Hold it guys! Nobody questions whether IAMS is making a profit. They are a "commercial" client because their advertising generates revenue. Period.

Breeders advertise to sell their puppies. That isn't a pejorative term. You breed for a lot of purposes but one of them is to sell them into great homes. That generates revenue/income. I am certainly not saying that I've ever make a profit on a litter. On the contrary, I've lost between $1,000 and $5,000 on every litter we've bred. But whether I make a profit isn't the issue. If I advertise to sell the puppies, that is a commercial ad.

When you think about stud services, it becomes more clear. What are the costs involved in marketing a stud dog? Except for the advertising, almost none. If the dog is still viable, he's producing the semen. If you do live breedings (and that's getting almost as rare as an honest exhibitor), the bitch comes to you, you manage the breedings and the owner of the bitch pays you to keep her, feed her and give her the meds.

If you do AI, the owner of the bitch pays for the collection and shipment and the costs of the AI. Plus the stud fee. A point of reference: we just bred Cassidy to a very nice boy who lives in Wisconsin. Last week, I drove 2 hours a day for 5 days for progesterone tests, ordered the fresh-chilled collection and shipment, had her surgically implanted and at this point, I have spent over $5,000 and I have no idea whether or not she's pregnant.

My point is that the marketing of a stud dog is unquestionably a commercial venture. And it's probably profitable. Breeding puppies is also IMHO a commercial venture but if you do it the right way, there's no way it's profitable. As a breeder, you have to breed for yourself and for the improvement of the breed because unless you breed "too much" you can't make any money at it.

I'm with David. It it makes money, it's commercial. If it's simply to build awareness of a dog for national ranking, it's not.

Jim

Jim,
Do you mean "makes money" regardless of profit or loss?

Just curious.

If we want to split hairs, its all commercial. I am not arguing that the dog advertising photos are more commercial than a pet portrait, they are. I just won't be able to charge them, what I charge a magazine for a cover advertising issue. They will not buy it. Plain and simple. I can get $1200 for one image from a magazine and if I COULD get that from a dog owner, it would be awesome, but, I can't. I'd sell zero.

You are correct in theory, but, right now, a fair price for the market works for me.

I will concede that image usage on breeder web sites is commercial use. I'm just saying that the way I license my images allows the breeders to use me as their photographer. My license is very specifically limited to personal use and personal breeder web sites with no third party usage.

I think this has turned into a pricing discussion rather than the semantics of commercial vs personal usage. I enjoy learning from you guys.

Quote:

---

Do you mean "makes money" regardless of profit or loss?

---

Jim,
that was the point. If the intent of the use is to generate income -- regardless of profit or loss -- then it's a commercial application. If the intended use is not to generate income but to make people aware of something the dog has accomplished i.e. won the National Specialty, then it's not commercial. It can't get any plainer than that.

As for pricing, that wasn't what I was dealing with. I don't care how you distinguish between commercial and non-commercial in your pricing. That's your marketing program and you can do whatever you want. But I charge more for commercial uses than for non-commercial. And if you think about it, it only makes sense. If the use is going to generate income, the person who gets the income should be better equipped to pay for the usage. Trust me, there is some logic in this .

Jim

Quote:

---

I am not arguing that the dog advertising photos are more commercial than a pet portrait, they are.

---

Julie,
some are and some aren't. I've shot some "pet portraits" that turned into Stud Dog ads. That's commercial. I've shot a lot of win photos that were only used to promote the win. That's non-commercial.

The original point of this discussion was what would you give away as complimentary and what would you never give away. I'd never give away a photo for a stud dog promotion or litter promotion. I do give away Junior Handler photos because I want them to have their photos taken. It's part of the learning process to know how to set up your dog for a photo and the best incentive for having the Juniors take the time for photos is to tell them it will be "free".

At small Specialties, I make a trophy donation of the Reserve Winners Dog and Reserve Winners Bitch photos. Why? Because in small specialties, the folks who win those awards never have a photo taken. A Reserve is akin to kissing your sister. And if I take a really good picture the owners generally will order more prints when they take WD or WB.

So, yes, sometimes giving samples of your work to folks who would not purchase it under normal circumstances does generate future business. Sampling has been the bastion of supermarkets for ages.

Jim

Very interesting Jim.

I was just writing a post about selling to those who just don't buy . . . Stay tuned

I had a display next to a guy that put up a sign on his space that said compliments don't pay the bills. Don't think it helped much!

It happened again today! I received an email from a woman who had purchased one of the win photos asking if it was OK for her to use it in an ad in a competitive magazine. I told her "yes" and notified the editor that she had my permission.

An hour later, she emailed and said she was asking for somebody else -- a top handler who wanted to use my Top 20 formal in the same publication. I told her I would be delighted for him to use that photo but first, he'd have to purchase it. Now, understand that I really like this guy but I've shot 5 ARC Nationals and this guy has never, ever purchased an image from me. So, naturally, I copied the editor with my response.

Excuse me now while I pour myself a large glass of red wine. I need an alternative reality. This one is just too surreal.

Jim

Jim, I guess I would change the question you asked to
Are People As Corrupt As They Appear To Be?

Most know the rules and they just keep pushing to get stuff for free!
If they do not know the rules, they then are told and they still try to play
the ignorant game.

I am heading off to school to confront one of the professors on his acceptance of copying anything off the net. One small step for photograpers...