How much to sell news footage for?

S

Stephen Coates

Member
Hi everyone. I've mentioned in another topic that I shoot a lot of protests and last year I got some good footage of a riot a few miles from where I live. I've had a couple of enquiries about licensing some of it (including a large national news"paper"). As its not available on stock footage websites, I'm just wondering (roughly) how much people here would charge for such footage (per second/minute/clip), bearing in mind that in order to get it, it was an entire days' work, I was assaulted and abused multiple times, and was standing in the firing line of flying rocks and bottles. I didn't have any trouble with the police (usually they are fine round here), but there is also a risk of wrongful arrest etc in these situations as well.

For reference, the journalist (who originally asked for it for free :)), having just returned from a war zone, did agree on the need to not devalue such risks.

Thanks.
 
Back in the day we could get £100 a second for broadcast on national news

So if the news was on at 1200, 1800 and 2200 that is £300 and maybe a couple more pops the next day.

My bristol footage I think the beeb (local) offered my £50 and the hack delivering that advised me not to take it.

"Im sorry mate they are offereing £50.. I would tell them to stick it" .. (I did)

So I would be..

-respect yourself
-be clear on single use/repeat fees/terrortory

-consider finding an 'agent' .. someone who can sell it for you .. not so easy

Id be £500 for 20s (could be a few shots) for something that will live on iplayer or so (non exclusive) ... I dunno
 
There's no specific answer to the inquiry; the price is whatever the person/people are willing to pay for it.

And, per usual, we always want the business but don't want to go too low and also don't want to go too high, so that's the mental grind and the OP will have to figure it out for himself.

Type in 'crowd protest' to Pond5 and you get 137,649 hits. I don't think there's really that many - if one took the time and reviewed every page - but it's probably close, there are a lot of clips.

Ranging from $39-$225 (maybe more, maybe less, IDK, just what I see now), a few seconds to a few minutes (price doesn't affect the length, it's all mixed), modern IQs to what some look like legit film from the mid to late 1900s.

You get offered $50 b/c people know the prices, and if the footage was very sought-after it would have already sold for a handsome fee.
 
As NorBro stated. "There's no specific answer to the inquiry; the price is whatever the person/people are willing to pay for it."

Look at the photos below.

Jack Beers, who worked for The Dallas Morning News, captured an image which was taken six-tenths of a second before Jackson's. In the Beers image Ruby had not yet fired the fatal shot. Beers' image was first to press but the Jackson image was preferred because it captured the instant of Oswald being shot.

Jackson's image went on to make hundreds of thousands of $$$s worldwide for Jackson and the Dallas Times Herald. Beers photo only made a few thousand. I'm talking 1963 $$$s here. The following day I'll never forget a group of us in the newsroom discussing "the shot".

It really depends on what you got.

A tale:

A cameraman I know well here in Sydney was packing up after a surf carnival when he heard some odd sounds. He got curious, grabbed his Betacam and started to dive down some streets that ran from the beachfront. He ended up walking into a mid-afternoon gunfight going on in the middle of a street. He said he nearly c*****d himself. But he had the presence of mind to duck behind some street furniture and start rolling.

Long story short. Twenty minutes later he had two news cruisers with their reporters and ENG crews huddled around him looking over his shoulder looking at the B&W playback in the viewfinder. The reporters were on their phones talking to their chief's of staff back in the newsrooms saying "Yes! He's got the real deal here. He's got it all."

A bidding war by phone ensued. He settled with one of the networks for $20K. And that was mid '80s $$$s!

Again. It really does depend on what you got. :) The moral of the story? Negotiate hard!

Good luck

Chris Young
 

Attachments

  • Jacksons - Beers.jpg
    Jacksons - Beers.jpg
    103.4 KB · Views: 5
Last edited:
I would begin the negotiations by asking them what their budget is. Get them to throw out the first number, and then go from there. If they try to low-ball you, walk away. They probably need the footage more than you need the money, so they'll come back with a higher number. If they don't come back, well, at least you didn't devalue your work. The power of saying "no".

BTW, getting potential clients to tell you their budget upfront is a great way to begin negotiations for corporate video too. If I can offer them a solution that fits their budget, great, if not, then I explain why they need to plan on spending more to get the product they want. But at least I have an idea where they stand when I get them to disclose their budget. Sometimes the divide is so great that I can just save myself a lot of time right at the front and say, no thanks, and move on.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the helpful replies. In this case, its a quality national newspaper who might want to use it on their website. I'd ordinarily consider this to be worth less than a TV station. They do seem to have some decent budget for the story at least, given the amount of time and travelling that the journalist has done.

It is unfortunate that photography and video are seen to be relatively low value (or even worthless) by some people. I was explaining to a plumber the other day (who doesn't seem to have any issues charging for his work) that people view photographers as raking it in, whilst simultaneously being expected to work for free!

A bidding war by phone ensued. He settled with one of the networks for $20K. And that was mid '80s $$$s!
Click to expand...
Ker-ching! I bet he wouldn't get that nowadays.
 
Stephen Coates said:
It is unfortunate that photography and video are seen to be relatively low value (or even worthless) by some people
Click to expand...
I think the proliferation of smart phones has a lot to do with that. Everyone is a photographer now and that's driven down the general view on what makes a good photo or video. I hope you can get a good rate for your footage, Doug's advice about getting the client's budget up front is spot on.
 
Just thought I'd follow this one up. The national newspaper didn't get back to me. I did however have an enquiry from a production company who are making a documentary for a major national broadcaster. They offered less than £5/sec which I think is a bit low for a national broadcaster. The producer did actually come up on the train half way across the country to collect viewing copies of the rushes and I suspect his train & taxi fares probably cost more!

I was wondering a while back, does anyone know how much companies like ITN & BBC etc charge for archive materials? [Edit: Just checked, ITN seems to be in the £500/clip ballpark for TV documentary use if licensed through Getty].
 
Stephen Coates said:
The producer did actually come up on the train half way across the country to collect viewing copies of the rushes and I suspect his train & taxi fares probably cost more!
Click to expand...
Really? In 2025, why wouldn't you just send watermarked (or TC window) copies electronically? Not very green. When the BBC wanted wildlife footage from me a couple of years ago, they didn't fly over to get a drive.
 
Actually, in this case it was probably a case of convenience as he'd been travelling to the region to speak to potential interview subjects. Whether he'd have come up specially for me I don't know - I'd have been happy to post them a memory card or upload to a server.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top