Why do most editors ask for photos for free from photographers?

[Fred]

I have a similar situation to Picture Taker in that I am a UK photographer much involved with railway photography - a specialist field in many ways. My work is published in railway magazines - defined by the market as "hobby magazines" - where the budgets are low and photographers are paid but at a very low rate. In this market many photographers have turned to digital where it is easy to produce acceptable quality images for publication although those who came from a film background are noticeable by their better composition and production skills.

Allied to the magazines are preserved lines (over 300 it is reckoned) which rely to a great deal on volunteers and voluntary contributions where photographers supply material for commercial use (e.g in advertising and publicity material) in return for privileges such as access to the railway to non-public areas. This is a win-win situation in a way for those involved but it does deny a market to the professional photographer looking to earn a living.

Sadly the problem identified by the questioner is that as more and more magazines look to on-line publication they find a ready source of material from "amateurs" looking to increase their market who use the magazines as a "show case" thus not expecting a fee in cash terms.

As magazines transfer to on-line selling those left behind as print magazines will find that budgets are increasingly limited and - again - the pool of amateurs willing to supply allows them to look for free photographs.

In my humble opinion it is only such publications as newspapers where Trade Unions still have a presence that fees are paid to contributing photographers; the pool of amateur photographers willing to supply "free" images is sufficient to allow the rest to pay no fee - or expect not to.