays firmly with the second shooter.
Because you are really just paying them for the use of their work, after they have done all the work – which means any images which they would create would belong to them – so you are therefore just paying them for the Rights to use or make Copies of their work.
Which is where this Licence to use document comes into play…
.. as basically that is what you would be paying them to sign – so as you could then legally use their work for whatever has been agreed to here.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
