What's a TIME Magazine Cover Worth?

Posted on 7/29/2009 by Jim Pickerell | Printable Version | Comments (7)

TIME used Robert Lam's photo of a jar of coins on the cover of the magazine, with the headline "The New Frugality." The copy read: "The recession has changed more than just how we live. It's changed what we value and what we expect---even after the economy recovers." Lam received $30 for use of the image, which suggests we should expect a lot less.

Get the Full Article (2 Credits)

Have an Account?

Access to this site is an exclusive benefit for you. Enter your username and password in the form above. If you don't remember your password you can reset it at any time.

Keep me logged in

Forgot your password?

New to Selling Stock?

Selling Stock is an on-line newsletter that reports on developing trends in the stock photo industry. It is updated at least twice a month. On-line subscribers receive e-mail notification whenever new stories are posted. Archives containing stories going back to late 1995 are fully available to subscribers.

Buy Credits

Copyright © 2009 Jim Pickerell. The above article may not be copied, reproduced, excerpted or distributed in any manner without written permission from the author. All requests should be submitted to Selling Stock at 10319 Westlake Drive, Suite 162, Bethesda, MD 20817, phone 301-461-7627, e-mail: wvz@fpcubgbf.pbz

Jim Pickerell is founder of www.selling-stock.com, an online newsletter that publishes daily. He is also available for personal telephone consultations on pricing and other matters related to stock photography. He occasionally acts as an expert witness on matters related to stock photography. For his current curriculum vitae go to: http://www.jimpickerell.com/Curriculum-Vitae.aspx.

Comments

Jonathan Ross Posted Jul 29, 2009
It is only a photo of a jar full of money to start with. This is the second time Time magazine has used Micro for their cover. All I get from this is, don't shoot simple objects for RM anymore. They belong in Micro. As far as their being anything ethically wrong. The photographer was happy the client was happy and so was the agency win-win-win for the parties involved. As far as the value of an image, that is the world around us and I don't believe time is going to reverse it.

Best,
Jonathan Ross

Morgan David de lossy Posted Jul 29, 2009
I must agree with you Jonathan, but still... it hurts!
;-)

Best.

Morgan

Gerard Fritz Posted Jul 29, 2009
Sadly, it hardly matters if the images was used for a 500 print run by a local shoe store, or the cover of a national magazine that used it to promoted their magazine making to make millions of dollars as a result. Buying it that cheap, and selling it that cheap are rooted in the same flaw...greed.

Tibor Bognar Posted Jul 29, 2009
I wonder what Robert Lam is doing to pay his rent and groceries? Wouldn't he prefer to earn a living from photography instead of happily giving it away? The trend may not be reversible, but it's beyond me why have photographers started it? Of course the clients are happy....

Jagdish Agarwal Posted Jul 30, 2009
Time will soon come where photographers will pay magazines to print their photos.

Mark & Audrey Gibson Posted Jul 30, 2009
Cost of graphic design?

Posted Jul 30, 2009
Every photographer finds his own level of value in the marketplace. Time Magazine now values a Robert Lam photograph at $150 or less. Yikes!

Post Comment