Photo Retoucher Rates!?

[Bianca Carosio]

So I've seen this question been thrown around. Retouchers offer basic rates when it comes to images used for portfolio only..but once it gets into Advertisement/Publishing it's a different story with their rates and much higher. So for Advertisement, Editorial, and etc. what should the Retouchers rates be?



Thanks!

[zganie]

Hi Bianca
1)Your right this question has been asked many times.Doubt you will get a direct answer

2)Maybe part of the problem is location,as was mentioned in an earlier post an ad from craigslist offering 80000 a year (I think) in New York was not considered that good.
So what I am basically saying depending on your location lets say New York versus Montreal where Montreal being a lot cheaper to live but rates and salaries are probably a lot lower.
zganie

[Bianca Carosio]

Right of course. But we're speaking of salaries where I was directing the question more to "self employed/ Freelance" Retouchers.

But of course when it comes to full time jobs location plays a bit part. I'm located in Miami where the cost of living is very high so salaries should be high. Although that's not the case here (economy very bad).

[AFrazier]

The question falls to clientele and material. If you're freelancing, fixing old family photographs, good luck trying to get 80k or more a year doing it, unless you're going to also incorporate a full photo studio and take on full time photography to boot (the route I'm headed down).
If, on the other hand, you're retouching for a major magazine, you have to consider royalties and other things of that nature. The photographer took the picture, but you made it look the way it did, and the owner of the magazine has to pay you a royalty for each copy of the photograph for which you own a small portion of the intellectual property.
So fix granny's picture for $15.00, print it at 16 × 20 enlarged on luster for an extra $19.50, hit her for $25.00 to dry mount the photograph, and you might make $40.00-$50.00 after product cost.
OR, you can retouch a photograph for a major magazine, they can pay you $0.10 for each issue since you own a small portion of the copyright (if your contract is written correctly) - multiply that by who knows how many issues times twelve months ... and if you're good enough you might even find yourself with contracts in more than one magazine. That's how you get 80K+ as a freelance. "Free" being the operative word here.
If you want a salary, you won't be freelance. You'll be employed. If you freelance while employed, it will be a conflict of interests, and you won't be employed for long if you're caught.

[Bianca Carosio]

Well that is the case here in Miami for many people...where they are emplo'yed by a company but does freelance..and the company sometimes knows and doesn't really care, they only care if the employee is doing their job and doesnt steal any of the companies direct clients. (I just know off of experience with multiple people). Like I said the economy is very bad here in Miami and employers know that artists will go multiple routes for more money and they can't really stop them.

[rovis]

Originally Posted by AFrazier

OR, you can retouch a photograph for a major magazine, they can pay you $0.10 for each issue since you own a small portion of the copyright (if your contract is written correctly)

Never heard of a contract like that. The photographer doesn't get any royalty from a magazine. It's a flat fee, that includes the publishing rights. The retoucher doesn't have any copyright for his/her work.

[AFrazier]

I guess it works differently in this industry than in others. I know that a photographer owns the rights to his or her photographs until/unless they are sold, as does a writer, actor, film maker, musician, or any other sort of artist, and they are all entitled to royalties upon the reproduction of the material. Since they are earned in so many of these other industries, I assumed it would hold true in this one as well. I wasn't actually speaking from knowledge or experience. I was offering speculation based upon the common place in other artistic arenas.
My apologies if I don't know what I'm talking about.

[Bianca Carosio]

Originally Posted by rovis

Never heard of a contract like that. The photographer doesn't get any royalty from a magazine. It's a flat fee, that includes the publishing rights. The retoucher doesn't have any copyright for his/her work.

I really doubt a magazine will ever want to bother having to pay a retoucher 10 cents every issue...rather then just pay one royalty and not deal with it again.

[Bianca Carosio]

Originally Posted by AFrazier

I guess it works differently in this industry than in others. I know that a photographer owns the rights to his or her photographs until/unless they are sold, as does a writer, actor, film maker, musician, or any other sort of artist, and they are all entitled to royalties upon the reproduction of the material. Since they are earned in so many of these other industries, I assumed it would hold true in this one as well. I wasn't actually speaking from knowledge or experience. I was offering speculation based upon the common place in other artistic arenas.
My apologies if I don't know what I'm talking about.

I'm sorry, didn't mean to say what I did as if I was disagreeing with you...just off of what you previously stated I then replied with my own experience of how it has been here.

[AFrazier]

It's no thing. I'm not bothered or offended in any way. I was trying to make sense out of how someone could make that sort of money in the "retouching" industry and applying to that some common sense and what I know of other artistic fields. Authors, for example, get about $0.11 per paperback sold, and $0.30 per hardback sold (it might be more than that nowadays). The money earned goes towards the advance given at the time the contract is negotiated by the agent until said amount is paid back. Thereafter, all royalties go to the author on a quarterly basis.
I know that photographers have copyright rights. The contract the lawyer drew up for me for doing wedding shoots has a clause discussing who retains the rights to the photographs. They are my intellectual property, and they can't be reproduced without my permission (not that that will stop anyone in the digital age). Major magazines aren't above the same laws. They have to purchase those rights from the photographer, or pay him or her for each use of the photograph. I would be willing to guarantee that there is a contract involved for each photographer working with each and every magazine, guaranteeing the magazines' protection against copyright infringement, else there'd be lawsuits galore. Putting the photographer's name under the picture isn't enough to satisfy the law.
Even in retouching, for example, if you wanted to retouch an Olan Mills photograph, you would have to get a release from them at a cost of $15.00 per photograph, and if the photograph is less than three years old, the release is only good for a limited duration. Copyright is king.

So I assumed that there would be something similar with retouching after some form or fashion. After all, it is an art form, and the end product wouldn't be what it is without the artistry of the retoucher.
BUT ... I've never actually tried to work for another company before. I do retouching privately through my own business (If Only Photos), and I've never researched the law concerning copyright issues on the subject. Perhaps I should.

[Benny Profane]

Originally Posted by AFrazier

I would be willing to guarantee that there is a contract involved for each photographer working with each and every magazine, guaranteeing the magazines' protection against copyright infringement, else there'd be lawsuits galore. Putting the photographer's name under the picture isn't enough to satisfy the law.

Nope, that's not how things work in the real world. Especially today. No way a retoucher is in on some sort of percentage. Hell, 95% of the time the retoucher gets no credit at all. You know, here's a photo by Annie Lebowitz. Yeah, it does look heavily retouched, doesn't it? Who did the retouching? Beats me. Annie's a great photograher, though, isn't she?
Just expect a nice little flat or hourly rate and a pat on the butt.

[Ant]

AFrazier,

You need to stop replying to threads and spreading your misinformation and general bullshit. Worse is when you post an example. stop.

[Markzebra]

Generally no credit. The world hasn't woken up yet to exactly how much is now done. There would be some damn rich retouchers out there with a percentage

[AFrazier]

Originally Posted by Benny Profane

Nope, that's not how things work in the real world. Especially today. No way a retoucher is in on some sort of percentage. Hell, 95% of the time the retoucher gets no credit at all. You know, here's a photo by Annie Lebowitz. Yeah, it does look heavily retouched, doesn't it? Who did the retouching? Beats me. Annie's a great photograher, though, isn't she?
Just expect a nice little flat or hourly rate and a pat on the butt.

"there is a contract involved for each photographer ..."

I wasn't talking about retouching anymore. Someone said I was mistaken. I said okay.

There are copyrights on photographs for photographers.

[AFrazier]

Originally Posted by Ant

AFrazier,

You need to stop replying to threads and spreading your misinformation and general bullshit. Worse is when you post an example. stop.

Completely unnecessary. I haven't argued the point. I was mistaken. I said so. I merely explained why I thought it might be that way and reiterated that I was mistaken. There was no call for you to speak to me that way.

[Benny Profane]

Originally Posted by AFrazier

So I assumed that there would be something similar with retouching after some form or fashion. After all, it is an art form, and the end product wouldn't be what it is without the artistry of the retoucher.
BUT ... I've never actually tried to work for another company before. I do retouching privately through my own business (If Only Photos), and I've never researched the law concerning copyright issues on the subject. Perhaps I should.

I quoted the wrong part.

[Bianca Carosio]

whats going on here?? lol

[AFrazier]

Again, I was explaining why I posted what I did, and emphasized that I've never researched it, and that it was an assumption on my part that it might work similar to other industries. I didn't just shoot someone's dog here. This is a web forum. Lighten up.

[Bianca Carosio]

don't know what happened..lol

[AFrazier]

One (maybe more) posters on this thread got bent out of shape because I posted bad information because I, admittedly, didn't really know what I was talking about.
But I said as much, as I recall. Apologies were made. All was well. Then posts went on criticizing the original post as though the issue had never been resolved.
So I am trying to clear up the confusion. I don't much care for ugly comments. People make mistakes.

[Markzebra]

"I, admittedly, didn't really know what I was talking about." -not often anyone makes that admission round here. Well done

[mikkimicole]

Originally Posted by AFrazier

One (maybe more)
So I am trying to clear up the confusion. I don't much care for ugly comments. People make mistakes.

It's unfortunate that u reaped the ugly end of ur comments, hopefully u will b a little more careful about what u spew in here. We twist images not so much facts, well knowingly anywayz.

[SilvaFox]

$125 per hour for freelance agency work in Orlando. That's the low end. The agency charges the client $185-200.

Fun, somewhat volatile thread.

Cheers,

bp

[jadams007]

wow, i thought this was about "rates". anyhoo...I've seen freelance rates range low as $20 per hour to $120 per hour. This mostly depends on retoucher experience and client demand. Some photographers are going with their printing labs which are something like $8 per facial retouch head. sheez! I've even heard rumor of new software that automatically does facial retouch - not too accurate - but labs like Miller's Imaging only charging $3 per image. whats a freelancer to do ?

[Bianca Carosio]

I'd never trust a program that does automatic fixing.

$3 a retouch..I mean how much work would a lab really put in an image for that amount, that's not trusting either.


It seems more high end and high demand retouchers are the ones that make it in this dark world...lol

[Ant]

Originally Posted by Bianca Carosio

It seems more high end and high demand retouchers are the ones that make it in this dark world...lol

There is no other market in this day and age. Everyone has a computer, a digital camera and photoshop. It's only those that have the finest skills that are going to get paid, now and in the future.

[Bianca Carosio]

Originally Posted by Ant

There is no other market in this day and age. Everyone has a computer, a digital camera and photoshop. It's only those that have the finest skills that are going to get paid, now and in the future.

ha-le-lu-ya!!! lololol

[CMS]

I know for sure that there will always be people asking for to much money than they deserve.But who decides what deserves each.I am one of the best photographers in Romania.I am not making more than 30-35 K a year.For me (learning 15 years and spending more than 100k for equipment ) watching you talking about 80k beeing not so much.WAKE UP people.There are many much more dificult jobs than retouching and earning much less.I see that everyone compares with New York, Los Angeles, London,,,,what about rest of the world??? I need also a retoucher but i live in Bucharest.That means i'm already dead???????

[Bianca Carosio]

CMS,


I emailed you but you never responded...lol

[johnnycorcoran]

looking at some website..Amazing