On Fri, 2 Jan 2004, John Francis wrote: > > I was surprised to find the budget so low. You'd think the photography > > budget for advertising/promotional needs would be a lot greater. > > That's not a budget - it's a joke. > > four rolls of film, and expecting 100 shots? > > HAR! > > When I donated my photographic services for a one-and-a-half day shoot > the budget for materials and incidentals (hire of equipment, etc.) was > probably more than this entire project.
It's a tricky situation. On the one hand, you (generic "you") have the chance to get experience doing something you've maybe never done before. You can get some shots to add to your portfolio, a shoot for a company to add to your CV, and perhaps even contacts within companies. On the other hand, agreeing to do a shoot like this for so little money only encourages companies to devalue the work of photographers. It's now going to be that much harder for you (or other photographers) to convince clients that $100 is a ludicrously small amount of money. I don't want to comment on Tanya's situation, as I don't know all the details, but she does very good work and shouldn't have to work for peanuts. chris
