Apple, Inc. wants to license my images - what to charge?

Varina Patel posted the same issue in 2008. I have an email in to her, but I guess I'm a little too impatient There are 4 images they are looking at. Here is the wording on the email I received:

"My name is Tracy. I am a Photo Producer for Apple’s Graphic Design Dept. I am currently working on a project to refresh some of our desktop images and screen savers. We are interested in speaking with you about licensing the images below. ...The rights we would require are: Worldwide, used as a desktop or screensaver option. Image will be embedded in our products and sold pre-installed in the software.
Duration of license is 5 years."

I questioned her a little more and got this answer "unfortunately I cannot estimate how many will be distributed, that is why we are asking for 'unlimited use' for that 5 years. There will be no watermark or photo credit given. It will be embedded therefore protected and people cannot pull down the image."

fotoQuote states that the average price, for a distribution of 50k-100k (the max they give) should be $825 for each image. However, it also makes a point to make sure the copyright is displayed, which Apple won't do. Plus, I would imagine the distribution would be much more than 100K (millions?). Any advice on what to charge?

I haven't done anything with Apple, but my first communication with them would be to note that you've surveyed the markets for similar uses and cite those figures at a minimum, probably doubling them instead since use could be a lot higher and you won't be getting any credit or advertising benefit. The worst they can say is no, and a counter offer might be forthcoming if they feel you're too high. It also depends on the specific images. If they're talking exclusive use or if you feel that Apple's use would cut into your own sales then the price could go up yet again. Negotiation is a "touchy-feely" process of offer-counteroffer. If they don't counteroffer, there never was a negotiation in the first place and they were merely shopping for lowballs.

Doug, it seems that unlimited 5-year use with no viable credit given on a distribution that wide would certainly add a tremendous value (I'm assuming this is a non-exclusive situation, meaning you can still use the images). Plus there is the very real possibility of screenshots taken on tha Macs and used in websites, etc, and there's no way that Apple can control that, so it seems that a reasonable fee for that long with those attributes is $2500 per image minimum, non-exclusive. If they want exclusive for 5 years, that's $10K easy. The problem, though, is losing the bid because someone else who may take great images is careless enough to de-value an image and sell cheap just to get their stuff into that platform. It'd be great if you could know what the threshold of price would be that makes Tracy go from counteroffer to withdrawing the offer... even that is aggravating because you have to de-value your work due to someone else's perception.

At any rate, Apple wants your stuff and they are certainly all about presentation so you obviously have what they want if they are asking. If they want the best, it will cost. They have no qualms about charging the elevated prices of their hardware (and parts, try replacing a power supply for under $150!), so to ME, and I could be way off, $2K per image sounds like a reasonable value. (Oh, and before the rebuttal starts, yes, Apple makes great stuff but they do charge for it... that wasn't an Apple slam, lol! I remember well the cost of my iPhone 3G, 3Gs, 4 and iPad)

Anyway, as far as the starting point I've suggested to you, I'd like to hear others pipe in, and certainly correct me if I'm off the mark.

They found my images on a site called 1x.com, where images go through a rigorous screening process to be 'published' online (most submissions, in fact, get rejected). It's a huge site, with a massive number of viewers, with some excellent photography. Thing is, another guy from Apple emailed me on that site on the same day, not realizing Tracy had already contacted me. So, it seems they are trolling the site, making me think they have alot of options and looking for 'lowballs' as Hank mentions. I'm afraid to overprice my images, as I'm afraid I'll lose the deal, but I don't want to be taken advantage of either. I have a feeling if I ask for $2000-2500 per image, they may not negotiate at all.

It's Apple. You really shouldn't undersell yourself. I had a company working in association with an NFL team ask for a huge (8 feet+) print once. I dropped my price down significantly, but it was still four figures. They opted for the 1 dollar image from iStockPhoto, which they acknowledged was much worse than mine. I also received inquiries from the Discovery Channel, who didn't want to pay a dime for several images.

I don't regret losing out on either of those transactions, because I knew they were asking for something that was unfair to me and didn't make any fiscal sense on my end.

Maybe my point is that you can try and be competitive with your pricing to an extent, but these are large corporations that can afford your rate. If they don't go for your fair quote for some extensive usage (which is what they're getting in this case) you shouldn't feel bad.

They also happen to be somewhat professional, telling you about "worldwide rights, unlimited usage, etc." I think they're used to large licensing fees and a 4-5 figure quote won't shock them a bit.

Max

Varina did email me back and can't remember, even ballpark, what she asked for. However, they didn't reply to her offer. Too bad, I would love to know what that number was. I suspect they are looking for cheap deals.

I suspect they are looking for cheap deals.

That's why I suggested explaining the reasoning, along with quoting a fair but stiff price.

If they're tire-kicking for suckers, they'll find them and not bother you again. If they're serious about your images but find your rates high, they'll get back to you with a counter and you can proceed from there.

Sorry I couldn't be more helpful, Doug. I remember people suggesting that I ask for absolutely huge numbers... and others suggesting that I refuse the deal entirely. Both extremes seemed unreasonable.

I think part of the problem is with Apple's approach. Remember, they are sending out lots of similar requests - and the responses must be all over the place. Nobody really knows what to charge for an agreement like this one, so they can ask 1000 photographers and use images from the ten who don't really know enough to ask questions... the ones who are just flattered to be asked by Apple. I wish they would make a fair offer to get the ball rolling. If a photographer wants more than that, the negotiations can begin.

As long as their requests are vague, the photographer is the underdog. On the other hand - that's good business for them. So, I can't blame them.

Good luck to you, Doug. I hope things work out for you. Maybe you'll be smarter than I was - and write down the price you quote. I know others will be interested - yours was not the first email I've received asking for advice in this same situation.

I'm sure they have an amount budgeted for the images. So why not just ask them what their budget is and use that as a starting point? If it's way too low then you haven't wasted your time and gotten your hopes up.

Doug

First off I must say I have enjoyed looking at your work this morning for the first time, you do have a unique voice to your work. That being said the proverbial bottom line is no one here can tell you exactly what to charge. You run a certain amount of risk if you come in too high or low. Me personally, I would try to avoid underselling myself as my priority, I would ask for what I would deem as reasonable for the Usage Apple is intending. You don't have a crystal ball, so you cannot possibly for see some one who does not value their work accepting a low offer. However I think you run a much bigger risk by sounding too green during negotiations. I could possibly refer you to some one who might represent you for a fee or percentage if you like? If this concept appeals to you e mail me and we can pursue this.

Best of Luck



Phil

Thank you all for your valuable input. Thanks, Phil, for the compliment.
I ended up emailing Tracy back yesterday, and we negotiated and agreed on a fee of $1500 per image. I feel pretty good about that, especially given my total lack of experience in this, and it is nearly double the avr fotoQuote price. I did just what Hank suggested and cited the figures from fotoQuote, and why I was asking for significantly more than that.

However, I'm still not absolutely sure this is legit. Now she is asking "Please send me hires images (3200 x 2000 @ 72dpi) if you would like to be included in the presentation." What I'm gathering from this, is that they will end up picking out certain photos out of a whole bunch for the final screensaver, and for now, she just wants my photos to show and see if they make the final cut. Should I be nervous about sending them a hi-res file without some sort of contract, or is this standard and I'm shouldn't be worried?

Thank you very much for all the help so far, and guiding me through this whole nerve racking process.

I'd specify in the delivery memo that these are of the size requested and for review only, as spelled out by Tracy_______. I'd even go ahead and watermark each in the LRC with your copyright notice. If they question it, say those are review images and you'll send the final image to their final specs when you are selected. It's all about the paper trail!!!!

Congrats on moving the negotiations to the next stage! That in itself is an accomplishment.

Yeah, I'd avoid sending them the "final" images before you know you're getting paid. Watermark them, and maybe contact them ahead of time to make sure this doesn't create any major issues... you obviously don't want to "disqualify" yourself simply by trying to protect your work.

Max

I'll be interested to read about how this all turns out Doug. I would definitely watermark all your images and I would imagine other competent artists they have contacted will do the same. Please keep us informed and good luck!

Michael

Doug- Have always enjoyed your work and glad to hear this. Good luck and please do let us know how it turns out.

Hi Doug,
Between 3 -5k per image is what they pay and yes, you can still sell the image to others.
I've sold to Apple - 5k was the max
Good Luck and don't under sell yourself.
Michele

per image that is .... ;-)
So I would quote them 20k for your 4 images. btw, your work is beautiful.

Looks like Apple is on the hunt again, surfing for nice images that they can get for cheap! I've had 2 folks emailing me today about the same thing! The end result was that I sent them the 4 hi-res images which were supposedly used in a presentation where they would pick out the images they want. The person that was emailing me said that "$1500 an image is fine". ...but then I never heard back. I am assuming they were looking for the lowest bidders, folks just excited to have there images (though no photo credit will be given) picked out by Apple, rather than picking out images and paying them for what they are worth. Too bad. Don't give away your work, folks - it would be an insult! I don't think it is a scam, and I think the risk of sending your images is low, but I can't be completely sure.

Do not be afraid to ask for a very legitimate license fee. Remember that one of those images might just become synonymous with the product it accompanies. Consider the Chuck O'Rear photograph that became the default Windows XP wallpaper. It is reported to be second largest license fee ever paid for a photograph. I imagine Will Austin's Windows 7 wallpapers provided a nice license fee too.

You need to know whether this is an exclusive license. I think an unlimited, worldwide, 5-year, exclusive license for four images that will be displayed every single day on millions of desktops all around the world and become synonymous with a product associated with the world's #3 computer maker, should incur a 5 or 6 figure license fee. You know that blogs, wallpaper sites, etc, will lift and redistribute them to other platforms (Linux, tablets, mobile phones).

I concede that the Windows XP wallpaper was licensed before microstock eroded the stock photo market, but you should still get paid! They came to you.