Thursday, July 22, 2010

What's a CD Cover Worth?

There are two stories to take away from this article - Vampire Weekend's Cover Art 'Contra'-versy: Model Sues Band for $2 Million.



First - you have a model who did not sign a model release and who's likeness was used in the marketing and advertising of a rock band. Her story - a Polaroid "snapshot" of the model, taken by her mother may well have been something given to a charity bazaar (during a house-cleaning?). This is but one risk of the Orphan Works legislation, yet, right now, the model has recourse, to the tune of $2,000,000. If Orphan Works were passed, surely her mother (the photographer) wouldn't have recourse, but, would the subject?

And now, a second consideration.
(Continued after the Jump)

All to often, bands claim to have no money to pay for photography - let alone the visual images they use to market their albums/CD's. It's not uncommon for bands to want to pay $100 (or only photo credit!) up to $500. In this case, an "INDIE" group, through a small label, "reportedly paid $5,000 to use the picture". Being paid for cover uses is critical, and values an skyrocket. For example, Japanese photographer Hiroshi Sugimoto's photograph, "Boden Sea", was used on the cover for U2's "No Line on the Horizon" album cover, "Sugimoto's only stipulation was that no text could be placed on top of the image." according to Wikipedia. The arists made a deal, according to The Japan Times (here) "Bono agreed on an "artist-to-artist" barter whereby Sugimoto could use the "No Line on the Horizon" song in any project he wanted in the future." What's the unlimited use of a U2 song worth?

This point is not to be missed - rock bands typically want to pay a fraction of the true value that an album cover image should license for. That image will become synonymous with the artist and album. It will be used in advertising, marketing, and so on, for years to come. The ability of the photographer to relicense that image for exclusive use will not exist in the music industry, and may well be an issue for other industries as well. Further, and don't fall for this one - the record label may say they have to have all rights in perpetuity!

In the end, if you're a hobbyist photographer (as this model's mom was) and you have a polaroid, and the band is an indie band, and the record label is a small one, then the album cover art is STILL worth AT LEAST $5,000.

Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
at

4 comments:

  1. AnonymousJuly 27, 2010 at 12:02 PM

    What about the Polo logo visible on her shirt. Isn't that a no-no as well?

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousJuly 30, 2010 at 9:09 AM

    Looks like a casting call Polaroid to me.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jim NewberryAugust 5, 2010 at 7:46 PM

    "...you have a model who did not sign a model release ..."

    We don't know that, do we? The subject says no, Tod Brody says yes.

    ReplyDelete
  4. James Wm. DawsonAugust 14, 2010 at 8:03 PM

    John you made me rethink that whole CD Cover shoot thing. I've done a fare amount of work for indie bands and artists and you are right .. they never have any money, or at least not much. In all my work I do include a clause in the usage rights that stipulates if the number of CD's sold is beyond a certain number than the a different usage fee structure kicks in. Hopefully that tiered usage fee will cover me should the band/artist CD sales take off. I've yet to be that lucky though.

    ReplyDelete

COMMENT GUIDELINES

Every month, tens of thousands of visitors come to Photo Business News, and approximately 2,000 readers get PBN via RSS feeds. As we approach three years of blogging (in one form or another) PBN has matured, and has, as one might expect, attracted some less-than-mature readers, which, in turn, turns to commenters with their own agendas.

Following are our Terms of Service (TOS) for commenting on the blog posts:
-------------------
1. Comment Spam - we have had a ton of spam from countries like Russia, Japan, China, and so on. It interferes with the discourse, and is one of the prime reasons we are moving to moderation. All one need to is look back a few months to see the blog posts I haven't had time to clean up from this type of spam to see that moderation is needed for this reason alone. In addition, if your comment is not germane to the point being discussed, it too becomes spam. It will be deleted.

2. Over time, some pretty irrational challenges and attacks have been levied against me, and that's ok if you disagree with me, just don't make it personal on me, or anyone else. Doing so means your comment won't make it out of moderation, so don't waste your time. In addition, it would be a shame for you to make a really great point that everyone would benefit from reading, and include personal attacks on me, or other commenters, because we don't edit comments, they're either in, or they're out.

3. Over at the Photo Business News Flickr forum, (here) there are almost 2,000 members and a good opportunity to get your questions answered there. If you have a suggestion for a blog topic, there's a link to make that suggestion on every page of the blog.

4. It is the policy of Photo Business News that if there is a YouTube, Vimeo, Viddler, Hulu or any other video service online, we can post it here using the embedding players for those services (which often insert ads into the playback). We can't know if what might normally be considered a copyrighted work that you would think might not be allowed on, say, YouTube, in fact has been agreed to between the copyright holder and YouTube. So, if you have a question or concern, visit those sites, and flag the content you believe is problematic. In addition, we adhere to standards for quoting and citing other content, with attribution and where possible, a link to that content.

5. ANONYMOUS COMMENTS - For several years now, we've given free reign to anonymous commenters, and a small fraction of those were beneficial to the readership. It is our opinion that anonymous commenters would best be from someone who, for example, should their identity be revealed, could pose job security or economic problems for them. So to that end, unless your comment is significantly beneficial, anonymous comments won't get moderated in. If you wish to make an anonymous comment and you want to send me an e-mail identifying yourself (which I will not reveal), that would be helpful, and will increase your chances of getting your comments posted. Oh, and don't go creating a fake Blogger ID just to get in - blank Blogger ID's are just one step removed from plain anonymous postings. The more discourse where people know who each other are, the better. David Hobby, of Strobist fame summed it up best in his TOS: "Nothing looks more weenie and pathetic than sniping, critical, anonymous comments."