Trying to rationalise Fashion photography is foolish. It doesn’t work in the same way as other sectors, and hopefully never will.

It could also be that the bigger magazines hired the established shooters first and the outtake from these shoots are being sold or given to the smaller magazines. Thus the photographer did get paid originally and might now be doing it for credit or a very small stock rate. Or the small magazine might offer the established shooter access to a celebrity/talent they could not have gotten on their own and then they sell the out takes to the bigger magazines for a stock fee.

THIS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu1C6PowUjY&feature=related

Is how it’s done in England!

Thanks for your reply. I suppose it’s no harm following up with them, keeping my name on their radar and simply passing on the pro-bono gigs.

Cheers,
ES

I think everyone agrees that shooting shitty front of book shots for free will only get you more jobs shooting shitty front of book shots for free.

To all those that think this is ‘spot on’, the publication title in the movie kinda ruins it.
If it were some hot Euro fashion quarterly with an $18 cover price and top-tier advertising throughout, we might be getting closer to the mark.

It works like this, you see;
1. Budding Stylist starts off as a wardrobe assistant at Condé Nast / Hearst / IPC Publishing and earns her stripes making tea and all that other crap you saw on The Devil Wears Prada.
2. Starts styling for their top titles, and mixing with all the hot Photographers.
3. Starts shooting no-budget, high-cachet Editorial for i-D / Dazed & Confused / Self Service / Wonderland, showcasing her favourite Designers in epic stories.
4. Gets her first big Advertising job, some money finally begins to roll in.
5. Repeat 3 & 4, for a few years.
6. Stylist begins to get offers from Marc Jacobs / Gucci / Lanvin to become Creative Director. Accepts offer, becomes one of the more powerful fashon figures on earth.
7. Starts thinking about setting up own magazine, what with her having the ultimate Fashion rolodex and all.
8. Her new Magazine launches, all the Designers that she has spent most of her professional life trying to expose through Editorial rush to advertise in the Magazine. Naturally, she takes her favourite and most loyal Photographers with her.
They’re happy to cover their own costs and shoot for no fee, because the creative direction of the magazine is so strong, and the connections within it are so powerful.
The Photographers get to work with their favourite Stylists, and run riot over 16-20 pages, and the work be seen by every single Advertiser in that magazine. Fashion Photographer often consider these as partly personal projects, and it’s not uncommon for them to pour upwards of $20,000 of their own money into one story.

So if you cold-call this Magazine as a newbie, what’s your response to finding out that they have no budget for you?

I do have one question: In a follow up to one of my recent email promos, I spoke on the phone with one of the editors for a national music magazine. She mentioned that they do not have a budget for photography and wanted to know if I was still interested. I said to feel free to contact me when things come up and we’ll take it from there. I didn’t say yes or no.

I took a further look into the photo credits of a few of their past issues, and there are established, talented photographers that shoot regularly for this particular publication who also shoot for larger magazines and the big-name record labels. Surely they aren’t shooting multiple features per issue for this magazine for free, are they?

My question is this: What is going on here? Is this magazine shying away from paying capable, emerging photographers and giving that money to the more established shooters? Or is it true that no one is getting paid? I find it hard to believe that a magazine that relies so much on its visual aesthetic, places no value in its photography.

Sub-question: Since this is a national magazine and the exposure is great, would I be an idiot if I a shot a few jobs for free and then said, “OK now that you know I can consistently produce, I’ll need to be compensated if we are to continue to work together.” OR am I without a leg to stand on at that point- the whole ‘why buy the cow’ philosophy?

Thanks,
ES

Personally, I think that the larger publications pulling this crap is the problem. They have the budget but they also have the leverage to get people to stab each other in the back.

As a young photographer, I see nothing but opportunity in the industry, mostly because so many people are losing faith. Negativity corrupts everything it touches.

Scott, I believe you left one out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

“The initial state before the cycle is received is stable, at least in terms of the subsequent reaction on hearing the bad news. Compared with the ups and downs to come, even if there is some variation, this is indeed a stable state.
And then, into the calm of this relative paradise, a bombshell bursts…

Shock stage: Initial paralysis at hearing the bad news.

Denial stage: Trying to avoid the inevitable.

Anger stage: Frustrated outpouring of bottled-up emotion.

Bargaining stage: Seeking in vain for a way out.

Depression stage: Final realization of the inevitable.

Testing stage: Seeking realistic solutions.

Acceptance stage: Finally finding the way forward.”

reference: http://changingminds.org/disciplines/change_management/kubler_ross/kubler_ross.htm

No animators, no voice actors … how good is that. 8-]

“To make an animated movie you needed a lot of computers and this”

Pointing over his shoulder to a chart of a hundred or so people.