However, the size and prominence of the client as well as the exposure level of the images put upward pressure on the fee. The fact that this shoot was part of a larger project and that the photographer was eager to land his first assignment of this scale put downward pressure on how I approached his creative/licensing fee. In this instance, however, I was told that limiting the licensing would not be an option. In cases like this, we do our best to structure the licensing language to be more in line with the intended use. It’s often the case that a client’s requested use doesn’t correspond with their intended use. Upon speaking with the art buyer I learned that their intended use was limited to in-store display and use on their website (no additional advertising or printed collateral) and would likely be up in the stores for less than a year (rather than 2 years which they’d requested). The creative deck also made it clear that the primary use of the images was for in-store displays, but this didn’t quite match up to the broader use that the client requested. We were presented with a creative deck that included these three shots along with details for additional projects featuring product and lifestyle images, which told us that our shoot would just be one part of a larger overall project. When the project was first presented to us, the scope was to capture individual close-up portraits of three female talent. Photographer: Up-and-coming beauty and fashion specialistĬlient: Prominent retailer with approximately 2,000 stores in North America. Although we avoid vague language whenever possible, the client insisted on using this language, effectively conveying Advertising, Collateral and Publicity use of the images as defined in our T&C. Licensing: Use of three images in any media (excluding Outdoor and Broadcast) in North America for 2 years. Shoot Concept: Beauty shots of professional talent in a studio
0 kommentar(er)
