Not really a rant, per-se, just something funny that happened. Had a person from a local newspaper contact me to use one of my images in their article. They asked if they could use it, which is 9/10 a red flag that they didn't want to pay. So I responded asking whether it was a cover, or internal placement, and what size, and once I got that I'd give them a quote. The addition of "i'll get you a quote" is almost a fullproof method of weeding out those who want to pay vs. those who don't.
Well, they responded with the size/placement details. This threw me off a bit, so I took the time to prepare the quote and sent it on. I even lowballed myself here figuring they weren't a big operation (their ads sell for $500-1k I believe) and I thought it was nice that they gave me placement details. So I figured $35 for one-time use internal placement was more than fair to them. They declined saying they didn't have a budget, lol.
I'm not really that mad, because they probably didn't. But I know they'd charge me an arm and a leg for ad space, so it's just funny/sad at the state of editorial photography. They've relied on free imagery for so long that when a great image comes their way, they can't pay for it properly, even pennies.
This is the shot in question. It took me about 2.5hrs to light, and probably another 2-3hrs to clean all the wires out and edit in photoshop. Not the best one I've taken, not the worst.
IMG_6169 by
Durka-Durka, on Flickr